Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, February 19, 2013

If you ever happen to come across a Republican on television these days, chances are that you will hear the name Ronald Reagan. Recent Republican debates are the perfect example of the love fest that the current Republican party has for Reagan as each candidate name drops the former president at every turn. If you only listened to conservatives you would think that Jesus Christ was the only person above Reagan on the totem pole of conservative love. They talk about his love of low taxes, less government and conservative family values. The problem is that when you step out of the conservative dream and come back to reality, you find that not only was Ronald Reagan a bad president, but he was one of the worst presidents we've seen in modern times. Reagan's policies have destroyed the United States for three decades, and for the eight years he was in office, here are eight reasons why Ronald Reagan was the worst president of our lifetime.

Advertisement

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

lee_the_agent

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

1. Reagan cut taxes for the Rich, increased taxes on the Middle Class -

Ronald Reagan is loved by conservatives and was loved by big business throughout his presidency and there's a reason for it. When Reagan came into office in January of 1981, the top tax rate was 70%, but when he left office in 1989 the top tax rate was down to only 28%. As Reagan gave the breaks to all his rich friends, there was a lack of revenue coming into the federal government. In order to bring money back into the government, Reagan was forced to raise taxes eleven times throughout his time in office. One example was when he signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. Reagan raised taxes seven of the eight years he was in office and the tax increases were felt hardest by the lower and middle class.

2. Tripling the National Debt -

As Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, the government was left with less money to spend. When Reagan came into office the national debt was $900 billion, by the time he left the national debt had tripled to $2.8 trillion.

3. Iran/Contra -

In 1986, a group of Americans were being held hostage by a terrorist group with ties to Iran. In an attempt to free the hostages, Ronald Reagan secretly sold arms and money to Iran. Much of the money that was received from the trade went to fund the Nicaragua Contra rebels who were in a war with the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. When the scandal broke in the Untied States it became the biggest story in the country, Reagan tried to down play what happened, but never fully recovered.

4. Reagan funded Terrorists -

The attacks on 9/11 by al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden brought new attention to international terrorism. All of a sudden, Americans coast to coast wore their American flag pins, ate their freedom fries and couldn't wait to go to war with anyone who looked like a Muslim. What Americans didn't realize was that the same group that attacked the United States on 9/11 was funded by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. Prepping for a possible war with the Soviet Union, Ronald Reagan spent billions of dollars funding the Islamist mujahidin Freedom Fighters in Afghanistan. With billions of American dollars, weapons and training coming their way, the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden took everything they were given and gave it back to the United States over a decade later in the worst possible way imaginable.

5. Unemployment issues -

When Ronald Reagan came into office 1981, unemployment was at 7.5%. After Reagan cut taxes for the wealthy, he began raising taxes on the middle and lower class. Corporations started to ship more jobs out of the United States while hiring cheap foreign labor in order to make a bigger profit. While corporations made billions, Americans across the country lost their jobs. As 1982 came to a close, unemployment was nearly 11%. Unemployment began to drop as the years went on, but the jobs that were created were low paying and barely helped people make ends meet. The middle and lower class had their wages nearly frozen as the top earners saw dramatic increases in salary.

6. Ignoring AIDS -

By the time the 1980s came around, AIDS had become one of the most frightening things to happen to the country in recent memory. No one understood what AIDS and HIV really was and when people don't understand something, they become scared of it. The fear of the unknown was sweeping across the country and Americans needed a leader to speak out about this horrible virus, that leader never came. Instead of grabbing the bull by the horns and taking charge, Reagan kept quiet. Reagan couldn't say the words AIDS or HIV until seven years into his presidency, a leader not so much.

7. Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million Undocumented Immigrants -

In today's GOP, the idea of any immigrant staying in the United States whether they are legal or illegal isn't something that conservatives embrace. What might shock them is that in 1982 Ronald Reagan gave nearly 3 million undocumented workers amnesty. The biggest reason for undocumented workers coming to the United States is because corporations hire them at a cheaper rate than they would an American citizen. All the laws that would have cracked down on companies who hire undocumented workers were, of course, removed from the bill.

8. His attack on Unions and the Middle Class - The Republican war on unions and the middle class has been heating up in states like Wisconsin and Ohio, but it has been going on for a long time. Unions are formed to give a united voice to the workers in an attempt to create fairness between the corporations and their employees. On August 3rd, 1981, PATCO (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization) went on strike in an effort to get better pay and safer working conditions. Two days later, taking the side of business, Ronald Reagan fired 11,345 workers for not returning to work.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you have comments about site moderation, contact the site publisher in email.

Ahh,

Liberals trying to rewrite history. How often are you guys going to polish that turd, Carter? Among Democrats and Republicans alike, everyone agrees he is about the worst president ever. And that's a fact.

#2 | Posted by boaz at 2013-02-19 02:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Paneocon Flagged this thread as Abusive.
#1 | POSTED BY CORKY

No I flagged it as Horse Crap. Man,you boys must really be feeling the pressure to deflect the for the messiah, Obama.

#3 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 02:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is absolutely true although I now consider Reagan the second worst after W. I've always been amazed at how many people fell for the propoganda of that administration.

#4 | Posted by DCinMA at 2013-02-19 02:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

#4 | POSTED BY DCINMA

Some of us were there and I was still a idiot liberal back then. Article is sad.

#5 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

I was back there too and got to see it up close. Most corrupt administration in our lifetme. How many of his cronies went to jail? Should have been impeached for iran contra. What specifics do you wish to refute in the article?

