tHE TRUTH ABOUT rEPUBLICAN Keynesians like REAGAN

[Oldstyle]

Believing that the US has ever been a libertarian economy, for instance.

As close as any has ever come. Phenomenally successful too.

Get thee a history book not written by a Progressive.

You are such a con. You believe that those who disagree with you, who basically includes everyone except other con tools, are progressives. I have read PLENTY of economic history. Never found an economist that was not on the payroll of the bat shit crazy con web sites that agree that the us was ever a libertarian economy. Perhaps you have one.
The main thing, me boy, is that libertarian economies have started, simply NEVER succeeded. That is what history would teach you, if you actually read it.
Second, you are desperate enough to try to suggest looking at the US in the past as libertarian. It was not. But more importantly, you can not name a current one. Which makes you, well, a desperate con tool.

This from the fraud who claimed to have taught college level economics but didn't know what the term "economic school" meant.

"Con tool" is about all Rshermr has in his "intellectual quiver"...hence his constant use of the term.

 

[Rshermr]

As close as any has ever come. Phenomenally successful too.

Get thee a history book not written by a Progressive.

You are such a con. You believe that those who disagree with you, who basically includes everyone except other con tools, are progressives. I have read PLENTY of economic history. Never found an economist that was not on the payroll of the bat shit crazy con web sites that agree that the us was ever a libertarian economy. Perhaps you have one.
The main thing, me boy, is that libertarian economies have started, simply NEVER succeeded. That is what history would teach you, if you actually read it.
Second, you are desperate enough to try to suggest looking at the US in the past as libertarian. It was not. But more importantly, you can not name a current one. Which makes you, well, a desperate con tool.

This from the fraud who claimed to have taught college level economics but didn't know what the term "economic school" meant.

"Con tool" is about all Rshermr has in his "intellectual quiver"...hence his constant use of the term.

Back to washing dishes, me boy. Other than baseless attacks, you have nothing.

 

[eflatminor]

Believing that the US has ever been a libertarian economy, for instance.

As close as any has ever come. Phenomenally successful too.

Get thee a history book not written by a Progressive.

You are such a con. You believe that those who disagree with you, who basically includes everyone except other con tools, are progressives. I have read PLENTY of economic history. Never found an economist that was not on the payroll of the bat shit crazy con web sites that agree that the us was ever a libertarian economy. Perhaps you have one.
The main thing, me boy, is that libertarian economies have started, simply NEVER succeeded. That is what history would teach you, if you actually read it.
Second, you are desperate enough to try to suggest looking at the US in the past as libertarian. It was not. But more importantly, you can not name a current one. Which makes you, well, a desperate con tool.

Well, it's clear you're capable of ad hominem attacks. That's impressive. Further, your insistence that the US economy, built on the very idea of limited government, was not in any way libertarian comes down to the argument, "Because you say so". Yea, well, I'm not impressed with your retort, no matter how condescending you word it.

That current societies are infected across the globe with central planners that are just SURE they know what's best for everyone else does not diminish the sound arguments for libertarianism, which I and many others will continue to advocate. You're free to respond with logic, reason and specificity...or you can just call everyone a 'con'. Your choice.

Good luck with that nasty streak. It doesn't help your case.

 

[Oldstyle]

You are such a con. You believe that those who disagree with you, who basically includes everyone except other con tools, are progressives. I have read PLENTY of economic history. Never found an economist that was not on the payroll of the bat shit crazy con web sites that agree that the us was ever a libertarian economy. Perhaps you have one.
The main thing, me boy, is that libertarian economies have started, simply NEVER succeeded. That is what history would teach you, if you actually read it.
Second, you are desperate enough to try to suggest looking at the US in the past as libertarian. It was not. But more importantly, you can not name a current one. Which makes you, well, a desperate con tool.

This from the fraud who claimed to have taught college level economics but didn't know what the term "economic school" meant.

"Con tool" is about all Rshermr has in his "intellectual quiver"...hence his constant use of the term.

Back to washing dishes, me boy. Other than baseless attacks, you have nothing.

That from the man who's thinks calling others a "con tool" constitutes an argument!

The thing that made America so great for so long was it was as close to a Libertarian government as any that have ever existed. This was the country where you could succeed on your hard work and intelligence. This was the country where the rule of law protected individuals from an over zealous government.

You've made it obvious at this point that you know about as much about what constitutes a "Libertarian" government as you do about economics...which is to say ZILCH...NADA...NOTHING!

