Obama looks so small compared to this great man

[Fordsflylow]

Fact remains, I don't trust a stinking rich fuck who is of the minority known today as the 1%. In fact, he is of the .01% and has lived a life of privilege. On the other hand, Obama was raised poor by a single mother to become the President of the US. Quite an achievement in this time. Obama has given 1/4 of his meager wealth to "actual charities," not his church of super underwear.

Romney, refuses to release more than one of his tax returns and has asked for an extension on his 2011 return so he can't be scrutinized for the gimmees it likely contains. His fazha, in comparison, released 7 of his most recent returns, and that's just the tip of the iceburg with this pos.

 

[Bfgrn]

"Washington couldn't tell a lie, Nixon couldn't tell the truth, and Reagan couldn't tell the difference."
Mort Sahl

 

[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.

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

For those of us who were aware during that time, this stuff is a matter of record, but here is an example for your pleasure.


Reagan's 1982 Deficit Reduction Compromise: Lessons for Today
<snip>
write in today’s USA Today of the agreement Reagan struck in 1982 in hopes of tackling high deficits. He agreed to a modest increase in business taxes (which he didn’t like) in exchange for spending cuts (which he wanted). The higher taxes were enacted, but the spending cuts never arrived. Meese and Needham explain:
<snip>

<snip>
Did the higher taxes help bring down the deficit? Nope. Meese and Needham write that “spending for fiscal year 1983 was some $48 billion higher than the budget targets, and no progress was made in lowering the deficit. Even tax receipts for that year went down — a lingering effect of the recession, which the additional business taxes did nothing to redress.”
<snip?

 

[Mac1958]

.

Reagan definitely was a great military Keynesian. If you would actually consider that a "good" thing.

.

 

[code1211]

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.

As compared to most of the Great Presidents, Reagan was what he was. The situation is what defines greatness. Without the Civil war, Lincoln is not so much.

Reagan took a pail of poop and made it into something good.

Clinton took something good and made it into something great.

They are the two best since Eisenhower, really. I have often thought that both Clinton and Eisenhower did exactly what was needed at the time and that was pretty much to just stand back and let the drivers drive.

 

[Fordsflylow]

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?

Doubtful seeing as the con's at multiple state's and level's are limiting voting specifically designed to limit voters likely to vote democratic = poll tax = unconstitutional = con's trying to oust Holder who IS trying to uphold the Constitution regarding such.

To borrow a worthy phrase from an unknown; I would embrace a flag burner who wraps himself in the Constitution vs one who would burn the Constitution and wrap him/herself in the flag.

 

[Old Rocks]

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

And another dumb fuck falls for that lie.

 

[code1211]

Fact remains, I don't trust a stinking rich fuck who is of the minority known today as the 1%. In fact, he is of the .01% and has lived a life of privilege. On the other hand, Obama was raised poor by a single mother to become the President of the US. Quite an achievement in this time. Obama has given 1/4 of his meager wealth to "actual charities," not his church of super underwear.

Romney, refuses to release more than one of his tax returns and has asked for an extension on his 2011 return so he can't be scrutinized for the gimmees it likely contains. His fazha, in comparison, released 7 of his most recent returns, and that's just the tip of the iceburg with this pos.

This is an incredibly uninformed stance on this issue.

You despise Mitt because he has a track record as a man who can turn around failed enterprises and make them successful?

In what way does this not apply to a country that needs to borrow about half of everything that it spends just to keep going.

Buddy, we are sinking fast and the Captain of the ship has chosen since day 1 in office to conduct a re-election campaign rather than govern.

 

[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.

As compared to most of the Great Presidents, Reagan was what he was. The situation is what defines greatness. Without the Civil war, Lincoln is not so much.

Reagan took a pail of poop and made it into something good.

Clinton took something good and made it into something great.

They are the two best since Eisenhower, really. I have often thought that both Clinton and Eisenhower did exactly what was needed at the time and that was pretty much to just stand back and let the drivers drive.

