Are republicans hopelessly stuck in the 80's because of their undying love of Reagan?

[Dad2three]

You and an associate go out to lunch and you both order identical steak dinners.

The tab comes to $100. You two owe $50 each.

But the restaurant has a policy that if you are wearing a red tie with the restaurant logo on it, you get to deduct $20 from your share of the check.

You bought such a tie yesterday and are wearing it.

The tab is still $100, so while you are hootin and hollerin about "getting to keep more of my money", your associate is having to shell out $70 instead of $50.

And he thinks the deduction scheme is a ripoff, and that you are an idiot.

Gov't isn't a friendship. Bad analogy

 

[Dad2three]

What IS Obama's plan to grow the economy, Dad? It's six years into his Presidency...don't you think that would be an ample amount of time for him to have formulated an economic strategy?

So what IS the plan?

The rest of the world went with the conservative 'austerity', how's the US compare? lol

What's sad, Dad...is that you don't seem to grasp that being the same as someone else who DIDN'T spend a trillion dollars on stimulus when you HAVE spent a trillion on stimulus...isn't much of an accomplishment!

You mean over $5 trillion on tax cuts and UNFUNDED wars is better?

Stimulus was 40% tax cuts, it was $788 billion According to most credible economists it created nearly 3 million jobs and kept US out of GOP great depression 2.0.

Remember Dubya's stimulus and TARP?

His $300 per person REBATE' (stimulus) cost nearly $200 billion, did it work? lol

Just as well as cash for clunkers,keep trying.

Just wondering,are there not Dems in DC also?? your just like all the other simple minded hacks that can't see past their own little hates.

Better than Iraq, 9/11 or Dubya's tax cuts for the rich

Dems? Sure MANY Corp Dems, the best being Obama. AND? I'm am independent who wants Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to straighten out the ConservaDems like Hillary and Obama.

Worst policy you get are conservatives policy, even conservative light...

 

[Dad2three]

Conservatives choose to ignore facts and reality and live in a right wing world of delusion and disconnect created by the right wing echo chamber of spin, lies and misinformation.





If Obama implements a growth policy on Tuesday and the nation is not back in the black on Thursday, this is a "failed policy."

If Bush in eight years brings us from surplus to crushing deficit, rampant unemployment, an economic black hole, a) his policies just "needed more time to work," and b) it was all Barney Franks' fault. If Obama in 6 years, with no economic engine left to work with and a 100% obstructionist congress opposing him at every turn recovers the stock market, reverses the unemployment trend, restores growth and puts the nation back on sound economic footing, but we're not as well off as at the end of the Clinton presidency, these are "failed policies."

You can't make this stuff up.

Who's living in a "world of delusion", Dad...those who recognize all of the good things that a Ronald Reagan did for the United States...or those who pretend that Barack Obama is competent after six years of "leading from behind"?

The truth is...Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. His POLICIES are what have held back that recovery. Job growth is strongest in States primarily led by Republican Governors espousing policies that contradict the President's. The stock market bubble has been fueled by non-stop quantitative easing by the Fed in an attempt to keep the economy from going back into recession due to a total lack of an economic plan from this President to create jobs and grow the economy. There are still millions of Americans on long term unemployment six YEARS after Barack Obama took office and he has no plan to put them back to work. We were "well off" in the Clinton Presidency because of the Dot Com Boom. That was coming to an end before Clinton left office. This liberal "fantasy" that Slick Willie created the prosperity back then by raising taxes is one of the more naive beliefs on this board.

MORE right wing garbage. I'm shocked

You mean the recession Dubya/GOP policy took US too? The one where he gutted regulators and cheered on the Banksters?

You mean states dependent on ENERGY are booming and states that depended on Dubya's housing bubble are slow to come out of Dubya's recession AFTER he allowed household debt to double the first 7 years?


