Obama looks so small compared to this great man

[Fordsflylow]

Meanwhile... Mr. Soetoro is spending America's birthday (July 4th) in France... How decidedly fitting for the Commander in Choom.

Yup, another clueless ditto head. That matters why/how?

 

[Fordsflylow]

President Reagan's Address to the Nation on Independence Day - 7/4/86 - YouTube

To be honest, I don't see anybody of Reagan-calibre in either party right now.

Reagan wasn't that great of a President. He didn't really do anything great.

Exactly! In fact, he rose taxes much more than has this pres and gave weapon's to Iran.

 

[Fordsflylow]

President Reagan's Address to the Nation on Independence Day - 7/4/86 - YouTube

Yeah Reagan was so great.

The administration in 1984 secretly sold arms to Iran -- which the United States considered a supporter of terrorism -- to raise cash for Nicaraguan contra rebels, despite a congressional ban on support for the Latin American insurgency. An independent investigation concluded that the arms sales to Iran operations "were carried out with the knowledge of, among others, President Ronald Reagan [and] Vice President George Bush," and that "large volumes of highly relevant, contemporaneously created documents were systematically and willfully withheld from investigators by several Reagan Administration officials."

The combination of a huge "supply-side" tax cut, a historic military buildup and a painful two-year recession produced huge budget deficits and a near tripling of the national debt that haunted the country and policymakers for years and drained resources from social programs. And the administration showed indifference to an emerging AIDS crisis in the early 1980s. By the time Reagan delivered his first speech on the epidemic in May 1988 -- about eight months before he left office -- the disease had been diagnosed in more than 36,000 Americans, and 20,849 had died.

Until a public protest forced Reagan to back away, his Agriculture Department sought to cut the school lunch program and redefine ketchup and relish as vegetables.
Schisms From Administration Lingered for Years

I'm not impressed.

Me either. In fact, trickle-down economics is, was, and always will be an utter failure. Stockman has even wised up and denounced the trickle-down bs.

 

[code1211]

President Reagan's Address to the Nation on Independence Day - 7/4/86 - YouTube

Yeah Reagan was so great.

The administration in 1984 secretly sold arms to Iran -- which the United States considered a supporter of terrorism -- to raise cash for Nicaraguan contra rebels, despite a congressional ban on support for the Latin American insurgency. An independent investigation concluded that the arms sales to Iran operations "were carried out with the knowledge of, among others, President Ronald Reagan [and] Vice President George Bush," and that "large volumes of highly relevant, contemporaneously created documents were systematically and willfully withheld from investigators by several Reagan Administration officials."

The combination of a huge "supply-side" tax cut, a historic military buildup and a painful two-year recession produced huge budget deficits and a near tripling of the national debt that haunted the country and policymakers for years and drained resources from social programs. And the administration showed indifference to an emerging AIDS crisis in the early 1980s. By the time Reagan delivered his first speech on the epidemic in May 1988 -- about eight months before he left office -- the disease had been diagnosed in more than 36,000 Americans, and 20,849 had died.

Until a public protest forced Reagan to back away, his Agriculture Department sought to cut the school lunch program and redefine ketchup and relish as vegetables.
Schisms From Administration Lingered for Years

I'm not impressed.

I don't know how old you are, but the Reagan Administration occurred at a time when the country was suffering not only from all of the measurable plagues of inflation, unemployment and debt, but also from a spiritual emptiness. Not religious. Our American Spirit was gone.

The general feel on the street was that we, the USA, as the leader of the world, were done.

Sound familiar? I read that today the country divides into two basic groups right now: Those who remember how the Carter years felt and those who are finding out.

I remember. You may be finding out.

How deeply do you want to understand what was happening then?

I would love to have a leader who delivers what Obama promised before we witnessed the divisive and corrosive attacks that have characterized every word and idea he has presented since taking office.

Just getting him gone is an improvement. Even nothing beats this loser. When an empty chair is an improvement, you know there are problems.

 

[Fordsflylow]

OK, my question is answered. Be all you can be goes for stupid people too.

Well good for you then.

You can't even name a single concrete action by Reagan that was great.

Actually, I already met your challenge and then some. You asked what he did that was great, i provided multiple examples.

Now you want to know HOW he did those things and you're pretending he had nothing to do with them.

Sorry, you lose. You're just a troll.

BS You haven't provided anything worthy of noting.

 

[code1211]

President Reagan's Address to the Nation on Independence Day - 7/4/86 - YouTube

Yeah Reagan was so great.

The administration in 1984 secretly sold arms to Iran -- which the United States considered a supporter of terrorism -- to raise cash for Nicaraguan contra rebels, despite a congressional ban on support for the Latin American insurgency. An independent investigation concluded that the arms sales to Iran operations "were carried out with the knowledge of, among others, President Ronald Reagan [and] Vice President George Bush," and that "large volumes of highly relevant, contemporaneously created documents were systematically and willfully withheld from investigators by several Reagan Administration officials."

