Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (290219)	7/12/2006 3:55:17 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 1572659

re: 1 - If Republicans are also tax and spenders, even if the where bigger taxers and spenders than the Democrats, that would not make "tax and spend Democrats" a myth. It would just mean that "tax and spend Republicans" is also true. Bull shit. You know damn well that the implication of "Tax and Spend Democrats" is that the Republicans are fiscally responsible. No slamming the Democrats isn't the same as praising the Republicans. re: Reagan was a net tax cutter. Reagan raised taxes when he knew that he was going to screw future generations if he didn't. Admirable. Nonsense, he knew no such thing. To know it would imply it was true, and it wasn't, but also there is no sign that he believed it either. re: Clinton moved the growth of government from taxes to regulation, but new regulation still makes for a larger more intrusive government, and he increased taxes. Data to support? Clinton actually reduced government employment, the first in a long time (maybe ever) and the only since. Look at all the new and expanded regulations that came out under Clinton. As for employment, Clinton was able to cut the military (including civilian DoD employees), if you drop out those areas federal government employment increased under Clinton. re: "One of the things was a historic reforming welfare." - Largely a child of the Republican congress. You are a Republican lap dog... you LOVE to sit on those guys laps! It was a Clinton sponsored bill, and he signed it. It's a Clinton accomplishment... The idea wasn't even a serious proposal until the Republicans won congress. The congress at the time is one of the few in modern times to mostly have a positive record. Its unfortunate that they turned so strongly away from spending restraint in subsequent years but that doesn't change what they did then. Well "technically" true is also "factually" true. If you talk entitlements, Bush is far more of a spender than any president since Roosevelt. You might reasonably say "than any president since Johnson. I'm not a Republican apologist or a big fan of the current administration or congress. They are the lesser of two evils to me. I'll defend them against inaccurate or exaggerated charges, but there are plenty or real negatives to attack.