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: combjelly who wrote (511283)	9/8/2009 2:43:52 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578952

When Bush spoke to students, Democrats investigated, held hearings By: Byron York Chief Political Correspondent 09/08/09 7:11 AM EDT The controversy over President Obama's speech to the nation's schoolchildren will likely be over shortly after Obama speaks today at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. But when President George H.W. Bush delivered a similar speech on October 1, 1991, from Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC, the controversy was just beginning. Democrats, then the majority party in Congress, not only denounced Bush's speech -- they also ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate its production and later summoned top Bush administration officials to Capitol Hill for an extensive hearing on the issue. Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance. The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported. With the Post article in hand, Democrats pounced. "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Richard Gephardt, then the House Majority Leader. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'" Democrats did not stop with words. Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech. "The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC," Ford began. "As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event." Unfortunately for Ford, the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly. "The speech itself and the use of the department's funds to support it, including the cost of the production contract, appear to be legal," the GAO wrote in a letter to Chairman Ford. "The speech also does not appear to have violated the restrictions on the use of appropriations for publicity and propaganda." That didn't stop Democratic allies from taking their own shots at Bush. The National Education Association denounced the speech, saying it "cannot endorse a president who spends $26,000 of taxpayers' money on a staged media event at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, D.C. -- while cutting school lunch funds for our neediest youngsters." Lost in all the denouncing and investigating was the fact that Bush's speech itself, like Obama's today, was entirely unremarkable. "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," the president told students. "If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now, when they're stuck in a dead end job. Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams. washingtonexaminer.com

To: combjelly who wrote (511283)	9/8/2009 3:25:40 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578952

For you thesis to be correct, when Reagan raised taxes, the economy should have slowed. Just the opposite occurred. And when Clinton did it, ditto. It didn't happen again. Which means you are FOS. I won't focus on the specific allegation but address it below. Because you'll just argue your way out of it. BUT EVERY ECONOMIST OTHER THAN THE LEFT WING NUTJOBS LIKE KRUGMAN KNOWS THAT CUTTING TAXES CAUSES A SURGE IN ECONOMIC GROWTH.* The evidence is overwhelming. Every significant tax cut in the last 100 years (or more) has come with a surge in economic growth, in tax revenue growth, investment and employment. There really isn't any doubt about this amongst persons who are informed. *While there were some tax increases under Reagan, NEVER did those increases TOUCH the cuts generated by ERTA. So, while you and others would claim that TEFRA was an increase, it was effectively a reduction in ERTA since ERTA had not become fully effective when TEFRA was passed.