Jesus--Where is Ronald Reagan!!

[del]

Holy sh!t I just spit out my pomegranite juice everywhere when I read that!!!

sorry, but anyone who starts screaming at me about my liberal ideas has the mental acuity of a sea sponge. lauding mr. reagan is just frosting on the (sponge) cake.

i'm a lot of things, my friend, but liberal ain't one of them.

 

[DavidS]

sorry, but anyone who starts screaming at me about my liberal ideas has the mental acuity of a sea sponge. lauding mr. reagan is just frosting on the (sponge) cake.

i'm a lot of things, my friend, but liberal ain't one of them.

Where's the ostridge?

 

[del]

Where's the ostridge?

on sabbatical, he'll be back, though. with the playoffsand all, i needed to give Teddy Ballgame some face time.

 

[midcan5]

Where have you gone Ronnie Reagan? Not far as Palin is as far out there as Ronnie was. And I liked Reagan even though he screwed up bad for the middle class, given time and a clear head he may have come around. Palin's lies about the bridge to nowhere, and her distortions on many issues would have made the senile Reagan proud.

"Reagan was notorious for taking a real event and transforming it into a mythical story, which he then repeated over and over, making of it an archetype for some political principle he held. When a welfare recipient in Chicago was publicly exposed in 1977 for having defrauded state welfare programs out of $8,000 by using two identities, Reagan transformed the news report into a story regarding a “welfare queen” who drove a Cadillac and who collected an annual tax-free income of $150,000 by using “eighty names, thirty addresses, twelve Social Security cards and . . . collecting veterans’ benefits on four nonexisting deceased husbands.”4 Reagan repeated this story of the Chicago welfare queen multiple times over the years, growing it like some kind of political fish-story with each re-telling. In the end, it seems clear that he could not distinguish his own mythical version from the historical one."

Ronald Reagan and Medicare

 

[busara]

The republican party--had Mitt Romney, Rudi Gulliani & a few more that represented the above ideas. Instead we got a very weak 72 year old John McCain--whose only hope was Sarah Palin--who is the female version of Ronald Reagan.

you had me until this

 

[Shogun]

Hey laugh now! 4 years from now, there won't be a democrat in the oval office, the senate or congress. Guaranteed!

Did you ever think this may be a set-up for a major defeat of your liberal ideas in 4 years? Why did the RNC nominate the weakest candidate they had to choose from?

They knew he would have an uphill road after 8 years with a republican in office. They knew that they would have to defend an unpopular war. They knew they would have to defend an economy that was slowing. So instead they put up the weakest member--so as not to de-foul the "real" conservatives within the party. Remember even John McCain was begging for support within his own party. The only thing that fired up his base, was Sarah Palin a true conservative.

Nope--you liberals may have been set up big time for 2012.

YEA! you keep thinking that, buddy!

 

[editec]

Jesus--Where is Ronald Reagan!!

He's dead, Sho.

But I'm not absoultely sure Jesus is the guy to ask about his immediate whereabouts, if you get my drift.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Hey laugh now! 4 years from now, there won't be a democrat in the oval office, the senate or congress. Guaranteed!

Did you ever think this may be a set-up for a major defeat of your liberal ideas in 4 years? Why did the RNC nominate the weakest candidate they had to choose from?

They knew he would have an uphill road after 8 years with a republican in office. They knew that they would have to defend an unpopular war. They knew they would have to defend an economy that was slowing. So instead they put up the weakest member--so as not to de-foul the "real" conservatives within the party. Remember even John McCain was begging for support within his own party. The only thing that fired up his base, was Sarah Palin a true conservative.

Nope--you liberals may have been set up big time for 2012.

They (the controlling money behind both parties) let McCain have his turn because they thought they would have 4 to 8 years of a somewhat beholding and controllable Hillary - the cost of doing 8 wonderful years of business with George Jr.

Obama upset the apple cart. That is the only reason I'm not voting for Bob Barr or Mickey Mouse this year.

You want proof? Sarah Palin.

-Joe

 

[AllieBaba]

Yeah, the country could certainly use another Reagan. McCain and Palin combined don’t equal the man.

I was going to ask this question in the Debate thread but, that thread is so unbalanced it might fall over, so I’ll ask here:

Did McCain offer up an additional 300B for the bad mortgages or was he referring to part of the 700B bailout package? I thought the ladder but, right after the debate one of the commentators on FNC said she thought that money would be in addition to the 700B.

Just curious what y’all think he meant.

I don't know but I trust Sarah Palin when it comes to money. I'm guessing McCain does too.