#6 | Posted by DCinMA at 2013-02-19 02:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

#6 | POSTED BY DCINMA

If it was worth my time I would and could repudiate the entire article. I have done it a bunch of times before. You libs sure have a Ronnie fixation.

#7 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Man,you boys must really be feeling the pressure to deflect the for the messiah, Obama."

Liberal Mentality:
"Since I been votin' for Obama, my taxes have gone up, my employer stopped offering health insurance and my guns were taken away.

Damn you George Bush"

#8 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2013-02-19 02:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

#3 It's called history.

Here's more detail from Reagan's own Budget Directors

www.rollingstone.com

#9 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Long before GWB, Ronald Reagan taught me never to underestimate the gullibility of the American people.

#10 | Posted by moder8 at 2013-02-19 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If it was worth my time I would and could repudiate the entire article."

Uh huh, you could spout a few talking points and declare victory.

#11 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-19 02:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

I remember LBJ very well, so that makes him the worst President in my lifetime by far...

1963: On June 4th President John F. Kennedy (the 35th President of the United States 1961 – 1963) signs Executive Order 11110 which returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Rosthchilds owned Federal Reserve.

Less than 6 months later on November 22nd , president Kennedy is assassinated by the Rothschilds for the same reason as they assassinated President Abraham Lincoln in 1865, he wanted to print American money for the American people, as oppose to for the benefit of a money grabbing war mongering foreign elite.

This Executive Order 11110, is rescinded by President Lyndon Baines Johnson (the 36th President of the United States 1963 to 1969) on Air Force One from Dallas to Washington, the same day as President Kennedy was assassinated.

Another, and probably the primary, reason for Kennedy's assassination is however, the fact that he made it quite clear to Israeli Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, that under no circumstances would he agree to Israel becoming a nuclear state. The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz on February 5, 1999, in a review of, Avner Cohen's book, "Israel and the Bomb," states the following,

"The murder of American President John F. Kennedy brought to an abrupt end the massive pressure being applied by the U.S. administration on the government of Israel to discontinue the nuclear program...The book implied that, had Kennedy remained alive, it is doubtful whether Israel would today have a nuclear option." www.iamthewitness.com

#12 | Posted by Bani at 2013-02-19 02:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's difficult to imagine today, but taxing the rich wasn't always a major flash point of American political life.

From the end of World War II to the eve of the Reagan administration, the parties fought over social spending – Democrats pushing for more, Republicans demanding less.

But once the budget was fixed, both parties saw taxes as an otherwise uninteresting mechanism to raise the money required to pay the bills. Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford each fought for higher taxes, while the biggest tax cut was secured by John F. Kennedy, whose across-the-board tax reductions were actually opposed by the majority of Republicans in the House.

The distribution of the tax burden wasn't really up for debate: Even after the Kennedy cuts, the top tax rate stood at 70 percent – double its current level. Steeply progressive taxation paid for the postwar investments in infrastructure, science and education that enabled the average American family to get ahead.

That only changed in the late 1970s, when high inflation drove up wages and pushed the middle class into higher tax brackets.

Harnessing the widespread anger, Reagan put it to work on behalf of the rich.

In a move that GOP Majority Leader Howard Baker called a "riverboat gamble," Reagan sold the country on an "across-the-board" tax cut that brought the top rate down to 50 percent. According to supply-side economists, the wealthy would use their tax break to spur investment, and the economy would boom.

And if it didn't – well, to Reagan's cadre of small-government conservatives, the resulting red ink could be a win-win.

"We started talking about just cutting taxes and saying, 'Screw the deficit,'" Bartlett recalls. "We had this idea that if you lowered revenues, the concern about the deficit would be channeled into spending cuts."

RS link

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 02:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

#9 | POSTED BY CORKY

You keep that sour grapes Rolling Stone hit piece link tattooed to your man parts? How about the 2000 joint economic report?

THE 2000 JOINT ECONOMIC REPORT
The United States continues to enjoy the effects of the Great
Expansion, a period of economic growth since December 1982 that has
been interrupted only by a shallow recession from August 1990 to
March 1991. The U.S. economy has spent less time in recession since
December 1982 than in any comparable period in history.
Unlike the expansions of the 1960s and 1970s, the Great
Expansion is not the result of policies aimed at stimulating demand. In
the 1960s and 1970s, policies to stimulate demand often led to
inflation, provoking policy makers to depress demand to bring inflation
back under control. This stop-go strategy was discarded during the
early 1980s. Since then, monetary policy has focused on price stability
and fiscal policy has focused on long-run growth
Another error is to have tax rates so high that they strongly
discourage productive effort. In the early 1980s the United States
slashed top rates on income taxes and capital gains taxes to spur
economic growth. Since then, tax rates have gradually crept up, though
not to their former levels. By avoiding increases that are too large and
too sudden, the federal government has generated higher tax revenues
without stifling economic growth. Still, the federal government today
takes about as much of the nation's income in taxes as it did during the
height of World War II. It is appropriate to ask what can be done to
reduce the burden of taxes so as to help prolong the current expansion

#14 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 02:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

It was the birth of what is now known as "Starve the Beast" – a conscious strategy by conservatives to force cuts in federal spending by bankrupting the country.

As conceived by the right-wing intellectual Irving Kristol in 1980, the plan called for Republicans to create a "fiscal problem" by slashing taxes – and then foist the pain of reimposing fiscal discipline onto future Democratic administrations who, in Kristol's words, would be forced to "tidy up afterward."

There was only one problem: The Reagan tax cuts spiked the federal deficit to a dangerous level, even as the country remained mired in a deep recession. Republican leaders in Congress immediately moved to reverse themselves and feed the beast.

