Bad News for Bush Haters

It may very well pertain to Underwood during his first term but it clearly doens't apply to Arch, who left the unemployment rate at 6.6% after his first two terms and nearly halfed it during his third term.

Even my father, a true teamsters and rock solid Democrat acknowledged that Moore did a tremendous job as Governor during his first two terms.

As to Underwood, I'd like to know what he inherited. It must have been really bad for WV'ians to elect a Republician for the first time in almost 30 years. So possilby he left the state in better condition then he found it. As about all we see are inflated numbers with no explaination and nothing is on line, I guess I'll have to make a trip to Charleston and find out the truth.

But you haven't proven anything bad happened under Underwood during his first term Frank. All you've done is supply what has been shown to be over inflated unemployment numbers.

So what did Underwood do bad during his first term? Continue with the safe implementation of desegration laws and support all civil rights measures? Or was it that he fired all state workers? Or is there something else we don't know about.

All you've done is supply what has been shown to be over inflated unemployment numbers.

No such thing has been shown. The numbers are just as Sherm said they were 6 years ago- from his earlier research. And they were verified by my own separate inquiry to WV BEP. No one has yet shown that the initial unemployment claims for 1957-1961 were any different than what Sherm said they were- and as later verified by WV BEP.

ziggy wrote:

Stephanie wrote:Ziggy,

Arch Moore has been out of office for nearly 20 years. How long is he going to be blamed for WV's economic troubles? Moore didn't have the benefit of a Legislature controlled by Republicans like Wise and Manchin have enjoyed.

Stephanie, apparently I did not make my question clear.

You give Arch Moore credit for what you presume to be good things that took place on one of his terms as governor. But you made several excuses for the 1957-61 Underwood years. My question is why is it OK to give credit to a governor for good things that happen under his watch, but make excuses for another governor because such good things did not happen under his watch. In other words, why is Arch Moore do any more political credit for the "good" things that happened under his watch than Underwood is due political criticism for the not so good things under his watch?

In both cases these men were impeded from implementing policies and programs by the opposition party. As Aaron clearly pointed out, Rockefeller had 8 years during which time unemployment skyrocketd well into double digits. Given that the Democrats had control of both chambers of the Legislature and the Governor's office, clearly it is the Democrats who shoulder responsibility for that. Moore comes into office again, the Democrats still controlled both the House & the Senate and yet unemployment was cut nearly in half......in four years!

How did the Democrats in WV treat these men? They sent Jay to a seat in the US Senate and they keep him there. I saw absolutely no attempt by the Democrats to launch a challenge to his nomination.

It seems to me that Jay Rockefeller cost the state at least as much through his inability and lack of leadership as Arch Moore did with his crimes. Arch Moore actually did do a lot of good for the citizens of this state while he was in office. Arch got prison and Jay was allowed to buy himself a seat in the US Senate.

btw.....I don't presume them to be good things. He expanded the highway system in this state in doing so bringing jobs to the state and much needed money to the state for all kinds of necessities. This state is difficult enough to get around now, I don't want to even think about what it must have been like prior to Arch Moore's tenure as governor. That was most certainly a "good thing". That all came to a grinding halt under his Democratic successor and started right back up again under Moore's leadership.

So what did Underwood do bad during his first term?

I didn't say that he did anything bad. I didn't even say that he did anything, period. I simply posted the numbers furnished by WV BEP.

Then I asked Strephanie a broader question about assigning political credits and political blame generally- based on her commentary about Underwood's and Arch Moore's terms as governor.

I believe that politicians- Republicans and Democrats- who claim full credit for when times are good under their watch should claim full blame when things are not so good under their watch. And if they won't take the initiative to claim their share of blame with the same zeal they claim more than their share of credit, then the general public should assign that political blame with the same zeal the politicians claim political credit.

ziggy wrote:

So what did Underwood do bad during his first term?

I didn't say that he did anything bad. I didn't even say that he did anything, period. I simply posted the numbers furnished by WV BEP.

Then I asked Strephanie a broader question about assigning political credits and political blame generally- based on her commentary about Underwood's and Arch Moore's terms as governor.