 

[ScienceRocks]

Libertarianism may of worked under the confraderation but not under the current constitution.

Not if you want a first world power that competes against China, South Korea and Europe. Not doable.

 

[Oldstyle]

Libertarianism may of worked under the confraderation but not under the current constitution.

Not if you want a first world power that competes against China, South Korea and Europe. Not doable.

Pray tell...why?

 

[Rshermr]

As close as any has ever come. Phenomenally successful too.

Get thee a history book not written by a Progressive.

You are such a con. You believe that those who disagree with you, who basically includes everyone except other con tools, are progressives. I have read PLENTY of economic history. Never found an economist that was not on the payroll of the bat shit crazy con web sites that agree that the us was ever a libertarian economy. Perhaps you have one.
The main thing, me boy, is that libertarian economies have started, simply NEVER succeeded. That is what history would teach you, if you actually read it.
Second, you are desperate enough to try to suggest looking at the US in the past as libertarian. It was not. But more importantly, you can not name a current one. Which makes you, well, a desperate con tool.

Well, it's clear you're capable of ad hominem attacks. That's impressive. Further, your insistence that the US economy, built on the very idea of limited government, was not in any way libertarian comes down to the argument, "Because you say so". Yea, well, I'm not impressed with your retort, no matter how condescending you word it.

That current societies are infected across the globe with central planners that are just SURE they know what's best for everyone else does not diminish the sound arguments for libertarianism, which I and many others will continue to advocate. You're free to respond with logic, reason and specificity...or you can just call everyone a 'con'. Your choice.

Good luck with that nasty streak. It doesn't help your case.

You are avoiding your problem, me boy. You are following an economic policy that does not work. I did not say anything that is not truth. Which is why you can not find an actual libertarian economy that worked for any period of time. You insist that the us is that country, up till the early 1900's. Problem is, that is your opinion. And you have no rational support. No link. Just your opinion. And your opinion is worth about as much as mine, me boy. Which is nothing.
Now, the reason you can not find a link from an impartial source backing you up is interesting, step. Sorry, you are far from convincing.

It is really pitiful that you can not find a successful libertarian economy. Must be lousy following an economic theory that never lasts for any length of time, even when tried. But remember, there is always that man made island idea.

 

[Rshermr]

This from the fraud who claimed to have taught college level economics but didn't know what the term "economic school" meant.

"Con tool" is about all Rshermr has in his "intellectual quiver"...hence his constant use of the term.

Back to washing dishes, me boy. Other than baseless attacks, you have nothing.

That from the man who's thinks calling others a "con tool" constitutes an argument!

The thing that made America so great for so long was it was as close to a Libertarian government as any that have ever existed. This was the country where you could succeed on your hard work and intelligence. This was the country where the rule of law protected individuals from an over zealous government.

You've made it obvious at this point that you know about as much about what constitutes a "Libertarian" government as you do about economics...which is to say ZILCH...NADA...NOTHING!

Funny. The dish washer thinks he has made an economic argument. Was there an argument there, me boy. did you have a link proving anything, or are you just posting blather.

Now, calling you a con tool is something that I do because you have EARNED it. If I look at an argument from you, I can always find it in a right wing bat shit crazy conservative web site. Not most of the time. Always. And, as a con tool, I am always correct about what you will say about any issue. Always. So, me poor dishwasher, thing is, it is almost like science. It is always right. Over hundreds of your posts I have had the misfortune of reading, all are that way. You are totally incapable of rational argument, and certainly incapable of rational argument about economic issues.
By the way, me boy. We were not discussing libertarian government, or libertarian societies. Different things, of course. That entails Civil libertarians and libertarian socialists. I have no issue with them. And they do not affect the argument of the validity of a libertarian economy.

So, I am not in the slightest interested in your argument about libertarian economics, which you obviously do not understand.. Though, were there such a thing as libertarian food professionals, maybe you would be able to compare notes. Otherwise, your opinions are of no value.

 

[Oldstyle]

Back to washing dishes, me boy. Other than baseless attacks, you have nothing.

That from the man who's thinks calling others a "con tool" constitutes an argument!

The thing that made America so great for so long was it was as close to a Libertarian government as any that have ever existed. This was the country where you could succeed on your hard work and intelligence. This was the country where the rule of law protected individuals from an over zealous government.

You've made it obvious at this point that you know about as much about what constitutes a "Libertarian" government as you do about economics...which is to say ZILCH...NADA...NOTHING!

Funny. The dish washer thinks he has made an economic argument. Was there an argument there, me boy. did you have a link proving anything, or are you just posting blather.

