Re: Boycott CBS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-- 
"In any country there must be people who have to die. They are the
sacrifices any nation has to make to achieve law & order."

- Idi Dada Amin

"Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of
Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in
midstream. .and would have incurred incalculable human and political
costs. .We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect rule
Iraq. .There was no viable 'exit strategy' we could see. .Going in and
occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate,
would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression
that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United
States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile
land. It would have been a dramatically  different -- and perhaps barren -- 
outcome."

- Elected President Bush

"Gunner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote

> <http://russp.org/taxcuts.html>
> <http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-261.html
<http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-261.html>
> <http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/politics/politics3.htm>

Carter's economic woes and Reagan's 'recovery' coincided with the
destabilization
(due to internal squabbling) of OPEC's monopoly on overseas oil production.

The budget deficits came from wild spending combined with a lowering of tax
revenues, as the lower tax rates failed to generate the revenue needed to
even stay
level, let alone pay for Reagan's Brave New Military, a small fraction of
which
was needed, a significant portion of which the Pentagon recommended
against, and a great big chunk of which was slashed from the budget by the
Democrat-controlled legislature.
Coincidence does not always mean causation, but the same is true of Reagan's
"plan."

The major factor in Clinton's recovery and the reduction in the deficit
corresponds nicely to his refinancing the debt at ever shorter terms and
lower
rates, along with raising taxes and a bump from the internet bubble.

The first URL is some Podunk description with no support.

The second URL goes to the Cato Institute. Lots of numbers (and one
assumes they have access to most any number they might want) but the
analysis stops in 1994-1995, depending on chart or table, and the numbers
are massaged in unique and definitely biased ways, depending on what is
being
talked about at the time.  OPEC is dismissed entirely, except to blithely
counter the claim that OPEC had anything to do with anything, with a single
"report" cited as "proof."  Yet, despite a reasonable allowance of a year
for
Reagan's policies to be emplaced and take effect, and a few more years to
overcome those policies effects, Reagan is being compared with Clinton,
and at the time of comparisons, Clinton had been in office a little over a
year!
Talk about stacking the deck!  Of course, the deficits were all the
Democrat's
faults - I mean, they only cut Reagan's proposed budgets instead of trashing
them completely and starting from scratch!

The third URL is an opinion piece with no real documentation.

The crux of the matter is that Reagan grew the economy the same way as every
other President does, with government largess.  The problem is that he left
us with
a debt that ate the entire "Peace Dividend" until Clinton made a dent in the
edifice.
Now we have Bush who has undone all that was done before, and we have
ballooning
deficits, a sluggard economy, a brand new baby war to feed, and NO DEMOCRATS
IN SIGHT to blame!

Who said God is dead?  He just has a very wry sense of humor...

Dan


Dan