Ronald Reagan - Prophet

[CrusaderFrank]

Your Lord and Savior has outspent every other country in human history

You're going to pull that in a thread in which the OP muses "one presumes, at least, that [Reagan] was not a prophet in the true sense, and delivering directives straight from the Almighty, although I could be wrong about that"?

Bet you $10 you have an Obama Halo pic in your wallet where normal people keeps pictures of their kids

 

[Dot Com]

Your Lord and Savior has outspent every other country in human history

You're going to pull that in a thread in which the OP muses "one presumes, at least, that [Reagan] was not a prophet in the true sense, and delivering directives straight from the Almighty, although I could be wrong about that"?

Bet you $10 you have an Obama Halo pic in your wallet where normal people keeps pictures of their kids

I bet you $10,000 (Romney-style ) that you have a Raygun desktop b/g.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You're going to pull that in a thread in which the OP muses "one presumes, at least, that [Reagan] was not a prophet in the true sense, and delivering directives straight from the Almighty, although I could be wrong about that"?

Bet you $10 you have an Obama Halo pic in your wallet where normal people keeps pictures of their kids

I bet you $10,000 (Romney-style ) that you have a Raygun desktop b/g.

My nephew has probably the last autographed picture with Reagan and my brother ran the RonaldReagan website, but no, I don't the RR Desktop b/g.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

One Obama Deficit > Any Reagan Budget

One Obama Deficit > All Reagans Deficits

Gee Frank...you know, back in 1971 my Dodge 3/4 ton pickup with a 318 cu. in. V-8 used to cost me < $8 to fill up. Now, my car with a 4 cylinder costs me almost $80 to fill up. So I outta go out and find me one of them there 1971 pickup...I could save $72 dollars!!!

Reagan was President 1981, you're a decade off. Not surprising considering you admire a guy who can't tell how many states are in the USA to the nearest 10

 

[Cecilie1200]

Reagan consistently comes out in the top five in public polling, and even in rankings by historians averages about 10th. In either case, Reagan's legacy is secure - left-wing whining not-with-standing.

Even from NBC, the socialist news organization:

List of presidential rankings - politics - White House | NBC News

President: 2009 rank, 2000 rank (Historians)
Abraham Lincoln: 1, 1
George Washington: 2, 3
Franklin D. Roosevelt: 3, 2
Theodore Roosevelt: 4, 4
Harry S. Truman: 5, 5
John F. Kennedy: 6, 8
Thomas Jefferson: 7, 7
Dwight D. Eisenhower: 8, 9
Woodrow Wilson: 9, 6
Ronald Reagan: 10, 11

Suck it up!

Those who are interested, there is a 2004 book, titled "Presidential Leadership" compiled and edited by various scholars, historians, professors and pundits, of all political affiliation.
(ISBN 0-7432-5433-3).

In this book, the Appendix shows several tables of ratings of presidents.

I am sure it is available at various outlets or in your local library. Buy it or borrow it and enjoy!

Polls of the public are usually suspect, the average citizen usually know some of the presidents like Lincoln and Ike but how many can rate Van Buren, or John Tyler? One of the interesting bits is why historians rate as they do. What characteristics do they look for? It brings up still other questions, do the times create the best or worst presidents? Would Lincoln just be a so so president if not for the Civil War? There are a number of books on presidential qualities or lack thereof, and it might explain how we the people pick some awful duds. Think of it when America had five million people we had Washington and Jefferson, with 300 million we had....

S'matter? Pissed off that someone else can manage that whole "sourcing" thing that seems to escape you so much? Or is it just that you're outraged by the idea of giving the peasants an opinion on anything?

 

[bripat9643]

Your chart only shows dates for the Reagan administration, not for the Obama administration. I suspect the reason for that is that your playing fast a loose with the fact and leaving out all the quarters when Obama's spending grew the fastest. Check that. I don't SUSPECT it. I know it.

Talk about MYTHS. Everything liberals say about Obama is big ******* lie. The myth making has already started and he's still in office.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Your Lord and Savior has outspent every other country in human history

You're going to pull that in a thread in which the OP muses "one presumes, at least, that [Reagan] was not a prophet in the true sense, and delivering directives straight from the Almighty, although I could be wrong about that"?

Bet you $10 you have an Obama Halo pic in your wallet where normal people keeps pictures of their kids

It's a pity there's not a store where we can go and buy leftists a sense of humor.

 

[Bfgrn]

Your chart only shows dates for the Reagan administration, not for the Obama administration. I suspect the reason for that is that your playing fast a loose with the fact and leaving out all the quarters when Obama's spending grew the fastest. Check that. I don't SUSPECT it. I know it.

Talk about MYTHS. Everything liberals say about Obama is big ******* lie. The myth making has already started and he's still in office.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

 

[bripat9643]

Your chart only shows dates for the Reagan administration, not for the Obama administration. I suspect the reason for that is that your playing fast a loose with the fact and leaving out all the quarters when Obama's spending grew the fastest. Check that. I don't SUSPECT it. I know it.

