More Reagan - split from other thread

[Cutlass]

I still don't get how you equate "below average economic performance" with something good.

 

[LightSpectra]

I still don't get how you equate "below average economic performance" with something good.

I still don't get why you continue to bring this up, as if it had any relevance. As much as it may pain you to admit it, the fact is that the '80s was a decade of economic prosperity for America, in stark contrast with the economic failures that were prevalent in the Nixon, Ford and Carter administrations.

 

[Cutlass]

I still don't get why you continue to bring this up, as if it had any relevance. As much as it may pain you to admit it, the fact is that the '80s was a decade of economic prosperity for America, in stark contrast with the economic failures that were prevalent in the Nixon, Ford and Carter administrations.

The 80s were a decade of under-performance, punctuated by huge deficits (do exclusively to the incompetence and irresponsibility of your idol) and by ending the American dream for half of the American population. By putting the wealthy on welfare, he got them to cease to work. And because of that the US has a much smaller GDP today than it would have if Reagan had never been born.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Asking on what source you base your accusations is nonsensical?

I didn't know that's what you're asking.

That's only if the poor are paying more taxes, which they were not, since Reagan's tax cuts were across the board.

Yes, but you've failed to grasp that it is the poor who make up the shortfall and it is mostly the poor that have to pay for the privatised services. There are certain things we all have to pay for anyway. Governments, like Reagan's, can pull off short-term stat-candy by privatising services, but the services still have to be paid for; the poor have to start paying for the services themselves, the rich often don't, plus the richest get the profit from "Mediating" the service. You get this, right?

That's quite a feat, since that would mean that all college tuition and medical fees are in Europe are managed from charity. Which is not the case. Government only makes revenue by taxation, so that means the average European is paying quite a bit for health care and college. The only difference is how direct it is.

Well, people would still be paying for it through charity, as they often do in the US. You can presume I know where governments get their money from ... thanks.

This is a credible source, how?

I don't think this is controversial.

Sane people also don't think that anybody who doesn't agree with them are enslaving brain-washing ideologues. There are reasons not to share your beliefs beyond pure malice. Get over it.

That's not why I'd use a term as strong as "brain-washed". It's because I'm familiar with the rhetoric used in popular discourse (only among the brain-washed would the government death-panel meme have had any traction ... I mean how else would the American peasant come to support panels controlled by corporate interests who make profits by refusing care. to panels run by officials they can elect?).

Curiously, continually straw-manning an "opponent" is another sign of brain washing. It means you're at the point that the stance is more important than the truth. As Nietzsche said, "convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies".

I'm actually in favor of government-run universal health care, which is why I'm quite baffled as to how you're attributing any of this to Reagan.
.

Not attributing it to Reagan, but the ideology he unleashed in the American right has made this impossible.

Also, citation needed on the "you are becoming poorer than Europeans and less happy." If surveys are to be believed, poorer countries are happier overall, so it sounds like you're pulling this out of thin air.

Well, it is a fact that America is becoming poorer relative to Europe. As for happy ... well, I can only go with my own experience. Not reliable maybe, but not coming out of the air.

 

[LightSpectra]

The 80s were a decade of under-performance, punctuated by huge deficits (do exclusively to the incompetence and irresponsibility of your idol) and by ending the American dream for half of the American population. By putting the wealthy on welfare, he got them to cease to work. And because of that the US has a much smaller GDP today than it would have if Reagan had never been born.

I certainly do admire people who can maintain beliefs in the face of cited evidence to the contrary. Together with Young Earth Creationists and 9/11 Troofers, you may be able to change the world, Cutlass.

In case you think rhetoric wins debates: you're not doing your side any favors by simply ignoring evidence that contradicts your opinions.

I didn't know that's what you're asking.

OK. Now you know. Answer it.

Yes, but you've failed to grasp that it is the poor who make up the shortfall and it is mostly the poor that have to pay for the privatised services.

If privatized services can perform better than public, then the only ones who suffer are government bureaucrats.

There are certain things we all have to pay for anyway. Governments, like Reagan's, can pull off short-term stat-candy by privatising services, but the services still have to be paid for; the poor have to start paying for the services themselves, the rich often don't, plus the richest get the profit from "Mediating" the service. You get this, right?

I'm not sure if you are. "Government-run" does not mean "free." It means your bill comes on April 15 instead of when you normally would've paid for it.

Well, people would still be paying for it through charity, as they often do in the US. You can presume I know where governments get their money from ... thanks.

I prefer charity to government-run services, in fact. FDR put it best:

"The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of sound policy. It is in violation of the traditions of America... The Federal Government must and shall quit this business of relief."

I don't think this is controversial.

A website whose stated aim is to demonstrate the moral failures of capitalism is controversial by definition.

