Obama vandalizes WH presidential biographies

Kate wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote:

Kate wrote: It's not truly vandalism, since it's just a commentary added to some of the biographies.

Ok, it's not vandalism.

Shameless campaigning, and an incredible show of disrespect to those that held the office before him.

How's that?

It is campaigning, but I don't think it's disrespectful.

To understand why it is disrespectful, you have to have a grasp of honor and respectability, something I suspect both Obama and you are missing.

Nothing disrespectful here... lol

"Reagan revved up the crowd: “Do you think the millionaire ought to pay more in taxes than the bus driver or less?”

“More!” the audience shouted.

“We want to see that everyone pays their fair share and no one gets a free ride,” Reagan said, and that “no one is manipulating the system to their advantage because they’re rich and powerful.”"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgbJ-Fs1 ... r_embedded


You can spin, but you can not hide.

Something the Dog Said wrote: "Reagan revved up the crowd: “Do you think the millionaire ought to pay more in taxes than the bus driver or less?”

“More!” the audience shouted.

“We want to see that everyone pays their fair share and no one gets a free ride,” Reagan said, and that “no one is manipulating the system to their advantage because they’re rich and powerful.”"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgbJ-Fs1 ... r_embedded


You can spin, but you can not hide.

What the hell are you talking about? This is a topic about changing presidential biographies.

Changed to add truth to the biography.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Changed to add truth to the biography.

If you want truth then they should add that Reagan cut the tax rate for millionaires from 70% to 35% and 16 million jobs were created (Jan '81 to Jan '89).

Something the Dog Said wrote: Changed to add truth to the biography.

Changed to make sure Obama's name appeared in them.

pineinthegrass wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Changed to add truth to the biography.

If you want truth then they should add that Reagan cut the tax rate for millionaires from 70% to 35% and 16 million jobs were created (Jan '81 to Jan '89).

And add that to pay for that cut in tax rate, the deficit was tripled.

Something the Dog Said wrote: "Reagan revved up the crowd: “Do you think the millionaire ought to pay more in taxes than the bus driver or less?”

“More!” the audience shouted.

“We want to see that everyone pays their fair share and no one gets a free ride,” Reagan said, and that “no one is manipulating the system to their advantage because they’re rich and powerful.”"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgbJ-Fs1 ... r_embedded


You can spin, but you can not hide.

Reagan wasn't talking percentages, he was talking dollars and cents. Who pays more dollars in taxes Dog - Buffet or his secretary? The Buffet rule is about percentages, Reagan was talking dollars. Lower the rates, broaden the base and tax revenues, both in dollars and as a percentage of GDP, will increase. If you want that increase in revenue to have a chance of doing any good, however, you need the other part of the equation to make it successful - actually lowering the number of dollars the federal government spends every year. More revenue and less dollars spent is much more effective than more revenue and more dollars spent, especially when the dollars spent has increased by a significantly greater amount than the more revenue end of the equation. Bush and Reagan's 16 years combined won't hold a candle to the deficit Obama racks up in 8 if he's given the chance. He's already exceeded Bush's "unpatriotic" 8 year addition in under 4 years and he'll be matching their 16 combined years after 5 at the pace he is going.

In 1789 Obama approached the 1st United States Congress suggesting they set up a commission to investigate the Cherry Tree Incident.