I believe that politicians- Republicans and Democrats- who claim full credit for when times are good under their watch should claim full blame when things are not so good under their watch. And if they won't take the initiative to claim their share of blame with the same zeal they claim more than their share of credit, then the general public should assign that political blame with the same zeal the politicians claim political credit.

Ziggy,

I agree. Perhaps you should be having that conversation with Sherm rather than me or Aaron.

Ziggy,

I agree. Perhaps you should be having that conversation with Sherm rather than me or Aaron.

I am pretty sure Sherm is still reading this thread. If he disagrees with me, he can 'bring it on'.

I really like your new avatar.

You're spinning this too though.

Sherm started again with his attacks on Republicans like all Republicans are minions of the devil himself. He gives a free pass to Democrats who are massive failures........like Senator Rockefeller.

I'd bet my eye teeth when Sherm goes to vote in November, he'll vote straight party ticket, just like he did 12 years ago when Rockefeller ran for the Senate the first time. To hell with the fact that Rockefeller has been a disaster for the state and is a wealthy elitist who bought his way into the Senate and continues to contribute nothing of any value to the state or the nation.

Stephanie wrote:I'd bet my eye teeth when Sherm goes to vote in November, he'll vote straight party ticket, just like he did 12 years ago when Rockefeller ran for the Senate the first time. To hell with the fact that Rockefeller has been a disaster for the state and is a wealthy elitist who bought his way into the Senate and continues to contribute nothing of any value to the state or the nation.

Just fyi Stephanie, Rockefeller was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1984- 24 years ago.

I would be surprised to learn that Sherm voted for Rockefeller for anything- other than maybe for governor in 1972 when Rockefeller was still a strip mine abolotionist.

1984 was 24 years ago? Good grief. I really am getting old, and senile to boot.

You think Sherm will vote for his opponent? I doubt it. I won't vote for either one of them. But I'm not the person who was advocating straight ticket voting either. That was Sherm.

ziggy wrote:I didn't say that he did anything bad. I didn't even say that he did anything, period. I simply posted the numbers furnished by WV BEP.

Whether you're talking about initial claims or first time payments, anyone with even a lick of sense knows that unemployment wasn't 30 or 40%, but more in line with Jimmy's numbers which put the high somewhere around 16%. I don't care how it was worded, he received information from the same source you did, so in my opinion he completely disproved both your numbers and Sherman's claim.

And Stephanie's right, you need to tell Sherm to differentiate. I ask him the exact same question you ask Stephanie and he refused to answer.

Do you think it's because he knew that what I, and you have subsequently said is right in that you can’t assign blame for the bad without giving credit for the good but that’s exactly what he is trying to do regarding Underwood’s two terms and that he is about as wrong as you can get? Or do you think there’s another reason he refuses to answer. Perhaps Jimmy’s right and it’s because Underwood beat Pritt. What do you think it is?

Do you think it's because he knew that what I, and you have subsequently said is right in that you can’t assign blame for the bad without giving credit for the good but that’s exactly what he is trying to do regarding Underwood’s two terms and that he is about as wrong as you can get?

I can't answer for Sherm. But I am rather sure that he did not invent political partisianism.

But for my part, politicians are always claiming political credit for the good- on their own- without prodding- and usually claiming more credit than they are do. So there is no problem with insuffucient credit to politicians when times are good. They assure that there isn't.

Both politicians are loathe to even admit it when times are not so good- much less assume the political blame for it. So just as Republicans remind the whole world when Democratoc times are not so good, turn-about partisianism demands that Democrats remind the world that Republican times are not always so good either.

Now, if there is a credible campaign to rid our system of political parties and their inherent partisianism, I will join that campaign. But until the system changes, I would think that whatever accrues to one party when times are either good or not so good should accrue to the other party also when times are good or not so good.

And since politicians do not willingly blame themselves for the not so good times, who but partisans on the other side can we expect to point the fingers of blame?

ziggy wrote:
I can't answer for Sherm.

I didn't ask you to answer for Sherm. I ask your opinion. Why do you duck questions like that so much?

ziggy wrote:But I am rather sure that he did not invent political partisianism.

So he didn't invent it, what did he do, stay at a Holiday Inn Express last YEAR?

"I guess I'll have to make a trip to Charleston and find out the truth."--Aaron

There's a phrase you don't hear every day!

