I want it back: it was Camelot

[Harry Dresden]

Naw.

What I am saying is that you guys have no standards. None. Zip. Zero.

Because you don't hold them up to everyone.

If you guys did..McCain would have never been a Republican, neither would Bush or plenty of other guys that were elected.

Seems the skeletons in the Closet don't matter to you folks as long as the politics match up.

what "guys" am i a part of now Sallow?....lets see Dean called me a "right wing wacko?.....i think it was Rabbi who called me a "Libturd"......now what group are you throwing me in?....

You claim to be a conservative.

Sheesh..

you would think as long as we have been posting together you would realize how stupid that statement is.....WHERE have i ever claimed to be a Conservative?.... if i am a Conservative ....how come the only 5 times i have been negged has been by Conservatives here?......what did i say for them to neg me?....could it be when i was defending Unions?.....could it be when i was taking heat for being a lowlife Federal worker?....maybe because i think a Woman is in charge of having an Abortion or not?.....or maybe it was when i thought people should be able to see a Doctor if they are sick....EVEN if they dont have Ins.....maybe its all those times i have said the Republican party sucks......yea i am one of them guys Sallow.....and to think i have even defended some of the stuff you have said....

 

[Avatar4321]

And Bob's your uncle.

That..is what conservatives were saying about the Kennedys.

Never mind that Bobby, John and Ted devoted their lives to public service. The conservatives think they were "scum".

While such "luminaries" as Nixon, Reagan and Bush are not "scum".

Gotta love it.

Public service... Is that what you call corruption and abuse of power?

 

[Avatar4321]

Poor teddy..........the worthless, incompetent, embarrassing, FREDO of the family..........alcoholic blowhard

One of the most successful legislators in the history of the United States.

And how on earth do you define success?

 

[KissMy]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

 

[tinydancer]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

I'm not talking about a fiscal "Camelot"; not at all. It was a great and wonderous time to be alive

But at least tell me that you understand that Kennedy tried to reduce taxes; that effort was rejected by Congress but LBJ managed to get the Revenue Act of 1964 passed.

The general figures that you stated in your post was a reduction in taxes.

History and effects

President John F. Kennedy brought up the issue of tax reduction in his 1963 State of the Union address.

His initial plan called for a $13.5 billion tax cut through a reduction of the top income tax rate from 91% to 65%, reduction of the bottom rate from 20% to 14%, and a reduction in the corporate tax rate from 52% to 47%.

The first attempt at passing the tax cuts was rejected by Congress in 1963.

Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, and was succeeded by Lyndon Johnson. Johnson was able to achieve Kennedy's goal of a tax cut in exchange for promising a budget not to exceed $100 billion in 1965.

The Revenue Act of 1964 emerged from Congress and was signed by Johnson on February 26, 1964.

The stated goal of the tax cuts were to raise personal incomes, increase consumption, and increase capital investments.

Evidence shows that these goals were met to some degree by the tax cut.

Unemployment fell from 5.2% in 1964 to 4.5% in 1965, and fell to 3.8% in 1966.

Initial estimates predicted a loss of revenue as a result of the tax cuts, however, tax revenue increased in 1964 and 1965.

Revenue Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I want it back: it was Camelot

Naïve, reactionary nonsense.

America’s greatness lies in its future, not its past.

 

[tinydancer]

I want it back: it was Camelot

Naïve, reactionary nonsense.

America’s greatness lies in its future, not its past.

I'm not talking about America's greatness. Her greatness has been in her past, her present and her future. America's greatness is eternal.

So many missing the point of the thread.

*sigh*

 

[Greenbeard]

Ted was not in the same league as his brothers....

Ideologically and politically, he certainly was.

Although Johnson did much to expand the social welfare system, JFK actually did little.

Exactly my point. Kennedy didn't bring in a lot of liberalsim. He merely brought in a little... and in doing so, got Americans used to the (false) idea that government "helping" people was OK, a legitimate function.

Johnson then brought in a lot more.

I would assume that the New Frontier would generally be considered a fairly liberal set of domestic policies. That said, some of Kennedy's larger domestic priorities--most notably the creation of Medicare--did have to wait for his successor's administration to come to fruition.

 

[Two Thumbs]

There never was a Camelot

The kennedys were all scum. They got their money by being rum runners, criminals.
Pa cheered the nazi as they bombed england
the boys all cheated on their wives, most were drunks, jfk CHOSE war.

it was one big lie generated by the media b/c Bobby and jfk were good looking. nothing more

And Bob's your uncle.

That..is what conservatives were saying about the Kennedys.

Never mind that Bobby, John and Ted devoted their lives to public service. The conservatives think they were "scum".

While such "luminaries" as Nixon, Reagan and Bush are not "scum".

Gotta love it.

idiot

It doesn't excuse the worship.

