Obama looks so small compared to this great man

[BDBoop]

Wow, you need to check into a clinic and dry out. The Iran-Contra affair only defines Reagan to the wing nuts who absolutely have to tear him down to justify their own existence.

Every policy that pushed the Soviets into economic collapse trying to keep up with our re-establishing our military defense of this county was instrumental to the reunification of Germany and the all of the Soviet Empire.

Oh, sorry; we may have become a bit befuddled when Obama eating dog was the big story.

It happened long before the dog story.

Okay. YOU tried to say the Iran-Contra affair was "no big." I meant by comparison to eating dog, apparently *in your world*.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Obama looks so small compared to this great man

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

....Only if you consider being "small" meaning Obama didn't have....

....his own, private BUTCHER!!!!!

*

Guatemala Death Files

 

[Darkwind]

Oh, sorry; we may have become a bit befuddled when Obama eating dog was the big story.

It happened long before the dog story.

Okay. YOU tried to say the Iran-Contra affair was "no big." I meant by comparison to eating dog, apparently *in your world*.

Really? I made a big deal out of the dog story?

I'll admit I had some fun at the Presidents expense, but that was a none story to Me. Why? Because when you live in other cultures, you normally follow their norms.

But you go ahead and find a post be Me where I made a big deal out of the dog story from Obama's book.

The Iran-Contra affair was a big deal. It WAS NOT THE DEFINING moment of the Reagan Administration.. That is a conspiracy theory by wingnuts.

 

[BDBoop]

It happened long before the dog story.

Okay. YOU tried to say the Iran-Contra affair was "no big." I meant by comparison to eating dog, apparently *in your world*.

Really? I made a big deal out of the dog story?

I'll admit I had some fun at the Presidents expense, but that was a none story to Me. Why? Because when you live in other cultures, you normally follow their norms.

But you go ahead and find a post be Me where I made a big deal out of the dog story from Obama's book.

The Iran-Contra affair was a big deal. It WAS NOT THE DEFINING moment of the Reagan Administration.. That is a conspiracy theory by wingnuts.

Okay, what was THE defining moment? And I'm not asking for his high note, I'm asking for the low note(s).

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It happened long before the dog story.

Okay. YOU tried to say the Iran-Contra affair was "no big." I meant by comparison to eating dog, apparently *in your world*.

Really? I made a big deal out of the dog story?

I'll admit I had some fun at the Presidents expense, but that was a none story to Me. Why? Because when you live in other cultures, you normally follow their norms.

But you go ahead and find a post be Me where I made a big deal out of the dog story from Obama's book.

The Iran-Contra affair was a big deal. It WAS NOT THE DEFINING moment of the Reagan Administration.. That is a conspiracy theory by wingnuts.

Hell......the White Wingers are merely.....​

.....FAUX Noise/Limbaugh lemmings.​

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

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 **** 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.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4sKg18lTqw]Trailer Park Boys - Bam Peanut Butter and Jam! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And Reagan was no ‘great man.’

He was a typical politician whose Administration was of questionable success. The regulatory and social programs that were eliminated and de-funded during his tenure had a net negative effect on the Nation. He left office with the country still in debt and at the threshold of a recession that cost GHWB a second term. Indeed, Bush 41 was a better president than Reagan, as he at least had a more sophisticated understanding of policy both foreign and domestic.

 

[Jroc]

He only blamed and thought what the scripts told him to blame and think. He never did anything on his own, maybe not even as a kid.

Since you have obviously never heard of this man, here's a short bio for you.

SparkNotes: Ronald Reagan: Summary

Some more light reading:

10 Things Conservatives Don't Want You To Know About Ronald Reagan | ThinkProgress

If most of that were true Reagan should be loved by the libs since most of those are liberal mainstays. Think progress?..Media Matters, George Soros, propaganda bullshit

President Reagan campaigned on an explicitly articulated, four-point economic program to reverse this slow motion collapse of the American economy:

1. Cut tax rates to restore incentives for economic growth, which was implemented first with a reduction in the top income tax rate of 70% down to 50%, and then a 25% across-the-board reduction in income tax rates for everyone. The 1986 tax reform then reduced tax rates further, leaving just two rates, 28% and 15%.

2. Spending reductions, including a $31 billion cut in spending in 1981, close to 5% of the federal budget then, or the equivalent of about $175 billion in spending cuts for the year today. In constant dollars, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this nondefense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms! Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which won the Cold War without firing a shot, total federal spending declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989. That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%.

3. Anti-inflation monetary policy restraining money supply growth compared to demand, to maintain a stronger, more stable dollar value.

4. Deregulation, which saved consumers an estimated $100 billion per year in lower prices. Reagan’s first executive order, in fact, eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and aided by a strong dollar the price of oil declined by more than 50%.

These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.

During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989

.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures - Forbes

 

[P@triot]

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

Reagan didn't earn the nickname, "The Great Communicator" for nothing. Give Mitt a chance though. He has good fundamentals.

Reagan wasn't a flip flopper like Romney, who was for the individual mandate before he was against it.

