Caller: Why is Reagan a hero to conservatives? Rush: Derp

[sangha]

If you would care to respond to what I said, then do so. If you would like to respond to voices echoing in your own head, then why quote me?

1. Not every criticism is stiken moot. He did that whole Contra thing and he did raise taxes and blah, blah, blah. Who cares? Were you there?

When Carter left office, the word on the street was that the USA was finished. The Japanese were taking over and we were a footnote in history. No international respect, no ideas, no passion and no future. Plenty of rust and plenty of bloat.

When Reagan left office, the USA was the pre eminent Super Power and was poised to reconstruct the economy of the world using computers.

2. Reagan did not cut defense spending. By uping the ante in the weapons race, the Russians had to cash out their chips. When Reagan talked about the SDI, the Russians thought it was ready to deploy.

How does"ushered in the era of" and "cut" translate as synonomous in your language?

1) The caller didn't criticize Regan, The caller asked why wingnuts support a president who gave amnesty to illegals, cut and run in Lebanon, raised taxes and negotiated with terrorists. Election results don't make the question moot. The only thing you did is render yourself mute when it comes to answering the question

That's because wingnuts are scared of the answer. That's why you won't answer the question either

2) There haven't been any cuts to the miliatary. The "Peace Dividend" you referred to never materialized. Your claims of military cuts are a fiction

Not even fiction. He increased the size of the military by about 30% as I recall. When Clinton came in, and the cold war no longer such a threat, he reduced it back by the same 30% to where it was. Of course Clinton has since been accused of "gutting" the military. Go figure.

If wingnuts didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say
U.S. Military Spending, 1946–2009 — Infoplease.com

WHen Reagan came into office in 1980, the military budget was at $303.4B. Reagans last budget (FY1989) the budget was $427.7B, almost 50% more.

When GHW Bush came into office the budget was 427.7B. In his last budget, it was $358.6, a cut of about 15%

Clinton started at $358.6B and his last budget was $307.8B which is about another 15%

 

[MaggieMae]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

The DNC gave marching orders to their minions to exalt Reagan and compare Obama favorably to him in the run up to the 2012 elections and from what I can tell, most of them are up in arms about it.

I think the big problem is that Reagan loved America and the Obama-Bots don't.

The fact that you "think" that's a big problem is the big problem. Reagan was a negotiater, a compromiser. So is Obama. To accuse Obama supporters of being unpatriotic is moranic, and I take that as a personal insult.

What Would Ronnie Do? - Newsweek

 

[sangha]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

The DNC gave marching orders to their minions to exalt Reagan and compare Obama favorably to him in the run up to the 2012 elections and from what I can tell, most of them are up in arms about it.

I think the big problem is that Reagan loved America and the Obama-Bots don't.

The fact that you "think" that's a big problem is the big problem. Reagan was a negotiater, a compromiser. So is Obama. To accuse Obama supporters of being unpatriotic is moranic, and I take that as a personal insult.

What Would Ronnie Do? - Newsweek

I'm not sure that his ablity to think is a fact.

The fact is that wingnuts can't point to any accomplishments from Reagan (aside from arming terrorists, raising taxes, and increasing the national debt) so all they have is adjective-laden slogans that they endlessly repeat about how Reagan "loved freedom", "humble", "pragmatist", "patriotic", etc

You know, Reagan is just an humble optimistic patriot who armed terrorists and who loves the freedom to support people who rape and murder nuns.

One wingnut praised Reagan for being "pragmatic" enough to "choose his battles" because Reagan retreated from Lebanon after terrorists killed 200+ Marines :crazy:

 

[MaggieMae]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

The DNC gave marching orders to their minions to exalt Reagan and compare Obama favorably to him in the run up to the 2012 elections and from what I can tell, most of them are up in arms about it.

I think the big problem is that Reagan loved America and the Obama-Bots don't.

There's a problem with comparing Obama to Reagan. People that followed Reagan love America and knew there were issues. People that follow obama want nothing more than to bring the issues to the front, and speak poorly of America.