I agree completely. My issue is with the cult of personality. Reagan wasn't the man-god some conservatives make him out to be, as Clinton wasn't the man-god liberals make him out to be. Give a president credit where credit is due. When you prop up a president on things he never did it makes him look worse than what he realy was to the "other side".

 

[Bfgrn]

Reagan was the greatest socialist in our nations history. Ronny was a staunch socialist, totally committed to his cause of wealth redistribution towards the affluent. How much wealth transfer has occurred through Reagan’s policies? At least $3 trillion.

The Myth of Ronald Reagan

Excerpts:

There are two enemies of a real conservative society, thought Chesterton; one of them “is State Socialism and the other is Big Business.” In other words, the enemy is bigness, no matter on which side of the political spectrum it originates. Hayek, quoted by Kleinknecht, wrote something similar in his highly influential book “The Road to Serfdom” (1944): “... [T]he movement toward totalitarianism comes from two great vested interests: organized capital and organized labor. Probably the greatest menace of all is that the politics of these two most powerful groups point in the same direction.” Such sentiments, Kleinknecht writes, “were swept out of Washington in the 1980s. Relief from government regulation was one of a handful of core beliefs that really mattered to Reagan and his business supporters, and anything that stood in the way of the natural consolidation of the nation’s productive forces was a barrier to be removed.” Or as Reagan’s good friend whom he appointed attorney general, William French Smith, put it, “Bigness doesn’t necessarily mean badness.”

Reagan was the “obvious enemy of the common people he claimed to represent, this empty suit who believed in flying saucers and allowed an astrologer to guide his presidential scheduling. ...”

“He enacted policies that helped wipe out the high-paying jobs for the working class that were the real backbone of the country. ... His legacy—mergers, deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, privatization, globalization—helped weaken the family and eradicate small-town life and sense of community.”

Reaganomics did create fortunes, but mostly for those at the top of the economic ladder; it also brought “a reversal in the slow gains that the working class and the poor had made in the previous two decades.”

During a month when Republicans dug in against Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, Kleinknecht’s words, written last year before the economic crash, ring clear. “Reaganism replaced Enlightenment thinking with the corrupted Romanticism that portrays free-market purism as an article of religious faith that is the real meaning of America. The answer to any of the economic challenges of the twenty-first century is to do nothing. Cut taxes, eviscerate all regulation of private enterprise, and trust the market to guide our fates.” If this sounds like hyperbole, then you weren’t listening to the Republican response to President Obama’s bailout proposal.




Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

 

[code1211]

Reagan was the greatest socialist in our nations history. Ronny was a staunch socialist, totally committed to his cause of wealth redistribution towards the affluent. How much wealth transfer has occurred through Reagan’s policies? At least $3 trillion.

The Myth of Ronald Reagan

Excerpts:

There are two enemies of a real conservative society, thought Chesterton; one of them “is State Socialism and the other is Big Business.” In other words, the enemy is bigness, no matter on which side of the political spectrum it originates. Hayek, quoted by Kleinknecht, wrote something similar in his highly influential book “The Road to Serfdom” (1944): “... [T]he movement toward totalitarianism comes from two great vested interests: organized capital and organized labor. Probably the greatest menace of all is that the politics of these two most powerful groups point in the same direction.” Such sentiments, Kleinknecht writes, “were swept out of Washington in the 1980s. Relief from government regulation was one of a handful of core beliefs that really mattered to Reagan and his business supporters, and anything that stood in the way of the natural consolidation of the nation’s productive forces was a barrier to be removed.” Or as Reagan’s good friend whom he appointed attorney general, William French Smith, put it, “Bigness doesn’t necessarily mean badness.”

Reagan was the “obvious enemy of the common people he claimed to represent, this empty suit who believed in flying saucers and allowed an astrologer to guide his presidential scheduling. ...”