They dedicated themselves for money and power. they couldn't care less passed getting a headline

 

[Two Thumbs]

Poor teddy..........the worthless, incompetent, embarrassing, FREDO of the family..........alcoholic blowhard

One of the most successful legislators in the history of the United States.

He prevented Carter from passing universal government health care.

not out of kindness or concern for the debt it would create, but b/c he was bitter that Carter beat him for the nom.


real sweetheart

 

[Harry Dresden]

Ted was not in the same league as his brothers....

Ideologically and politically, he certainly was.

so he was riding on their coat tails.....the guy was a dirt bag....

 

[Flopper]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

Kennedy's tax cut bill which became the Revenue Act of 1964 cut income tax rates across the board by approximately 20%. In addition to individual income tax cuts, the act slightly reduced corporate tax rates and introduced a minimum standard deduction among other cuts.

 

[KissMy]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

I'm not talking about a fiscal "Camelot"; not at all. It was a great and wonderous time to be alive

I do not know because I was not yet alive. I imagine the space race was exciting.

 

[Flopper]

The problem with Democrats even back then is that, though the did not intend it, any move toward letting government do "just a little to help" people with the ordinary problems of life (instead of sticking strictly to protecting their rights and no more, which is government's real purpose)... once government is allowed to do "just a little", the next batch of politicians will ALWAYS gravitate toward "doing just a little more". And the next batch to doing more, etc. etc.

Liberalism, no matter how mildly started or with whatever good intentions, ALWAYS turns into a "race to the bottom" as politicians try to out-goodguy the others and spend more and more tax money on trinkets and goodies for the voters.

And you wind up with exactly the government we have today: Wallowing in debt, pouring out vast sums to people whose life doesn't get any better as a result, and screaming at the people who actually earn that money, for not being "generous enough". IN the meantime, actual charities who used to do that, shrink steadily, unable to compete with government's "free" money taken from people by force (ever seen what happens when you don't pay your taxes?)

Conservatives knew this back then, and resisted the plans of Kennedy et. al. as much as possible. To no avail.

You want Camelot back? Kennedy took it from you and redistributed it. Followed by more and more extreme versions of the same.

Although Johnson did much to expand the social welfare system, JFK actually did little.

Exactly my point. Kennedy didn't bring in a lot of liberalsim. He merely brought in a little... and in doing so, got Americans used to the (false) idea that government "helping" people was OK, a legitimate function.

Johnson then brought in a lot more.

And every successive liberal President (in both parties) brought in more and more.

Conservatives knew early on, that it would be a downward slide once the process started, and have fought it every step of the way. Unsuccessfully.

And now we have the gargantuan Nanny State of today, wallowing in debt, spending more on unproductive, unsuccessful leftist programs than earlier governments spent on ALL programs, even in the middle of WWII.

We were quite use to the idea of government helping Americans long before Kennedy.

The problem with cutting entitlement spending is Americans have a choice between two extremes, policies that result in wealth being shifted to the rich or policies that shift wealth to the poor. Since there's a lot more poor people than rich people, it's pretty obvious that not much is going change until the two sides come up with programs that can be agreed on as being of mutual benefit.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

We are coming up fast on the fiftieth anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy. While it is good and proper to respectfully note the assassination of any political leader in America, the establishment left in America has tried since November 1963 to bleat, blame, and badger their countrymen into accepting the false notion that Kennedy was a great president or, indeed, a good man. The assassination of his brother five years later magnified this theme.

What is the truth about JFK? How ought we to view this president in the light of what we know now?


Every new revelation about JFK since his death makes him look worse. Consider his military career. PT boats were small, fast, and nimble. Any competent skipper would have used these advantages, but Kennedy managed the remarkable feat of being the only PT skipper in the Second World War to have his boat rammed. If his name had not been "Kennedy," he might have face court martial instead of glory.

His political career was greased by Papa Joe, who had built up a fortune selling short during the Depression (gambling that stocks would drop in value), bootlegging booze with crime boss Frank Costello, and creating a corrupt political machine which stole the West Virginia Democrat primary from Humphrey and carried Illinois in the general election by winning every graveyard in Chicago by a landslide.

Much of the muck of Kennedy was concealed by those who knew the truth, and no establishment reporter exercised much energy trying to dig up Kennedy scandals. Kennedy was addicted to meth, and his behavior bordered on the psychotic as times, the New York Post reported recently.


About his sordid sex life, the putrescence began to ooze out decades ago. We learned in 1976 that Kennedy and Giancana had sex with the same woman, Judith Exner. Then, in 1988, Exner, dying of cancer, revealed that she had carried messages back and forth between the mob and President Kennedy. About the time the Exner story broke in the 1970s, America learned that President Kennedy was a serial adulterer and that both he and RFK had had sex with Marilyn Monroe, which in light of her suicide makes their roles particularly malodorous.................

