Reaganomics

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I just don’t like getting lectured from people who are not yet old enough to buy a legal beer, or even vote.

I’m funny like that.[/quote]

Well, if I were you, I’d be more concerned about the fact that you were just attemptedly lectured by a person who woke up this morning, ate a can of pizza pringles and a half gallon of ginger ale as a START to his breakfast. If that’s not patriotism…

[/quote]

Anyone who calls Reagan a “B list shit head” is either an idiot, or a young punk who never lived during that time period and never studied it either.

Maybe you should back off on the ginger ale and pizza and start eating some fish?

Better yet go away little man.[/quote]

Or just someone fucking with an overly conservative political sub-forum, which may as well be subtitled “Let’s Talk About Jesus and Bill O’Reilly!” * See more

Pizza pringles*

*The firing of air traffic controllers, winnable nuclear war, recallable nuclear missiles, trees that cause pollution, Elliott Abrams lying to Congress, ketchup as vegetable, colluding with Guatemalan thugs, pardons for F.B.I. lawbreakers, voodoo economics, budget deficits, toasts to Ferdinand Marcos, public housing cutbacks, redbaiting the nuclear freeze movement, James Watt.

Getting cozy with Argentine fascist generals, tax credits for segregated schools, disinformation campaigns, “homeless by choice,” Manuel Noriega, falling wages, the HUD scandal, air raids on Libya, “constructive engagement” with apartheid South Africa, United States Information Agency blacklists of liberal speakers, attacks on OSHA and workplace safety, the invasion of Grenada, assassination manuals, Nancy’s astrologer.

Drug tests, lie detector tests, Fawn Hall, female appointees (8 percent), mining harbors, the S&L scandal, 239 dead U.S. troops in Beirut, Al Haig “in control,” silence on AIDS, food-stamp reductions, Debategate, White House shredding, Jonas Savimbi, tax cuts for the rich, “mistakes were made.”, inconclusive research regarding AIDS.

Michael Deaver’s conviction for influence peddling, Lyn Nofziger’s conviction for influence peddling, Caspar Weinberger’s five-count indictment, Ed Meese (“You don’t have many suspects who are innocent of a crime”), Donald Regan (women don’t “understand throw-weights”), education cuts, massacres in El Salvador.

“The bombing begins in five minutes,” $640 Pentagon toilet seats, African-American judicial appointees (1.9 percent), Reader’s Digest, C.I.A.-sponsored car-bombing in Lebanon (more than eighty civilians killed), 200 officials accused of wrongdoing, William Casey, Iran/contra. “Facts are stupid things,” three-by-five cards, the MX missile, Bitburg, S.D.I., Robert Bork, naps, Teflon. Campaigned for Nixon’s opponent, The Pink Lady in 1950, married an extremely conservative neurosurgeon’s daughter, 1962 campaign for an officer of The John Birch Society, 1964, campaign for segregationist Louisiana governor, campaign for Lloyd White, stances on welfare in California and in general, Donald Reagan and 1981 deregulations, “government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem”, Africans fucking gorillas, the Moscow evil empire, approach to exponential growth in the oil industry, attempts to downsize and defund the EPA, staffing of the EPA, “winning the Cold War”.

http://www.alternet.org/story/18874/

The last 1/4 paragraph is my own, sources: Gore Vidal, from him, various press announcements, related. Take your pick: all of the above, and what we potentially don’t know about or remains unmentioned, or temporary improvements in an economic system and posterboy status for capitalist prevalence. Studying and paying attention; it doesn’t count if you only read books whose publishing houses are subsidiaries of corporations who employ executives who benefit from tax cuts which primarily took root during his presidency, or contribute greatly to Republican campaigns through whatever venue, have investments in firms benefiting from deregulation, etc, etc, etc. There has been some documented evidence in the past of some sorts of carryover from those types of things… Fuck off. He was an actor, all his life. That’s it. That’s why, IMO, he was a B-list shit head. For overextending his career to just another misformulated boyhood dream. [/quote]

Disprove this. This is what I posted in response to the statement that calling Reagan a B-list shit head required me to either be mentally disabled or a young, ignorant “punk”. You insinuated that, in lieu of this and related posts, evidently, my I.Q. was able to be inferred, and as such, the forum should adopt a policy of regulating intelligence and age, due to my obvious lack of argumentative skill, evidence to support conclusions, and young age.

