Correcting the Reagan Myth

[Truthmatters]

Tearing down the Reagan myth -- now more than ever | Philly | 01/31/2010


1) Reagan had a big-spending economic stimulus plan. It's true. As noted in the book, the economic turnaround of the 1980s had little or nothing to do with Reagan's income tax cut that was heavily weighted to the rich but was instead the result of other factors, including the tight money policies of then-Fed chairman Paul Volcker (now an Obama adviser) and a global collapse of oil prices. But there was something else: Reagan also created thousands upon thousands of new jobs across America with a spending program that caused the federal deficit to skyrocket. It was called the Reagan defense buildup.

In the part of America where I lived in the 1980s, Long Island, N.Y., the economy was booming, in part because of the government dollars thrown at the then-Grumman Corp. to build new jet fighters. Now, government has a chance to do the same thing that Reagan achieved -- but not by building machines of death but creating jobs for things that will improve life, like solar power and high-speed rail.


2) Reagan would not have allowed many of the terror tactics started by Bush and Cheney and continued in the face of pressure by the Obama administration. Don't believe it? -- let me count the ways:

 

[The Rabbi]

Wow.
Reagan has been dead for what 2 years now? And he left office over 20 years ago. So why does anyone care?
Can it be that if we tear down Reagan's real accomplishments we will make Obama look better? Say it aint so.
And this is the first tiem I've seen that tight money contributes to economic activity. That is one new message for Bernanke. He's got it all wrong. He needs to raise rates, like to 15% like they were in Reagan's day.

Total fucking tool of a post from a total fucking tool of a poster.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

SNATCH at them straws!

 

[Baruch Menachem]

OH boy, this is bad.

I lived through that. I remember what caused that collapse in oil prices. I remember getting the benefit of those tax cuts. The spending dindn't help much, as it was concentrated in SoCal and the NE, and the NE still suffered huge job loses back then as the economy was changing so much.

This is one of the very bothersome parts of liberalism, the changing of history to suit their needs.
What I remember was that the government spending was a drag and the tax cuts helped everybody.

 

[Truthmatters]

Changing of history?

please tell me what part of this is an attempt to change history?

Did you even read it?

 

[uscitizen]

They have faith Truthmatters, you will not sway their opinions.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Right because the USSR wasn't a threat back then, so we didn't need to Increase spending to Protect our nation.

Nope.


TM, this thread shows that your an idiot, Liberals still Loathe Reagan, maybe because they hate seeing a Conservative who actually helped America?

It's also kind of funny how you guys complain about the spending, but you guys don't say shit when it comes to Obama's Spending.

 

[Cold Fusion38]

Reagan TRIPLED the national debt. DISPUTE that FACT! Our economy LOST manufacturing jobs DESPITE Reagans HUGE tax breaks for the RICH and big business, why is that?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

TM, this thread shows that your an idiot, Liberals still Loathe Reagan, maybe because they hate seeing a Conservative who actually helped America?

Sam Donaldson: Mr. President, how many of the country's problems would you accept the blame for at this point in your administration?

President Reagan: All of them Sam, I was once a Democrat.

It's also kind of funny how you guys complain about the spending, but you guys don't say shit when it comes to Obama's Spending.

It's "wag the dog" and "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" straw grasping!

An outstanding display of pure desperation, and relying on a century-old playbook!

 

[rightwinger]

Reagan myth: Reagans policies won the Cold War

 

[Oldandtired]

Tearing down the Reagan myth -- now more than ever | Philly | 01/31/2010


1) Reagan had a big-spending economic stimulus plan. It's true. As noted in the book, the economic turnaround of the 1980s had little or nothing to do with Reagan's income tax cut that was heavily weighted to the rich but was instead the result of other factors, including the tight money policies of then-Fed chairman Paul Volcker (now an Obama adviser) and a global collapse of oil prices. But there was something else: Reagan also created thousands upon thousands of new jobs across America with a spending program that caused the federal deficit to skyrocket. It was called the Reagan defense buildup.

In the part of America where I lived in the 1980s, Long Island, N.Y., the economy was booming, in part because of the government dollars thrown at the then-Grumman Corp. to build new jet fighters. Now, government has a chance to do the same thing that Reagan achieved -- but not by building machines of death but creating jobs for things that will improve life, like solar power and high-speed rail.


2) Reagan would not have allowed many of the terror tactics started by Bush and Cheney and continued in the face of pressure by the Obama administration. Don't believe it? -- let me count the ways:

Your posting of this and the...ahem...interpretation is exactly what is meant by indoctrination.