The combination of a huge "supply-side" tax cut, a historic military buildup and a painful two-year recession produced huge budget deficits and a near tripling of the national debt that haunted the country and policymakers for years and drained resources from social programs. And the administration showed indifference to an emerging AIDS crisis in the early 1980s. By the time Reagan delivered his first speech on the epidemic in May 1988 -- about eight months before he left office -- the disease had been diagnosed in more than 36,000 Americans, and 20,849 had died.

Until a public protest forced Reagan to back away, his Agriculture Department sought to cut the school lunch program and redefine ketchup and relish as vegetables.
Schisms From Administration Lingered for Years

I'm not impressed.

Me either. In fact, trickle-down economics is, was, and always will be an utter failure. Stockman has even wised up and denounced the trickle-down bs.

Are you recommending the Obama Model?

 

[code1211]

He halved black unemployment, and presided over a 12 percent increase in family earning.

No, actually, both of your claims are factually untrue.

He didn't halve black unemployment. Black unemployment was 14.3 in 1980 and 11.7 in 1988. That's a 22% decline, not a 50% decline. So you're wrong.
Unemployment rates by race and ethnicity, 2010

Also, median household income only rose about 8% over his term. You can see in this table:
Median Household Income History in the United States
that it was, in inflation adjusted dollars, $48126 in 1988 and $44616 in 1980 for an improvement of 8%. And in fact, during his first term, the real value of the median income rose less than $200.


Reagan's modest 8% improvement over 8 years is better than any Republican President in recent history, but as you can see, it went from $46,616 in 1992 to $53,164, for a 14% increase over 8 years under President Clinton. So Reagan isn't particularly noteworthy for his 8% improvement, except that its the best for a recent Republican.



Where the fuck did you get your numbers, BTW. Did you just make them up or are you parroting something you heard somewhere that you obviously never bothered to check out yourself? That's the trouble with debating things with people like you. You only know what others have told you, you seldom decide to check out the facts for yourself. God forbid you have to read past a headline and do your own homework to make sure you aren't being lied to. Obviously - whoever told you Reagan reduced black unemployment by halve was full of shit. Obviously - whoever told you Reagan increased household incomes by 12% was also wrong. You probably couldn't even say where you first heard it - I'm sure that there are millions of sheep like you out their parroting the same false statistics. Its obvious you didn't come up with those figures on your own, because I presume you have basic arithmetic skills. But you'll continue to believe whatever FOX News or Rush Limbaugh or your ignorant conservative friends who get their knowledge from Hannity or Ann Coulter have to tell you because its easier than doing your own damn homework and thinking.

How's Black unemployment doing under the Big 0?

 

[RDD_1210]

He halved black unemployment, and presided over a 12 percent increase in family earning.

No, actually, both of your claims are factually untrue.

He didn't halve black unemployment. Black unemployment was 14.3 in 1980 and 11.7 in 1988. That's a 22% decline, not a 50% decline. So you're wrong.
Unemployment rates by race and ethnicity, 2010

Also, median household income only rose about 8% over his term. You can see in this table:
Median Household Income History in the United States
that it was, in inflation adjusted dollars, $48126 in 1988 and $44616 in 1980 for an improvement of 8%. And in fact, during his first term, the real value of the median income rose less than $200.


Reagan's modest 8% improvement over 8 years is better than any Republican President in recent history, but as you can see, it went from $46,616 in 1992 to $53,164, for a 14% increase over 8 years under President Clinton. So Reagan isn't particularly noteworthy for his 8% improvement, except that its the best for a recent Republican.



Where the fuck did you get your numbers, BTW. Did you just make them up or are you parroting something you heard somewhere that you obviously never bothered to check out yourself? That's the trouble with debating things with people like you. You only know what others have told you, you seldom decide to check out the facts for yourself. God forbid you have to read past a headline and do your own homework to make sure you aren't being lied to. Obviously - whoever told you Reagan reduced black unemployment by halve was full of shit. Obviously - whoever told you Reagan increased household incomes by 12% was also wrong. You probably couldn't even say where you first heard it - I'm sure that there are millions of sheep like you out their parroting the same false statistics. Its obvious you didn't come up with those figures on your own, because I presume you have basic arithmetic skills. But you'll continue to believe whatever FOX News or Rush Limbaugh or your ignorant conservative friends who get their knowledge from Hannity or Ann Coulter have to tell you because its easier than doing your own damn homework and thinking.

How's Black unemployment doing under the Big 0?

Let's not pretend that you care about black people. Actually, let's not pretend you care about anyone but yourself.

 

[Fordsflylow]

Meanwhile... Mr. Soetoro is spending America's birthday (July 4th) in France... How decidedly fitting for the Commander in Choom.

Yup, another clueless ditto head. That matters why/how?

How many of your birthdays did your father spend with his friends in a bar while you sat at home alone?

Again, that matters why or how?

 

[Bfgrn]

Forced to raise taxes eleven times to avert financial catastrophe, the Gipper nonetheless presided over a tripling of the American national debt to nearly $3 trillion. By the time he left office in 1989, Ronald Reagan more than equaled the entire debt burden produced by the previous 200 years of American history. It's no wonder Stockman lamented last year:

"[The] debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."

