Caller: Why is Reagan a hero to conservatives? Rush: Derp

[Two Thumbs]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

The DNC gave marching orders to their minions to exalt Reagan and compare Obama favorably to him in the run up to the 2012 elections and from what I can tell, most of them are up in arms about it.

I think the big problem is that Reagan loved America and the Obama-Bots don't.

There's a problem with comparing Obama to Reagan. People that followed Reagan love America and knew there were issues. People that follow obama want nothing more than to bring the issues to the front, and speak poorly of America.

So obama can't = Reagan.

Reagan had such a large landslide re-election that liberals had to vote for him. I was every state except for Mass.

It's comical really. For Reagan to get re-elected he had to be Reagan, for Clinton to get re-eclected he had to move to the right. Bush had to be Bush. Obama has to pull a Clinton.

 

[Article 15]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

Are you all pissed off that some people cared about his birthday? Or are you out of ways to back big 0 and you're doing this to make yourselves feel better about having been duped by big 0?

Lebanon? Damn, if we had gone in you fucks would be calling him a war monger for having done so.

Remember Libya and "The Line of Death"? Recall the "Surgical removal of terrorist encampments"?

no?

of course not

I posted this Saturday morning ...

... and I just found the exchange hilarious. I happened upon it on another site I frequent and thought it was funny hearing Rush flubber around like he was asked the name of the last Domincan boy he slept with and not something he should have a canned answer prepared for at all times.

A lot of us have been saying for years that many conservatives are practicing a high level of cognitive dissonance when it comes to St. Ronnie but you just wouldn't understand

 

[Two Thumbs]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

Are you all pissed off that some people cared about his birthday? Or are you out of ways to back big 0 and you're doing this to make yourselves feel better about having been duped by big 0?

Lebanon? Damn, if we had gone in you fucks would be calling him a war monger for having done so.

Remember Libya and "The Line of Death"? Recall the "Surgical removal of terrorist encampments"?

no?

of course not

I posted this Saturday morning ...

... and I just found the exchange hilarious. I happened upon it on another site I frequent and thought it was funny hearing Rush flubber around like he was asked the name of the last Domincan boy he slept with and not something he should have a canned answer prepared for at all times.

A lot of us have been saying for years that many conservatives are practicing a high level of cognitive dissonance when it comes to St. Ronnie but you just wouldn't understand

No problem. I just found it odd beyond odd that this would be brought up.

Rush dropped the ball like anyone would have if someone brought up a subject from 30 years ago.

but everyone seems to hold Rush up to the level of some historical scholar.

And stop taking Pres Reagans name in vain you filty liberal you! You are unclean and may not speak the holy words.

 

[edthecynic]

Reagan is a conservative hero because he brought hope back to alot of people who saw the nation being destroyed during the Carter administration.

Oh BULLSHIT!

Carter inherited the destruction from Nixon and Ford!!!!!
Remember Ford's WIN, Whip Inflation Now, buttons???

You may be too young to remember, but to get reelected Nixon had his fed chief, Arthur Burns, rev up the economy by expanding the money supply, ending the gold standard and Nixon put a 10% tariff on imports. Nixon also froze wages and prices and created the czar like Pay Board and the Price Commission to monitor compliance with guidelines for increases in wages and prices, something CON$ now suddenly condemn under Obama.

Like today, CON$ attacked Carter for not fixing fast enough the damage Nixon and Ford had 8 years to create, and blame Carter for everything the GOP destroyed to get reelected!!!

It was Carter who appointed Paul Volker to the fed and it was Volker's tightening of the money supply, not Reagan, that turned the economy around. Everything Reagan did only made the economy worse. When Carter left unemployment was 7.2%, down from Ford's 7.8%. After Reagan's 1981 tax cuts to create jobs, unemployment soared to 10.8% with 10 consecutive months of double digit UE and 19 consecutive months of UE over 9%. It was Volker's tight monetary policy at the fed that brought interest rates down and that is what turned around the economy. All Reagan did was steal the credit for what Carter's fed chairman accomplished.

So it was Carter who got us out of the Reagan Recession, the worst at the time since the Great Depression, and gave us a decade of prosperity!!!

 

[edthecynic]

This is the 2nd Reagan post in as many days.

What's with the Reagan Derangement Syndrom?

Are you all pissed off that some people cared about his birthday? Or are you out of ways to back big 0 and you're doing this to make yourselves feel better about having been duped by big 0?

