Skip to comments.
O'Neill, Lindsey resign [UPI]
United Press International ^
| 12/6/2002 11:08 AM
| Richard Tomkins and Peter Roff
Posted on 12/06/2002 8:39:39 AM PST by CanisMajor2002
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 (UPI) -- Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and White House economic adviser Lawrence Lindsey, architect of the president's tax cuts, resigned within minutes of each other Friday, officials said.
The resignations, effective in the next few weeks, came as the Labor Deparetment announced unemployment in November increased to 6 percent, the highest level in nine years.
It was not clear if the resignations were coordinated, related to the spike in unemployment or were requested by the White House.
"They resigned," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said repeatedly when asked if the departures were part of a house cleaning.
"I've said everything I'm going to say" on that.
"The answer will always be the same. They resigned."
O'Neill has been a lightning rod for criticism by Democrats and others over an economy the president concedes is "bumping along."
"The data continues to be mixed on the economy," Fleischer said, and Friday's unemployment figure "was a setback" for positive trends, such as lower interest rates, low inflation and some growth in the economy.
President George W. Bush, while touting the positive, has repeatedly expressed in speeches his concern about stimulating the economy and creating job growth.
"The president very much appreciates the service of Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and Larry Lindsey," Fleischer said, and their contributions to getting Congress to pass tax cuts, new trade authority, terrorism insurance and other measures.
"They have both served the president ably and well in leading the nation from a period of recession into a period of growth," Fleischer said.
Fleischer said no successor for O'Neill was in place, but the president would look for a candidate with government and private-sector experience.
O'Neill was head of the industrial giant Alcoa when Bush tapped him to be his administration's first treasury secretary, largely because of his close relations to Vice President Dick Cheney and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan.
Lindsey is a prominent supply-side economist who was appointed a Federal Reserve governor by the current president's father. Lindsey also played an important advisory role in President George W. Bush's 2000 presidential campaign.
Both men have been the focus of criticism from the GOP pro-growth wing for some time. Calls for O'Neill's resignation have built steadily almost from the beginning.
Early speculation as to their replacements is mute, but names frequently mentioned in the past include retiring House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, former Texas GOP Sen. Phil Gramm and magazine publisher Steve Forbes --all favorites of the GOP's pro-growth wing.
TOPICS: Breaking News; Government
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
To: CanisMajor2002
Actually there is an anti-growth wing. Those that blindly worship balanced budgets to the point where it is acceptable to raise taxes in order to "fix" it. People like Hoover, Eisenhower, Bush #1...even Goldwater was opposed to JFK's tax cuts on the grounds it would create deficits. Then you have the republicans who are in favor of tariffs and anti free trade measures
61
posted on
12/06/2002 12:45:07 PM PST
by
arielb
To: Darksheare
"You're in Pennsylvania."It's really tough for us PA freepers, having to share our state with socialist collectivists like MurrayMom. Embarrassing.
To: cake_crumb
Well.. I have to admit, I'm not much better- if at all. I live in New York.. see post #51.
Comment #64 Removed by Moderator
To: CanisMajor2002
"For the third time, and perhaps a different way, I'm going to phrase this: In an article that says there is a 'pro-growth' wing of the Republican Party, the implication is made that there must be an 'anti-growth' wing"Your question has been answered at least twice on this thread.
Your refusal to accept the simple, straightforward answers given to you speak volumes. BTW, that wans't a flame. When I flame you, there will be no doubt in your mind that you have been flamed. If you don't want to get flamed, stop pulling liberaltarian TV Talking Head Show debating stunts.
To: The Raven
I wonder if Walter Williams would want the job?
He would be an excellent choice,IMHO.
66
posted on
12/06/2002 1:34:49 PM PST
by
roballen
To: Darksheare
If you live in NY, I'd say you're a little worse off. Then again, I live in one of the remaining (beleaguered) islands of conservatism in PA.
To: CanisMajor2002
Early speculation as to their replacements is mute Mabye they can hire a couple of H-1Bs to take the slots.