That's not why I'd use a term as strong as "brain-washed". It's because I'm familiar with the rhetoric used in popular discourse (only among the brain-washed would the government death-panel meme have had any traction ... I mean how else would the American peasant come to support panels controlled by corporate interests who make profits by refusing care. to panels run by officials they can elect?).

I lol'd so hard at this. "I don't like how people are good at disagreeing with me. Therefore, they are brainwashing people."

Curiously, continually straw-manning an "opponent" is another sign of brain washing. It means you're at the point that the stance is more important than the truth. As Nietzsche said, "convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies".

Sorry? How is this a strawman? You're the one who first used the term "brain-washing."

= "Europeans don't brain-wash their poor population into believing government expenditure is 'lack of freedom'..." =

Not attributing it to Reagan, but the ideology he unleashed in the American right has made this impossible.

One, conservatism pre-dates Ronald Reagan. Two, let me get this straight: Reagan was a terrible president because he was good at convincing people of an ideology you don't agree with? That makes him a stated enemy of your opinions, but not a poor statesman.

Well, it is a fact that America is becoming poorer relative to Europe.

Countries by GDP growth averaged from 1988 to 2007. The U.S. is well above most of Europe.

 

[Karalysia]

Reagan was a devout Satanist, proof:

Besides Ronald Wilson Reagan equaling the number on the head of beast or 666, when Ronald and Nancy Reagan left office they moved to a house in California with the address "666 Xxxxxxxxxx Drive." But they had it officially changed.

Coincidence? Are or were you deceived? The Radical Religious Right who claims to be Christian should have known. They did because I told them! But what did they do? Ronald Wilson Reagan was their God! They weren't about to warn the American people of what was happening. The Radical Religious Right and Ronald Wilson Reagan were in cahoots together and Radical Religious Right is still riding the coat tails of the American People's love for Ronald Reagan. It is human nature to try to find the best in a person and what they do.

In 1981, even after being warned by a messenger of God, I still was deceived by Ronald Reagan. He said most things I wanted to hear, and if it wasn't what I wanted to hear, he said it in such a way that made me feel good about what he said and he was able to make me think that's what I wanted. Then he went and did the opposite.

Star Wars: When it comes to his policies like his Star Wars fiasco, granted, that was his style. Shoot from the hip and hope to hell you hit the target! Well, after quadrupling our national debt, he never come close to the target. He promised he wouldn't raise your taxes and he didn't but he raised the taxes on your children on our children 5, 10, 15 and 20 years down the road by and spending trillions of dollars on a "pie in the sky" theory, we still aren't any closer to realizing the concocted dream than when Reagan had the bully pulpit and held the purse strings. Now, what is Bob Dole and the Republicans trying to win your votes by promising you? They'll cut your taxes! WHO THE HELL IS GOING TO PAY BACK THE MONEY REAGAN BORROWED SPENDING THE SOVIETS UNDER THE TABLE?

While the Democrats believe more in a "pay as you go, tax as you go" policy of tax and spend -- if you don't like the taxes, don't ask them to spend the money -- the Republicans on the other hand believe in a policy of "fooling the people by lowering their taxes, borrow heavily and spend like there was no tomorrow and let our kids will pay it back!" As for me, while I've been both, I'm neither Republican nor Democrat but I think we should live within our means and pay as we go. First, pay off the debt even if it means burdening the people who made money off the extravagant borrowing with heavier taxes. In the end, we all have to put our shoulder to the wheel and push!!

Taxes: I've already explained how Reagan lied to the American people and said he wasn't going to raise your taxes then mortgaged your future and that of your children, raising their taxes 5, 10, 15 and 20 years down the road, by borrowing trillions of dollars and spending what he borrowed on a pie in the sky pipe dream and theory. That's what defeated communism. They couldn't match the spending!

Freedom and Human Rights: Probably his most pernicious accomplishment. While bringing about the demise of the Soviet Totalitarian Communist Regime, Reagan resurrected the viability and credibility of the oxymoron, the "Pro-Life" movement. God promised, that which is built upon a lie will not stand. However, with his demonic ally of, again an oxymoron, the Christian Coalition, sought and still seeks to thwart God's Plan that everyone have the right and freedom of choice. Otherwise, what's the need for a judgment. Remember Satan's Plan? We would have all been saved, at the same level, with the same promise and reward. Believe me, we would have deserved it. Had Satan's Plan been adopted there would have been an order, an edict that we would have _____________, and there would have been nothing we could do to changed it.

 

[Jabarto]

If privatized services can perform better than public, then the only ones who suffer are government bureaucrats.

That's a pretty huge 'if'. Privatisation has been an unmitigated disaster more often than it has succeeded.