 

[code1211]

Reagan would be called a RINO by you wackjobs today. Simply because he understood that there are times and in his case, multiple times when taxes need to be raised. You'd crucify him as a RINO if he dared to say such a thing today.

You people are hypocritical to the core.

Most, if not all, of the tax increases were compromise deals that were tied to spending cuts.

The spending cuts never were implemented because they were agreed to by politicians who simply cannot bring themselves to not bribe, pay off and pay back.

That line of broken commitments is one of the reasons why the current Republicans are not willing to make the same deals with the same lying snakes.

 

[code1211]

President Reagan's Address to the Nation on Independence Day - 7/4/86 - YouTube

That "great man" couldn't even remember his own name for half of his presidency. Nancy was running the show.

And he STILL had better results than the Big 0.

 

[Sarah G]

President Reagan's Address to the Nation on Independence Day - 7/4/86 - YouTube

That "great man" couldn't even remember his own name for half of his presidency. Nancy was running the show.

And he STILL had better results than the Big 0.

In your opinion.

 

[code1211]

Who exactly is Obama running against?

Right! What's so great about romney?

He seems to like the idea of America. That's a step up from the current guy.

 

[RDD_1210]

Reagan would be called a RINO by you wackjobs today. Simply because he understood that there are times and in his case, multiple times when taxes need to be raised. You'd crucify him as a RINO if he dared to say such a thing today.

You people are hypocritical to the core.

Most, if not all, of the tax increases were compromise deals that were tied to spending cuts.

The spending cuts never were implemented because they were agreed to by politicians who simply cannot bring themselves to not bribe, pay off and pay back.

That line of broken commitments is one of the reasons why the current Republicans are not willing to make the same deals with the same lying snakes.

Thanks for the "lesson". Examples will help you seem more credible next time...just saying.

 

[code1211]

No, actually, both of your claims are factually untrue.

He didn't halve black unemployment. Black unemployment was 14.3 in 1980 and 11.7 in 1988. That's a 22% decline, not a 50% decline. So you're wrong.
Unemployment rates by race and ethnicity, 2010

Also, median household income only rose about 8% over his term. You can see in this table:
Median Household Income History in the United States
that it was, in inflation adjusted dollars, $48126 in 1988 and $44616 in 1980 for an improvement of 8%. And in fact, during his first term, the real value of the median income rose less than $200.


Reagan's modest 8% improvement over 8 years is better than any Republican President in recent history, but as you can see, it went from $46,616 in 1992 to $53,164, for a 14% increase over 8 years under President Clinton. So Reagan isn't particularly noteworthy for his 8% improvement, except that its the best for a recent Republican.



Where the fuck did you get your numbers, BTW. Did you just make them up or are you parroting something you heard somewhere that you obviously never bothered to check out yourself? That's the trouble with debating things with people like you. You only know what others have told you, you seldom decide to check out the facts for yourself. God forbid you have to read past a headline and do your own homework to make sure you aren't being lied to. Obviously - whoever told you Reagan reduced black unemployment by halve was full of shit. Obviously - whoever told you Reagan increased household incomes by 12% was also wrong. You probably couldn't even say where you first heard it - I'm sure that there are millions of sheep like you out their parroting the same false statistics. Its obvious you didn't come up with those figures on your own, because I presume you have basic arithmetic skills. But you'll continue to believe whatever FOX News or Rush Limbaugh or your ignorant conservative friends who get their knowledge from Hannity or Ann Coulter have to tell you because its easier than doing your own damn homework and thinking.

How's Black unemployment doing under the Big 0?

Let's not pretend that you care about black people. Actually, let's not pretend you care about anyone but yourself.

I have no idea what that has to do with what i said.

The measure to undermine Reagan's effectiveness was that Black unemployment was not as improved as the previous poster stated. That same measure applied to the "work" of Obama reveals that he is not as effective as was Reagan.

The issue is not whether or not I care about Blacks or anyone else. The issue is whether or not Obama is able to do the job he was elected to do.

He cannot.

 

[aaronleland]

I consider myself liberal in some ways but consider Reagan a decent president. That said the cult of personality built around him by some conservatives is ridiculous. He wasn't a GREAT president. None in recent history have been. Making him out to be something he was not only hurts his true legacy in my opinion.

 

[code1211]

Yup, another clueless ditto head. That matters why/how?

How many of your birthdays did your father spend with his friends in a bar while you sat at home alone?

Again, that matters why or how?

It is only a reflection of the affection and the love that he had or did not have for you.

The same is why this matter both why and how.

 

[code1211]

That "great man" couldn't even remember his own name for half of his presidency. Nancy was running the show.

And he STILL had better results than the Big 0.

In your opinion.

Prove me wrong. Better yet, let's just wait for the election and let the polling results prove me wrong. Care to make odds on the margin of the obama victory over Mitt?

 

[Artevelde]

Is there anybody here who thinks there is even a minuscule chance that President Obama will gain the sort of landslide re-election victory that Ronald reagan won in 1984?