General Discussion

merrily

(45,251 posts)

27. Oh, come on now. And why do you suppose they weren't rolled back?

Fri Nov 21, 2014, 08:23 AM

Nov 2014

I guess things like NAFTA, ending "welfare as we know it" and repeal of Glass Steagall had no impact at all on wealth disparity in the US?

Aside from multinational economic collapse in 2008, that is.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

48 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

MUST READ: 'Elizabeth Warren Infiltrates The Clinton Borg' - HuffPo [View all] WillyT Nov 2014 OP

Wealth and income inequality took off under Clinton Warpy Nov 2014 #1

No, it took off under Reagan. gcomeau Nov 2014 #12

Look at the largest peaks on the end. Warpy Nov 2014 #17

I did. gcomeau Nov 2014 #18

Oh, come on now. And why do you suppose they weren't rolled back? merrily Nov 2014 #27

Oh come on now what??? gcomeau Nov 2014 #40

Dude, if you thought my post did nothing but agree with you, you didn't read it. merrily Nov 2014 #42

Oh I read it. gcomeau Nov 2014 #45

Sorry you are that easily confounded. merrily Nov 2014 #46

Yes, all it takes is rants directed at me for no reason. gcomeau Nov 2014 #47

Elizabeth the Beloved. LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #2

Peace and Prosperity for the well to do: LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #3

I agree one hundred percent.. whathehell Nov 2014 #4

Hillary takes money from Wall Street for her pretty speeches LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #5

I'm with you. whathehell Nov 2014 #10

The fact that Chelsea married a Bankster tells me everything I need to know about the Clintons. Odin2005 Nov 2014 #23

The truth Is Robbins Nov 2014 #15

I would say there is a continuum, more so than three wings. And the Clintons are center right, merrily Nov 2014 #28

Obama himself said that 50 years ago he would be an "Eisenhower Republican". Odin2005 Nov 2014 #21

I know.. whathehell Nov 2014 #25

Obama said in the 1980s (Reagan era), he would have been considered a moderate Republican merrily Nov 2014 #29

His cardinal sins don't stop there either RufusTFirefly Nov 2014 #7

We know why she gets money for speeches to Wall Streeters. LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #8

I agree with you Robbins Nov 2014 #16

Wait a minute, much as i tend to agree with your post, hedgehog Nov 2014 #6

LOL !!! WillyT Nov 2014 #14

Here's the thing: Not Sure Nov 2014 #9

The Clinton meme, "fiscally conservative/socially liberal," or the DLC/New Democrat/3rd Way line, KJG52 Nov 2014 #11

No one seems to be disagreeing... Very telling... Fearless Nov 2014 #13

k & r!!! RiverLover Nov 2014 #19

I think the 1992 Election was a loss for real liberals. Odin2005 Nov 2014 #20

Agreed, absolutely. whathehell Nov 2014 #26

Yep. People tend not to mention Perot, who was a factor in both 1992 and 1996. merrily Nov 2014 #33

Yep, in 1992 the DLC took Clinton's freak victory as a mandate... Odin2005 Nov 2014 #43

Not only the DLC, but the Democratic Party. merrily Nov 2014 #44

Elizabeth Warren: I hope Hillary Clinton runs for president brooklynite Nov 2014 #22

Don't bring facts into this. nt msanthrope Nov 2014 #24

Every fact is not dispositive. merrily Nov 2014 #31

So? What did you expect a new Democratic Senator to say about the Clinton furor merrily Nov 2014 #30

I expect Warren to speak honesty, because I've been told she's not just another politician... brooklynite Nov 2014 #32

Good. Then go with the "not infallible" alternative in my post. merrily Nov 2014 #34

The implication is that she was too weak/scared to stand up to the other Senators... brooklynite Nov 2014 #35

My Reply 34 to you already covered that "point." merrily Nov 2014 #36

Will Warren vote for President Bernie? aspirant Nov 2014 #37

The only people who've emphatically stated they wouldn't vote.... brooklynite Nov 2014 #38

Still waiting aspirant Nov 2014 #39

Kick !!! WillyT Nov 2014 #41

Recommend... KoKo Nov 2014 #48