"It was not a Democrat who led the effort in 1982 to undo about a third of the Reagan tax cuts," recalls Robert Greenstein, president of the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "It was Bob Dole." Even Reagan embraced the tax hike, Stockman says, "because he believed that, at some point, you have to pay the bills."

For the remainder of his time in office, Reagan repeatedly raised taxes to bring down unwieldy deficits.

In 1983, he hiked gas and payroll taxes. In 1984, he raised revenue by closing tax loopholes for businesses. The tax reform of 1986 lowered the top rate for the wealthy to just 28 percent – but that cut for high earners was paid for by closing tax loopholes that resulted in the largest corporate tax hike in history.

Reagan also raised revenues by abolishing special favors for the investor class: He boosted taxes on capital gains by 40 percent to align them with the taxes paid on wages.

Today, Reagan may be lionized as a tax abolitionist, says Alan Simpson, a former Republican senator and friend of the president, but that's not true to his record. "Reagan raised taxes 11 times in eight years!"

#15 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 02:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

THE 2000 JOINT ECONOMIC REPORT

is a Republican whitewash. Look who wrote it.

chuckskipton.com

#16 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Or you could just google The Great Expansion, lol.

www.google.com

#17 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Reagan, what the ? The authoritarian liberals continue to focus on 30 year old presidents instead of their own.

I just have to laugh, they can't find fault with their current idiot so now go back 30 years to find some president they can trash.

#18 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-02-19 03:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

The distribution of the tax burden wasn't really up for debate

Yea, who wouldnt love it to be able to say to other people "It really isnt up for debate, just continue to give me 70% of every dollar you make, oh and yea, I may come back for more anytime I wish, you just make sure you dont complain, and by the way, everyone else is paying ALOT less than you, but you are rich, so I have decided YOU can afford it"...

Do you think people are just stupid and are going to continue to lay down for that?

#19 | Posted by boaz at 2013-02-19 03:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

In 1983, he hiked gas and payroll taxes. In 1984, he raised revenue by closing tax loopholes for businesses. The tax reform of 1986 lowered the top rate for the wealthy to just 28 percent – but that cut for high earners was paid for by closing tax loopholes that resulted in the largest corporate tax hike in history.

Reagan also raised revenues by abolishing special favors for the investor class: He boosted taxes on capital gains by 40 percent to align them with the taxes paid on wages.

Today, Reagan may be lionized as a tax abolitionist, says Alan Simpson, a former Republican senator and friend of the president, but that's not true to his record. "Reagan raised taxes 11 times in eight years!"

WOW!

this represents the majority of Reagan's time in office and ironically, this is being pointed out on a thread where he is being thrown under the bus for being the worst president ever.

You know, it's not just ignorant so-called conservatives that focus on the "myths" of Reagan....maybe that includes a lot of GOP haters as well.

#20 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-19 03:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

#16 | POSTED BY CORKY

He didn't write it Kreskin, he reprinted it. Pay attention, I spanked you on that once before.

thomas.loc.gov

THE 2000 JOINT ECONOMIC REPORT
_________
R E P O R T
of the
JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
on the
1999 ECONOMIC REPORT
OF THE PRESIDENT
together with
MINORITY VIEWS

#21 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 03:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

The distribution of the tax burden wasn't really up for debate

Well, thank god it is up for debate because it isnt FAIR. There should be no "distribution". It should only be ONE rate for EVERYONE. Period. If we are truly equal, that's the way it should be.

#22 | Posted by boaz at 2013-02-19 03:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Meanwhile Wanta Trillions keep floating around...perhaps the true legacy of RR remains yet to unfold?

Monday February 18, 2013

Protocol Supreme Court Update and Commerzbank AG

by Tom Heneghan
International Intelligence Expert

U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts

UNITED States of America - It can now be reported that U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts tomorrow will issue a direct order aka time and date for the final implementation of the Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocols aka the bilateral tax agreement between the IMF, U.S. Treasury and Austrian banks that was ordered by the U.S. Supreme Court last October.

Over the last week current U.S. President Barack Obama and former year 2000 illegal White House occupant George W. BushFRAUD were subpoenaed and questioned by the U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice.

At this hour we can also divulge that IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde and the European Union (EU) derivative watchdog headquartered in Brussels, Belgium have ordered complete liquidation of Commerzbank AG derivatives reference illegal cross-collateralized derivatives that were written put options on the Japanese yen and precious metals.

At this hour there are trillions of dollars of crooked Japanes yen bets issued by the Commerzbank AG taking place with an unprecedented spread between the exchange rate 112.43, which Bank of America and Wells Fargo are currently selling yen at their banks and the cash futures price of the yen, which is 106.42.

The unusual wide spread differential specifically represents $1.5 trillion of cross-collateralized derivatives that the U.S. Treasury is owed reference $1.5 trillion on the final implementation of the Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocols.
www.myspace.com

#23 | Posted by Bani at 2013-02-19 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

#21

Connie Mack (R) et al had the Report written as a whitewash of Republican economic policy.

The history of Ronald Reagan as front man for the Boy Band resoonsible for turning the Republican Party into the Party of the Rich is easily available and little disputed history.

#24 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

-He didn't write it Kreskin, he reprinted it.

lol, you must be deflecting. Of course the link site named didn't write it, Connie Mack and a bunch of other Republicans did.

#25 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

#24 | POSTED BY CORKY

i278.photobucket.com

#26 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Instead of grabbing the bull by the horns and taking charge, Reagan kept quiet."