Now, calling you a con tool is something that I do because you have EARNED it. If I look at an argument from you, I can always find it in a right wing bat shit crazy conservative web site. Not most of the time. Always. And, as a con tool, I am always correct about what you will say about any issue. Always. So, me poor dishwasher, thing is, it is almost like science. It is always right. Over hundreds of your posts I have had the misfortune of reading, all are that way. You are totally incapable of rational argument, and certainly incapable of rational argument about economic issues.
By the way, me boy. We were not discussing libertarian government, or libertarian societies. Different things, of course. That entails Civil libertarians and libertarian socialists. I have no issue with them. And they do not affect the argument of the validity of a libertarian economy.

So, I am not in the slightest interested in your argument about libertarian economics, which you obviously do not understand.. Though, were there such a thing as libertarian food professionals, maybe you would be able to compare notes. Otherwise, your opinions are of no value.

You call EVERYONE who disagrees with you a "con tool"...you use the term so much if folks on here were playing the Rshermr "con tool" game and having to drink a shot every time you blathered on about "con tool" this and "con tool" that we'd all be stinking drunk after about two of your posts.

And YOU trying to hold forth on economics is akin to George Costanza holding forth on architecture. You both pretend to be things you're not and you both embarrass yourself to no end in the process.

 

[Rshermr]

That from the man who's thinks calling others a "con tool" constitutes an argument!

The thing that made America so great for so long was it was as close to a Libertarian government as any that have ever existed. This was the country where you could succeed on your hard work and intelligence. This was the country where the rule of law protected individuals from an over zealous government.

You've made it obvious at this point that you know about as much about what constitutes a "Libertarian" government as you do about economics...which is to say ZILCH...NADA...NOTHING!

Funny. The dish washer thinks he has made an economic argument. Was there an argument there, me boy. did you have a link proving anything, or are you just posting blather.

Now, calling you a con tool is something that I do because you have EARNED it. If I look at an argument from you, I can always find it in a right wing bat shit crazy conservative web site. Not most of the time. Always. And, as a con tool, I am always correct about what you will say about any issue. Always. So, me poor dishwasher, thing is, it is almost like science. It is always right. Over hundreds of your posts I have had the misfortune of reading, all are that way. You are totally incapable of rational argument, and certainly incapable of rational argument about economic issues.
By the way, me boy. We were not discussing libertarian government, or libertarian societies. Different things, of course. That entails Civil libertarians and libertarian socialists. I have no issue with them. And they do not affect the argument of the validity of a libertarian economy.

So, I am not in the slightest interested in your argument about libertarian economics, which you obviously do not understand.. Though, were there such a thing as libertarian food professionals, maybe you would be able to compare notes. Otherwise, your opinions are of no value.

You call EVERYONE who disagrees with you a "con tool"...you use the term so much if folks on here were playing the Rshermr "con tool" game and having to drink a shot every time you blathered on about "con tool" this and "con tool" that we'd all be stinking drunk after about two of your posts.

And YOU trying to hold forth on economics is akin to George Costanza holding forth on architecture. You both pretend to be things you're not and you both embarrass yourself to no end in the process.

Hardly, me boy. Many disagree with me, and we can discuss the facts. Possibly agree to disagree. My best friend and I disagree about MANY things.
You have to earn the title of con tool. Con tool, from my standpoint, means that you get your information (or your "facts" in your mind) from bat shit crazy con web sites. You know, the sites funded by the libertarian nut cases you like so much.
So, it is nothing to worry about. You are simply ignorant. By your own choice. You prefer to believe what you want to believe. Which is a malady that has been scientifically studied in numerous studies. It is a really cool self perpetuating thing in which you believe what you want, read what supports what you want to believe, and believe it more. And, it makes you angry. Which you also like.

Which, of course, you prove in your posts. Like suggesting anyone is talking about libertarian governments. Which, if you think about it, is kind of an oxymoron. But then, thinking is not you strong point. Posting dogma is your strong point. But it is funny that you could suggest that we were discussing libertarian GOVERNMENT, and then suggesting that you have enough understanding about economics to criticize anyone's understanding of economic issues.

But really, me boy, it is ok. It is not your fault. You are part of that small percentage of people who need to be told what to do, where to go, and what to believe. Which makes you ignorant. It is a basic mental issue which is very hard for you to control, and which you actually do not want to control. Not your fault at all. Just plain bad luck.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Reaganite legend begins with the false proposition that the Reagan Administration stopped the march of “Big Government” and brought a new fiscal restraint to Washington.

