Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaReagan couldn't endorse anyone but Ron Paul. The rest of these Neocon jerks are complete stiffs. He would have to go with him. He's the only candidate running who has any intelligence and integrity. And Reagan really would be appalled at the way the Neocon jerks have treated their fellow Republican Ron Paul. They should all be ashamed of themselves. If they had consciences they would anyway.
Regan's biggest accomplishments were on the foreign policy front. He never once said "why don't we mind our own business", and because of that we defeated communism. He was the exact opposite of Paul.
Cut the bullshit.
"The foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration was the foreign policy of the United States from 1981 to 1989. It was characterized by a strategy of "peace through strength" followed by a warming of relations with the Soviet Union, and resulting in an end to the Cold War when Mikhail Gorbachev rose to power."
Ron Paul actually knew Ronald Reagan. He understands what Ronald Reagan stood for more than the other wannabes currently running. They all claim they know what Ronald Reagan was about but none of them knew the man as well as Ron Paul did. So go with Ron Paul on this issue.
OK Ron Paul supporters, riddle me this...which GOP candidate is the most electable in 2012? Then STFU.
Obama is going to annihilate these Neocon stiffs in 2012. And the Republicans deserve it. Romney/McCain? Yea like there's a big difference there. So now the Neocon Republicans will guarantee the nations stays in the hands of the Socialists/Progressives. It's a real shame. Either way,all we have to look forward to is more Big Government oppression though. No real choices anymore. And that's the saddest thing of all.
Obama is going to annihilate these Neocon stiffs in 2012. And the Republicans deserve it. Romney/McCain? Yea like there's a big difference there. So now the Neocon Republicans will guarantee the nations stays in the hands of the Socialists/Progressives. It's a real shame. Either way,all we have to look forward to is more Big Government oppression though. No real choices anymore. And that's the saddest thing of all.
Out of curiosity, you do know there's more to being a "neocon" then supporting foreign wars, right?
There's one thing you all are missing... Ronald Reagan would be considered a Communist today.
Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube
Obama is going to annihilate these Neocon stiffs in 2012. And the Republicans deserve it. Romney/McCain? Yea like there's a big difference there. So now the Neocon Republicans will guarantee the nations stays in the hands of the Socialists/Progressives. It's a real shame. Either way,all we have to look forward to is more Big Government oppression though. No real choices anymore. And that's the saddest thing of all.
Out of curiosity, you do know there's more to being a "neocon" then supporting foreign wars, right?
In my opinion the current President is a Big Government Neocon himself. His policies are Neocon policies. I know most call him a Socialist/Progressive,but he's actually a Neocon. Which gets back to what i've always said,There is no real difference between a Socialist/Progressive and Neocon. They both take you to the same place in the end. They both need to get the boot. It's time for real Conservatism. Because that's the only thing that can save this country now.
Foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaRegan's biggest accomplishments were on the foreign policy front. He never once said "why don't we mind our own business", and because of that we defeated communism. He was the exact opposite of Paul.
Cut the bullshit.
"The foreign policy of the Ronald Reagan administration was the foreign policy of the United States from 1981 to 1989. It was characterized by a strategy of "peace through strength" followed by a warming of relations with the Soviet Union, and resulting in an end to the Cold War when Mikhail Gorbachev rose to power."
Right now you're in your teens. Give yourself time to grow. Don't worry young fella, there's a girl out there that will give you a chance one day. Fine you like Ron Paul, that's a start, if you keep yourself immersed in debate, you'll have a fully developed world view one day.
Regan saw American has a crucial role for the world. Paul wants to turn his back to the world. Spare me with the Regan comparisons.
Obama is going to annihilate these Neocon stiffs in 2012. And the Republicans deserve it. Romney/McCain? Yea like there's a big difference there. So now the Neocon Republicans will guarantee the nations stays in the hands of the Socialists/Progressives. It's a real shame. Either way,all we have to look forward to is more Big Government oppression though. No real choices anymore. And that's the saddest thing of all.
Out of curiosity, you do know there's more to being a "neocon" then supporting foreign wars, right?
In my opinion the current President is a Big Government Neocon himself. His policies are Neocon policies. I know most call him a Socialist/Progressive,but he's actually a Neocon. Which gets back to what i've always said,There is no real difference between a Socialist/Progressive and Neocon. They both take you to the same place in the end. They both need to get the boot. It's time for real Conservatism. Because that's the only thing that can save this country now.
OK Ron Paul supporters, riddle me this...which GOP candidate is the most electable in 2012? Then STFU.
