Reagan & Conservatives -- Revisonist History 101

[Oldstyle]

I can't help but be amused by someone who thinks 9/11 was an "inside job" accusing me of not being able to deal with reality.

What's also amusing is that the very same liberals who want to point fingers at Reagan for increasing taxes conveniently forget that a good deal of those tax increases were part of a deal between Reagan and Democrats where Reagan agreed to tax increases and Democrats promised to cut spending. Reagan lived up to his end of the bargain...the Democrats did not live up to their end!

But you liberal shills don't want to acknowledge THAT! The truth is...Reagan cut taxes for the Middle Class just as he cut them for the wealthy.

 

[Dot Com]

Reagan, when faced w/ truth about Iran/Contra, cut 'n ran

 

[JoeB131]

[

How exactly did the 1% "lose"? Wealth among the extremely wealthy has gone up more under Obama than any other sector of the population. Obama's economic policies have hurt the Middle Class more than any other sector of the population. Yes, Obama "won" but his victories have cost Middle Class Americans dearly...something that they are now figuring out as the true costs of the ACA slowly are revealed. There is a REASON why major parts of that law have been delayed. Obama and the Democrats don't want the Middle Class to know how badly they've been fucked over until AFTER the next mid-term election. After that takes place...Barry won't care because dealing with voter anger will be the problem of someone else while he's out hitting the links on our dime.

Yawn, guy, you can keep repeating your sorry mantra of Hate Radio (watch, he'll deny he listens to Hate Radio).

Reality is, none of the horrid things your side predicted about the ACA have come to pass. And, sorry, the economy really is better now than it was for people in 2009. Obama answered the Reagan question in the affirmative. That's why he won.

 

[JoeB131]

[

That's a complete falsehood on your part...Reagan raised some taxes...Reagan lowered some taxes...Reagan reworked the tax codes. Some ignorant people think Reagan increased taxes when the truth is that he cut taxes SUBSTANTIALLY!

Yes, he cut them for Rich People and increased them on working people.

That's the point.

Reagan cut income taxes for everyone...not just the rich.

NO, he cut taxes for the rich, and they increased on working folks.

Not only did he increasethe bottom bracket from 11% to 15%.

But he eliminated a lot of middle class tax decutions like beign able to deduct credit card interest on Schedule A.

He also increased the payroll tax on Social Security and Medicare, which didn't really affect the rich because it's capped for them, but did hit working folks.

But then you get the final place where he hit them. When he cut deep into social programs, the States had to pick up the slack, and most states have flat income taxes or sales taxes... the kind of **** the WOrking Man taxes you conservatards just looooove.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

[

How exactly did the 1% "lose"? Wealth among the extremely wealthy has gone up more under Obama than any other sector of the population. Obama's economic policies have hurt the Middle Class more than any other sector of the population. Yes, Obama "won" but his victories have cost Middle Class Americans dearly...something that they are now figuring out as the true costs of the ACA slowly are revealed. There is a REASON why major parts of that law have been delayed. Obama and the Democrats don't want the Middle Class to know how badly they've been fucked over until AFTER the next mid-term election. After that takes place...Barry won't care because dealing with voter anger will be the problem of someone else while he's out hitting the links on our dime.

Yawn, guy, you can keep repeating your sorry mantra of Hate Radio (watch, he'll deny he listens to Hate Radio).

Reality is, none of the horrid things your side predicted about the ACA have come to pass. And, sorry, the economy really is better now than it was for people in 2009. Obama answered the Reagan question in the affirmative. That's why he won.

that ones not true Bud. Obomination has continued expanding the disasterous economy that Bushwacker got started.Things are so bad economic wise and much worse under him than they were with Bush,that many people have forgotten how bad it actually was under Bush. everywhere i went,i heard people saying back then-Bush has left Obama quite a mess in this economy he is going to have to clean up.something he will need at least two terms to be able to do.Its so much worse now under obozo,people have forgotten how bad it was under Bushwacker.

got to remember,what the lamestream media is reporting-the same ones that toot the myth about reagan,what they REPORT about the econoomy and how it REALLY is now are two totally different things.They want you to think that things are getting better under Obama when it has actually gotten worse.
Reagan is the one of course they all took their lessons from though as im sure you must know.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Yes, he cut them for Rich People and increased them on working people.

That's the point.

Reagan cut income taxes for everyone...not just the rich.

NO, he cut taxes for the rich, and they increased on working folks.

Not only did he increasethe bottom bracket from 11% to 15%.