Yet after the economy had rebounded and recession-bloated spendinghad subsidized during Reagan’s Second term, Federal outlays averaged 21.7 percent of gross domestic product/

This was obviously no imprivement at all on the 21.1 percent of GDP average during the alleged “big spending: Carter years. And compared quite miserably to the 19.3 percent of the GDP recording during Lundon Johnson’s final four years of “:guns and butter” extravagance.

page 57 The Great Deformation -Corruption of Capitalism in America by David A. Stockman


Jusdt in case any of you partisan Republicans are still clinging to the DELUSION that Reagan was NOT a STATIST or a KEYNESIAN?

And not to make too big a deal about it, this CONSERVATIVE author continues to prove that both Bush's were ALSO STATISTS who increased GOVERMENT .

Will any of you loayl GOP partisans actually read this book, or do you prefer to LIOE TO YOURSELVES because it is so forking painful to realize THAT YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED, BY revisionist history?

Face it, you fuckers hate Reagan because he called your hometeam Evil, then beat them so badly he left them no choices but to takeover the Democrat Party

 

[Rshermr]

The Reaganite legend begins with the false proposition that the Reagan Administration stopped the march of “Big Government” and brought a new fiscal restraint to Washington.

Yet after the economy had rebounded and recession-bloated spendinghad subsidized during Reagan’s Second term, Federal outlays averaged 21.7 percent of gross domestic product/

This was obviously no imprivement at all on the 21.1 percent of GDP average during the alleged “big spending: Carter years. And compared quite miserably to the 19.3 percent of the GDP recording during Lundon Johnson’s final four years of “:guns and butter” extravagance.

page 57 The Great Deformation -Corruption of Capitalism in America by David A. Stockman


Jusdt in case any of you partisan Republicans are still clinging to the DELUSION that Reagan was NOT a STATIST or a KEYNESIAN?

And not to make too big a deal about it, this CONSERVATIVE author continues to prove that both Bush's were ALSO STATISTS who increased GOVERMENT .

Will any of you loayl GOP partisans actually read this book, or do you prefer to LIOE TO YOURSELVES because it is so forking painful to realize THAT YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED, BY revisionist history?

Face it, you fuckers hate Reagan because he called your hometeam Evil, then beat them so badly he left them no choices but to takeover the Democrat Party

Nah. I hardly hate reagan. He was suffering from Alzheimers. Just as you suffer from congenital ignorance. You can not be angry with people who are mentally challenged. It is not their, or your, fault. It is just plain bad luck.

However, that thing about driving up the unemployment rate in less than two years to the second highest rate EVER, next to the great depression was a bother.

But then he spent and drove up the deficit, which helped to correct things. Kind of a Keynesian thing, all right. Hell, no other pres ever tripled the national debt, except for reagan. Really smart of his economic team. They did learn a bit from their self created fiasco. stimulated the hell out of a bad economy.

 

[Oldstyle]

Funny. The dish washer thinks he has made an economic argument. Was there an argument there, me boy. did you have a link proving anything, or are you just posting blather.

Now, calling you a con tool is something that I do because you have EARNED it. If I look at an argument from you, I can always find it in a right wing bat shit crazy conservative web site. Not most of the time. Always. And, as a con tool, I am always correct about what you will say about any issue. Always. So, me poor dishwasher, thing is, it is almost like science. It is always right. Over hundreds of your posts I have had the misfortune of reading, all are that way. You are totally incapable of rational argument, and certainly incapable of rational argument about economic issues.
By the way, me boy. We were not discussing libertarian government, or libertarian societies. Different things, of course. That entails Civil libertarians and libertarian socialists. I have no issue with them. And they do not affect the argument of the validity of a libertarian economy.

So, I am not in the slightest interested in your argument about libertarian economics, which you obviously do not understand.. Though, were there such a thing as libertarian food professionals, maybe you would be able to compare notes. Otherwise, your opinions are of no value.

You call EVERYONE who disagrees with you a "con tool"...you use the term so much if folks on here were playing the Rshermr "con tool" game and having to drink a shot every time you blathered on about "con tool" this and "con tool" that we'd all be stinking drunk after about two of your posts.

And YOU trying to hold forth on economics is akin to George Costanza holding forth on architecture. You both pretend to be things you're not and you both embarrass yourself to no end in the process.