I ask your opinion. Why do you duck questions like that so much?

I told you my opinion. I told you that I believed Sherm's contention that he read back in the 1990s about more than 600,000 initial unemployment claims made in the 4 yours Underwood was governor, 1957-61. And I told you why I believed it- because the WV BEP confirned those same numbers to me several years later- and which has now been 6 years since that confirmation.

And further it is my opinion that when you go to Charleston, and find the book titled Employment Security in West Virginia, Thirteenth Annual Report to the Governor, July 1, 1966 - June 30, 1967, you can find the same numbers Sherm has been recalling and that I have been posting here for years. You can probably find those numbers at or near near Table 13, page 59.

So let us know how it goes.

ziggy wrote:

Do you think it's because he knew that what I, and you have subsequently said is right in that you can’t assign blame for the bad without giving credit for the good but that’s exactly what he is trying to do regarding Underwood’s two terms and that he is about as wrong as you can get?

I can't answer for Sherm. But I am rather sure that he did not invent political partisianism.

But for my part, politicians are always claiming political credit for the good- on their own- without prodding- and usually claiming more credit than they are do. So there is no problem with insuffucient credit to politicians when times are good. They assure that there isn't.

Both politicians are loathe to even admit it when times are not so good- much less assume the political blame for it. So just as Republicans remind the whole world when Democratoc times are not so good, turn-about partisianism demands that Democrats remind the world that Republican times are not always so good either.

Now, if there is a credible campaign to rid our system of political parties and their inherent partisianism, I will join that campaign. But until the system changes, I would think that whatever accrues to one party when times are either good or not so good should accrue to the other party also when times are good or not so good.

And since politicians do not willingly blame themselves for the not so good times, who but partisans on the other side can we expect to point the fingers of blame?

Ziggy,

You're being unfair to the Republicans on this board with that assertion.

The few of us who acknowledge our affiliation with the GOP (Mike, Jimmy, me) regularly blast not only individual Republicans, but party leadership, as well. We critize their incompetence and their poor judgements and their personal greed and avarice. Other conservative leaning individuals on this board do too.

Not so with the partisan Democrats in the group. Sherm and Craig blame everything on the GOP. Times are always better when the Democrats are in office....to hell with the accomplishments of the conservatives.

On a state level this is even more appalling. The truth of the matter is Democrats have been in charge of this state since 1933 they have controlled both the House of Delegates and the Senate. Of those 75 years of Democratic control, a Republican has occupied the Governor's office for a total of 20 years. That is 55 years of solid Democratic rule.

So if West Virginia is not the place that we think it should be, obviously it is time to try something new. Demonizing the GOP for the lack of opportunities and personal wealth in this state is an outrage. I'm not going to sit by and let Sherm blame the Republicans for it any more. I won't do it.

Underwood and Moore were not perfect governors. With both public disgrace and prison time Arch Moore paid for the crimes he pleaded guilty to. Certainly they, like all men, had their strengths and their weaknesses. In this forum we have one person constantly blasting and belittling these individuals, ignoring their positive contributions to WV, and then making claims that all Republicans are guilty of the types of offenses committed by them, I'm not going to be quiet about it.

This is a beautiful state with some pretty remarkable citizens. West Virginia has suffered because of its poor business climate and lack of opportunities for her people. I'm not going to let him blame Republicans for that any more. It is crystal clear that if there is a political party to be blamed, it is the party that has dominated WV politics for 75 years....the Democratic Party.

Well Steph obviously you have not read my posts objectively.

I have repeatedly said the best I can claim about the Dems is they are clearly better than the republicans.

You have not been here so maybe you dont know.

I cannot make the same claim about some of the others.

But to the best of my knowledge the republicans we have elected have been disappointing.

I honestly dont know why they will not admit the shortcomings of the republicans we have elected.

I certainly have admitted the shortcomings of the Democrats.

For you to say otherwise is not fair imo.

You're telling me you told me what you thought now but when I stated you agreed with Sherm yesterday by posting those numbers, you said, no you didn't agree with him and all you were doing was posting numbers.

So which is it, do you or do you not agree with Sherms claims? Come on man, make up your mind. You switch stories so much, I doubt you even know anymore.