“He enacted policies that helped wipe out the high-paying jobs for the working class that were the real backbone of the country. ... His legacy—mergers, deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, privatization, globalization—helped weaken the family and eradicate small-town life and sense of community.”

Reaganomics did create fortunes, but mostly for those at the top of the economic ladder; it also brought “a reversal in the slow gains that the working class and the poor had made in the previous two decades.”

During a month when Republicans dug in against Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, Kleinknecht’s words, written last year before the economic crash, ring clear. “Reaganism replaced Enlightenment thinking with the corrupted Romanticism that portrays free-market purism as an article of religious faith that is the real meaning of America. The answer to any of the economic challenges of the twenty-first century is to do nothing. Cut taxes, eviscerate all regulation of private enterprise, and trust the market to guide our fates.” If this sounds like hyperbole, then you weren’t listening to the Republican response to President Obama’s bailout proposal.




Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

How do "re-distribute" wealth from those who have none to those who have it already?

When a farmer irrigates a dry field, he is re-distributing the water from where it is to where he wants it.

Are you saying that a farmer can take the water from a field that needs water and has none and put it into the well to fill it up?

 

[Fordsflylow]

This is an incredibly uninformed stance on this issue.

You despise Mitt because he has a track record as a man who can turn around failed enterprises and make them successful?

In what way does this not apply to a country that needs to borrow about half of everything that it spends just to keep going.

Buddy, we are sinking fast and the Captain of the ship has chosen since day 1 in office to conduct a re-election campaign rather than govern.

Oh no it's not. I am very very informed - try me.

Successful!?! Really? How so? Are you trying to imply everything he touches turns to gold?

Govt spending is NOT LIKE a person's budget. It IS called investing in the country and people. However, seeing as it is now an oligarchy run by a minority (1%) instead of a democracy run by the 99% we as a People are screwed and the con's will take full advantage. Proof is Bush outspent obama 1st term vs 1st term by 1 trillion. Bush was handed a surplus, obama not even close. I don't have selctive amnesia as you apparently do, OR you are purposely uninformed TRYING to make me out to be.

Here in reality land, and to anyone who will check out the FACTS, every "con presidenta" since and including reagan has outspent every dem president in the exact same time period.

Last but not least, you and your con ilk are making a mtn out of a mole hill in the whole scheme of things.......in fact this big arse pyramid scheme of things. Time to wake up sonny!!

 

[Bfgrn]

Reagan was the greatest socialist in our nations history. Ronny was a staunch socialist, totally committed to his cause of wealth redistribution towards the affluent. How much wealth transfer has occurred through Reagan’s policies? At least $3 trillion.

The Myth of Ronald Reagan

Excerpts:

There are two enemies of a real conservative society, thought Chesterton; one of them “is State Socialism and the other is Big Business.” In other words, the enemy is bigness, no matter on which side of the political spectrum it originates. Hayek, quoted by Kleinknecht, wrote something similar in his highly influential book “The Road to Serfdom” (1944): “... [T]he movement toward totalitarianism comes from two great vested interests: organized capital and organized labor. Probably the greatest menace of all is that the politics of these two most powerful groups point in the same direction.” Such sentiments, Kleinknecht writes, “were swept out of Washington in the 1980s. Relief from government regulation was one of a handful of core beliefs that really mattered to Reagan and his business supporters, and anything that stood in the way of the natural consolidation of the nation’s productive forces was a barrier to be removed.” Or as Reagan’s good friend whom he appointed attorney general, William French Smith, put it, “Bigness doesn’t necessarily mean badness.”

Reagan was the “obvious enemy of the common people he claimed to represent, this empty suit who believed in flying saucers and allowed an astrologer to guide his presidential scheduling. ...”

“He enacted policies that helped wipe out the high-paying jobs for the working class that were the real backbone of the country. ... His legacy—mergers, deregulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, privatization, globalization—helped weaken the family and eradicate small-town life and sense of community.”

Reaganomics did create fortunes, but mostly for those at the top of the economic ladder; it also brought “a reversal in the slow gains that the working class and the poor had made in the previous two decades.”