So obama can't = Reagan.

Reagan had such a large landslide re-election that liberals had to vote for him. I was every state except for Mass.

It's comical really. For Reagan to get re-elected he had to be Reagan, for Clinton to get re-eclected he had to move to the right. Bush had to be Bush. Obama has to pull a Clinton.

Reagan, a popular incumbent, would have won anyway. But the reason he won big was because he had a boring, unaccomplished opponent in Walter Mondale. Blech...

 

[MaggieMae]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

Are you all pissed off that some people cared about his birthday? Or are you out of ways to back big 0 and you're doing this to make yourselves feel better about having been duped by big 0?

Lebanon? Damn, if we had gone in you fucks would be calling him a war monger for having done so.

Remember Libya and "The Line of Death"? Recall the "Surgical removal of terrorist encampments"?

no?

of course not

I posted this Saturday morning ...

... and I just found the exchange hilarious. I happened upon it on another site I frequent and thought it was funny hearing Rush flubber around like he was asked the name of the last Domincan boy he slept with and not something he should have a canned answer prepared for at all times.

A lot of us have been saying for years that many conservatives are practicing a high level of cognitive dissonance when it comes to St. Ronnie but you just wouldn't understand

What other Republican president do they have to idolize? Eisenhower, by today's conservative standards, would be considered a rino.

 

[MaggieMae]

1) The caller didn't criticize Regan, The caller asked why wingnuts support a president who gave amnesty to illegals, cut and run in Lebanon, raised taxes and negotiated with terrorists. Election results don't make the question moot. The only thing you did is render yourself mute when it comes to answering the question

That's because wingnuts are scared of the answer. That's why you won't answer the question either

2) There haven't been any cuts to the miliatary. The "Peace Dividend" you referred to never materialized. Your claims of military cuts are a fiction

Not even fiction. He increased the size of the military by about 30% as I recall. When Clinton came in, and the cold war no longer such a threat, he reduced it back by the same 30% to where it was. Of course Clinton has since been accused of "gutting" the military. Go figure.

Actually the "gutting" started under Bush I.

I know. However, closing military bases didn't bring Bush41 any favors from fellow Republicans, for sure.

 

[MaggieMae]

Rush was a blubbering fool. He couldn't come close to answering the question the caller asked.
The call is word for word from Rush and a caller. Cons don't like to be confronted with audio or video of their own bullshit, which is what Media Matters does.

This is why they all fall in line, lock, stock and barrel of their vilification and their hatred for Media Matters. A site that simply posts their BS for the world to see, just as it was presented. They take video clips and audio clips of RWers and post them. And so, RWers hate them for it.

Classic!

This is exactly why I don't think we should exalt Reagan. He was a great President and did much to further the Conservative agenda, but we shouldn't ignore the mistakes he made either. Immigration being one of them. Reagan's mistake is exactly why we don't pass an amnesty again. Because we cant trust anyone in washington to actually fix the problem after such an amnesty.

It's one of the things I got annoyed with in the 2008 Rep Primary. Everyone was trying to pretend to be Reagan rather than being themselves.

We need to be looking forward, not back. We can appreciate the achievements he made. Particularly how we wouldn't be where we are now if not for eliminating the Unconstitutional Fairness doctrine. We need to build on the good things Reagan did and improve on the things he didn't do as well. But we can't do that if we aren't honest about them.

Reagan is a conservative hero because he brought hope back to alot of people who saw the nation being destroyed during the Carter administration. He is a hero because he articulated the concepts of limited government in a way that many people understood.

Unfortunately, he also did things that weren't up to those ideals. But id rather someone have the correct ideals and fail to live them than someone pretend the ideals dont exist or actively fight against them.

Surprisingly honest, although there is a good chunk that I totally disagree with. I will give you kudos for your honesty.

I thought it was good, too, but I couldn't note any praise because s/he doesn't practice what s/he preaches. If Avatar has truly had an epiphany and intends to talk in "honest assessment" tones, further postings will bear that out. We'll see.