I was saying, ever ask yourself why the mentality of “Why I need a smart phone” is prevalent amongst members of my generation, which you stated as the epitome of concomitant youth reasoning capacity (Not to mention making vast generalizations based on singular observation of experience)? Mainly because we live in an increasingly fascist corporatocracy, under the thinly veiled guise of a democracy! Fun, right? Shit, put your kid in front of a t.v. for 5 hours a day and see what happens! They can’t think! Put your dad in front of a t.v. for 5 hours a day, and turn on Fox, give 'em a book by Glenn Beck, or maybe Pat Buchanan if they’re a little more centrist-flavored, and guess what happens! They can’t think! And here’s ZEB…[/quote]

LOL…kid you’ve proven nothing. You think quoting a few lefty’s is proof of something? Ha ha…you claimed Reagan was only a B list actor. I’ve schooled you in the fact that he was a two term Governor of California. And what do I get? No response.

You’re a joke boy.

But the good part is if you keep this up you’re going to draw plenty of attention from the rest of the PWI community and then…Then the fun will begin.

Since I know you’re not bright enough to heed my warning I’m sure I’ll be talking to you soon.

:)[/quote]

Actually you misinterpreted the statement “B-list shit head”, as well as “he was just an actor” to mean literally “all he did professionally was act in B-list movies”. You need to seriously try and comprehend things better, or at least alternatively.

And at least you’re smart enough to realize this is a joke but evidently not smart enough to actually get it.

Not that it matters- that’s the joke!

62

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
In my history class, we were discussing the 1980s and the topic of Reaganomics came up. My teacher (who’s a bleeding-heart Liberal) was saying that Reaganomics was a failure and ruined the American economy. So, for those of you who are old enough, what is your opinion on the subject matter?

CS[/quote]

Compared to the predecessor anything looked better. Carter was so bad he invented a economic phenomenon nobody had ever seen before, Stagflation. It’s hard to do worse. [/quote]

Hey Hey HEY

The British government had been doing stagflation all through the 70s. We had fucked up far more than you, which is why we elected Thatcher…

64

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I just don’t like getting lectured from people who are not yet old enough to buy a legal beer, or even vote.

I’m funny like that.[/quote]

Well, if I were you, I’d be more concerned about the fact that you were just attemptedly lectured by a person who woke up this morning, ate a can of pizza pringles and a half gallon of ginger ale as a START to his breakfast. If that’s not patriotism…

[/quote]

Anyone who calls Reagan a “B list shit head” is either an idiot, or a young punk who never lived during that time period and never studied it either.

Maybe you should back off on the ginger ale and pizza and start eating some fish?

Better yet go away little man.[/quote]

Or just someone fucking with an overly conservative political sub-forum, which may as well be subtitled “Let’s Talk About Jesus and Bill O’Reilly!” * See more

Pizza pringles*

*The firing of air traffic controllers, winnable nuclear war, recallable nuclear missiles, trees that cause pollution, Elliott Abrams lying to Congress, ketchup as vegetable, colluding with Guatemalan thugs, pardons for F.B.I. lawbreakers, voodoo economics, budget deficits, toasts to Ferdinand Marcos, public housing cutbacks, redbaiting the nuclear freeze movement, James Watt.

Getting cozy with Argentine fascist generals, tax credits for segregated schools, disinformation campaigns, “homeless by choice,” Manuel Noriega, falling wages, the HUD scandal, air raids on Libya, “constructive engagement” with apartheid South Africa, United States Information Agency blacklists of liberal speakers, attacks on OSHA and workplace safety, the invasion of Grenada, assassination manuals, Nancy’s astrologer.

Drug tests, lie detector tests, Fawn Hall, female appointees (8 percent), mining harbors, the S&L scandal, 239 dead U.S. troops in Beirut, Al Haig “in control,” silence on AIDS, food-stamp reductions, Debategate, White House shredding, Jonas Savimbi, tax cuts for the rich, “mistakes were made.”, inconclusive research regarding AIDS.

Michael Deaver’s conviction for influence peddling, Lyn Nofziger’s conviction for influence peddling, Caspar Weinberger’s five-count indictment, Ed Meese (“You don’t have many suspects who are innocent of a crime”), Donald Regan (women don’t “understand throw-weights”), education cuts, massacres in El Salvador.