Ronald Reagan was one smart POTUS----he knew better then grabbing that bull by the horns and taking charge. He knew perfectly well where AIDS came from. And Lee the A____ didn't think he was that smart. Maybe Lee is the one needing a remedial course.

#27 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-19 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

"We started talking about just cutting taxes and saying, 'Screw the deficit,'" Bartlett recalls. "We had this idea that if you lowered revenues, the concern about the deficit would be channeled into spending cuts."

#28 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

#25 | POSTED BY CORKY

You serve up unsubstantiated crap and I give you official government documents and you complain about sources?

#29 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

#26

lmao... you put up some Republican written Report (again and again and again) to retort the open history of Reagan's Presidency, and when it is pointed out to you the Report was written by Republicans, all you have is is... nothing?

Figures.

#31 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

#29

see what I mean?

according to that child, the GOP is always the party of the rich, until they aren't, and then it's the "system's fault" the dems take all of that money from the wealthy.

#32 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-19 03:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

- unsubstantiated crap

From Reagan's Budget Dirs and other Republicans who were there at the time.

You should be embarrassed.

No wonder you Flagged the thread Abusive.

#33 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Invading Grenada worst than escalating the Vietnam war...hmmm

That's a good question Corker! lol

#34 | Posted by Bani at 2013-02-19 03:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

#32 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-19 03:21 PM | Reply

Actually, the Obummer has been very kind to the 1%ers over the last 4 years. They've done very well; it's the rest of the country (and especially the middle class) that's inhaling the CO. Ask the shoppers at Walmart.

#35 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-19 03:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

You lost me at the Rothschilds, Bani.

#36 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

#36...Still dumb after 7 years of me here! Amazing!

#37 | Posted by Bani at 2013-02-19 03:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Reagan like every other POTUS blew it by not getting spending under control. Even the messiah will blow it. But that's okay; eventually the market will enforce the leveling of the largest monetary Ponzi Scheme in history. Anybody ever wonder how the Fed will ultimately clean up their balance sheet?

#38 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-19 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

The conflicting forecasts – one of sunshine and surplus, the other of gloom and contraction – should have set off alarm bells in the White House. But instead of rethinking the prudence of its massive giveaway to the rich, the Bush team dreamed up a new rationale for cutting taxes: to provide a needed jolt to the economy. "It's a fair thing to say that the stimulus argument was added in the spring of '01, when it had not been there before," Daniels says.

The stimulus argument was lousy economics. The previous two decades, after all, had demonstrated that "trickle-down" tax cuts don't juice the economy – they create bubbles and balloon deficits. Proponents pointed to Reagan's original tax cut in 1981, claiming it had spurred economic growth. But that is nothing more than "urban legend," Stockman says. The economy "did recover after 1982," he says, "but mainly because the Federal Reserve defeated inflation."

In fact, Stockman insists, Bush's tax cuts for the rich represent a bastardization of Reaganism. "The Republican Party originally said that prosperity comes from the private sector," he says. "But today's Republicans have become Chamber of Commerce Keynesians – using tax policy as a way of stimulating, boosting, prodding the economy." The Party of the Rich, in essence, was offering up a twisted version of New Deal policies that laissez-faire Republicans like Reagan had long opposed.

Read more: www.rollingstone.com
F

#39 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

#37

I mean, after the Rothschilds killed Kennedy did they also cause "Dallas" with Larry Hagman to be canceled?

Busy people.

#40 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 03:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Actually, the Obummer has been very kind to the 1%ers over the last 4 years."

when Obama is done with 8 years, the wealth divide in this country will be greater than when he started.......but you can bet your last dollar that the obama cheerleading squad will not blame Obama one bit for it.

to blame anyone(including the system) other than the GOP for the wealth divide problem in this country is blasphemy in the eyes of the obama cheerleaders

#41 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-19 03:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

#33 | POSTED BY CORKY

You should be embarrassed. From the NYT

Fraud and Fantasy in Congress,
The New York & Ernes, September 26, 1986, p. A34.

Last year Congress placed a spending gun at Ronald Reagan's head by spending bill. The ultimatum to Reagan: sign the most expensive piece of legislation in world history or shut down the United States government. This budget blackmail tactic properly triggered outrage from the White House, the press, and the American people. Asked a New York Times editorial: "Do the members of Congress care they are starting to look like frauds, or fools?" l Ignoring public anger, Congress refused to budge. After a few minor concessions to the White House, Capitol Hill got its way and the mammoth bill was signed.

Savoring its victory, Congress now is planning a repeat performance. Impossible though it may seem, the FY 1988 budget package is shaping up to be even bulkier and costlier than last year's. Congress is once again planning to tie together in one take-it-or-leave-it bill 13 individual appropriations bills, which themselves are gargantuan. And to add insult, Congress this year may also add to the package a contentious eighteen-month debt ceiling extension bill and a $20 billion tax hike proposal. There is even talk of tacking on the $5 billion welfare reform measure now before Congress.

The day may not 'be far off when Congress will bundle together an entire year's legislative business into one omnibus "bill" that the President would effectively have to sign at political gun point--making a mockery of the President's role in the legislative process.

www.nytimes.com

#42 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 03:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Median income in constant (2008) dollars
***************households

Year / White / Black / Asian / Hispanic
1980 / 46,482 / 26,779 / (NA) / 33,961
1990 /49,875 / 29,825 / 61,403 / 35,660

www.census.gov

Wonder how that looks against Obama's house hold income decreases?

#43 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 03:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Denial is still a river in Egypt.

The thread article is factual, as is the RS article factual.

Reagan, according to his Budget Dir, signed the"most expensive piece of legislation" to pay for the tax cuts he had given, which was why it was the, "most expensive".

But give credit where credit is due. Reagan was not dumb enough to think he didn't have to pay the government's bills, like some rwingers today.

#44 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 04:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

The thread article is factual, as is the RS article factual.
#44 | POSTED BY CORKY

No it's not it's a twist of the facts no better that saying that Obama said he would halve the deficit by 2012, On wait he did say that. Never mind.

#45 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 04:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just in the thread article, each one of the 8 facts is, well... a well documented fact.

#46 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

No it's not it's a twist of the facts no better that saying that Obama said he would halve the deficit by 2012, On wait he did say that. Never mind.
#45 | Posted by paneocon

Talk about rattled. ROTFLMAO!

#47 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-19 04:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm not arguing the shortfalls of Reagan's presidency. We have around a 30 year look back period to evaluate him. Prior to Reagan, who was the last 2 term president? goes back a while, doesn't it?

I think history will treat Clinton pretty good. GWB? not so good.

At this point, I don't think history will treat Obama very well either.

#48 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-19 04:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think history will treat Clinton pretty good.
#48 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Only because Doc, and CORKY are covering his @$$ for him.

President Clinton's tenure was characterized by economic prosperity and financial deregulation, which in many ways set the stage for the excesses of recent years. Among his biggest strokes of free-wheeling capitalism was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment.

Read more: www.time.com #ixzz2LNxcWzXE

#49 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 05:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

#49

Finally forced to a Clinton Deflection(tm)

Wholly predictable.

#50 | Posted by Corky at 2013-02-19 05:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think history will treat Clinton pretty good. GWB? not so good.

At this point, I don't think history will treat Obama very well either.

#48 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-19 04:55 PM | Reply | Flag

History will not mention clinton and his presidential success but his success for what a blow is.

GWB will go down as one of the worst.

obama will be right with GWB.

#51 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-02-19 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

"It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment."

It goes back to the CRA signed by Carter in the '70's. Clinton didn't actually "create" the permissive lending environment but he kept it rolling and growing. So did Bush. Actually, Clinton wasn't so bad once the Republican House and Senate from the 1994 election came in. I held my breath during all the impeachment stuff because I got thrills up my leg (not good ones like Matthews gets) whenever I thought of a possible President Gore.

#52 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2013-02-19 05:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

" whenever I thought of a possible President Gore."

Yeah, dodged a bullet there, think of how much money he would have spent trying to get the elusive manbearpig. Would have probably dwarfed the DHS budget.

#53 | Posted by salamandagator at 2013-02-19 05:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

#50 | POSTED BY CORKY

No just taking down yet another historical distortion. You libs love to rewrite history.

I think history will treat Clinton pretty good.
#48 | POSTED BY EBERLY

#54 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-19 06:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Reagan was better than most in my lifetime, but the neocon worship of him makes me sick.
Like all other presidents, he was not as good as his supporters say and no where near as bad as his detractors claim.
I do admire him for defeating that knee-jerk 70's attitude of, as he put it, "Blame America first." Reagan restored pride in America and he should be admired for that. He was also an amazingly talented orator, as any YouTube check will confirm. An astonishing public speaker.
But in the end, Reagan's greatest failure was not to implement his professed conservatism. Government and budgets continued to grow under him. There's no denying that! He failed to follow through.
I bet Reagan would agree with me on that, too.

#55 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-20 03:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

Watch this if you doubt Reagan could not make a speech. I remember this from my early days and was stunned by his frank approach with no regard for whether the left would pillory him:

www.youtube.com

#56 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-20 03:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The government can not control an economy without controlling people."

He was right.

#57 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-20 03:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

Way down deep, probing to the core, Ronald Reagan was a virtually empty vessel who proved that a guy whose claim to fame was that he played second banana to a chimp could bamboozle enough people to gain a position of responsibility that so greatly exceeded his capabilities as to be nothing short of mindboggling. He showed us that H.L. Mencken was right when he observed, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."

#58 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-20 07:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Actually, Clinton wasn't so bad once the Republican House and Senate from the 1994 election came in."

Baloney. Clinton's biggest achievement was the economic plan he got passed before the Republicans were voted in. He could have accomplished much more had those freaks not been elected and enabled to go on their 70 million dollar witch hunt. The only thing they accomplished was his impeachment and even that didn't end with his removal from office. For Repblicans, since the election of Clinton it is party first all the time, forget country, just strive for power.

#59 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-20 07:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

Somewhat off topic, but not completely so: I finally started reading Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin (www.amazon.com) and am reporting back, about a third of the way through, that this is a book for political junkies that's right up there with Theodore White's earliest efforts, e.g. The Making of the President 1960.

#60 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2013-02-20 07:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

Watch this if you doubt Reagan could not make a speech.

I don't think his acting skills were ever in question.

#62 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-20 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

He was the worst President of your lifetime if you were a partial birth abortion between January 20, 1981 – January 20, 1989.

#63 | Posted by wisgod at 2013-02-20 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

acting skills?

oh, it's "acting skills" when Reagan gave a good speech but when Obama gives one (not saying he really has) then it's because he is such a great leader.

The left needs to quit babbling about Reagan's lack of intellect. Like it or not, he was a leader and people followed.

you can always cry about the way people voted (which is always thrown out by leftists when votes don't go their way) but we always get a choice every 4 years. It doesn't mean he didn't make mistakes and history has shown he did. All of them do.

IOW, quit crying....Reagan's legacy is always going to piss you off.

But that's your fault.....not Reagans.