Dubya LOST 1,000,00+ PRIVATE sector jobs in 8 years with his 'job creator' policies

NOT counting the 4+ million lost in 2009

OBAMA HAS A NET OF NEARLY 7 MILLION IN LESS THAN 6 YEARS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Dubya SAVAGED the treasury with 2 UNFUNDED tax cuts (you cut spending!!!), 2 UNFUNDED wars (you get new revenues) AND UNFUNDED Medicare expansion, taking US from 20%+ to less than 15% of GDP, Obama has done a fukking miracle considering the hole Dubya left US in and the unwillingness of the GOP to help US for 6 years!!!

No, BJ Bill just was the best FISCALLY conservative Prez since Ike, looks like Obama comes in second place

AFTER BILL's first surplus what did the GOP do? Of course they passed a $700+ billion tax cut he had to veto to get 3 more!!!

"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits." — Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994


"Clinton’s 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity." — Business Week, May 19, 1997

No, BJ Bill just was the best FISCALLY conservative Prez since Ike, looks like Obama comes in second place

He found that working with the republican congress worked out fairly well.

Question who has the purse strings,the pres or the house.

Its a hoot when hacks like this one,quote wishful numbers as truths,last week it was 10 million jobs that have been created by Obama,this week it 8 mill .

There was no real surplus,another talking point repeated

The US enjoyed the second longest economic expansion in our history under Bush,saying other wise is just false.

The same question that all lefties seem to want to pass.Which tax bracket enjoyed the largest tax relief from the bush cuts??

Sure, it was 'working with them' that got US 20%+ of GDP in revenues and 4 surpluses, must've been why Gov't was shut down twice and BJ Bill impeached!

Which policy is more important, Prez or Congress? We saw that AFTER Clinton's first surplus the GOP passed a $700+ billion tax cut Bill had to veto to get 3 more SURPLUSES (more money coming in than going out)


Obama has 10+ million PRIVATE sector jobs under him since Obamacares passed Feb 2010, for a net of nearly 7 million (it will be in a few days) since he came into office


Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.

The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton


Weird, you saying Dubya had growth? Oh you mean that ponzi scheme where he gutted regulators and cheered on the Banksters? How did that turn out? lol


Dec 2007 (pre Dubya's recession)

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush Vanity Fair


Bush Lead During Weakest Economy in Decades

"The expansion was a continuation of the way the U.S. has grown for too long, which was a consumer-led expansion that was heavily concentrated in housing," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a onetime Bush White House staffer and one of Sen. John McCain's top economic advisers for his presidential campaign. "There was very little of the kind of saving and export-led growth that would be more sustainable."

"For a group that claims it wants to be judged by history, there is no evidence on the economic policy front that that was the view," Holtz-Eakin said. "It was all Band-Aids."

Bush Lead During Weakest Economy in Decades



July 30, 2012

Bush Tax Cuts Have Provided Extremely Large Benefits to Wealthiest Americans Over Last Nine Years

• The average tax cut that people making over $1 million received exceeded $110,000 in each of the last nine years — for a total of more than $1 million over this period.
• The tax cuts made the tax system less progressive.
  
  Bush Tax Cuts Have Provided Extremely Large Benefits to Wealthiest Americans Over Last Nine Years mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
  

Here’s the legacy of the Bush tax cuts

1. Drove the deficit :

2. Fueled income inequality:

3. Benefited the wealthy: By any measure, the Bush tax cuts have benefited the wealthy more than the middle class

The legacy of the Bush tax cuts in four charts - The Washington Post

So nice smoke screen,with a real nice graph.

Spending is what drives the deficit.

Its also plan to see ya are lost,once again which tax bracket made out the best which one?

Really? So gutting 1/4th of revenues WHILE you go to 2 UNFUNDED wars and give an UNFUNDED Medicare expansion doesn't drive it?

Why didn't the GOP cut spending in good times again? lol


Which ones made out the best? I'll take $1,000,000+ per family for the win

• The average tax cut that people making over $1 million received exceeded $110,000 in each of the last nine years — for a total of more than $1 million over this period.
• The tax cuts made the tax system less progressive.

 

[Iceweasel]

... 2 UNFUNDED wars and give an UNFUNDED Medicare expansion doesn't drive it?

Your KoolAid is strong. But your head is weak.

Bush signs bill funding wars into 2009 - CNN.com
Bush signs bill funding wars into 2009
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Monday signed a bill that will pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through the remainder of his presidency and into spring 2009.

 

[Dad2three]

... 2 UNFUNDED wars and give an UNFUNDED Medicare expansion doesn't drive it?

Your KoolAid is strong. But your head is weak.

Bush signs bill funding wars into 2009 - CNN.com
Bush signs bill funding wars into 2009
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Monday signed a bill that will pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through the remainder of his presidency and into spring 2009.

Weird you don't understand UNFUNDED means like EVERY other nation that EVER went to war, they created new revenues to pay for it. Dubya/GOP decided to slash revenues instead, lol

 

[Political Junky]

Ronnie was 'much more conservative'?

Yes.

Ronald Reagan on Abortion

2001: Nancy pushed Bush on stem cell research for Alzheimers
In April of 2001, a piece of writing turned up in the Oval Office. Describing what she called a "wrenching family journey," the author urged me to support the "miracle possibilities" of embryonic stem cell research to provide cures for people like her husband, who was suffering from Alzheimer's. She closed, "Mr. President, I have some personal experience regarding the many decisions you face each day. I'd be very grateful if you would take my thoughts and prayers into your consideration on this critical issue. Most sincerely, Nancy Reagan."
Many felt the federal government had a responsibility to fund medical research that might help save the lives of people like President Reagan. Others argued that supporting the destruction of human embryos could take us off a moral cliff toward an uncaring society that devalued life. The contrast was stark, and I faced a difficult decision.
Source: Living History, by Hillary Rodham Clinton, p.431 , Nov 1, 2003

Allowed abortion as CA Gov.; didn’t push pro-life as Pres.
Reagan was not as obsessive about anti-abortion legislation as he often seemed. Early in his California governorship he had signed a permissive abortion bill that has resulted in more than a million abortions. Afterward, he inaccurately blamed this outcome on doctors, saying that they had deliberately misinterpreted the law. When Reagan ran for president, he won backing from pro-life forces by advocating a constitutional amendment that would have prohibited all abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother. Reagan’s stand was partly a product of political calculation, as was his tactic after he was elected of addressing the annual pro-life rally held in Washington by telephone so that he would not be seen with the leaders of the movement on the evening news. While I do not doubt Reagan’s sincerity in advocating an anti-abortion amendment, he invested few political resources toward obtaining this goal.Source: The Role of a Lifetime, by Lou Cannon, p. 812 , Jul 2, 1991

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[Billy000]

Ah I love how threads like these turn out.

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, the GOP policies take awhile to get over. They dig wide and deep holes

 

[Rotagilla]

hyperpartisan troll posts daily hyperpartisan trolling thread disparaging the "other" party.

 

[Dad2three]

hyperpartisan troll posts daily hyperpartisan trolling thread disparaging the "other" party.

True, since conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history on EVERY policy...

 

[Rotagilla]

hyperpartisan troll posts daily hyperpartisan trolling thread disparaging the "other" party.

True, since conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history on EVERY policy...

sure..scooter..whatever you say, son.

 

[Meathead]

True, since conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history on EVERY policy...

Explain the Cold War. It was a period of time between about 1950 and Reagan's second administration.

 

[Zander]

Reagan was a great man and a great leader. Unlike liberal shitbags he didn't apologize for being pro-America. He didn't apologize for the USA being the worlds greatest nation.




.

 

[Dad2three]

True, since conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history on EVERY policy...

Explain the Cold War. It was a period of time between about 1950 and Reagan's second administration.

That was what policy? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Reagan was a great man and a great leader. Unlike liberal shitbags he didn't apologize for being pro-America. He didn't apologize for the USA being the worlds greatest nation.




.

Nope


History shows that Reagan's was the most corrupt administration in the lifetime of most Americans

"By the end of his term, 138 Reagan administration officials had been convicted, had been indicted, or had been the subject of official investigations for official misconduct and/or criminal violations. In terms of number of officials involved, the record of his administration was the worst ever."
from p. 184,Sleep-Walking Through History: America in the Reagan Years, by Haynes Johnson, (1991, Doubleday), as are the examples below:
Reagan s was the most corrupt administration in the lifetime of most Americans

 

[Dad2three]

hyperpartisan troll posts daily hyperpartisan trolling thread disparaging the "other" party.

True, since conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history on EVERY policy...

sure..scooter..whatever you say, son.

You COULD try ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history on? Too difficult huh?

 

[Chris]

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally."
- Ronald Reagan

"It's just plain common sense that there be a waiting period to allow local law-enforcement officials to conduct background checks on those who wish to purchase handguns."
- Ronald Reagan

" We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory some of those loophole were understandable, but in practice, they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing."
- Ronald Reagan

 

[Youch]

I mean it's bad enough republicans can't give specific reasons why anyone should be republican other than saying "they aren't democrats!", but Reagan is the only president they feel any sort of pride about. Are republicans stuck in the 80's? Why can't they give any contemporary reasons for voting republican?

Let's look at the facts:

Clinton's job growth was about as good as Reagan's, yet both Bushs' job growth is pathetic in comparison to Obama's.

The Iraq War was the worst political travesty of modern time. He also over saw the Great Recession. That's all Bush Jr will be known for.

Supply side economics has proven to be a fraudulent idea for the good of America as a whole.

Republicans are losing badly on the issue of gay marriage. What other progressive issues will follow?

Sure, republicans will claim the senate next month, but then what? It's not like there will be a republican president come 2016. I guarantee it. Seriously. What exactly are they going to do improve this country if their mindset is stuck in the 80's? The only reason they are even taking the senate is because the current democrats running are pussies (oh and gerrymandering). May I remind you of republican disapproval ratings? They are at 75%! Is that all the have to show for? Being chosen over shitty democratic candidates? It certainly won't be for specific policies.

Polls show Americans favor democratic policies:

1) Background checks on gun ownership
2) Raising the minimum wage
3) Gay marriage
4) Extending unemployment benefits.

You obviously are not following actual events.

You obviously think history began with Obama.

You obviously must think that the Constitution, which attempted to enshrine our natural freedoms, which gives your the right to spew uneducated BS on a forum such as this, must be archaic (which means old and outdated, in case you did not know)...I mean after all, you think a highly successful Conservative president of 2 decades ago is somehow not to be emulated, thus the Constitution that he held dearly must also be old and outdated, relegates that same political philosophy to the ash bin of history? What a dangerous moron.

You cite polls that are not even real. Pay attention. The world is different than you believe it to be.

You contradict yourself in three areas above. Know what they are? No.

You're one of these 99%ers that have not a clue how things actually work.

You blame the failure of liberal policies on the fact that the functionaries that make it all happen are "pussies." That insinuates that you want more, not less, of that failed philosophy. That makes your a dangerous schmuck.

You cite 4 things that turn you on, NONE of which are important to the general American electorate. Res Ipsa Loquitur.

 

[Meathead]

True, since conservatives are ALWAYS on the wrong side of history on EVERY policy...

Explain the Cold War. It was a period of time between about 1950 and Reagan's second administration.

That was what policy? lol

The policy of ending detente and confronting the Soviet Union. The policy of basing missiles in Europe which was met by huge demonstrations by idiots like yourself of a bygone day. It worked, and no, Reagan certainly did not bring us to nuclear extinction. Remember the nuclear midnight clock?

God, such losers! lol