“The bombing begins in five minutes,” $640 Pentagon toilet seats, African-American judicial appointees (1.9 percent), Reader’s Digest, C.I.A.-sponsored car-bombing in Lebanon (more than eighty civilians killed), 200 officials accused of wrongdoing, William Casey, Iran/contra. “Facts are stupid things,” three-by-five cards, the MX missile, Bitburg, S.D.I., Robert Bork, naps, Teflon. Campaigned for Nixon’s opponent, The Pink Lady in 1950, married an extremely conservative neurosurgeon’s daughter, 1962 campaign for an officer of The John Birch Society, 1964, campaign for segregationist Louisiana governor, campaign for Lloyd White, stances on welfare in California and in general, Donald Reagan and 1981 deregulations, “government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem”, Africans fucking gorillas, the Moscow evil empire, approach to exponential growth in the oil industry, attempts to downsize and defund the EPA, staffing of the EPA, “winning the Cold War”.

http://www.alternet.org/story/18874/

The last 1/4 paragraph is my own, sources: Gore Vidal, from him, various press announcements, related. Take your pick: all of the above, and what we potentially don’t know about or remains unmentioned, or temporary improvements in an economic system and posterboy status for capitalist prevalence. Studying and paying attention; it doesn’t count if you only read books whose publishing houses are subsidiaries of corporations who employ executives who benefit from tax cuts which primarily took root during his presidency, or contribute greatly to Republican campaigns through whatever venue, have investments in firms benefiting from deregulation, etc, etc, etc. There has been some documented evidence in the past of some sorts of carryover from those types of things… Fuck off. He was an actor, all his life. That’s it. That’s why, IMO, he was a B-list shit head. For overextending his career to just another misformulated boyhood dream. [/quote]

Disprove this. This is what I posted in response to the statement that calling Reagan a B-list shit head required me to either be mentally disabled or a young, ignorant “punk”. You insinuated that, in lieu of this and related posts, evidently, my I.Q. was able to be inferred, and as such, the forum should adopt a policy of regulating intelligence and age, due to my obvious lack of argumentative skill, evidence to support conclusions, and young age.

I was saying, ever ask yourself why the mentality of “Why I need a smart phone” is prevalent amongst members of my generation, which you stated as the epitome of concomitant youth reasoning capacity (Not to mention making vast generalizations based on singular observation of experience)? Mainly because we live in an increasingly fascist corporatocracy, under the thinly veiled guise of a democracy! Fun, right? Shit, put your kid in front of a t.v. for 5 hours a day and see what happens! They can’t think! Put your dad in front of a t.v. for 5 hours a day, and turn on Fox, give 'em a book by Glenn Beck, or maybe Pat Buchanan if they’re a little more centrist-flavored, and guess what happens! They can’t think! And here’s ZEB…[/quote]

Give me a Y! Give me an A! Give me a W! Give me an N! What’s that spell? yawn.

You’ve got me confused with somebody who gives a shit about your opinion.

65

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Gore Vidal…LOL…what a “source.”[/quote]

Um…he’s 16, probably a Sophomore or Junior in High School. What’s next some arrogant 12 year old political expert who quotes his 7th grade teacher?

Okay, funny stuff I suppose.
[/quote]

We should have a minimum age & IQ requirement. If you are under 18 and do not have an IQ of 100 or higher, your not allowed.
I have a teenager at home… They have the reasoning capability of an isolated wet noodle. It’s pretty much limited to 'Why I should have a smart phone"[/quote]

This 16 year old knit wit takes it to a whole new level. It sort of causes me to think back to the good old days when we only had to put up with 22 year old foreign policy experts.[/quote]

Oh it’s the same shit all the time. They read a little ‘thinkprogress.org’ watch a little T.V. and take in some propaganda and behold you have a political genius. I actually read about 1/4 of what was said, recognized the 'tude and decided my toe nails were really dirty.
It’s just the super exaggerated hysterics and broad, sweeping generalizations based on a spittle of have baked information that is mostly copied and pasted.
That’s what I mean about the age limit. You just aren’t going to manage a level headed, well reasoned conversation with people that age. It’s always just hysterical rantings and sweeping conclusions, based on idealism.
I teach kids his age, I have 16 year old’s at my house all the time. They are smart, they don’t give a rat’s ass about politics and don’t pretend to know a damn thing about it. They don’t know, don’t care, they just need a ride to ‘Game Stop’.
You need to know your history pretty damn well to make a political conversation something other than a ‘long dick’ contest.