Hey stupid, there is a monumental difference between a state mandate (constitutional) and a federal mandate (unconstitutional). Why can't you incompetent liberals grasp something so simple? I know you guys are stupid, but come on - even a toddler can grasp this.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Since you have obviously never heard of this man, here's a short bio for you.

SparkNotes: Ronald Reagan: Summary

Some more light reading:

10 Things Conservatives Don't Want You To Know About Ronald Reagan | ThinkProgress

If most of that were true Reagan should be loved by the libs since most of those are liberal mainstays. Think progress?..Media Matters, George Soros, propaganda bullshit

I didn't know truth was determined by how people felt.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Reagan didn't earn the nickname, "The Great Communicator" for nothing. Give Mitt a chance though. He has good fundamentals.

Reagan wasn't a flip flopper like Romney, who was for the individual mandate before he was against it.

Hey stupid, there is a monumental difference between a state mandate (constitutional) and a federal mandate (unconstitutional). Why can't you incompetent liberals grasp something so simple? I know you guys are stupid, but come on - even a toddler can grasp this.

Its not unconstitutional. Watch the news lately? For ***** sake you're stupid.

Mitt Romney says the model should be implemented for the entire nation:

“If Massachusetts succeeds in implementing it, then that will be a model for the nation.”
- Romney in Baltimore, Feb. 2, 2007

 

[Bfgrn]

Since you have obviously never heard of this man, here's a short bio for you.

SparkNotes: Ronald Reagan: Summary

Some more light reading:

10 Things Conservatives Don't Want You To Know About Ronald Reagan | ThinkProgress

If most of that were true Reagan should be loved by the libs since most of those are liberal mainstays. Think progress?..Media Matters, George Soros, propaganda bullshit

President Reagan campaigned on an explicitly articulated, four-point economic program to reverse this slow motion collapse of the American economy:

1. Cut tax rates to restore incentives for economic growth, which was implemented first with a reduction in the top income tax rate of 70% down to 50%, and then a 25% across-the-board reduction in income tax rates for everyone. The 1986 tax reform then reduced tax rates further, leaving just two rates, 28% and 15%.

2. Spending reductions, including a $31 billion cut in spending in 1981, close to 5% of the federal budget then, or the equivalent of about $175 billion in spending cuts for the year today. In constant dollars, nondefense discretionary spending declined by 14.4% from 1981 to 1982, and by 16.8% from 1981 to 1983. Moreover, in constant dollars, this nondefense discretionary spending never returned to its 1981 level for the rest of Reagan’s two terms! Even with the Reagan defense buildup, which won the Cold War without firing a shot, total federal spending declined from a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.3% in 1988 and 21.2% in 1989. That’s a real reduction in the size of government relative to the economy of 10%.

3. Anti-inflation monetary policy restraining money supply growth compared to demand, to maintain a stronger, more stable dollar value.

4. Deregulation, which saved consumers an estimated $100 billion per year in lower prices. Reagan’s first executive order, in fact, eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and aided by a strong dollar the price of oil declined by more than 50%.

These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.

During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989

.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures - Forbes

WOW...you accuse sfcal of propaganda bullshit, then you post propaganda bullshit from Peter Ferrara, a "senior policy adviser" at the conservative Institute for Policy Innovation, who admitted that he "took money" from Jack Abramoff "to write op-ed pieces boosting the lobbyist's clients. 'I do that all the time,' Ferrara said. 'I've done that in the past, and I'll do it in the future'

 

[candycorn]

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.

Then why the overseas bank accounts?

 

[candycorn]

I have head Obama speak without the aid of a teleprompter. I am convinced beyond any doubt that he is small compared to most of the posters on this forum.

Those who think Obama is smarter then they are have serious self-esteem issues.

I admit that Obama has great speech writers, but I cannot understand why Obama gets credit for reading THEIR words.

Obama's great intelligence is nothing more than a media myth, and anyone who is truly honest will readily admit that.

Seriously, folks, do you really think Obama is smarter than you are?

I freely admit that there are many posters on this forum who are smarter than I am, but my intelligence dwarfs that of the enigma called Obama.

It's obvious that Obama is smarter than you are.

 

[candycorn]

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

Here's a picture of President Obama at the White House yesterday you moron.

 

[Claudette]

Reagan wasn't perfect. None of em are.

Reagan inherited one hell of a mess and it took some time but he certainly got this country rocking.

I sure as hell wish he were running the show today instead of that incompetent idiot Barry boy.

 

[HUGGY]

Obama looks so small compared to this great man


So does Nancy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A great speech by a poor president. As a Ford man, I knew that RR could make some very bad decisions for the republic. He did, and we suffer for it today.

 

[Jroc]

"Ford man?" Move out of your parents basement first little man

 

[Jroc]

WOW...you accuse sfcal of propaganda bullshit, then you post propaganda bullshit from Peter Ferrara, a "senior policy adviser" at the conservative Institute for Policy Innovation, who admitted that he "took money" from Jack Abramoff "to write op-ed pieces boosting the lobbyist's clients. 'I do that all the time,' Ferrara said. 'I've done that in the past, and I'll do it in the future'

You nutjob those are all facts... Look um up