Hardly, me boy. Many disagree with me, and we can discuss the facts. Possibly agree to disagree. My best friend and I disagree about MANY things.
You have to earn the title of con tool. Con tool, from my standpoint, means that you get your information (or your "facts" in your mind) from bat shit crazy con web sites. You know, the sites funded by the libertarian nut cases you like so much.
So, it is nothing to worry about. You are simply ignorant. By your own choice. You prefer to believe what you want to believe. Which is a malady that has been scientifically studied in numerous studies. It is a really cool self perpetuating thing in which you believe what you want, read what supports what you want to believe, and believe it more. And, it makes you angry. Which you also like.

Which, of course, you prove in your posts. Like suggesting anyone is talking about libertarian governments. Which, if you think about it, is kind of an oxymoron. But then, thinking is not you strong point. Posting dogma is your strong point. But it is funny that you could suggest that we were discussing libertarian GOVERNMENT, and then suggesting that you have enough understanding about economics to criticize anyone's understanding of economic issues.

But really, me boy, it is ok. It is not your fault. You are part of that small percentage of people who need to be told what to do, where to go, and what to believe. Which makes you ignorant. It is a basic mental issue which is very hard for you to control, and which you actually do not want to control. Not your fault at all. Just plain bad luck.

LOL...God, you're an idiot...

All you post is "dogma"...most of your "knowledge" comes direct from Wikipedia...and then you come on here and declare yourself to be intellectually superior to others while posting drivel.

The sad thing is that I "do" have more understanding about economics than you...AND YOU CLAIM TO HAVE BEEN AN ECONOMICS MAJOR IN COLLEGE AS WELL AS TEACH THE SUBJECT AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL!!! I don't know how to break this to you, Sparky...but just about EVERYONE on this board is smarter than you when it come to the subject of economics. Whenever a discussion on that, does get complex you're in so far over your head it's not funny. Yet you keep coming back for more with your lectures about Libertarian economics that wouldn't pass muster in a grade school class.

 

[Rshermr]

You call EVERYONE who disagrees with you a "con tool"...you use the term so much if folks on here were playing the Rshermr "con tool" game and having to drink a shot every time you blathered on about "con tool" this and "con tool" that we'd all be stinking drunk after about two of your posts.

And YOU trying to hold forth on economics is akin to George Costanza holding forth on architecture. You both pretend to be things you're not and you both embarrass yourself to no end in the process.

Hardly, me boy. Many disagree with me, and we can discuss the facts. Possibly agree to disagree. My best friend and I disagree about MANY things.
You have to earn the title of con tool. Con tool, from my standpoint, means that you get your information (or your "facts" in your mind) from bat shit crazy con web sites. You know, the sites funded by the libertarian nut cases you like so much.
So, it is nothing to worry about. You are simply ignorant. By your own choice. You prefer to believe what you want to believe. Which is a malady that has been scientifically studied in numerous studies. It is a really cool self perpetuating thing in which you believe what you want, read what supports what you want to believe, and believe it more. And, it makes you angry. Which you also like.

Which, of course, you prove in your posts. Like suggesting anyone is talking about libertarian governments. Which, if you think about it, is kind of an oxymoron. But then, thinking is not you strong point. Posting dogma is your strong point. But it is funny that you could suggest that we were discussing libertarian GOVERNMENT, and then suggesting that you have enough understanding about economics to criticize anyone's understanding of economic issues.

But really, me boy, it is ok. It is not your fault. You are part of that small percentage of people who need to be told what to do, where to go, and what to believe. Which makes you ignorant. It is a basic mental issue which is very hard for you to control, and which you actually do not want to control. Not your fault at all. Just plain bad luck.

LOL...God, you're an idiot...

All you post is "dogma"...most of your "knowledge" comes direct from Wikipedia...and then you come on here and declare yourself to be intellectually superior to others while posting drivel.

The sad thing is that I "do" have more understanding about economics than you...AND YOU CLAIM TO HAVE BEEN AN ECONOMICS MAJOR IN COLLEGE AS WELL AS TEACH THE SUBJECT AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL!!! I don't know how to break this to you, Sparky...but just about EVERYONE on this board is smarter than you when it come to the subject of economics. Whenever a discussion on that, does get complex you're in so far over your head it's not funny. Yet you keep coming back for more with your lectures about Libertarian economics that wouldn't pass muster in a grade school class.