Obama will destroy the Republican Neocon stiffs in 2012. It's a guarantee. None are real alternatives to him. Socialists/Progressives & Neocons are the same entity. But i guess that's how the Global elites have set things up. It's all about the Big Government/Corporate Globalism in the end. Ron Paul is the only real alternative out there. But i guess that's why he can't win. It is what it is.
Obama will destroy the Republican Neocon stiffs in 2012. It's a guarantee. None are real alternatives to him. Socialists/Progressives & Neocons are the same entity. But i guess that's how the Global elites have set things up. It's all about the Big Government/Corporate Globalism in the end. Ron Paul is the only real alternative out there. But i guess that's why he can't win. It is what it is.
Still tossing the word around. Which Republicans are you referring to as "neocons?"
Obama is clearly not. Using the military and spending isn't enough, you have to specifically want to use the military to spread democracy and I see no evidence that Obama's doing that or that he even believes in democracy. That is central to neocon.
Romney? He's certainly a spender, but I haven't heard enough of his military views and he to my knowledge isn't for a military foreign policy to spread democracy. Then again because of his fiscal policies I don't support him so if you have clearer evidence on his military views then I could be swayed he's a neocon.
Perry, Cain, Bachman, Paul, and Gingrich are not big spenders, so they aren't neocons. Perry leaves doubt about how fiscally conservative he is, but he's not a government spender in the vein of Obama or W.
W was clearly a neocon, though not until after he invaded Iraq as before that he was for defense and after invading he decided the military for democracy building made sense. By the end he was a solid neocon.
But I'm not seeing it in the current candidates. Again, neocon's an actual ideology. You can't just apply the label on policy, it's an objective. It's like Christian. Someone acting like a Christian doesn't make them one, they have to believe in Jesus, by definition. If acting religiously dogmatic alone made you a christian then liberals would be Christians.
Only very minor differences in Socialist/Progressive and Neocon policies. Too minute to dwell on for any length of time. They both may have slightly different motivations for their Big Government Globalist policies,but in the end they take you to the same place. We need a real alternative to them both. And Ron Paul is that real alternative in my opinion. But hey,that's just my take anyway.
Only very minor differences in Socialist/Progressive and Neocon policies. Too minute to dwell on for any length of time. They both may have slightly different motivations for their Big Government Globalist policies,but in the end they take you to the same place. We need a real alternative to them both. And Ron Paul is that real alternative in my opinion. But hey,that's just my take anyway.
Again neocon doesn't mean someone who believes in the military and spending, it's specifically the view that the military is the best way to spread democracy hand in hand with a belief in big government domestically. It's an ideology, not a behavior or a policy. An ideology of trust of government to spend domestically and spread democracy through force. And again, I see zero evidence that Obama is attempting to use the government to spreading democracy, so his policy is not Neocon. And your using the term for fiscal conservatives because they support foreign military use in support of spreading democracy is even more wrong. Fiscal conservatives are not neocon no matter how much they support the military. They are con, not neocon. Neocon is NEW conservative, not conservative.
Basically, you like the word so you're going to keep using it even you're using it wrong because you like the way it sounds. I got it.
Only very minor differences in Socialist/Progressive and Neocon policies. Too minute to dwell on for any length of time. They both may have slightly different motivations for their Big Government Globalist policies,but in the end they take you to the same place. We need a real alternative to them both. And Ron Paul is that real alternative in my opinion. But hey,that's just my take anyway.
Again neocon doesn't mean someone who believes in the military and spending, it's specifically the view that the military is the best way to spread democracy hand in hand with a belief in big government domestically. It's an ideology, not a behavior or a policy. An ideology of trust of government to spend domestically and spread democracy through force. And again, I see zero evidence that Obama is attempting to use the government to spreading democracy, so his policy is not Neocon. And your using the term for fiscal conservatives because they support foreign military use in support of spreading democracy is even more wrong. Fiscal conservatives are not neocon no matter how much they support the military. They are con, not neocon. Neocon is NEW conservative, not conservative.
Basically, you like the word so you're going to keep using it even you're using it wrong because you like the way it sounds. I got it.
Obama is spreading Democracy with the use of Military and he will be doing that some more in the near future. Regardless though,you see all these major differences between Socialists/Progressives & Neocons but i just don't. It's all Big Government Globalism in the end. Bush/Obama?? I see only almost identical policies. But i can see we'll agree to disagree on this one. No one changes minds on Message Boards. That just doesn't happen. So have a great Sunday and take care.
Reagans views are frankly irrelevant, his administrations policies were clearly neo-con interventionist, directed by aggressive Cold Warriors, and at complete odds with Pauls foreign policy position.