But he eliminated a lot of middle class tax decutions like beign able to deduct credit card interest on Schedule A.

He also increased the payroll tax on Social Security and Medicare, which didn't really affect the rich because it's capped for them, but did hit working folks.

But then you get the final place where he hit them. When he cut deep into social programs, the States had to pick up the slack, and most states have flat income taxes or sales taxes... the kind of **** the WOrking Man taxes you conservatards just looooove.

pesky facts like that are a little too complicted for Trollstyle to comprehend.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

you know I wonder where frank is,its extremely unusual for him to be gone so long from this thread.He must have suffered a nervous breakdown and had to go into the doctors office for a while from all his previous meltdowns he had here so he is taking it easy for a while trying to recuperate and lower his blood pressure after it got so high.

 

[Oldstyle]

[

How exactly did the 1% "lose"? Wealth among the extremely wealthy has gone up more under Obama than any other sector of the population. Obama's economic policies have hurt the Middle Class more than any other sector of the population. Yes, Obama "won" but his victories have cost Middle Class Americans dearly...something that they are now figuring out as the true costs of the ACA slowly are revealed. There is a REASON why major parts of that law have been delayed. Obama and the Democrats don't want the Middle Class to know how badly they've been fucked over until AFTER the next mid-term election. After that takes place...Barry won't care because dealing with voter anger will be the problem of someone else while he's out hitting the links on our dime.

Yawn, guy, you can keep repeating your sorry mantra of Hate Radio (watch, he'll deny he listens to Hate Radio).

Reality is, none of the horrid things your side predicted about the ACA have come to pass. And, sorry, the economy really is better now than it was for people in 2009. Obama answered the Reagan question in the affirmative. That's why he won.

Are you kidding? None of the things conservatives predicted about the ACA have come to pass? Most of the things that conservatives predicted about the ACA have come to pass! Or have you not been paying attention?

As for the economy? Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. That's not a partisan statement...that's a fact!

 

[JoeB131]

[

Are you kidding? None of the things conservatives predicted about the ACA have come to pass? Most of the things that conservatives predicted about the ACA have come to pass! Or have you not been paying attention?

As for the economy? Barack Obama has overseen the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. That's not a partisan statement...that's a fact!

That's an OPINION.

Frankly, the recovery from the 1981 recession was pretty much just as weak.

Meanwhile, Republicans are now talking about "fixing" ObamaCare and not scrapping it.

 

[RKMBrown]

No, it says if you break up unions, make American workers compete with child labor in third world countries, shift the tax burden from the wealthy to the working class, then, yes, yes, you are going to reduce the wages and size of the middle class.

How is ZERO TAX FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS SHIFTING TAX TO THE MIDDLE CLASS? Did you flunk elementary math?

What the **** are you talking about?

Reagan INCREASED the tax burden on the middle class. The bottom rate for FICA went up from 11 to 15% on his watch, while the top rate dropped from 70% to 35%.

On top of that, he increased the amount paid in Medicare and Social Security Tax from 11% to 14%.

Liar.

 

[bedowin62]

leftard loves to remind people Reagan raised taxes

geez then you'd think Reagan could get some love from left-wing idiots like Joe B; instead LWNJs whine that Reagan is the father of "trickle-down"


lib idiots; always crying. you just cant keep em happy

 

[JoeB131]

leftard loves to remind people Reagan raised taxes

geez then you'd think Reagan could get some love from left-wing idiots like Joe B; instead LWNJs whine that Reagan is the father of "trickle-down"


lib idiots; always crying. you just cant keep em happy

It was the way he raised taxes.

He essentially lowered them on the RIch, who could more than afford them, tripled hte national debt, and then raised them on working folks.

In short, it's not what he did, it's that he did it in the most messed up way humanly possible.

 

[Oldstyle]

leftard loves to remind people Reagan raised taxes

geez then you'd think Reagan could get some love from left-wing idiots like Joe B; instead LWNJs whine that Reagan is the father of "trickle-down"


lib idiots; always crying. you just cant keep em happy

It was the way he raised taxes.

He essentially lowered them on the RIch, who could more than afford them, tripled hte national debt, and then raised them on working folks.

In short, it's not what he did, it's that he did it in the most messed up way humanly possible.

Do you REALLY want to get into a discussion of Reagan and taxes, Joe? It's obvious that you know about as much about THAT subject as you do about Eisenhower and how the Interstate highway system was financed! Why don't you do yourself a favor and sit your ass down in a library someplace and READ about the subjects you're blathering on about here! Perhaps then you won't make such a colossal ass of yourself?