During a month when Republicans dug in against Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, Kleinknecht’s words, written last year before the economic crash, ring clear. “Reaganism replaced Enlightenment thinking with the corrupted Romanticism that portrays free-market purism as an article of religious faith that is the real meaning of America. The answer to any of the economic challenges of the twenty-first century is to do nothing. Cut taxes, eviscerate all regulation of private enterprise, and trust the market to guide our fates.” If this sounds like hyperbole, then you weren’t listening to the Republican response to President Obama’s bailout proposal.




Mere parsimony (frugality, stinginess) is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

How do "re-distribute" wealth from those who have none to those who have it already?

When a farmer irrigates a dry field, he is re-distributing the water from where it is to where he wants it.

Are you saying that a farmer can take the water from a field that needs water and has none and put it into the well to fill it up?

How?

In 1982, taxes were raised on gasoline and cigarettes, but the deficit hardly budged. In 1983, the president signed the biggest tax rise on payrolls, promising to create a surplus in the Social Security system, while knowing all along that the new revenue would be used to finance the deficit.

The retirement system was looted from the first day the Social Security surplus came into being, because the legislation itself gave the president a free hand to spend the surplus in any way he liked.

Thus began a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class, especially the self-employed small businessman, to the wealthy. The self-employment tax jumped as much as 66 percent.

In 1986, Reagan slashed the top tax rate further. His redistributionist obsession led to a perversity in the law. The wealthiest faced a 28 percent tax rate, while those with lower incomes faced a 33 percent rate; in addition, the bottom rate climbed from 11 percent to 15 percent.

For the first time in history, the top rate fell and the bottom rate rose simultaneously. Even unemployment compensation was not spared. The jobless had to pay income tax on their benefits.

A year later, the man who would not spare unemployment compensation from taxation called for a cut in the capital gains tax.

 

[Fordsflylow]

How do "re-distribute" wealth from those who have none to those who have it already?

When a farmer irrigates a dry field, he is re-distributing the water from where it is to where he wants it.

Are you saying that a farmer can take the water from a field that needs water and has none and put it into the well to fill it up?

Seriously!?! Are you really that lost in space?

 

[midcan5]

Reagan was lucky he had cooperation from the democrats as he raised taxes eleven times and helped secure social security. One has to give him credit there. The rest of his ideas and administration is off the wall. Why do few remember the S&L Bailout? Voodoo economics led to 'it's the economy, Stupid!' And if Reagan had been a democrat, the birdbrain republicans of today would be impeaching the nice but senile old man.

"Facts are stupid things." Ronald Reagan

Reagan Versus Clinton RVC--Graphs


http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/126617-reagan-and-taxes.html


"....there's a growing realization that the starting point for many of the catastrophes confronting the United States today can be traced to Reagan's presidency. There's also a grudging reassessment that the "failed"- presidents of the 1970s--Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter--may deserve more credit for trying to grapple with the problems that now beset the country." OpEdNews - Article: Ronald Reagan: Worst President Ever?

 

[Steelplate]

Fellow Dems....why do you do this? You know that these Limbaugh trained useful idiots are taught to use their critical thinking skills. Against Democrats...exclusively. To suggest that they do the same to their own party and even their own ideology is an exercise in futility.

Limbaugh never told them to do that and never will. Why? Because they are paid shills.

 

[Dr Grump]

Oh, god. I clicked on this thinking I might see Ghandi or Mandela. Instead I get Ronnie Raygun, a president masquerading as an actor...



...or was it the other way around...??

 

[uscitizen]

Reagan used a teleprompter.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

I disagree strongly. Reagan was a very important President, one of the most important in US history. He profoundly changed the direction of the country.

Yes. He managed to make perpetrating massive peacetime deficits politically survivable, and we are in the mess we are in because of that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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

The President is spending today at the White House with military families, you lying asshole.

Go away. Forever. Please.