#64 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-20 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

#55 | POSTED BY DIABLO

The real Reagan lesson here is that reaching across the isle in a bipartisan manor will result in a future trashing of you political history. Several of the items on this list would get you in the lib hall of socialist fame but suddenly they are no longer acceptable and deserve lib ridicule.

#65 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 02:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

I finally started reading Game Change:
#60 | POSTED BY DOC_SARVIS

So you're the guy that bought that book. Thanks for the review.

#66 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 02:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

The facts listed in this story are true. The Reagan legacy is based on republican propaganda---not facts. Reagan was truly a terrible President. Even his economic program was merely a continuation of the Carter program with the same people making decisions. Reagan had Alzheimers during his first term and it got worse during his second term.

#67 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2013-02-20 02:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

No question that Reagan was a great actor and he played the part of the President very well. But who was calling the shots? Reagan was so mentally hosed (Alzheimers) he could not function other than in select public situations. Drugs were a significant part of his daily routine and served as the necessary crutch to make the R nutjobs think he was great.

#68 | Posted by UGM27Polaris at 2013-02-20 03:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

#68 | POSTED BY UGM27POLARIS

And your proof that Reagan suffered from Alzheimers while serving as President?

Michael Reagan slams brother Ron's claim that President Reagan had Alzheimer's while in office

Ronald Reagan's son Michael Reagan slammed his half-brother Ron's recent claim that the Gipper had Alzheimer's during his second term as President, accusing his liberal sibling of stirring up controversy to line his own pockets.

"Ron, my brother, was an embarrassment to his father when he was alive and today he became an embarrassment to his mother," Michael Reagan wrote on Twitter on Saturday.

"As for the topic of Alzheimer's, this subject has been well-documented over the years by both President Reagan's personal physicians, physicians who treated him after the diagnosis, as well as those who worked closely with him daily," the foundation said. "All are consistent in their view that signs of Alzheimer's did not appear until well after President Reagan left the White House."

Read more: www.nydailynews.com

#69 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 03:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Reagan legacy is based on republican propaganda
#67 | POSTED BY BUFFALO_BOB

So millions of jobs created and an increase in the standard of living not seen sense then and growth in the GDP never experienced sense, all fabricated by those Wacully Republicans.

#70 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 03:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Dammit Paneocon....couldn't you wait until 4 or 5 more retards showed up and piled on those same comments before you showed what a 1 minute google search could produce??

#71 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-20 03:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

#71 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Sorry but history revision P!$$'$ me off. If your party does it right or wrong live with it and learn from the lesson.

#72 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

There's no question that Reagan was a wrinkled sack of dementia.

When she and her family entered the office, the 75-year-old Reagan was standing by a Remington sculpture of a rearing horse, and Stahl immediately began to fret:

Reagan was as shriveled as a kumquat. He was so frail, his skin so paper-thin. I could almost see the sunlight through the back of his withered neck…His eyes were coated. Larry introduced us, but he had to shout. Had Reagan turned off his hearing aid?

…Reagan didn't seem to know who I was. He gave me a distant look with those milky eyes and shook my hand weakly. Oh, my, he's gonzo, I thought. I have to go out on the lawn tonight and tell my countrymen that the president of the United States is a doddering space cadet. My heart began to hammer with the import...I was aware of the delicacy with which I would have to write my script. But I was quite sure of my diagnosis.

Stahl tried to fill the silence, telling Reagan that her daughter used to tell everyone that the president works for her mommy, but after Reagan took office, she started saying that her mother worked for the president.

I wasn't above a little massaging. Was he so out of it that he couldn't appreciate a sweet story that reflected well on him? Guess so. His pupils didn't even dilate. Nothing. No reaction.


www.motherjones.com

#73 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-20 03:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Now the authoritarian liberals are trying to blame reagan for their current failure, what! apparently they are seeing people are not buying its bush fault anymore.

#74 | Posted by moneywar at 2013-02-20 03:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

oh, it's "acting skills" when Reagan gave a good speech but when Obama gives one

Wow. So they could read with emotion. Whoppidity doo.

People that get all misty and weak in the knees over a speech need to get their head examined.

#75 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-20 03:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"All are consistent in their view that signs of Alzheimer's did not appear until well after President Reagan left the White House."

Of course they are. I would expect nothing less.

#76 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-20 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

There's no question that Reagan was a wrinkled sack of dementia.

#73 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2013-02-

Let's see if you'd be so offensive and cold-hearted if and when your own father or mother dies from Alzheimers. Blowhard.

.
go again, Rcade, give me another dump. I don't care.

#77 | Posted by CalifChris at 2013-02-20 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

# 77 go again = go ahead

#78 | Posted by CalifChris at 2013-02-20 03:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

#73 | POSTED BY REINHEITSGEBOT

So do you really expect us to think that a liberal reporter when given evidence of a medical problem with a conservative president never reports it while he is president?
Nice try rinobot you're better off trolling your slim sources for your next yellow journalism thread post.

#79 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 03:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

#77 | POSTED BY CALIFCHRIS

Thanks CALIFCHRIS, well said as someone who took care of a dementia parent.

#80 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 03:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

#70

Link?

#81 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2013-02-20 03:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

well with Rein and bob here, no doubt it's a "conspiracy" to cover up Reagan's illness while in office.

#82 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-20 03:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

#81 | POSTED BY BUFFALO_BOB

Try google, the facts are all around you. Try government sources. Were are a couple easy ones for you.