 

[JoeB131]

[

Do you REALLY want to get into a discussion of Reagan and taxes, Joe? It's obvious that you know about as much about THAT subject as you do about Eisenhower and how the Interstate highway system was financed! Why don't you do yourself a favor and sit your ass down in a library someplace and READ about the subjects you're blathering on about here! Perhaps then you won't make such a colossal ass of yourself?

Guy, I don't want to get into that discussion with you, as you are posting from Bizarro World, where Reagan was a good president, Sarah Palin was Smart, the Iraq War was a great idea and Mr. Potter is the Hero in It's a Wonderful Life.

Out here in the real world, Reagan ran up more debt in 8 years than his 39 predecessors had run up in 200.

I mean, I could post all the graphs and charts to show how Reagan fucked up, well, let's be honest, just about everything. But you guys are oblivious to those things. So what's the point, really.

 

[RKMBrown]

[

Do you REALLY want to get into a discussion of Reagan and taxes, Joe? It's obvious that you know about as much about THAT subject as you do about Eisenhower and how the Interstate highway system was financed! Why don't you do yourself a favor and sit your ass down in a library someplace and READ about the subjects you're blathering on about here! Perhaps then you won't make such a colossal ass of yourself?

Guy, I don't want to get into that discussion with you, as you are posting from Bizarro World, where Reagan was a good president, Sarah Palin was Smart, the Iraq War was a great idea and Mr. Potter is the Hero in It's a Wonderful Life.

Out here in the real world, Reagan ran up more debt in 8 years than his 39 predecessors had run up in 200.

I mean, I could post all the graphs and charts to show how Reagan fucked up, well, let's be honest, just about everything. But you guys are oblivious to those things. So what's the point, really.

Piece of shit liar.

 

[Oldstyle]

[

Do you REALLY want to get into a discussion of Reagan and taxes, Joe? It's obvious that you know about as much about THAT subject as you do about Eisenhower and how the Interstate highway system was financed! Why don't you do yourself a favor and sit your ass down in a library someplace and READ about the subjects you're blathering on about here! Perhaps then you won't make such a colossal ass of yourself?

Guy, I don't want to get into that discussion with you, as you are posting from Bizarro World, where Reagan was a good president, Sarah Palin was Smart, the Iraq War was a great idea and Mr. Potter is the Hero in It's a Wonderful Life.

Out here in the real world, Reagan ran up more debt in 8 years than his 39 predecessors had run up in 200.

I mean, I could post all the graphs and charts to show how Reagan fucked up, well, let's be honest, just about everything. But you guys are oblivious to those things. So what's the point, really.

LOL...ah, yes...the old "percentage of growth" chart that you progressives LOVE to trot out to try and paint Reagan as a big spender and Barry as a "frugal" President. It's laughable that any of you STILL think this little bit of statistical sleight of hand is going to stand up to even casual scrutiny.

All your pretty bar graph "measures" is what percentage any given President increased or decreased spending over the President who was in office before him. In Obama's case, he followed W. who was dealing with the economic crash and utilizing massive amounts of Keynesian spending that all you liberals love so much to prop up the economy. What your bar chart doesn't show is that Obama spent more than W. did even at the height of the economic crisis EVERY SINGLE YEAR HE'S BEEN IN OFFICE.

As for Reagan's numbers? Funny thing, Joe...Reagan worked out a deal with the Democratically controlled Congress where he would raise taxes if they would cut spending. Reagan fulfilled his end of the bargain...only to have the Democrats renege on their part of that deal and NOT cut spending as agreed.

Reagan attempted to do the right thing...only to be double crossed by liberals in Congress. Yet you liberals today point to his numbers on taxes and spending and blame Reagan for something that was in some ways forced upon him by Tip O'Neil and the Democrats.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

 

[JoeB131]

[

LOL...ah, yes...the old "percentage of growth" chart that you progressives LOVE to trot out to try and paint Reagan as a big spender and Barry as a "frugal" President. It's laughable that any of you STILL think this little bit of statistical sleight of hand is going to stand up to even casual scrutiny.

No, guy, it's a valid point. IN the 200 years before Reagan, we only ran up a Trillion dollars in debt. WOrld Wars, Interstate highway system, Putting men on the ******* moon- we still lived within our means and paid our way! Then along came your boy Reagan who decided to give huge tax cuts to the rich while spending money on $200 hammers, and lo and behold, we ended up with two trillion more in debt- essentially tripling it, with another trillion added on under his boy Bush bailing out his Saving and Loan cronies.

