SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tim Luke who wrote (9654)11/28/1999 12:20:00 AM
From: chalu2  Respond to of 769670
 
Interesting article on McCain from one who knows him well:

John McCain in the Crucible

Commentary by James B. Stockdale for The New York Times

CORONADO, Calif. -- I am not surprised by reports that Senator John McCain's political enemies have been spreading rumors that his famous temper is a sign of a broader "instability" caused by his imprisonment in Vietnam.

In fact, a few weeks ago I received a call from an old friend who is also close to the George W. Bush campaign soliciting comments on Mr. McCain's "weaknesses." As I told that caller, I think John McCain is solid as a rock.

And I consider it blasphemy to smudge the straight-arrow prisoner-of-war record of a man who was near death when he arrived at Hoa Loa prison 1967: both arms broken, left leg broken, left shoulder broken by a civilian with a rifle butt.

He was eventually taken to the same rat-infested hospital room I had occupied two years earlier, and, like me, he had surgery on his leg. By then the Vietnamese had discovered that his father was the ranking admiral in the Pacific Fleet, and he received an offer that, as far as I know, was made to no other American prisoner: immediate release, no strings attached. He refused, thereby sentencing himself to four more years in a cell.

There was a special cramped and hot privy-like structure in that Hanoi prison reserved for whichever American was causing the Vietnamese the most trouble. I was the first in the camp to be locked up in it, and I gave it the name Calcutta.

There was only room for one person at a time in the cage, and after a couple of months I was taken out and marched back to a regular cell. As I limped along, I sneaked a peek at my replacement: John McCain, hobbling along on his own bad leg.

As one of the few Americans who spent more than four years in solitary confinement during that war, I know that pride and self-respect lead to aggressiveness, and aggressiveness leads to a deep sense of joy when one is under pressure. This is hardly a character flaw.

The military psychiatrists who periodically examine former prisoners of war have found that the more resistant a man was to harsh treatment, the more emotionally stable he is likely to become later in life.

The troublemakers who endured long stretches in solitary, the men we called the tigers, are for the most part more in tune with themselves now than are those who chose the easier path of nonconfrontation, which made them "deserving" of cell mates. The psychiatrists tell us that many of those prisoners who chose a more docile existence missed out on the joy of "getting even" after release; some look back on their performances with regret.

The psychiatrists have it partly right, but the truth of imprisonment is best learned from the writings of men who have spent a lot of time in cells, like Dostoyevsky, Cervantes and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. The last described his feeling of high-mindedness in his gulag writings:

"And it was only when I lay there on rotting prison straw that I sensed within myself the first stirrings of good. Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts. ...

And that is why I turn back to the years of my imprisonment and say, sometimes to the astonishment of those about me: 'Bless you, prison!'"

I understand that, and so does John McCain.

James B. Stockdale, a retired Navy Vice Admiral, was the Reform Party vice-presidential candidate in 1992.

Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company




To: Tim Luke who wrote (9654)12/1/1999 10:38:00 AM
From: Bill  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 769670
 
Get ready for the Gore chorus of "risky scheme", "risky scheme", "risky scheme"...

Bush tax plan would aid very rich and working poor
10.06 a.m. ET (1518 GMT) December 1, 1999
By Ron Fournier, Associated Press

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush today proposed slashing tax rates at all income levels with a five-year, $483 billion package "designed to sustain our nation's prosperity and reflect our nation's decency.''

Bush's economic package ignited the sharpest exchange between the two-term Texas governor and one of his top rivals, conservative millionaire Steve Forbes.

Forbes, who supports a massive overhaul of the tax system to implement a flat 17 percent tax rate, called Bush's plan "something only the timid could love — simply more political expediency.''

Bush, the front-runner who has avoided confrontation with his fellow GOP hopefuls, fired back.

"I think he likes to campaign by tearing down other people. That's just not how I'm going to campaign. Republicans will have a choice,'' Bush said in a brief interview with The Associated Press.

Just minutes before, Bush and Forbes shook hands as they greeted voters at a farmer's breakfast, and they exchanged best wishes for Thursday night's Republican debate, the first for Bush.

Bush's package, targeting the working poor as well as the very rich, embraces conservative economic staples with a populist twist, further defining what he means by his promise to be a "compassionate conservative.''

In his address unveiling the proposal, Bush focused on the benefits his plan would bring to the working poor and middle class, saying that half of the cost of his income tax cuts will help people who are trying to work themselves out of poverty.

"We will take down the tollgate on the road to the middle class,'' Bush said in prepared remarks, noting no middle class family would face a federal income tax rate higher than 25 percent.

Doubling the child tax credit and lowering the marginal income tax rates would eliminate taxes for a four person family earning $35,000, a tax cut of more than $1,500, Bush said. Many two-income families making $50,000 would see their income taxes cut by half, Bush said.

"Let's start where the need is greatest: with social mobility for hard-working American families,'' Bush said. "We need a tax system that makes it easier, not harder, to join the ranks of the middle class.''

The package would cut taxes a bit deeper than a similar GOP congressional package vetoed this year by President Clinton, but is not nearly as ambitious as flat-tax overhauls championed by Forbes and other conservatives.

Bush's package would:

—Simplify and reduce marginal tax rates. Incomes are now taxed at five levels — 15 percent, 28 percent, 31 percent, 36 percent and 39.6 percent. Bush would propose four rates, with the poorest paying 10 percent and the wealthiest paying a top rate of 33 percent.

—Double the $500 child tax credit, a benefit to the middle class. Bush would open the credit to people earning up to $200,000; the current cap is $100,000.

—Reduce the penalty paid by couples who get married by restoring a deduction that ended in 1986.

—Eliminate all estate taxes, a GOP favorite that would primarily aid small business men and women, farmers and family members who inherit huge sums.

—Make permanent the research and development tax credit that Congress just extended for five years.

—Raise from $500 to $5,000 the amount of money a person can put in tax-free education savings accounts. Current law limits the accounts to college expenses; Bush would expand it to kindergarten through 12th grade.

—Eliminate the so-called "earnings limit'' for Social Security. Recipients between the ages of 65-69 currently lose part of their Social Security benefits for every dollar they earn over $17,000.

Bush said the package would benefit give groups, the working poor, the middle class, entrepreneurs, charitable givers and the elderly — purposely avoiding a direct reference to the people who would save tens of thousands of dollars under a sweeping tax cut program — wealthy Americans.

The Bush tax plan also relies on economic assumptions somewhat rosier than those forecast by the Congressional Budget Office, which estimated an after-inflation growth rate of 2.3 percent over the next decade. The Bush plan projects a 2.7 percent growth rate.

Congress proposed a 10-year, $792 billion package that would have reduced all five marginal income rates by 1 percentage point, eased the so-called "marriage penalty,'' phased out estate taxes and expanded the IRA-like education savings accounts to $2,000.

Clinton vetoed the bill, saying it would have run the nation deeper into debt. Democrats say Bush's package is just as flawed, even though it lowers rates for low- and middle-income Americans.

"His plan is going to needlessly risk the economic prosperity and jeopardize the future of Social Security and Medicare,'' Democratic Party spokeswoman Jenny Backus said.

Tax cuts are a staple of GOP presidential primaries, but Bush is especially eager to establish his supply-side credentials to counter concerns that he will follow the footsteps of his father, the former president who is still blamed for breaking a "no new taxes'' promise.

Among Bush's GOP rivals, Arizona Sen. John McCain says he would "dramatically increase'' the number of Americans taxed at the lowest rate, 15 per cent, by letting couples earning up to $70,000 qualify for that tax bracket. Forbes and Gary Bauer support flat taxes.