Year Gross domestic product, constant prices
1980 -0.275
1981 2.539
1982 -1.942
1983 4.518
1984 7.187
1985 4.137
1986 3.465
1987 3.2
1988 4.11
1989 3.573

www.indexmundi.com

Median income in constant (2008) dollars
***************households
Year / White / Black / Asian / Hispanic
1980 / 46,482 / 26,779 / (NA) / 33,961
1990 /49,875 / 29,825 / 61,403 / 35,660

www.census.gov

#83 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 03:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Remember gang, RR first term problems were Carter's fault!!

that's what the Dems are STILL saying about Bush

#84 | Posted by Maverick at 2013-02-20 03:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

#84 | POSTED BY MAVERICK

Do you remember Reagan or Republicans saying it was Carter's fault after the election?

#85 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 04:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ronald Reagan claimed that the Russian language had no word for "freedom." (The word is "svoboda"; it's quite well attested in Russian literature.) Ronald Reagan said that intercontinental ballistic missiles (not that there are any non-ballistic missiles -- a corruption of language that isn't his fault) could be recalled once launched. Ronald Reagan said that he sought a "Star Wars" defense only in order to share the technology with the tyrants of the U.S.S.R. Ronald Reagan professed to be annoyed when people called it "Star Wars," even though he had ended his speech on the subject with the lame quip, "May the force be with you." Ronald Reagan used to alarm his Soviet counterparts by saying that surely they'd both unite against an invasion from Mars. Ronald Reagan used to alarm other constituencies by speaking freely about the "End Times" foreshadowed in the Bible. In the Oval Office, Ronald Reagan told Yitzhak Shamir and Simon Wiesenthal, on two separate occasions, that he himself had assisted personally at the liberation of the Nazi death camps.

www.slate.com

#86 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2013-02-20 04:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

There was more to Ronald Reagan than that. Reagan announced that apartheid South Africa had "stood beside us in every war we've ever fought," when the South African leadership had been on the other side in the most recent world war. Reagan allowed Alexander Haig to greenlight the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, fired him when that went too far and led to mayhem in Beirut, then ran away from Lebanon altogether when the Marine barracks were bombed, and then unbelievably accused Tip O'Neill and the Democrats of "scuttling." Reagan sold heavy weapons to the Iranian mullahs and lied about it, saying that all the weapons he hadn't sold them (and hadn't traded for hostages in any case) would, all the same, have fit on a small truck. Reagan then diverted the profits of this criminal trade to an illegal war in Nicaragua and lied unceasingly about that, too. Reagan then modestly let his underlings maintain that he was too dense to understand the connection between the two impeachable crimes. He then switched without any apparent strain to a policy of backing Saddam Hussein against Iran. (If Margaret Thatcher's intelligence services had not bugged Oliver North in London and become infuriated because all European nations were boycotting Iran at Reagan's request, we might still not know about this.)

#87 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2013-02-20 04:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

#84

Carters first term was fixing Nixon/Agnew/Ford mistakes. He was successful--Reagan kept his policies and personnel in place and took the credit rightly belonging to Carter.

Carter will be shown by history to be one of our better Presidents while Reagan will be shown to be a lower tier President. Reagan making a behind the scenes deal to keep the Hostages prisoner until his inaugeration day was just the beginning of his evil tricks and brainwashing of the American people.

#88 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2013-02-20 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Median income in constant (2008) dollars
***************households
Year / White / Black / Asian / Hispanic
1980 / 46,482 / 26,779 / (NA) / 33,961
1990 /49,875 / 29,825 / 61,403 / 35,660
www.census.gov
#83 | POSTED BY PANEOCON AT 2013-02-20 03:50 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

.7% raise! Oh happy days!

#89 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-20 04:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

Alexander Haig's resigned NOT fired and he had a long history of conflict with Caspar Weinberger.

"Reagan sold heavy weapons to the Iranian mullahs and lied about it"
is Christopher Hitchens bull, The Iran contra statement are on you tube if you want it from Reagan's own mouth.

So I'm sure you will be as out raged about the ground to air missle launchers that Barry is sending to the rebels in Syria through Turkey?

#90 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 04:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

#89 | POSTED BY 726

Man you stepped in that one. Obama's numbers

Household Income for States:
2009 and 2010

Real median household income
in the United States fell between
the 2009 ACS and the 2010 ACS,
decreasing by 2.2 percent from
$51,190 to $50,046 (see table).
www.census.gov

I could keep going but I hate to see liberal cry in public.

#91 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you remember Reagan or Republicans saying it was Carter's fault after the election?

#85 | POSTED BY PANEOCON AT 2013-02-20 04:19 PM | FLAG:

The problems we inherited were far worse than most inside and out of government had expected; the recession was deeper than most inside and out of government had predicted. Curing those problems has taken more time and a higher toll than any of us wanted.

Read more: State of the Union Address: Ronald Reagan (January 25, 1983) -- Infoplease.com www.infoplease.com

#92 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-20 04:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

I could keep going but I hate to see liberal cry in public.

#91 | POSTED BY PANEOCON AT 2013-02-20 04:43 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Yes his numbers suck too. So what? That doesn't make Reagan an even worse president.

Cry? I am laughing at you and your idolatry.

#93 | Posted by 726 at 2013-02-20 04:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

Right. He states he would hate to make liberals cry, yet all he has done is cry all over the thread.

#94 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2013-02-20 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

#94 | POSTED BY LEE_THE_AGENT

You confuse crying with up holding the truth. I guess if I was an Obama boy I'd be deflecting too.

#95 | Posted by paneocon at 2013-02-20 05:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Real median household income in the United States fell between the 2009 ACS and the 2010 ACS, decreasing by 2.2 percent from $51,190 to $50,046 (see table)."