Lebanon? Damn, if we had gone in you fucks would be calling him a war monger for having done so.

Remember Libya and "The Line of Death"? Recall the "Surgical removal of terrorist encampments"?

no?

of course not

I posted this Saturday morning ...

... and I just found the exchange hilarious. I happened upon it on another site I frequent and thought it was funny hearing Rush flubber around like he was asked the name of the last Domincan boy he slept with and not something he should have a canned answer prepared for at all times.

A lot of us have been saying for years that many conservatives are practicing a high level of cognitive dissonance when it comes to St. Ronnie but you just wouldn't understand

No problem. I just found it odd beyond odd that this would be brought up.

Rush dropped the ball like anyone would have if someone brought up a subject from 30 years ago.

but everyone seems to hold Rush up to the level of some historical scholar.

And stop taking Pres Reagans name in vain you filty liberal you! You are unclean and may not speak the holy words.

More BULLSHIT!

Pathological liar Stuttering LimpTard worships at the alter of St Ronnie just about every day. Nearly every day he gives the "historical" significance of Reagan.

Any fool can tell the truth, but it requires a man of some sense to know how to lie well.
Samuel Butler

April 7, 2010
RUSH: What are they so afraid of, why do they have to wipe out Reaganism? Top marginal tax rate in 1981, Reagan takes office, 70%. Total take to the Treasury then, $500 billion. Reagan leaves office in 1989. Top marginal tax rate, 28%, dropped from 70. Total take to the Treasury, almost a trillion dollars. Cutting tax rates from 70%, that was a top marginal rate at the time, down to 28% doubled revenues. We know how to increase revenue. That's not their objective with taxation. The regime doesn't care about raising revenue with taxation. No, no, no.

As the extremist right wing Heritage Foundation chart shows, revenue declines in 1982 and 1983 as a result of Reagan's 1981 tax cuts leading to the Reagan Recession of 1982-1983. Reagan followed his tax cut with 8 tax increases in 6 years and revenue grows substantially!!!

If you notice, the professional CON$ervative liars always leave out Reagan's 8 tax increases as well as the decline in revenue AFTER Reagan's tax cut and BEFORE Reagan's 8 tax increases. And what is carefully left out shows premeditation and the intent to deceive.

This is one of the most professionally crafted lies in history. It is a perfect example of the CON$ervative technique of lying to your level of ignorance.

The best liar is he who makes the smallest amount of lying go the longest way.
Samuel Butler

 

[Sallow]

oooooooooooooooooooo, they CRUSHED Rush.

good grief...

Crushed? Rush was completely destroyed.

His retort? "You have an understanding of Reagan that is flawed"..

What the heck does that mean?

Reality is flawed?

If the caller were wrong..Rush should have tore about his points. He didn't. He attacked the caller..and the source of his information.

What he just should have said, is, "These things nevered happened".

You know why he didn't say that?

Bad trip to the Vet? Calm down Spot. Sit! Stay! Good Boy!!!

You have an understanding of Reagan that is flawed Sallow, it has everything but context. In your current state a logical argument is futile. You need an intervention first. Collective Hive Think bad. Free Market, Value for Value, Good. You can choose to support excellence or mediocrity, you have to make a choice. Now Go fetch.

So, dealing with the facts and the history somehow lacks "context"? Context in what way?

The sort of Context that one use to find on the back of Comic Books? When they use to sell X-Ray specs?

There's no real way to dismiss Reagan's crimes unless you blather on about how the man was loved.

And I am sure..that Al Capone could have used the same sort of defense.

 

[Flopper]

Ronald Regan ran on cutting the size of government. It seemed every other speech was about spending yet he led the administration to the highest deficits since WWII. Republicans may or make not cut spend spending but that doesn't keep them from cutting taxes and piling up deficits.

 

[MaggieMae]

I was listening at the time. I thought he handled the call very well. He exposed the caller for what he was. We used to Protest Reagan all the time back in the day. Ronald Wilson Reagan=666, all the fun stuff. One thing I have really truly admire about him looking back is how he handled personal attacks, nothing stuck. We could all learn from that.

What personal attacks? They were few, as I recall, very few, and those poked fun at his acting career, period. Reagan also liked to dish it out, vilifying his opponents with a smile. His popularity was due to his sloganeering rather than the public actually delving into the goings on such as we are able to do today with the Internet. The rallying of Americanism propelling Reagan into the White House was generally due to the hostage situation; tantamount to Americans rallying around George W. Bush after the attacks of 911.