And I've told you, the numbers you posted have been disproven as far as I'm concerned. Do you got anything else, perhaps another link or something?

Stephanie wrote:Ziggy,

You're being unfair to the Republicans on this board with that assertion..

How so? Are the Republicans on this board politicians seeking credit for all the good they oversaw but denying knowing about, let along accepting any blame for the not so good? I don't think so.

And neither Sherm nor I nor Craig nor anyone else hold you or Mike or Jimmy responsible for what George Bush and his gang of neo-conservatives do in DC.

But recently you seem to hold Sherm responsible for anything and everything that any Democrat ever did.

Somehow here there is a one-sided mindset that some of us who participate in discussions here are as much to blame for the condition of West Virginia or the nation as the politicians who run the state and nation are. I respectfully suggest that their outrage is misdirected.

The few of us who acknowledge our affiliation with the GOP (Mike, Jimmy, me) regularly blast not only individual Republicans, but party leadership, as well.

They do not do that with even 5 percent of the zeal they do Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed- neither of whom I am defending here or anywhere else.

We critize their incompetence and their poor judgements and their personal greed and avarice. Other conservative leaning individuals on this board do too.

Well, maybe I need to read closer, but I just do not see very much of that.

Not so with the partisan Democrats in the group. Sherm and Craig blame everything on the GOP. Times are always better when the Democrats are in office....to hell with the accomplishments of the conservatives.

And for the past couple days here you've blammed everything on Nancy Pelosi. Tonight you even blame Sherm because abortion is not illegal. And Aaron and Keli and others still blame Bill Clinton for everything that both did and did not happen when he was president, 8 years ago and more. And you still blame Clinton for the Monica affair. And maybe Clinton deserves all that blame. I am just pointing out that, as relates to who is pointing fingers at whom here, none of us are typing with with clean hands.

On a state level this is even more appalling. The truth of the matter is Democrats have been in charge of this state since 1933 they have controlled both the House of Delegates and the Senate. Of those 75 years of Democratic control, a Republican has occupied the Governor's office for a total of 20 years. That is 55 years of solid Democratic rule.

So if West Virginia is not the place that we think it should be, obviously it is time to try something new. Demonizing the GOP for the lack of opportunities and personal wealth in this state is an outrage.

And it is equally outrageous for Republicans to sit back on their asses and preach every election cycle about how WV is such a terrible place when it is the envy of many people both inside and outside West Virginia. It has a crime rate and a cost of living rate that would be the envy of most of the states cited as what WV should try to be like. No thank you. I'll take WV any day of the week. And apparently so would you.

I'm not going to sit by and let Sherm blame the Republicans for it any more. I won't do it.

So are you going to sit by and let SamCogar continue to blame Democrats for it any more?

This is a beautiful state with some pretty remarkable citizens. West Virginia has suffered because of its poor business climate and lack of opportunities for her people.

The primary people who keep saying that are with the WV Chamber of Commerce- a group of large corporations with a vested interest in discouraging new industries with new ways of working with people and their government. The coal and utility companies that have controlled WV state government for over 100 years- regardless of which political party was in power- want to continue to control state government for their own purposes. They do not seem at all about ready to pack up and leave. They are seeking permits that would allow them to build tens of billions of dollars in new infrastructure. "Poor business climate" my ass.

I'm not going to let him blame Republicans for that any more. It is crystal clear that if there is a political party to be blamed, it is the party that has dominated WV politics for 75 years....the Democratic Party.

West Virginia is not dominated by any "political party". West Virginia is dominated by certain natural resource industries- by some of the most profitable corporations in the world. That sad old story about how "poor" West Virginia is is a fable, a fairy-tale. West Virginia could really be as rich as any oil rich country in the mid-east- if it would but use its natural wealth for the benefit of ALL the people of West Virginia. "Lack of opportunities and personal wealth", you say? If West Virginia shared its natural wealth with its citizens- as does the state of Alaska- every adult West Virginian could receive thousands of dollars in royalty payments every year for the coal that is blasted from the hills. But the bulk of those monies are sent to Pittsburgh, to Richmond- even to the Italian government, which operates- or at least did operate- coal mines in Taylor and/or Barbour County.