68
posted on
12/06/2002 1:43:22 PM PST
by
adx
To: jjhunsecker
Larry Kudlow could never be confirmed. He is a former cocaine addict.
To: cake_crumb
I'm fairly close to Pike County PA, and that place quit being a conservative bastion decades ago.
But that comes from it's proximity,I hope, with New York and New Jersey.
Unless it comes from the over-abundance of government offices in that area. Like the National Park service....
My part of New York is one of the few areas that didn't block vote for ALGore. At least, not willingly.
They also didn't vote for Hitlery. (I am aware of only 230 votes for the Beats from my area. But my area is ratehr rural.)
To: CanisMajor2002
71
posted on
12/06/2002 1:52:01 PM PST
by
KQQL
To: MurryMom
How does it feel to be completely out of power with little hope for a comeback?
To: CanisMajor2002
"...what was this "pro-growth" arm of the Republican party...is there an anti-growth arm?" As a matter of fact, there is. Most Republicans are anti-growth...when it comes to liberal foolishness.
73
posted on
12/06/2002 2:04:49 PM PST
by
okie01
To: All
The real news that is being glossed over is Bush personally asked for the resignations.
And this happened immediately after these guys sat down with Bush to discuss ideas and implementations for the new fiscal year, which Bush wanted to bring forward in January.
Could it be because the only thing that was presented to Bush was a simplification of the tax code and more reasons why the administration should not cut taxes?
To: CanisMajor2002
I HOPE WE SELECT A REAL PRO-GROWTH GUY -like Armey, Williams etc. and not
a "popular politician" whomever he/she is!!
To: Darksheare
And it took a Terrorist attack to send that out the window. Seems like you've fallen for one of Dumbya's fairy tales. Your post ignore the fact that before 9/11 the economy was suffering high unemployment, falling GNP, and a lousy stock market as a result of Dumbya's failed policieis just like now. What 9/11 accomplished is it gives the press an excuse to ignore Dumbya's Big Lie about hitting the trifecta to justify continuation of the Bushies' failed spend-and-borrow policy.
76
posted on
12/06/2002 2:06:00 PM PST
by
MurryMom
To: MurryMom
Dumbya keeps running circles around the Rats. I guess that makes them feel pretty dumb.
To: MurryMom
So, how does it feel to lose, and lose big?
To: MurryMom
Really?
And the eight years under Clinton was a fairy tale as well?
You ignore the fact that Clinton was the most despicable lying scumbag ever to be in office, and his corruption infected everything. From how the U.S. dealt with other countries and people (Remember Elian?) to how it did business, period.
You willfully ignore the criminal behavior of your vaunted 'most ethical' president and your party.
And you believe the propaganda put out by the press and the terrorists themselves. You believe America got attacked because we deserve it, don't you?
And I noticed that you didn't bother to answer my questions. Go back and bone up on them. Or own up to the corruption in your party.
If the Democrats ever want to be taken seriously, then you have to stop cheating in the polls, and lying to the people.
You also have to stop being corrupt.
But the Democrats aren't ever going to do that now, are they?
What about Clinton's failed policy's.
What about the "Crime bull(bill)" and the "Brady Bill"?
They do and did absolutely nothing.
What about his foreign policy? (Clinton had none)
And his energy policy? (He had none.)
And his selling of fighter technology to the Chinese?(Fly by wire flight control system from the F-16 Fighting Falcon - Treason, punishable with death.)
Or his selling of missile technology to the Chinese? (Stability control tech and computers. Treason, punishable with death.)
Or his selling of our nuclear secrets to the Chinese? (Willful interference with an investigation.)
Now, answer the questions, like a smart person could, or go back to the DUh where the Flawgic flows and the party licks it's wounds.
To: MurryMom
You have been littering threads all day with your anti-gwb-rhetoric; I really dont care about your agenda, but your off topic flame floods are making it difficult to follow the on topic discussions. Could you please "take it to the Alley" ?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson