I would disagree with Kennedy that deficits aren't also the result of excessive spending. Still, no one can argue with the fact that robust revenue growth from a strong, full employment economy, and slower spending growth, would eliminate our deficits. We need both.
Kennedy added that "it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now." Amen to that.
Obama categorically rejects all this. He clings, instead, to his party's class warfare religion which preaches raising income taxes on wealthier people, including businesses, investors and venture capital risk-takers who are the job-creators of our economy.
He talks endlessly about a "winner-take-all economy where a few do better while everyone else just treads water." And calls for more of the same snake oil, spending remedies that's he tried without success.
Instead of embracing growth policies that have worked in the recent past, he reached back to the era of the Great Depression and blew more than $1 trillion on FDR-style, public works, make-work spending.
He said it would "jump start" our economy and create millions of permanent, new jobs. It failed and left $6 trillion in added debt and a slow growth economy in its wake.
"In contrast, Kennedy enjoyed a nearly miraculous economic turnaround. At the time of his death in November 1963, an employment boom was beginning," Geewax writes. Stocks soared, tax revenues climbed and the deficits fell.
Flash forward to the 1980s when Ronald Reagan won the presidency as the economy was plunging into a severe recession that in some respects was worse than the one Obama faced.
He similarly proposed cutting tax rates to boost sagging economic growth and bring down an unemployment rate that would rise to nearly 11 percent. In fact, he said he got the idea -- aggressively promoted by tax cut crusader Jack Kemp -- from Kennedy's tax cuts.
By 1983, the Reagan economy grew at a spectacular 4.5 percent rate that would soar to more than 7 percent in the fourth quarter and to 8.5 percent by 1984.
Unemployment plunged as job creation went through the roof. In one month, the economy created more than one million jobs (September, 1983) and 3.5 million jobs for the year -- job growth the Obama White House can only dream about.
But the Kennedy tax cuts also had an influence on yet another, more recent president, Bill Clinton, who had met President Kennedy when a young man. He raised taxes in his first year, only to see a modest, so-so economy in his first term.
Then, in 1997, the Republican-led Congress sent him a tax- relief, deficit-reduction bill that, after some resistance, he signed. It lowered the top capital gains tax rate from 28 percent to 20 percent, among other tax cut incentives, and the economy took off.
What caused this expansion? By 1998, venture capital investment exploded to $28 billion, up from $8 billion three years earlier -- launching a job-producing, high-tech boom.
Yes, all of these tax cuts benefited the rich, but they also opened up employment and investment opportunities for middle and lower income Americans, too.
When Kennedy's far left-wing critics criticized his tax cut plan during his 1960 campaign, saying it would benefit the wealthy, he would reply, "a rising tide lifts all boats."
Obama wants an economy that benefits the middle class but not anyone above that income level. It is a delusional and deeply dysfunctional school of economic belief that is worshiped by today's far-left Democratic Party and Obama is its high priest.
Today, any Democrat in good standing who dares to embrace and promote Kennedy's pro-growth, pro-job tax cuts risks being excommunicated by his party.