Read more: Articles: The Camelot Fraud
Follow us: [MENTION=20123]American[/MENTION]Thinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

But the Photos !!!!!!! lol

 

[Flopper]

We are coming up fast on the fiftieth anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy. While it is good and proper to respectfully note the assassination of any political leader in America, the establishment left in America has tried since November 1963 to bleat, blame, and badger their countrymen into accepting the false notion that Kennedy was a great president or, indeed, a good man. The assassination of his brother five years later magnified this theme.

What is the truth about JFK? How ought we to view this president in the light of what we know now?


Every new revelation about JFK since his death makes him look worse. Consider his military career. PT boats were small, fast, and nimble. Any competent skipper would have used these advantages, but Kennedy managed the remarkable feat of being the only PT skipper in the Second World War to have his boat rammed. If his name had not been "Kennedy," he might have face court martial instead of glory.

His political career was greased by Papa Joe, who had built up a fortune selling short during the Depression (gambling that stocks would drop in value), bootlegging booze with crime boss Frank Costello, and creating a corrupt political machine which stole the West Virginia Democrat primary from Humphrey and carried Illinois in the general election by winning every graveyard in Chicago by a landslide.

Much of the muck of Kennedy was concealed by those who knew the truth, and no establishment reporter exercised much energy trying to dig up Kennedy scandals. Kennedy was addicted to meth, and his behavior bordered on the psychotic as times, the New York Post reported recently.


About his sordid sex life, the putrescence began to ooze out decades ago. We learned in 1976 that Kennedy and Giancana had sex with the same woman, Judith Exner. Then, in 1988, Exner, dying of cancer, revealed that she had carried messages back and forth between the mob and President Kennedy. About the time the Exner story broke in the 1970s, America learned that President Kennedy was a serial adulterer and that both he and RFK had had sex with Marilyn Monroe, which in light of her suicide makes their roles particularly malodorous.................

Read more: Articles: The Camelot Fraud
Follow us: [MENTION=20123]American[/MENTION]Thinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

But the Photos !!!!!!! lol

Camelot a fraud? Camelot was a vision and the Kennedy's did a good job of spreading that vision across America, regardless of how flawed their personal life might have been. People believed in the vision which made it happen. The chains of segregation would be broken forever. We would prevail in the fight against communism. If a Catholic could be elected president, a back man could go to Ole Miss, we could go to the moon and we could accomplish anything. That was Camelot, a vision, a dream.

 

[P@triot]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

Kennedy's tax cut bill which became the Revenue Act of 1964 cut income tax rates across the board by approximately 20%. In addition to individual income tax cuts, the act slightly reduced corporate tax rates and introduced a minimum standard deduction among other cuts.

And yet anyone who suggests that today is accused of as being a "radical tea bagger". Yet there is the libtard Golden Boy on record as stating that cutting taxes is critical to a struggling economy.

 

[Flopper]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

Kennedy's tax cut bill which became the Revenue Act of 1964 cut income tax rates across the board by approximately 20%. In addition to individual income tax cuts, the act slightly reduced corporate tax rates and introduced a minimum standard deduction among other cuts.

And yet anyone who suggests that today is accused of as being a "radical tea bagger". Yet there is the libtard Golden Boy on record as stating that cutting taxes is critical to a struggling economy.

????

 

[KissMy]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

Kennedy's tax cut bill which became the Revenue Act of 1964 cut income tax rates across the board by approximately 20%. In addition to individual income tax cuts, the act slightly reduced corporate tax rates and introduced a minimum standard deduction among other cuts.

And yet anyone who suggests that today is accused of as being a "radical tea bagger". Yet there is the libtard Golden Boy on record as stating that cutting taxes is critical to a struggling economy.

No! - You just want the Middle Class to keep paying the highest tax rates & the rich to keep enjoying the tax subsidies. If you are for cutting income & payroll taxes on the middle class we are all for it. The Rich don't pay near the percent payroll or income tax rates & have huge loopholes. Get rid of payroll & sales taxes & make everyone pay a flat income tax rate above $25k with zero loopholes. Use "income splitting" for married couples to eliminate the marriage penalty. That will cause the Rich will lose their tax subsidy & they will cry like babies.

 

[tinydancer]

I do not want the 70% JFK tax rates & 48% corporate tax rate. You can keep your Camelot, I don't want it.

I'm not talking about a fiscal "Camelot"; not at all. It was a great and wonderous time to be alive

I do not know because I was not yet alive. I imagine the space race was exciting.

Not being alive is no excuse just keeeeeeeeeeeding.

The race to be the first on the moon was truly a wild ride. If you ever get a chance to tour Cape Canaveral go whole hog on the tours. It's unreal.

A really special part of America's glorious past.