Ronald Reagan tells us the truth again.
YAWNNNN
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Thats a lot less then your messiah Mao killed. And Reagan tried to reduce spending but the liberal congress would not allow it.
You are almost too easy to dismantle it is almost not fun.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
YAWNNNN[/quote]
Stop falling asleep in class I am trying to teach you.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Is that all?
Reagan’s got nothing on Marx, eh?
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Is that all?
Reagan’s got nothing on Marx, eh?[/quote]
Idealogues—especially idealogues with no life experience or articulative powers—are the most frustrating people on earth to talk with. They have no idea what it is they’re trying to expound, and they have no idea of the problems inherent to their worldview.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Is that all?
Reagan’s got nothing on Marx, eh?[/quote]
You have to understand that RPM (revisions per minute?) is suffering from a fairly common malady among leftists whereby their immune system mistakes reality for a disease and hence launches a wholesale assault in an effort to ward it off.
I do think that too many of you guys (not specifically the posters on this thread) take his bait. He’s an internet bully and a hypocrite, and his MO is obvious:
Control discussion by controlling the definition of terms.
Intimidate with circumlocution and sententiousness, avoiding plain speaking.
Attack the intellect and character of his opponent with every response in attempt to demoralize him and mold overall perception of both opponent and self.
Knock the crux of any argument off course by constantly focusing upon the crimes of his opponent’s side (deflecting from and certainly not excusing the atrocities spawned by his own side).
But my favorite part is that he will never, ever ever, ever let you get the last word.
He’s a Level 4 purchaser of capitalist pig products, but a Level 5 hubristic disinformation machine.
Makes me think of this:
Mao is not my messiah. You are the one with the utopian visions and the messiah figures (Reagan, Ron Paul). But it is good to know that you condone mass murder so long as the body count ends up being lower than that of the PRC.
He didn’t try to reduce military spending, which was a main source of the deficits. Also, his massive giveaways to the rich put holes into the budget. Turns out in real life, when you lower taxes, revenues go down. How ironic that your hero is the only US president to increase the debt more than Obama, and passed the largest peacetime tax increase in history.
If it is so easy, then why can’t you do it? You usually just end up throwing a temper tantrum and leaving.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Is that all?
Reagan’s got nothing on Marx, eh?[/quote]
Marx never killed anyone. Crack a book, please. But again, good to know that you have no qualms about mass murder. I don’t ever want to hear anything again about Communism killing 450 billion people.
Cute, but it doesn’t explain why you are again the one that is trying to deny history.
Are all conservatives this allergic to facts?
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Is that all?
Reagan’s got nothing on Marx, eh?[/quote]
Marx never killed anyone. Crack a book, please. But again, good to know that you have no qualms about mass murder. I don’t ever want to hear anything again about Communism killing 450 billion people.
[/quote]
Nice try, sophist. Keep on putting words and ideas into my mouth. I know how you work. Let’s let everyone see it here.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Mao is not my messiah. You are the one with the utopian visions and the messiah figures (Reagan, Ron Paul). But it is good to know that you condone mass murder so long as the body count ends up being lower than that of the PRC.
He didn’t try to reduce military spending, which was a main source of the deficits. Also, his massive giveaways to the rich put holes into the budget. Turns out in real life, when you lower taxes, revenues go down. How ironic that your hero is the only US president to increase the debt more than Obama, and passed the largest peacetime tax increase in history.
If it is so easy, then why can’t you do it? You usually just end up throwing a temper tantrum and leaving.
[/quote]
First off Reagan saved a lot of people, my little Mao loving friend.
Second you don’t reduce military spending in war, yes we where at war and we won. You really want me to pull out the debt chart? You really dont want to go there.
So let me get this right Reagan lowers taxes, but at the same time raised taxes more then any other president? 2+2=5. Are we including Reagan saving social security something that LBJ and the other socialists ran right into the ground? Or do you just cherry pick your “facts” and hope I don’t call you out on it Mao lover.
You have been dismantled, now please when you actually have to work for a living come back and have a debate with me, then maybe just maybe you will be able to use your brain.
Maybe you should look into a philosophy that hasn’t killed close to 100 million people.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
I do think that too many of you guys (not specifically the posters on this thread) take his bait. He’s an internet bully and a hypocrite, and his MO is obvious:
Control discussion by controlling the definition of terms.
Intimidate with circumlocution and sententiousness, avoiding plain speaking.[/quote]
How am I a bully? I have not insulted anyone, but here you are doing it yet again. But somehow I’m the bully?
How do I “intimidate with circumlocution?” All I did in the other thread was explain to you the difference between Democratic Socialists and revolutionary socialists.
More fantasy. Where did I attack the intellect or character of anyone here? Please find it and quote me. But your post right here is an example of you attempting to attack my intellect and character(incidentally, again with no evidence or substance–just pejoratives).
Do you not realize the pure delusion and hypocrisy in your statements? In all honesty, it seems like you’re just pouting that I disagreed with you and you had nothing to say.
Hmm…this is quite hard to square with the constant list of Communist atrocities rattled off by members here. Not that there’s anything wrong with listing them, so long as they’re true.
But it’s the height of ridiculousness to accuse me of knocking debate off course (when all he did was post a video–there was no discussion at the time) when half the members of this forum don’t even want to let communism come up for discussion without trying to deflect debate by enumerating said atrocities, as if that had anything to do with the economic system or philosophy.
In other words, people do this all the time on this forum, yet you have no problem with it. Even if I am guilty of it, this particular thread is the first instance of it. Where else have I “constantly focus[ed] upon the crimes of [my] opponent’s side?”
Again, I would seriously LOVE to see you try to back these allegations up. My bet: you don’t try, because you know you’re full of crap.
You are free to post till the cows come home. What you really mean is that I will engage in discussion as long as it is interesting, but that I tend not to stick to GOP talking points, which are all you are prepared to deal with, and so you get stumped as to how to respond. So you just leave. Don’t make it my fault.
Again, no substance. What disinformation? Where?
You seem like a big boy. Quit pouting.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
And we should listen to him, seeing as he used big government to balloon the deficit and kill 300,000 people in Latin America.[/quote]
Is that all?
Reagan’s got nothing on Marx, eh?[/quote]
Marx never killed anyone. Crack a book, please. But again, good to know that you have no qualms about mass murder. I don’t ever want to hear anything again about Communism killing 450 billion people.
[/quote]
Nice try, sophist. Keep on putting words and ideas into my mouth. I know how you work. Let’s let everyone see it here. [/quote]
Nice try? You dispute the claim that Marx never killed anyone? Well then the burden of proof is on you, because that’s quite contrary to recorded history. And I’m not sure how I’m “putting words in your mouth.” Maybe make your next devastating critique longer than 23 words.
Hitler also saved a lot of people. Want documentation? So do I.
In other words, please back up one claim. Just post one pitiful source, other than “John S.'s imagination.” It’s not a reputable academic source.
No, we were not at war, unless you mean in South America, at war against the poor people, and any clergy or journalists who dared to interfere.
Plese, learn something, ANYTHING.
He did it by raising taxes (and by the way, people did NOT sit down and refuse to work en masse because of the tax increase, contrary to libertarian orthodoxy). So now are taxes good, Hitler-lover? Don’t let your head explode trying to rationlize this.
Please, you are the most easily debunked member in this forum. That’s not a trivial distinction, either.
I would, if there were one.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
I do think that too many of you guys (not specifically the posters on this thread) take his bait. He’s an internet bully and a hypocrite, and his MO is obvious:
Control discussion by controlling the definition of terms.
Intimidate with circumlocution and sententiousness, avoiding plain speaking.[/quote]
How am I a bully? I have not insulted anyone, but here you are doing it yet again. But somehow I’m the bully?
How do I “intimidate with circumlocution?” All I did in the other thread was explain to you the difference between Democratic Socialists and revolutionary socialists.
More fantasy. Where did I attack the intellect or character of anyone here? Please find it and quote me. But your post right here is an example of you attempting to attack my intellect and character(incidentally, again with no evidence or substance–just pejoratives).
Do you not realize the pure delusion and hypocrisy in your statements? In all honesty, it seems like you’re just pouting that I disagreed with you and you had nothing to say.
Hmm…this is quite hard to square with the constant list of Communist atrocities rattled off by members here. Not that there’s anything wrong with listing them, so long as they’re true.
But it’s the height of ridiculousness to accuse me of knocking debate off course (when all he did was post a video–there was no discussion at the time) when half the members of this forum don’t even want to let communism come up for discussion without trying to deflect debate by enumerating said atrocities, as if that had anything to do with the economic system or philosophy.
In other words, people do this all the time on this forum, yet you have no problem with it. Even if I am guilty of it, this particular thread is the first instance of it. Where else have I “constantly focus[ed] upon the crimes of [my] opponent’s side?”
Again, I would seriously LOVE to see you try to back these allegations up. My bet: you don’t try, because you know you’re full of crap.
You are free to post till the cows come home. What you really mean is that I will engage in discussion as long as it is interesting, but that I tend not to stick to GOP talking points, which are all you are prepared to deal with, and so you get stumped as to how to respond. So you just leave. Don’t make it my fault.
Again, no substance. What disinformation? Where?
You seem like a big boy. Quit pouting.
[/quote]
Hey, where’d that Level 4 go?
Don’t know. I still see it.
By the way, good idea letting the claim about Marx go.