Just caught this on Yahoo! headlines:
Wonder how often Yahoo offers headline which feature claims Republicans make that have a basis in political and economic reality such as: “Romney: Obama policies cause women to suffer disproportionate share of job losses.”* You could remove the “Romney” from the headline and it would far more accurate than the above headline if Obama were removed.
Take off “Obama” from and, well, it’s just a silly statement with no basis in reality whatsoever. The Gipper would never support the Buffett rule (see below).
In the linked article, Oliver Knox quotes the president’s remarks, but also reports that “Reagan also championed the very same ‘trickle-down’ economics that Obama has roundly denounced—the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy lead to investment that generates growth and thereby jobs.” Yet, only those critical of Reagan’s economic policies use the expression “trickle-down” to describe them. And the Gipper favored cutting taxes across the board, not just on the “wealthy.”
Citing the actual speech where the Gipper discussed “problems with the tax code“, an address which included an “anecdote about an executive who was paying a lower tax rate than his secretary”, Philip Klein reminds us that
. . . Reagan was talking about simplifying the tax code, whereas Obama’s Buffett Rule would add another layer of complexity. Reagan was arguing for allowing people to keep more of their own money and reduce the burden of government. By contrast, Obama is arguing for instituting the Buffett Rule so that more money is available to pay for government programs.