Was Reagan a good president? I suppose he will always be judged as one, but I often wonder if his administration was successful only because of the experts who steered him, such as James Baker.

 

[MaggieMae]

sheesh, the man has been dead how long?

and they are still dumping on him..

pretty pathetic is you ask me.

Of course your kind would kick the wheelchair out from under FDR given the chance. But hey, he was a Democrat.

 

[MaggieMae]

Reagan didn't back amnesty he got played by the sleaze bag in congress.
He was a punk in the ME.

Uh huh...

PolitiFact | Yep. Reagan did the A-word

Reagan signed the bill after Republicans and Democrats cobbled together an amnesty program in response to concerns from farmers worried about harvesting profits. The official record of congressional debates shows that lawmakers intended the program to provide a steady supply of labor for growers of perishable crops, such as cherries, grapes, peaches, etc. At the time the bill was written, however, "perishable" was defined so loosely that more durable crops such as potted plants, tobacco and seedlings were lumped in as well.

So even at the start, this program could be interpreted in ways that would benefit employers looking to save on wages.

Or maybe you would better accept the truth from Edwin Meese, who implemented the amnesty.

Reagan Would Not Repeat Amnesty Mistake - HUMAN EVENTS

I was attorney general two decades ago during the debate over what became the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. President Reagan, acting on the recommendation of a bipartisan task force, supported a comprehensive approach to the problem of illegal immigration, including adjusting the status of what was then a relatively small population. Since the Immigration and Naturalization Service was then in the Department of Justice, I had the responsibility for directing the implementation of that plan.

President Reagan set out to correct the loss of control at our borders. Border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened—in particular, through sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants. If jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial.

He also agreed with the legislation in adjusting the status of immigrants—even if they had entered illegally—who were law-abiding long-term residents, many of whom had children in the United States. Illegal immigrants who could establish that they had resided in America continuously for five years would be granted temporary resident status, which could be upgraded to permanent residency after 18 months and, after another five years, to citizenship. It wasn’t automatic. They had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible.

I wonder why four years of George H.W. Bush, eight years of Bill Clinton and a Republican congress, and another eight years of George W. Bush, the proposed "fixes" in Reagan's amnesty bill never got done. Who dropped the ball?

 

[MaggieMae]

Listen to a Liberal Caller Crush Limbaugh?s Ronald Reagan Delusions

Funny.

I liked what this guy had to say about Reagan:

"Reagan has been a master at engineering an enormous gap between his rhetoric and the reality of his actions. All politicians, of course, have such a gap, but in Reagan it is cosmic, massive, as wide as the Pacific Ocean."

The Reagan Phenomenon by Murray N. Rothbard

The "reality" of the release of the Iran hostages has never been revisited, which is rather shocking. That they would win release as soon as Reagan took office would be a huge red flag in today's political arena. What behind-the-scenes negotiations were going on that the then President Carter was not made privy to? Did these negotiators promise Iran would get all of its demands in order to release the hostages? In exchange for what?

Who was working secretly to get a deal between Iran and the US which guaranteed the US would not interfere with Iranian internal affairs, remove the freeze on Iranian oil trade sanctions and money assets, eliminate Iranian debt to the US? Those were the concessions which won their release, and they were the ones that Carter would not agree to and therefore attempted a rescue mission that ultimately the military botched.

 

[MaggieMae]

so posting a few links to some blogs and amazon books is suppose to EXPLAIN it all.

Some of us LIVED through it, and can make up our own minds.

and what the hell is a firedoglake.

It's kinda like a Moonbattery, only from the competition. Got a problem with that too?

 

[MaggieMae]

Listen to a Liberal Caller Crush Limbaugh?s Ronald Reagan Delusions

That was an interesting exchange and eemonstrated the difference in the thinking of a Liberal vs a Conservative. Rush's response was not really included except in the few words between the statements of the caller.

When Reagan came to office, the country was a mess. When he was re-elected, he came within .18% of the votes in Minnesota of carrying every state in the union. There has never been a more decisive victory in history. The caller may or may not have known this, but it strikes any challenge to the impact Reagan had on the country moot.

Reagan changed the way that Americans thought about themselves and about the country. This conversion of attitude crossed party lines, economic stratas, race, religion and gender. He ushered in the period of the "Peace Dividend" that cut back military spending and helped to lead to the boom times of the 90's.