On we get it, let's play the Obama was responsible for all the economic bad news resulting from the Bush Housing Bubble bursting. Got it. Predictably dishonest.

#96 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-20 05:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

According to supply-side economists, the wealthy would use their tax break to spur investment, and the economy would boom.

Well, it worked. Sort of.
The economy for rich people boomed.
The economy for the other 4/5th of America has flatlined.

#97 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-20 05:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

The economy for the other 4/5th of America has flatlined.

#97 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-20 05:34 PM | Reply

That started when we went off the gold standard and according to recent stats, Obungler has really changed it from a "flatline" to a downtrend line.

#98 | Posted by matsop at 2013-02-20 05:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obummer's native American name:

"Walking Eagle" is the name given to a bird so full of $hit it can no longer fly.


#99 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2013-02-20 05:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

That started when we went off the gold standard

So, Nixon's fault?

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-20 05:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obungler has really changed it from a "flatline" to a downtrend line.

Not really. It trended down just as much from 2000-2004 and from 1989-1993. And the current downward trend started in 2008. Care to guess what happened in 2008?

In 2001 dollars median household income was 44,851 in 1976.
In 2001 dollars median household income was 50,054 in 2011.
www.census.gov

#101 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-20 06:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Money,

"I just have to laugh, they can't find fault with their current idiot so now go back 30 years to find some president they can trash."

Isn't that how it works?

We won't know Obama's legacy until later when history looks back to see how his programs played out.

I mean...history isn't being kind to Ronald Reagan because it's become evident how he led us all to slaughter just to feed the rich.

Do you honestly think history will be unkind to Obama?

Just because corporate America and congress is determined to see his policies fail doesn't mean they weren't the right thing to do at this juncture.

If capitalism worked well enough to meet the needs of everyone, things like New Deal, War on Poverty, and Obamacare would never have happened.

But there are major segments of America that are systemically ignored and deliberately overlooked by much of mainstream corporate America.

Is it any wonder so many people get foodstamps and free housing?

History is showing Reagan to be a pawn of the rich.

History will see Obama as a savior.

#102 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2013-02-20 07:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

"History is showing Reagan to be a pawn of the rich."

True.

"History will see Obama as a savior."

Hahahahahaha...

#103 | Posted by nullifidian at 2013-02-20 08:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, I need to meet this "History" fella. Don't know him and I really wonder how so many folks here do.

#104 | Posted by eberly at 2013-02-20 08:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

"History will see Obama as a savior."

Though I am a big supporter I'm not really sure you are right about that. We need a strong, powerful, dynamic leader who can garner the votes to elect a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress and pass big tax increases on the wealthy to pay down our debt. We need to tax the folks who profited from our wars, we should actually look at where the money for our wars was spent and tax the industries who profited. Haliburton already left America expecting this tactic but they have huge operations and investments here still vulnerable to taxation. We need to elect leaders who will stop pretending that doom is inevitable and start recognizing that our prosperity is no more or less possible than any other time in history. We just have to end this domination by the rich, we need to get the SC back, the Congress back. We need American institutions to work for the prosperity of Americans not just the rich.

#105 | Posted by danni at 2013-02-20 08:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

I would think that President Reagan's arms control efforts alone would keep him from being declared the worst president in recent memory.... I suppose such things are all a question of what issues you feel are important.

#106 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2013-02-20 08:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Interpretation of history is subjective.

Like it or not, more and more people are coming to the conclusion Reagan's economic polities are at the root of many of today's problems and that his policies were misguided and even dishonest.

What I mean is after we figure out how to adjust to a world with Obamacare, I believe the general consensus will be positive.

In the long run, more people will receive adequate health care than would have been the case without it.

Obama took on the system and won.

Not an easy task.

He will be seen by many as....well....a savior.

#107 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2013-02-20 08:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

The US debt/GDP ratio was the lowest since WWII at the end of the Carter administration.
Now we're back to WWII levels and the rest of the world isn't bombed into ruin.
Oh well ...

#108 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2013-02-20 08:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Danni,

"We need a strong, powerful, dynamic leader who can garner the votes to elect a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress and pass big tax increases on the wealthy to pay down our debt"

I'm not so sure that is a task well suited for Obama to lead or any democrat for that matter considering the public is so divided on this issue. And, it should be obvious the GOP will not back down out of shear principle.

However, I think republicans are evolving out of necessity.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised to see a republican lead the way.

#109 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2013-02-20 08:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

"On we get it, let's play the Obama was responsible for all the economic bad news resulting from the Bush Housing Bubble bursting"

You mean the Barney Frank mortgage debacle no doubt. Why do you think Barney did not run again? He lost cred and was becoming an embarrassment to his party. The original program started with Clinton, who was more practical than his co-Democrats, but it got to obscene with Barney's demanding the poor be given mortgages they could not afford to pay off.
Obama was not at fault for that, I agree. But put blame where it belongs.

#110 | Posted by Diablo at 2013-02-20 11:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

reinheitsgetbot --

Re my #77 post -- I shouldn't have let my emotions about something spill over on to here. You didn't mean to say anything hurtful by your comment and it's my fault for letting it become personal. Alright, that's all I wanted to tell you.

#111 | Posted by CalifChris at 2013-02-21 12:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Barney's demanding the poor be given mortgages they could not afford to pay off.
Obama was not at fault for that, I agree. But put blame where it belongs.

Weird how you put the blame on the mortgages, not the banks who leveraged the mortgages 30x.

Thirty is a larger number than one. But I guess the math works out differently if you're a right-winger.

#112 | Posted by snoofy at 2013-02-21 02:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2013 World Readable

 

Advertisement