Come on, tell me again how Republicans are about "fiscal responsibility".

And now you have all this interest on the debt, with the rich being so used to not paying their fair share you'd never get serious tax reform, and you gripe that when Bush-43 crashed worse than his Dad did (talk about an Oedipus complex!) Obama can't get it under control.

[
All your pretty bar graph "measures" is what percentage any given President increased or decreased spending over the President who was in office before him. In Obama's case, he followed W. who was dealing with the economic crash and utilizing massive amounts of Keynesian spending that all you liberals love so much to prop up the economy. What your bar chart doesn't show is that Obama spent more than W. did even at the height of the economic crisis EVERY SINGLE YEAR HE'S BEEN IN OFFICE.

Guy, Bush inherited surpluses. He was the one who decided that we needed to cut taxes for the rich while increasing government spending invading THE WRONG COUNTRY in response to 9/11.

[
As for Reagan's numbers? Funny thing, Joe...Reagan worked out a deal with the Democratically controlled Congress where he would raise taxes if they would cut spending. Reagan fulfilled his end of the bargain...only to have the Democrats renege on their part of that deal and NOT cut spending as agreed.

Mostly because there wasn't all that much to cut, really. And the point of Reagan's tax increases was that working people ended up paying them, not the rich.

[
Reagan attempted to do the right thing...only to be double crossed by liberals in Congress. Yet you liberals today point to his numbers on taxes and spending and blame Reagan for something that was in some ways forced upon him by Tip O'Neil and the Democrats.

Funny how Reagan was totally powerless for all the bad stuff that happened on his watch, but gosh darn, he totally caused the fall of the USSR by talking to a wall..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

[

LOL...ah, yes...the old "percentage of growth" chart that you progressives LOVE to trot out to try and paint Reagan as a big spender and Barry as a "frugal" President. It's laughable that any of you STILL think this little bit of statistical sleight of hand is going to stand up to even casual scrutiny.

No, guy, it's a valid point. IN the 200 years before Reagan, we only ran up a Trillion dollars in debt. WOrld Wars, Interstate highway system, Putting men on the ******* moon- we still lived within our means and paid our way! Then along came your boy Reagan who decided to give huge tax cuts to the rich while spending money on $200 hammers, and lo and behold, we ended up with two trillion more in debt- essentially tripling it, with another trillion added on under his boy Bush bailing out his Saving and Loan cronies.

Come on, tell me again how Republicans are about "fiscal responsibility".

And now you have all this interest on the debt, with the rich being so used to not paying their fair share you'd never get serious tax reform, and you gripe that when Bush-43 crashed worse than his Dad did (talk about an Oedipus complex!) Obama can't get it under control.

[
All your pretty bar graph "measures" is what percentage any given President increased or decreased spending over the President who was in office before him. In Obama's case, he followed W. who was dealing with the economic crash and utilizing massive amounts of Keynesian spending that all you liberals love so much to prop up the economy. What your bar chart doesn't show is that Obama spent more than W. did even at the height of the economic crisis EVERY SINGLE YEAR HE'S BEEN IN OFFICE.

Guy, Bush inherited surpluses. He was the one who decided that we needed to cut taxes for the rich while increasing government spending invading THE WRONG COUNTRY in response to 9/11.

[
As for Reagan's numbers? Funny thing, Joe...Reagan worked out a deal with the Democratically controlled Congress where he would raise taxes if they would cut spending. Reagan fulfilled his end of the bargain...only to have the Democrats renege on their part of that deal and NOT cut spending as agreed.

Mostly because there wasn't all that much to cut, really. And the point of Reagan's tax increases was that working people ended up paying them, not the rich.

[
Reagan attempted to do the right thing...only to be double crossed by liberals in Congress. Yet you liberals today point to his numbers on taxes and spending and blame Reagan for something that was in some ways forced upon him by Tip O'Neil and the Democrats.

Funny how Reagan was totally powerless for all the bad stuff that happened on his watch, but gosh darn, he totally caused the fall of the USSR by talking to a wall..

Your boy Obama ran up trillion deficits in a single year!

Your boy Obama has one single deficit that dwarfs all 8 of Reagan's!

In fact, your Progressive Failure Obama has deficits that dwarf Reagan's entire Budget!

Reagan beat the USSR and Obama got us downgraded

 

[bedowin62]

Frank; why bother responding to Joe B?

he's an unrepentent loser progressive wallowing in hypocrisy; living in the past