The caller called out various details that the Right likes to use as litmus tests. He set up the false gambit that if this is true than that is true. If these are the tennets of the Right then Reagan cannot be a hero of the Right because he did not champion these petty issues.

In truth, Reagan was a hero to the country and the country knew it. .18% of the vote in Minnesota is all that kept Reagan from carrying every state in the union. His opponent was from Minnesota and he almost did not carry his own state.

What might we gleen from this?

That there was no Internet at the time?

 

[MaggieMae]

That was an interesting exchange and eemonstrated the difference in the thinking of a Liberal vs a Conservative. Rush's response was not really included except in the few words between the statements of the caller.

When Reagan came to office, the country was a mess. When he was re-elected, he came within .18% of the votes in Minnesota of carrying every state in the union. There has never been a more decisive victory in history. The caller may or may not have known this, but it strikes any challenge to the impact Reagan had on the country moot.

Reagan changed the way that Americans thought about themselves and about the country. This conversion of attitude crossed party lines, economic stratas, race, religion and gender. He ushered in the period of the "Peace Dividend" that cut back military spending and helped to lead to the boom times of the 90's.

The caller called out various details that the Right likes to use as litmus tests. He set up the false gambit that if this is true than that is true. If these are the tennets of the Right then Reagan cannot be a hero of the Right because he did not champion these petty issues.

In truth, Reagan was a hero to the country and the country knew it. .18% of the vote in Minnesota is all that kept Reagan from carrying every state in the union. His opponent was from Minnesota and he almost did not carry his own state.

What might we gleen from this?

So wait. Because Reagan carried almost every state, that makes every single criticism about him "moot"? (1)

On top of that, he cut military spending? What? (2)

Domestic policy of the Ronald Reagan administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Domestic policy - Ronald Reagan - election

But Reagan, in fact, increased spending too. He proposed an enormous increase in the military budget ($1.5 trillion over five years) to rebuild armed forces that he claimed had been allowed to deteriorate badly in the 1970s. Congress approved that increase, although it was later scaled back significantly.

If you would care to respond to what I said, then do so. If you would like to respond to voices echoing in your own head, then why quote me?

1. Not every criticism is stiken moot. He did that whole Contra thing and he did raise taxes and blah, blah, blah. Who cares? Were you there?

When Carter left office, the word on the street was that the USA was finished. The Japanese were taking over and we were a footnote in history. No international respect, no ideas, no passion and no future. Plenty of rust and plenty of bloat.
Isn't it interesting that the same things are being said today. Didn't happen then; substitute China for Japan, and it ain't gonna happen now, either.

When Reagan left office, the USA was the pre eminent Super Power and was poised to reconstruct the economy of the world using computers.

2. Reagan did not cut defense spending. By uping the ante in the weapons race, the Russians had to cash out their chips. When Reagan talked about the SDI, the Russians thought it was ready to deploy.

How does"ushered in the era of" and "cut" translate as synonomous in your language?

That's a good analysis. There is no doubt that Reagan's efforts brought about the demise of the Cold War, but I think too many people forget that it never would have happened without a moderate Soviet leader like Gorbechev. So we got lucky.

 

[MaggieMae]

When Bush left office, the word on the street was that the USA was finished. The Chinese were taking over and we were a footnote in history. No international respect, no ideas, no passion and no future. Plenty of rust and plenty of bloat.

I spotted that bit of hypocrisy too!!

 

[uscitizen]

Yep Reagan pretty much caused the USSR to bankrupt itself trying to keep up with us in the arms race. A tactic the radical muslims are now using against us and it is working well for them too.

 

[MaggieMae]

So wait. Because Reagan carried almost every state, that makes every single criticism about him "moot"? (1)

On top of that, he cut military spending? What? (2)

Domestic policy of the Ronald Reagan administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Domestic policy - Ronald Reagan - election

If you would care to respond to what I said, then do so. If you would like to respond to voices echoing in your own head, then why quote me?

1. Not every criticism is stiken moot. He did that whole Contra thing and he did raise taxes and blah, blah, blah. Who cares? Were you there?

When Carter left office, the word on the street was that the USA was finished. The Japanese were taking over and we were a footnote in history. No international respect, no ideas, no passion and no future. Plenty of rust and plenty of bloat.

When Reagan left office, the USA was the pre eminent Super Power and was poised to reconstruct the economy of the world using computers.

2. Reagan did not cut defense spending. By uping the ante in the weapons race, the Russians had to cash out their chips. When Reagan talked about the SDI, the Russians thought it was ready to deploy.