Poor business climate my rear end.

shermangeneral wrote:
I have repeatedly said the best I can claim about the Dems is they are clearly better than the republicans.

Arch Moore left office in 1977 and the unemployment rate was 6.6%.

Jay Rockefeller took office in 1977 and stayed there until 1985, at which point, the unemployment rate was 15.7%. That's an increase of 9.1% in 8 years.

In 4 years, Arch Moore nearly halfed that too 8.8%.

No, democrats HAVE NOT done a better job then Republicans. In fact, it's the exact opposite.

Arch Moore left with the state dam near bankrupt.

Medical providers would not accept PEIA.

And I saw in the paper the guy who brought the gate to protect the Governor's Mansion came to repossess it for lack of payment.

Hell they didnt even pay the phone bill.

Give me a break....

Aaron wrote:You're telling me you told me what you thought now but when I stated you agreed with Sherm yesterday by posting those numbers, you said, no you didn't agree with him and all you were doing was posting numbers.

I told you I agreed with Sherm as to those numbers being consistent with the same numbers reported to me by WV BEP.

So which is it, do you or do you not agree with Sherms claims?

I agree with the claims put forth by both Sherm and WV BEP- the numbers of initial unemployment claims filed 1957-61.

And I've told you, the numbers you posted have been disproven as far as I'm concerned.

And as far as I'm concerned they have not been disproven. Indeed, they have been confirmed- by both Sherm's original reasearch back in the 1990s, and by Ms. Abbott at WV BEP in 2002.

Do you got anything else, perhaps another link or something

What more do you want? The numbers I posted came from WV BEP- the agency that generated and keeps those records. The internet did not exist in 1957-61. As far as I know all we have from that era are paper records.

Yes Ziggy, poor business climate. Yes, poor West Virginians. You can blame big coal all you like....certainly they do share in the blame. The fact of the matter is, under 75 years of Democrats controlling the Legislature, nothing has been done to make coal companies responsible corporate citizens.

Apparently all the politicians here can be bought quite easily because it seems to me things in WV are peachy-keen for coal companies, and mediocre at best for pretty much everything else.

Now are you claiming you think things in WV are A-OK? You know I've been doing some thinking about this.......maybe I haven't been giving Joe Manchin enough credit. Isn't he the fella that decided to finally do SOMETHING about the food tax in this state? I might be wrong about Ole Joe.......he might just have some conservative tendencies after all. I have to give credit where it is due......while he should have done this sooner, at least he is doing it.

West Virginia's natural resources are being exploited by outsiders, with West Virginians not receiving any of the benefits? Seems to me that if after 75 years the Democrats haven't been able to fix that problem, it's time to try something new.

Nancy Pelosi has made a target of herself. She has been very smug with her new-found power and used it to block votes on legislation that is vital to not only our economy, but our national security. She has it coming. When you hurl that accusation that we aren't as harsh with Republicans, you must have forgotten our comments on Sen. Stevens of just a couple of days ago.

If you're looking for a Republican I have no problem attacking with glee......do a bit of research on Ed DiPrete. DiPrete is a total disgrace who brought dishonor to not only the GOP, but the State of Rhode Island. That scum should have spent the rest of his life behind bars as far as I'm concerned.

I am not defending WV Democrats. But what would WV Republicans do differently were they to have the governor's office and the legislature? I would predict that after several nominally "Republican" statehouse terms, coal companies would still effectively run the state's regulatory agencies, would still effectively control the legislature, would still have West Virginia operating as a virtual economic colony of and for the coal industry, and that the state Chamber of Commerce would still be whining about a "poor economic climate" as a way to keep new and competing businesses away from West Virginia and as a way to blackmail the legislature for fewer and lower taxes on existing corporations- some of the most profitable corporations in the world.

You see Stephanie, you continue to make the mistake of thinking that there is some significant difference between most WV Democrats and most WV Republicans. But other than the D or the R behind their name, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them.

Well zig Steph seems to have sipped the koolaid ref. Arch Moore.

Maybe you should ask about the episodes of clandestine meetings at the Charleston city dump and the stuffing of $100 bills in pockets while hunkered down in the car seat etc.?

Maybe her sources forgot that part.

(not to mention the bags of cash in the office drawers, etc.)