Talk about MYTHS. Everything liberals say about Obama is big ******* lie. The myth making has already started and he's still in office.

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

 

[mjollnir]

Your chart only shows dates for the Reagan administration, not for the Obama administration. I suspect the reason for that is that your playing fast a loose with the fact and leaving out all the quarters when Obama's spending grew the fastest. Check that. I don't SUSPECT it. I know it.

Talk about MYTHS. Everything liberals say about Obama is big ******* lie. The myth making has already started and he's still in office.

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

So, if that's actually how it is, make the case for it.

 

[S.J.]

The chart is backwards. It came from the moveon.org website. Surprise? Hell no.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

So, if that's actually how it is, make the case for it.

Oh, for the love of God. Nothing like a person with their hands over their eyes, yelling, "Show me!"

President Obama: The Biggest Government Spender In World History - Forbes

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

So, if that's actually how it is, make the case for it.

Oh, for the love of God. Nothing like a person with their hands over their eyes, yelling, "Show me!"

President Obama: The Biggest Government Spender In World History - Forbes

It's the "Titanic hasn't sunk any further since Obama was President" School of economic "thought"

 

[Bfgrn]

Your chart only shows dates for the Reagan administration, not for the Obama administration. I suspect the reason for that is that your playing fast a loose with the fact and leaving out all the quarters when Obama's spending grew the fastest. Check that. I don't SUSPECT it. I know it.

Talk about MYTHS. Everything liberals say about Obama is big ******* lie. The myth making has already started and he's still in office.

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

Funny, someone else came to the same conclusion. Probably because the data taken from the Bureau of Economic Analysis doesn't change just because right wing parrots chirp what they are told by faux news.

Government spending highest under Reagan

Here’s an interesting chart I put together from data taken from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

It shows the quarter-over-quarter average percentage increase in government spending under presidents Reagan through Obama. As you can see, average levels of government spending were highest under Reagan, by a huge margin. We had a boom back then. Next was Bush, then Clinton, then Bush I and last, but not least, was Obama. Average quarterly increases in gov’t spending under Obama have been a miserly 0.7%. This data belies the claim that spending has surged. The nominal amounts are large, yes, but the percentage increases have been very modest. In contrast, Reagan put the pedal to the metal.

Average quarter-over-quarter percentage gain in government spending

Reagan 3.5
Bush I 1.4
Clinton 1.7
Bush II 2.1
Obama 0.7

 

[Bfgrn]

More bad news for right wing parrots...

Growing government? Bush grew government employment through his entire term. Under Obama government employment has DECREASED...

 

[boilermaker55]

Come on now, let them have their messiah they are so convinced he was like next to god.
Maybe they could check out the wages starting when the messiah got in office and how they declined since then with the policies his administration put in afect.

We went from a creditor nation under Reagan to a debtor one.

 

[bripat9643]

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

So, if that's actually how it is, make the case for it.

It's already been done in multiple threads. The claim that Obama's spending is the lowest in several administrations got laughed out of the forum, but here this turd is trying to pedal the same manure in different form.

 

[bripat9643]

Again, no source.

1. your chart shows "public sector employment," not federal government employees.
   
2. it includes military personnel. Obama has been hacking on the military budget. There's no doubt about that. However, no one thinks of cutting the size of our armed forces as "cutting government employment."

More bad news for right wing parrots...

Growing government? Bush grew government employment through his entire term. Under Obama government employment has DECREASED...

 

[mjollnir]

Then your chart is horseshit. Spending has gone up way more than that under Obama. The authors of this manure obviously aren't counting all of Obama's spending.

So, if that's actually how it is, make the case for it.

It's already been done in multiple threads. The claim that Obama's spending is the lowest in several administrations got laughed out of the forum, but here this turd is trying to pedal the same manure in different form.

Sorry, but you'll understand if I don't take you at your word.

 

[CrotchetyGeezer]

Your chart only shows dates for the Reagan administration, not for the Obama administration. I suspect the reason for that is that your playing fast a loose with the fact and leaving out all the quarters when Obama's spending grew the fastest. Check that. I don't SUSPECT it. I know it.

Talk about MYTHS. Everything liberals say about Obama is big ******* lie. The myth making has already started and he's still in office.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

Have an adult read the chart for you... the 'Start of First Term' is Q1 81/09

What I want to know is the data source of the individual who produced this chart. I've looked and so far I can't find anything which shows spending on a quarterly basis. I've found spending on a yearly basis but, not for quarterly. So, where is the clown who produced the chart getting his quarterly spending figures from?

Furthermore, the chart is misleading. Spending for Ronald Reagan wouldn't show up until the fourth quarter of 1981. The first, second and third quarters of 1981 would still be under Carter's last FY budget. Reagan's first FY budget wouldn't have started until October 1, 1981 and would go through September 30, 1982.

Additionally, spending for Obama wouldn't show up until the fourth quarter of 2009. The first, second and third quarters of 2009 would still be under Bush's last FY budget. Obama's first FY budget wouldn't have started until October 1, 2009 and would go through September 30, 2010.