How does"ushered in the era of" and "cut" translate as synonomous in your language?

1) The caller didn't criticize Regan, The caller asked why wingnuts support a president who gave amnesty to illegals, cut and run in Lebanon, raised taxes and negotiated with terrorists. Election results don't make the question moot. The only thing you did is render yourself mute when it comes to answering the question

That's because wingnuts are scared of the answer. That's why you won't answer the question either

2) There haven't been any cuts to the miliatary. The "Peace Dividend" you referred to never materialized. Your claims of military cuts are a fiction

Not even fiction. He increased the size of the military by about 30% as I recall. When Clinton came in, and the cold war no longer such a threat, he reduced it back by the same 30% to where it was. Of course Clinton has since been accused of "gutting" the military. Go figure.

 

[uscitizen]

If you would care to respond to what I said, then do so. If you would like to respond to voices echoing in your own head, then why quote me?

1. Not every criticism is stiken moot. He did that whole Contra thing and he did raise taxes and blah, blah, blah. Who cares? Were you there?

When Carter left office, the word on the street was that the USA was finished. The Japanese were taking over and we were a footnote in history. No international respect, no ideas, no passion and no future. Plenty of rust and plenty of bloat.

When Reagan left office, the USA was the pre eminent Super Power and was poised to reconstruct the economy of the world using computers.

2. Reagan did not cut defense spending. By uping the ante in the weapons race, the Russians had to cash out their chips. When Reagan talked about the SDI, the Russians thought it was ready to deploy.

How does"ushered in the era of" and "cut" translate as synonomous in your language?

1) The caller didn't criticize Regan, The caller asked why wingnuts support a president who gave amnesty to illegals, cut and run in Lebanon, raised taxes and negotiated with terrorists. Election results don't make the question moot. The only thing you did is render yourself mute when it comes to answering the question

That's because wingnuts are scared of the answer. That's why you won't answer the question either

2) There haven't been any cuts to the miliatary. The "Peace Dividend" you referred to never materialized. Your claims of military cuts are a fiction

Not even fiction. He increased the size of the military by about 30% as I recall. When Clinton came in, and the cold war no longer such a threat, he reduced it back by the same 30% to where it was. Of course Clinton has since been accused of "gutting" the military. Go figure.

Actually the "gutting" started under Bush I.

 

[MarcATL]

Rush was a blubbering fool. He couldn't come close to answering the question the caller asked.
The call is word for word from Rush and a caller. Cons don't like to be confronted with audio or video of their own bullshit, which is what Media Matters does.

This is why they all fall in line, lock, stock and barrel of their vilification and their hatred for Media Matters. A site that simply posts their BS for the world to see, just as it was presented. They take video clips and audio clips of RWers and post them. And so, RWers hate them for it.

Classic!

This is exactly why I don't think we should exalt Reagan. He was a great President and did much to further the Conservative agenda, but we shouldn't ignore the mistakes he made either. Immigration being one of them. Reagan's mistake is exactly why we don't pass an amnesty again. Because we cant trust anyone in washington to actually fix the problem after such an amnesty.

It's one of the things I got annoyed with in the 2008 Rep Primary. Everyone was trying to pretend to be Reagan rather than being themselves.

We need to be looking forward, not back. We can appreciate the achievements he made. Particularly how we wouldn't be where we are now if not for eliminating the Unconstitutional Fairness doctrine. We need to build on the good things Reagan did and improve on the things he didn't do as well. But we can't do that if we aren't honest about them.

Reagan is a conservative hero because he brought hope back to alot of people who saw the nation being destroyed during the Carter administration. He is a hero because he articulated the concepts of limited government in a way that many people understood.

Unfortunately, he also did things that weren't up to those ideals. But id rather someone have the correct ideals and fail to live them than someone pretend the ideals dont exist or actively fight against them.

Surprisingly honest, although there is a good chunk that I totally disagree with. I will give you kudos for your honesty.

 

[MaggieMae]

I think Reagan was a hero to conservatives because he told them exactly what they wanted to hear. Cut government spending since we know government is wasteful and evil. Then we won't need high taxes. More money in the hands of the wealthy, will mean more investments which creates more jobs. More jobs means more government revenue from taxes. Then we can cut taxes again and everything just gets better and better. Just like a perpetual motion machine. Hell what's not like.

Reagan was sold the theory of supply-side economics, which George H.W. Bush called "voodoo economics," and which has proven to be true.