Well, now, oldstyle, I would NEVER bother to suggest that I am intellectually superior to you. That would be as inconsiderate as suggesting such a thing to a mental institution resident. Why do such a thing to a poor ignorant dish washer. It is, as I have said, NOT YOUR FAULT. You believe in all sorts of things, I am sure. Probably think that other fanciful things besides successful libertarian economies exist, like unicorns. And that is ok, oldstyle. Because it is Not Your Fault. It is just bad luck.
And really, believing that you are smart is just part of the illness. All stupid people believe that they are very smart. Really, it is probably good for you. Ignorance and delusion are part of the mental defect from which you suffer. Really. It is not your fault.
And please, we all understand why you do not attempt to post economic thought. Because, of course, you believe that economic thought is simply cutting and pasting the drivel from right wing bat shit crazy con web sites. And we understand, doing so is really stretching your limited ability to reason. I mean, that whole copy a thought and post it thing is really about as far reaching as one can get, given your limited mental reasoning ability. And, please, we all try so hard not to laugh at you. Even when you get angry. Because we all understand that it is important for you to believe you are smart. And that you know something. We all want you to feel good about your poor ignorant state. And we all want you to remember, it is just plain bad luck. Not your fault at all.

 

[Saigon]

Raegan increased the military, which I don't really consider "the government" because they don't govern anybody.

.

That really must be one of the weirdest leaps of logic we will ever see on this board!

 

[Rshermr]

Raegan increased the military, which I don't really consider "the government" because they don't govern anybody.

.

That really must be one of the weirdest leaps of logic we will ever see on this board!

I thought it was simply an attempt at comedy.

 

[editec]

Raegan increased the military, which I don't really consider "the government" because they don't govern anybody.

I don't think anyone ever accused Bush of being a fiscal conservative, he could of done a lot more to cut welfare and other useless government agencies.

So I guess your arguement is that just because Raegan and Bush really weren't as fiscally conservative as we would of liked, the idea of being fiscally conservative is fallacious? Kind of a stupid premise isn't it?

But I suppose you'll explain to us how increasing the debt by trillions more is a better route than at least trying to cut the enormous spending our government is addicted to.

No Hawk I am just trying to correct the record so folks understand WHY our government is (and long has been) addicted to DEBT. (actaully mostly it's addiction to NEW MONEY)

Now seriously have you not been told that REAGAN was a small government republican that started to reduce taxes and government?

I'm sure even if you do not believe that most of the Republicans or conservatives you know believe that great big fat lie.

 

[editec]

The Reaganite legend begins with the false proposition that the Reagan Administration stopped the march of “Big Government” and brought a new fiscal restraint to Washington.

Yet after the economy had rebounded and recession-bloated spendinghad subsidized during Reagan’s Second term, Federal outlays averaged 21.7 percent of gross domestic product/

This was obviously no imprivement at all on the 21.1 percent of GDP average during the alleged “big spending: Carter years. And compared quite miserably to the 19.3 percent of the GDP recording during Lundon Johnson’s final four years of “:guns and butter” extravagance.

page 57 The Great Deformation -Corruption of Capitalism in America by David A. Stockman


Jusdt in case any of you partisan Republicans are still clinging to the DELUSION that Reagan was NOT a STATIST or a KEYNESIAN?

And not to make too big a deal about it, this CONSERVATIVE author continues to prove that both Bush's were ALSO STATISTS who increased GOVERMENT .

Will any of you loayl GOP partisans actually read this book, or do you prefer to LIOE TO YOURSELVES because it is so forking painful to realize THAT YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED, BY revisionist history?

With your rant against statism and Keynesian economics, it sounds like you're embracing what us libertarians have said all along. Wonderful. Welcome to the light.

MY POV has never been well understood here at USMB, eflat.

that's mostly because this place is dominated by partisans and trolls, so ANY complex POV is lost in the noise of hyperpartisan clatter.

Note how at least one detractor of my thread decides that since I am speaking an unwanted TRUTH about the myth of St. Ronnie, I must therefore be a support of St, Obama?

See how their minds work?

To clueless partisans there is only two sides to every narrative...theirs and the STRAW MAN's they create out of ever other POV that they cannot (or refuse to) understand.

RR spent more money--took a greater share of the nations GDP than CARTER.

Now go ask a "self proclaiming neo-con about that fact.

They think he cut spending. They really do.,

And when one of REAGANS former collaborators corrects that record?

they attack him!



Imbeciles!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Reagan increased the value of everyone's stuff and actually did what he could to walk back government involvement in ordinary life

 

[Rshermr]

Reagan increased the value of everyone's stuff and actually did what he could to walk back government involvement in ordinary life

Perfect TIMING!!!! Great proof of editec's hypothesis. Good job, Crusader!!!