SpellAndShield Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 First have a listen to Chomsky about Reagan then ask yourself if he really deserves to be deified as he has been; when you actually look at his record, he is more sub-human than deific. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8g_XE4oZqU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbringe Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 The really odd thing is that it was under Reagan that the likes of Rumsfeld , Cheney , Wolfwowitz and the proponents of The New American Century first got many of their policies going , one of them being Trickle Down Economics with massive deregulation of all aspects of governance in the financial sector .These are the same people who less than 20 years later picked up where they left off and under Bush Jr ran the country into its greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression and it was under Reagan that they got their start and they want to build monuments and have statutory holidays to the guy. How badly do people need to be whacked up side the head before they realize maybe having Reagan as a President wasn't such a good thing. As Forest Gump would say "stupid is as stupid does". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpellAndShield Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 The really odd thing is that it was under Reagan that the likes of Rumsfeld , Cheney , Wolfwowitz and the proponents of The New American Century first got many of their policies going , one of them being Trickle Down Economics with massive deregulation of all aspects of governance in the financial sector .These are the same people who less than 20 years later picked up where they left off and under Bush Jr ran the country into its greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression and it was under Reagan that they got their start and they want to build monuments and have statutory holidays to the guy. How badly do people need to be whacked up side the head before they realize maybe having Reagan as a President wasn't such a good thing. As Forest Gump would say "stupid is as stupid does". It's like Chomsky says, he is a bit like KIm Jung Il.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Well, you two have about said it all, along with that excellent Noam Chomsky vid, Stardusk. I have long ago given up wondering where all this Reagan idolatry was coming from. But I didn't think "We" were allowed to speak of it..... (just kidding). I just chose to let sleeping dogs lie, as it were. I will just add one more opinion. I personally don't think he was all that bright, and believe that he was occasionally being manipulated by lots of his (background) handlers, some of whom have already been mentioned by Harbringe. They managed to rear their lovely (insert more appropriate word if you choose) heads in later years. Just my opinion though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginnyfizz Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I hold no brief for Ronald Reagan, but is this really a debate thread or a slam thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 (edited) The really odd thing is that it was under Reagan that the likes of Rumsfeld , Cheney , Wolfwowitz and the proponents of The New American Century first got many of their policies going , one of them being Trickle Down Economics with massive deregulation of all aspects of governance in the financial sector .These are the same people who less than 20 years later picked up where they left off and under Bush Jr ran the country into its greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression and it was under Reagan that they got their start and they want to build monuments and have statutory holidays to the guy. How badly do people need to be whacked up side the head before they realize maybe having Reagan as a President wasn't such a good thing. As Forest Gump would say "stupid is as stupid does". It's like Chomsky says, he is a bit like KIm Jung Il....Before I start, just how would you like to support such a absurd claim? Am dying to hear the rationalization that you will come up with to support this contention. Lets see where should I begin, it such a target rich environment in this thread. OK first off you pick a clip from Democracy Now a progressive liberal network with their own agenda which is direct conflict with any form of conservatism. lets set the stage a bit, Regan came into office after the most incompetent foreign policy president of the 20th century, Carter. Carter had all but surrendered to the concept that Soviet expansion could not be contained, that we as Americans we needed to settle for less and supervised the worst inflation this country had in the entire century. Since you we not yet born, you missed out on gas lines, 17% interest rates, military fiasco's and a general world retreat. Now on the positive side Carter was an honest man and thats about the only nice thing I can say about him, because he certainly could not govern, he was incompetent in domestic as well as foreign policy. Regan on the other hand had a clear world vision and instituted it, he ended the cold war, revived the economy and reinstated our position geopolitically. comparing him to a North Korean dictator such as Jung aside from being moronic is simply insulting. If you look at the growth in GNP, the reversal of inflation, the revival of our military and our industrial base he comes out quite well. I do not personally deify him but he was a vast improvement on his predecessor. This thread is simply an ex post facto attempt at character assassination of well regarded president. You might just want to