66

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Gore Vidal…LOL…what a “source.”[/quote]

Um…he’s 16, probably a Sophomore or Junior in High School. What’s next some arrogant 12 year old political expert who quotes his 7th grade teacher?

Okay, funny stuff I suppose.
[/quote]

We should have a minimum age & IQ requirement. If you are under 18 and do not have an IQ of 100 or higher, your not allowed.
I have a teenager at home… They have the reasoning capability of an isolated wet noodle. It’s pretty much limited to 'Why I should have a smart phone"[/quote]

This 16 year old knit wit takes it to a whole new level. It sort of causes me to think back to the good old days when we only had to put up with 22 year old foreign policy experts.[/quote]

Oh it’s the same shit all the time. They read a little ‘thinkprogress.org’ watch a little T.V. and take in some propaganda and behold you have a political genius. I actually read about 1/4 of what was said, recognized the 'tude and decided my toe nails were really dirty.
It’s just the super exaggerated hysterics and broad, sweeping generalizations based on a spittle of have baked information that is mostly copied and pasted.
That’s what I mean about the age limit. You just aren’t going to manage a level headed, well reasoned conversation with people that age. It’s always just hysterical rantings and sweeping conclusions, based on idealism.
I teach kids his age, I have 16 year old’s at my house all the time. They are smart, they don’t give a rat’s ass about politics and don’t pretend to know a damn thing about it. They don’t know, don’t care, they just need a ride to ‘Game Stop’.
You need to know your history pretty damn well to make a political conversation something other than a ‘long dick’ contest. [/quote]

Good for you!

67

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I just don’t like getting lectured from people who are not yet old enough to buy a legal beer, or even vote.

I’m funny like that.[/quote]

Well, if I were you, I’d be more concerned about the fact that you were just attemptedly lectured by a person who woke up this morning, ate a can of pizza pringles and a half gallon of ginger ale as a START to his breakfast. If that’s not patriotism…

[/quote]

Anyone who calls Reagan a “B list shit head” is either an idiot, or a young punk who never lived during that time period and never studied it either.

Maybe you should back off on the ginger ale and pizza and start eating some fish?

Better yet go away little man.[/quote]

Or just someone fucking with an overly conservative political sub-forum, which may as well be subtitled “Let’s Talk About Jesus and Bill O’Reilly!” * See more

Pizza pringles*

*The firing of air traffic controllers, winnable nuclear war, recallable nuclear missiles, trees that cause pollution, Elliott Abrams lying to Congress, ketchup as vegetable, colluding with Guatemalan thugs, pardons for F.B.I. lawbreakers, voodoo economics, budget deficits, toasts to Ferdinand Marcos, public housing cutbacks, redbaiting the nuclear freeze movement, James Watt.

Getting cozy with Argentine fascist generals, tax credits for segregated schools, disinformation campaigns, “homeless by choice,” Manuel Noriega, falling wages, the HUD scandal, air raids on Libya, “constructive engagement” with apartheid South Africa, United States Information Agency blacklists of liberal speakers, attacks on OSHA and workplace safety, the invasion of Grenada, assassination manuals, Nancy’s astrologer.

Drug tests, lie detector tests, Fawn Hall, female appointees (8 percent), mining harbors, the S&L scandal, 239 dead U.S. troops in Beirut, Al Haig “in control,” silence on AIDS, food-stamp reductions, Debategate, White House shredding, Jonas Savimbi, tax cuts for the rich, “mistakes were made.”, inconclusive research regarding AIDS.

Michael Deaver’s conviction for influence peddling, Lyn Nofziger’s conviction for influence peddling, Caspar Weinberger’s five-count indictment, Ed Meese (“You don’t have many suspects who are innocent of a crime”), Donald Regan (women don’t “understand throw-weights”), education cuts, massacres in El Salvador.

“The bombing begins in five minutes,” $640 Pentagon toilet seats, African-American judicial appointees (1.9 percent), Reader’s Digest, C.I.A.-sponsored car-bombing in Lebanon (more than eighty civilians killed), 200 officials accused of wrongdoing, William Casey, Iran/contra. “Facts are stupid things,” three-by-five cards, the MX missile, Bitburg, S.D.I., Robert Bork, naps, Teflon. Campaigned for Nixon’s opponent, The Pink Lady in 1950, married an extremely conservative neurosurgeon’s daughter, 1962 campaign for an officer of The John Birch Society, 1964, campaign for segregationist Louisiana governor, campaign for Lloyd White, stances on welfare in California and in general, Donald Reagan and 1981 deregulations, “government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem”, Africans fucking gorillas, the Moscow evil empire, approach to exponential growth in the oil industry, attempts to downsize and defund the EPA, staffing of the EPA, “winning the Cold War”.

http://www.alternet.org/story/18874/

The last 1/4 paragraph is my own, sources: Gore Vidal, from him, various press announcements, related. Take your pick: all of the above, and what we potentially don’t know about or remains unmentioned, or temporary improvements in an economic system and posterboy status for capitalist prevalence. Studying and paying attention; it doesn’t count if you only read books whose publishing houses are subsidiaries of corporations who employ executives who benefit from tax cuts which primarily took root during his presidency, or contribute greatly to Republican campaigns through whatever venue, have investments in firms benefiting from deregulation, etc, etc, etc. There has been some documented evidence in the past of some sorts of carryover from those types of things… Fuck off. He was an actor, all his life. That’s it. That’s why, IMO, he was a B-list shit head. For overextending his career to just another misformulated boyhood dream. [/quote]

Disprove this. This is what I posted in response to the statement that calling Reagan a B-list shit head required me to either be mentally disabled or a young, ignorant “punk”. You insinuated that, in lieu of this and related posts, evidently, my I.Q. was able to be inferred, and as such, the forum should adopt a policy of regulating intelligence and age, due to my obvious lack of argumentative skill, evidence to support conclusions, and young age.

I was saying, ever ask yourself why the mentality of “Why I need a smart phone” is prevalent amongst members of my generation, which you stated as the epitome of concomitant youth reasoning capacity (Not to mention making vast generalizations based on singular observation of experience)? Mainly because we live in an increasingly fascist corporatocracy, under the thinly veiled guise of a democracy! Fun, right? Shit, put your kid in front of a t.v. for 5 hours a day and see what happens! They can’t think! Put your dad in front of a t.v. for 5 hours a day, and turn on Fox, give 'em a book by Glenn Beck, or maybe Pat Buchanan if they’re a little more centrist-flavored, and guess what happens! They can’t think! And here’s ZEB…[/quote]

Give me a Y! Give me an A! Give me a W! Give me an N! What’s that spell? yawn.

You’ve got me confused with somebody who gives a shit about your opinion. [/quote]

So why comment? If you’re that disinterested, don’t be here.

68

Ronald Reagan was not only a cock sucker his economic policies also sucked :slight_smile:

69

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bambi wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
In my history class, we were discussing the 1980s and the topic of Reaganomics came up. My teacher (who’s a bleeding-heart Liberal) was saying that Reaganomics was a failure and ruined the American economy. So, for those of you who are old enough, what is your opinion on the subject matter?

CS[/quote]

I personally liked the Cater cheek better :slight_smile:

Your history professor, like many who teach at liberal Universities, is totally wrong. Ronald Reagan ushered in one of the biggest economic boon’s of all time. creating an economic climate where almost 20 million new jobs were created. Low unemployment and low interest rates as well. And like Obama he inherited a lousy economy from a previous President (Jimmy Carter). Unlike Obama Ronald Reagan lowered the tax rate to its lowest in decades and created a great economy especially for entrepreneurs.

Liberals love to rewrite history. They hated him when he ran and they still hate him even though he’s been dead for several years. It just tears them up inside that supply side economics worked. The only thing that I wish is that he had control of both houses of congress if that were the case spending would have been driven down as well. But as long as there are democrats in power spending will never go down. But yes, there is no question that Reaganomics worked. In fact it worked so well he won the biggest electoral landslide in history in defeating Walter Mondale in 1984.

I was there - I worked on his campaign (at a low level), I prospered from the results and it is all true.

Tell your Professor for me that he’s full of shit!

Thank you,

Zeb[/quote]

Yep he also helped facilitate a pattern of deregulation, along with Alan Greenspan and all those other criminals, whose continuation led us to where we find ourselves now. Granted, it wasn’t all him. IMO, that fucker should’ve been investigated from the get-go. Iran contras anyone?* B-list shithead actor who gradually assumed stances of progressively more severe conservatism. Shit, just ask Gore Vidal for sources. He’ll tell ya.

B-B-But he’s a liberal!

*Nope never heard of it… Ah, conspiracy theories…[/quote]

inb4 Zeb insults you for your age
[/quote]

Yes, but just barely…GET EM!

[/quote]

Haha

I agree with Orion. Carter and Reagan are two cheeks of the same arse.

(imo, no lecture here)[/quote]

I personally liked the Cater cheek better :slight_smile:

70

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I just don’t like getting lectured from people who are not yet old enough to buy a legal beer, or even vote.

I’m funny like that.[/quote]

Well, if I were you, I’d be more concerned about the fact that you were just attemptedly lectured by a person who woke up this morning, ate a can of pizza pringles and a half gallon of ginger ale as a START to his breakfast. If that’s not patriotism…

[/quote]

Anyone who calls Reagan a “B list shit head” is either an idiot, or a young punk who never lived during that time period and never studied it either.

Maybe you should back off on the ginger ale and pizza and start eating some fish?

Better yet go away little man.[/quote]

He wasn’t even (B) he was C or D :slight_smile:

71

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]TooHuman wrote:

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:
In my history class, we were discussing the 1980s and the topic of Reaganomics came up. My teacher (who’s a bleeding-heart Liberal) was saying that Reaganomics was a failure and ruined the American economy. So, for those of you who are old enough, what is your opinion on the subject matter?

CS[/quote]

Your history professor, like many who teach at liberal Universities, is totally wrong. Ronald Reagan ushered in one of the biggest economic boon’s of all time. creating an economic climate where almost 20 million new jobs were created. Low unemployment and low interest rates as well. And like Obama he inherited a lousy economy from a previous President (Jimmy Carter). Unlike Obama Ronald Reagan lowered the tax rate to its lowest in decades and created a great economy especially for entrepreneurs.

Liberals love to rewrite history. They hated him when he ran and they still hate him even though he’s been dead for several years. It just tears them up inside that supply side economics worked. The only thing that I wish is that he had control of both houses of congress if that were the case spending would have been driven down as well. But as long as there are democrats in power spending will never go down. But yes, there is no question that Reaganomics worked. In fact it worked so well he won the biggest electoral landslide in history in defeating Walter Mondale in 1984.

I was there - I worked on his campaign (at a low level), I prospered from the results and it is all true.

Tell your Professor for me that he’s full of shit!

Thank you,

Zeb[/quote]

Haha, I’m in high school, but thanks anyways. People also like to forget that his military spending helped defeat the Soviet Union.

CS[/quote]

You’ve got that wrong, CS. If anything, the spending on military intervention helped consolidate public support(within the USSR) for the party regime. The USSR didn’t need any help collapsing on itself, The military spending just detracted(definitely to a lesser extent than the existing spending on “entitlements”) from the otherwise good fiscal policy. However, without Volcker(the FED Chariman at the time) raising interest rates to curb the monetization of large defecits, the additional inflation would have wiped out any positive effects of a lower tax policy. Ideally, spending would have gone down on par with the tax reductions and wiped out the inflation along side freeing up investment capital(via tax cuts). However, thazt didn’t happen because social security, welfare, etc… is untouchable to the voting public and the spineless congress then and now.[/quote]

Reagan’s increase in military spending caused the Soviet’s to go belly up as they tried to keep up. Anything to the contrary that you’ve been spoon fed by a liberal is so much crap. Did it taste good going down?[/quote]

Lol. My parents and grandparents lived it. Also no one fed this to me. The Russians were already spending like crazy. The additional spending on the military had a net negative effect on our deficit which offset the net benefits gained by accelerating the Soviet spending. Also, because of our involvement, the party was able to conceal the deaths of soldiers killed in Afghanistan as military accidents for a much longer period of time than they otherwise could because of the bolstered political environment. This is coming from families(mine included) that actually had men die in this way. BTW, my mother and grandmother since living in the U.S. have come around to the view of limited government being best, so they’re not exactly “liberals”.[/quote]

Don’t listen to the RAH RAH bullshit about Reagan , Russia went broke in Afghanistan , plane and simple

72

[quote]pushharder wrote:
OMG, if we aint got us a prima donna-esque wonderboy 'round here.[/quote]

Look, I don’t mean any disrespect to you. Politically, I think you’re an asshole, but you are a strong motherfucker otherwise.

73

I just wanna know if you read a 1/4 of something, and then you make a conclusion based on certain elements which only detract from the actual message of it, not actually have anything to do with it, and then accuse the writer of making sweeping generalizations, who’s the dipshit?

PAT: So basically you’ve got nothing to say in response to any single point I’ve made other than “fuck off, I don’t really care after all, I was just commenting to back up my friends on the internet!” ?

“Oh it’s all the same shit. I didn’t read enough of what he said to actually gain anything from it other than the fact that he sounds like a young prick whose disrespectful of his elders. So, he’s wrong, and he can be stereotyped.”

None of you are interested in legitimate conversation, so don’t bullshit yourself and this fine forum. You’re interested in supporting viewpoints. Your own, to be exact. -

You all make a great case for Reagan lol. I say: Reagan was a B-list shit head who, like all politicians, acted his way through the presidency. What’s the response? HE WAS THE GOVERNAH OF CALIFORNAH! Two terms. SCHOOLED.

And you wanna know the type of calm, intelligent discussion that occurs when these things are talked about with conservatives? Propaganda. Liberal propaganda. Everything, so I discredit it cause it makes me feel better about the way I was raised. Here’s the stuff I heard on Fox and read on the Drudge report, plus that essay by Breitbart…

74

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
Karl Marx loved to fuck his physics, didn’t he? It’s all a metaphysical joke, meta-humorous. Politics, at least American politics, is bullshit! By trolling this thread, I’ve instigated symbolic ennui in numerous posters. Snap to defense of your discomfort with absurdity! [/quote]

75

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
Karl Marx loved to fuck his physics, didn’t he? It’s all a metaphysical joke, meta-humorous. Politics, at least American politics, is bullshit! By trolling this thread, I’ve instigated symbolic ennui in numerous posters. Snap to defense of your discomfort with absurdity! [/quote]
[/quote]

You’re the epitome of why “my generation is fucked.”

CS

76

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
Karl Marx loved to fuck his physics, didn’t he? It’s all a metaphysical joke, meta-humorous. Politics, at least American politics, is bullshit! By trolling this thread, I’ve instigated symbolic ennui in numerous posters. Snap to defense of your discomfort with absurdity! [/quote]
[/quote]

You’re the epitome of why “my generation is fucked.”

CS[/quote]

What? Posting bullshit on a forum means a generation is fucked?

In that case I’m going to wake the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. this whole planet is doomed.

77

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
Karl Marx loved to fuck his physics, didn’t he? It’s all a metaphysical joke, meta-humorous. Politics, at least American politics, is bullshit! By trolling this thread, I’ve instigated symbolic ennui in numerous posters. Snap to defense of your discomfort with absurdity! [/quote]
[/quote]

You’re the epitome of why “my generation is fucked.”

CS[/quote]

People have a funny way of looking at things.

78

[quote]CSEagles1694 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
Karl Marx loved to fuck his physics, didn’t he? It’s all a metaphysical joke, meta-humorous. Politics, at least American politics, is bullshit! By trolling this thread, I’ve instigated symbolic ennui in numerous posters. Snap to defense of your discomfort with absurdity! [/quote]
[/quote]

You’re the epitome of why “my generation is fucked.”

CS[/quote]

Actually this kid has balls, he is questioning the “reagan is god” myth on a pre-dominantly conservative forum. Thats a sign of balls and character. You on the other hand are only saying what the older conservative-minded posters wants to hear, thats not a sign of balls my friend.

79

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
on the basis of approximately over 70 instances of wrongdoing, [/quote]

Angst-filled child, stop lying. If you read your own source it said 66.

80

[quote]Thomasm122 wrote:
refute the over 80 reasons I LISTED
[/quote]

I thought it was approximately over 70, now it is over 80. Before tonight I’m sure it will hit a 1000. Oh, and you didn’t list them, you copied them from your source.