This is EXACTLY what my son was taught at a SUNY college last semester....by an economics professor who referred to Bush as a war criminal, Reagan as a medioacre president according to "all polls" of the time and referred to the tea party attendees as "tea baggers".

 

[Baruch Menachem]

you said the tax cuts didn't work and the spending did. I lived through the spending of Carter and the Tax cuts of Reagan. One worked the other didn't. You are trying to revise history by saying that spending under reagan, which didn't work for carter, suddenly worked for him.

I will grant you the collapse in oil prices helped a lot. But that was Reagan's doing too. He pulled off the price controls that artificially supported the OPEC price and suppressed the price American producers could get. His first executive order killed the gas price controls, and shortly afterword oil prices began to plunge. Oil profits here in the state also skyrocketed, but that was just a matter of profits going from the Saudi's to the JR Ewing types. One could argue that is not really an improvement on personality, but the crunching of the price of oil was like a second tax cut.
You are trying to say what did work did not, and what failed was a success. That is revisionism of the worst kind. Because it matters today what course we take.

Do tax cuts work? Bush cut taxes and for all the period up to the smash, we had low unemployment and a fast moving economy. When Pelosi and Co came into power, things began to come unhinged, and their response was stimulus by spending. Which failed, failed and failed again.

When Obama came in, he promised his stimulus would work. It would keep unemployment under 8%. It is nearer 11.

So, to revise history and say the failure worked and the functional failed it very bad history.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

TRIPLED the national debt.

Allow me to fix your quote:

Obama QUADRUPLED the national debt. DISPUTE that FACT! Our economy LOST manufacturing jobs DESPITE Obama's HUGE deficit spending, why is that?

Remember, infantile one: Live in the NOW.

 

[uscitizen]

They are not Tea Baggers?

 

[Truthmatters]

Right because the USSR wasn't a threat back then, so we didn't need to Increase spending to Protect our nation.

Nope.


TM, this thread shows that your an idiot, Liberals still Loathe Reagan, maybe because they hate seeing a Conservative who actually helped America?

It's also kind of funny how you guys complain about the spending, but you guys don't say shit when it comes to Obama's Spending.

Great job , you adressed NOTHING in the thread and spewed hate.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Right because the USSR wasn't a threat back then, so we didn't need to Increase spending to Protect our nation.

Nope.


TM, this thread shows that your an idiot, Liberals still Loathe Reagan, maybe because they hate seeing a Conservative who actually helped America?

It's also kind of funny how you guys complain about the spending, but you guys don't say shit when it comes to Obama's Spending.

Great job , you adressed NOTHING in the thread and spewed hate.

Thank you for proving my point.

You can't read if your saying i didn't adress nothing and i'm spewing hate.. mhm. ok.

 

[rayboyusmc]

Can it be that if we tear down Reagan's real accomplishments we will make Obama look better?

No, but the truth about the low quality of Reagnomics needs to be aired more often. He ain't the frigging hero the right likes to glom on.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wow.
Reagan has been dead for what 2 years now? And he left office over 20 years ago. So why does anyone care?
Can it be that if we tear down Reagan's real accomplishments we will make Obama look better? Say it aint so.
And this is the first tiem I've seen that tight money contributes to economic activity. That is one new message for Bernanke. He's got it all wrong. He needs to raise rates, like to 15% like they were in Reagan's day.

Total fucking tool of a post from a total fucking tool of a poster.

Why would anyone care? Is the Heritage Foundation still running their 'What would Reagan do' thing?
Do the wankers in rightwing talk radio invoke the memory of Reagan almost on a daily basis?

 

[rightwinger]

TRIPLED the national debt.

Allow me to fix your quote:

Obama QUADRUPLED the national debt. DISPUTE that FACT! Our economy LOST manufacturing jobs DESPITE Obama's HUGE deficit spending, why is that?[/quote]

Remember, infantile one: Live in the NOW.

Please provide evidence where as of 2010, the deficit has been Quadrupled. Obama came in with a $11 trillion deficit. Show where we have a $44 trillion deficit today

 

[Oldandtired]

TRIPLED the national debt.

Allow me to fix your quote:

Obama QUADRUPLED the national debt. DISPUTE that FACT! Our economy LOST manufacturing jobs DESPITE Obama's HUGE deficit spending, why is that?[/quote]

Remember, infantile one: Live in the NOW.

Please provide evidence where as of 2010, the deficit has been Quadrupled. Obama came in with a $11 trillion deficit. Show where we have a $44 trillion deficit today

Another moron who does not kow the differecne between the debt and the deficit.