look at Regan's general approval rating while in office, evidently the country did not agree with your assessment. Edited February 18, 2011 by Aurielius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpellAndShield Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 (edited) The really odd thing is that it was under Reagan that the likes of Rumsfeld , Cheney , Wolfwowitz and the proponents of The New American Century first got many of their policies going , one of them being Trickle Down Economics with massive deregulation of all aspects of governance in the financial sector .These are the same people who less than 20 years later picked up where they left off and under Bush Jr ran the country into its greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression and it was under Reagan that they got their start and they want to build monuments and have statutory holidays to the guy. How badly do people need to be whacked up side the head before they realize maybe having Reagan as a President wasn't such a good thing. As Forest Gump would say "stupid is as stupid does". It's like Chomsky says, he is a bit like KIm Jung Il....Lets see where should I start, it such a target rich environment in this thread. OK first off you pick a clip from Democracy Now a progressive liberal network with their own agenda which is direct conflict with any form of conservatism. lets set the stage a bit, Regan came into office after the most incompetent foreign policy president of the 20th century, Carter. Carter had all but surrendered to the concept that Soviet expansion could not be contained, that we as Americans we needed to settle for less and supervised the worst inflation this country had in the entire century. Since you we not yet born, you missed out on gas lines, 17% interest rates, military fiasco's and a general world retreat. Now on the positive side Carter was an honest man and thats about the only nice thing I can say about him, because he certainly could not govern, he was incompetent in domestic as well as foreign policy. Regan on the other hand had a clear world vision and instituted it, he ended the cold war, revived the economy and reinstated our position geopolitically. comparing him to a North Korean dictator such as Jung aside from being moronic is simply insulting. If you look at the growth in GNP, the reversal of inflation, the revival of our military and our industrial base he comes out quite well. I do not personally deify him but he was a vast improvement on his predecessor. This thread is simply an ex post facto attempt at character assassination of well regarded president. You might just want to look at Regan's general approval rating while in office, evidently the country did not agree with your assessment. So Chomsky is just pulling it all out of his arse? Let's not focus on Democracy Now because it is one of the few channels that will actually host Chomsky because he gets ZERO air time on any mainstream news channel. Government DID grow under Reagan despite his apparent claim to small government, we did go from being a CREDITOR nation to a DEBTOR one under Reagan and there is so much more. Now for the record, in case I haven't already stated it, I am neither a liberal nor a conservative but an independent with strong libertarian tendencies. You seem rather obsessed with my age. Do you believe that having been born after a certain time makes it impossible to understand what happened? If that were true, every historian of antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance downwards would not exist. I am well aware of what happened under Carter but the situation was handed to him because of our actions in 1953 in Iran. The 17% interest rates were a necessity implemented by Volcker because of the Guns and Butter of the late sixties and seventies, courtesey of the Vietnam War, necessary to curb inflation. Carter inhereted a massive pile of dung; it begs the question if anyone would have fared well under that. Edited February 18, 2011 by Stardusk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Ok, may I start off by apologizing to anyone who might have been justifiably offended if she or he thought that I meant to "slam" Ronald Reagan. It was not my intention to do so. I perhaps spoke too harshly. However, I did not like him, did not respect him and disagree with almost everything that Aurielies said above regarding his presidency. To the best of my knowledge, his approval rating never got higher than about 62% or so during his whole time in office. His clear world vision consisted of "carrying a big stick" and having a stronger military. I am not a big fan of Reagonomics, never was, never wiil be. Although, I did not pick the clip in question, I do not believe that anything spoken in same was untrue, regardless of where it was presented. For the record, I admire Jimmy Carter immensely, but agree that he was not presidential material. However, I do believe that he has since done more for this country than many of our sitting presidents ever did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I hold no brief for Ronald Reagan, but is this really a debate thread or a slam thread? No Ginny I think that it is a troll thread for hoping for conservative reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpellAndShield Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 I hold no brief for Ronald Reagan, but is this really a debate thread or a slam thread? No Ginny I think that it is a troll thread for hoping for conservative reaction. No, this is a thread looking to confirm where Reagan is worthy of apotheosis or as much praise as he receives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts