He could have vetoed it and shut down the government. But presidents were more responsible in those days.I'm not going to explain basic history to you people other than to say Reagan traded 3-1 tax cuts to Tip for spending cuts. Tip suckered him and never gave him the spending cuts. Also, Reagan's priority was to bring down the Soviet Union. So he made deals with Tip.
Neither of those support the ridiculous assertion that Reagan is the one who spent the money. If you want to continue this discussion then you have to accurately portray basic history. You are free to disagree with me, but not knowing anything or your actually contradicting history I'm not interested in doing
Reagan didn't sign off on the spending?
There is a reason Obama never accepted the Ryan budget. If the Pres signs it, he agreed to it and then owns it.
The Democrat congress over spent the Reagan budget, every single year. The president can give a suggested budget, but ultimately it's up to congress to spend the money. Just like under Clinton, the Republican congress UNDER spent the Clinton Budget every single year.
The Reagan administration tried to cut spending, and the government increased it every single time. Reagan even wrote about his frustration on this issue, in his personal journals.
Ultimately Ronnie signed it every time.
So with your logic, any bill the Repub congress passes and Obama signs, good, bad or otherwise, then the Repubs own it and Obama is not then responsible for what he signed into law?
They are all responsible, dim wit. Your view that any of them can be not responsible for what they did is ridiculous
Was the Ronnie forced to sign? He couldn't have negotiated a better deal for America?
Did those big bad dems bully little Ronnie : (