[KQQL]

Larry Kadlow?

[KQQL]

Larry Kadlow?
NAAA .......He's a known guy......someone who isn't a household name....... I wonder who..............

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

[Huck]

We need new policies," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. "If it is going to be new people with the same old policies, we are in deep trouble."

I totally agree. We need to abandon so-called "targeted tax cuts" which do nothing to promote growth but instead redistribute wealth and add administrative overhead to the cost of government; we need to abandon giving "tax credits" to people who don't pay taxes; we need to simplify our tax code; we need to move away from so-called progressive taxation, which unfairly punishes achievement, impedes growtrh, and discourages wealth creation; we need to abandon the zero-sum notions that tax increases lead to revenue increases; we need to abandon static evaluations of the budget which ignore the growth effect of tax cuts; we need to abandon the class-warfare rhetoric of the 1930s in favor of a pro-growth, all-inclusive vision for America where opportunity and achievement rule, not envy and bureacratic fiat.

I could go on. But in short, Ms. Rodham, I agree with you. We need new policies.

[randita]

I was wondering about Phil Gramm. The timing seems perfect.

[winin2000]

Two quick thoughts:

Not sure how I like a co-chairman at Goldman Sachs, the spawning ground of both Rubin and Corzine. Such a pick would immediately be spun by the RATS as a tantamount admission that Rubinomics is a self-evident truth etched on stone tablets from Mount Sinai! If memory serves, that firm even issued some report unfavorable to tax cuts earlier this year that GOP House members had to respond to saying that it was a "Democrat-friendly company."

I still think a fresh, preferrably non-politician, face is in order. Archer, Forbes, Gramm, and Armey, don't fit the bill. Make it a Wall Street choice, but steer clear of Goldman Sachs.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

President Bush, struggling to demonstrate he can deal effectively with a sick economy,

Geez, no editorializing there, huh?

[SlightOfTongue]

"When it comes to the economy, we need more than new people from this administration. We need new policies," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. "If it is going to be new people with the same old policies, we are in deep trouble."

Do we have to report, instead of strike out, everything this vile excuse for a human, HRC, has to pull out of her "Vagina Chronicle Files", and BTW, stinking up FR threads. Sheeeeesh! If this woman had another brain, it would be very lonesome.

[mo]

If dubya successfully eliminates the IRS/income/capital gains taxes and privatizes social security-he will have re-mapped the domestic political seen as thoroughly as he intends to re-map the Mid-East. Such an accomplishemnt could put the GOP in DC for the next 30 years.

[Jackie]

James A. Baker III

[uglybiker]

"Blah,blah,blah,blah...", said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.

Of all the Democrats in The House and Senate, why do they always have to dig up a quote from crusty the pantsuit?

[savedbygrace]

"When it comes to the economy, we need more than new people from this administration. We need new policies," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. "If it is going to be new people with the same old policies, we are in deep trouble."

The Dims continue to practice the 3 Cs: criticize, condemn, and complain, rather than offer any ideas of their own. Clinton hasn't had a new idea since she was 18.

[kcvl]

"When it comes to the economy, we need more than new people from this administration. We need new policies," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. "If it is going to be new people with the same old policies, we are in deep trouble."

No, *ITCH, we were in DEEP TROUBLE during eight years of CLINTON(both of you).