 

[warpus]

All I've read about Reagan convinces me that he wasn't such a great president. I don't really get why some people worship him so much.. or think that he played a major part in ending the cold war.

 

[Cutlass]

I certainly do admire people who can maintain beliefs in the face of cited evidence to the contrary. Together with Young Earth Creationists and 9/11 Troofers, you may be able to change the world, Cutlass.

In case you think rhetoric wins debates: you're not doing your side any favors by simply ignoring evidence that contradicts your opinions.

So now you are admitting to being a troofer? You haven't presented any evidence. All the evidence from non-partisan sources support me. So why wouldn't I beleive it? Reagan weakened the economy of the US for a generation through the insanity and irresponsibility and stupidity of supply side economics and deficits. That's irrefutable historical fact.

 

[LightSpectra]

All I've read about Reagan convinces me that he wasn't such a great president. I don't really get why some people worship him so much.. or think that he played a major part in ending the cold war.

I already demonstrated the latter point to be true, so you can read through this thread or the previous threads if you'd like.

So now you are admitting to being a troofer?

Reading comprehension, reading comprehension. I'm comparing you to a 9/11 Troofer and YEC in that you are given evidence, promptly ignore it and continue repeating your points.

You haven't presented any evidence.

Here was my cited post, provided for the third or fourth time for you to ignore and pretend I've provided no evidence for my claims and rebuttals again.

All the evidence from non-partisan sources support me. So why wouldn't I beleive it?

Probably because your ideology is more important than the truth, so therefore you're either incapable or unwilling to accept evidence that contradicts your beliefs.

Reagan weakened the economy of the US for a generation through the insanity and irresponsibility and stupidity of supply side economics and deficits. That's irrefutable historical fact.

Already refuted repeatedly. You ignoring them is irrefutable fact.

 

[Cutlass]

All I've read about Reagan convinces me that he wasn't such a great president. I don't really get why some people worship him so much.. or think that he played a major part in ending the cold war.

That truly is the hard part to understand. Why the worship? Why? It's senseless. At best he was a far below average president. At worst, he was bottom of the barrel. But for some reason, he's patron saint of the movement. And it's really difficult to comprehend why. Maybe it has to do with reactionary-ism. Reagan was a reaction against freedom. The conservative movement of the 70s and 80s came together as a reaction against the freedom of the civil rights movement. And that is what elected Reagan. AFAIK, Regan himself was not a racist. However, he did use racism to get elected. In a very early part of his campaign, he went to a place that is famous for only one thing, and that is the murder of freedom fighters. And he gave a speech that hit all the racist code words.

As president, he wasn't really greatly popular. He had high times, he had low times. As popularity goes, ordinary.

But as a symbol, he is powerful. But only the dark side.

You hear about the Reagan that talked tough: You do not hear about the Reagan that sat down with his opponents and worked out deals that both sides could live with. Reagan's best accomplishments, both in foreign and domestic policy, were not the results of talking tough and being uncompromising and beating his opponents down. They were done by compromise and negotiation. They were done by working with the other side.

Do Reagan fanboiz today acknowledge that? No.

But 10-15 years ago an industry came into existence to make Reagan into a patron saint. It is a manufactured image. And the only thing that makes the least little bit of sense is that they want an image, an image not of the Ronald Reagan that lived, but an image of a Saint Ronnie. And why? To use that image. To use it to corrupt the government to serve certain interests.

This financial crisis? That wasn't really an accident. They wanted, lobbied for years to get, the government to allow the type of recklessness that made it possible.

Reagan hurt the United States badly. But the image of Saint Ronnie will destroy it. And that is why I am so opposed to the rehabilitation of Reagan.

 

[LightSpectra]

I'll give you a simpler answer why Cutlass has a mental breakdown when the facts demonstrate against his position.

He is a liberal. Liberals are intelligent and good-willed. Therefore, conservatives are unintelligent and bad-willed. Therefore, Ronald Reagan, an icon of conservatism, must be the epitome of unintelligence and bad-will. He arrives at this conclusion by ideological modus ponens reasoning, and therefore, he is utterly impervious to actuality.

If you've ever read any post he's ever made on Off-Topic, you'd see this is the case.

 

[Cutlass]

But you have no facts.

 

[LightSpectra]

But you have no facts.

Sic est.

 

[Karalysia]

But you have no facts.

Of course he doesn't. You see, conservatives cling to the Reagan myth because conservatives have never had any success in any of their ventures, they realize that the burden of success is in favor of liberals, that all the good things have resulted from liberals, and the burden of facts is on the side of liberals. Consevatisim is from the beginning a failure of an ideology because it goes against progress and if history has shown us anything it's that progress cannot be impeded for long and conservatives are again, and again, and again defeated. So they really have nothing and nobody to look toward, so they invent myths, disregard facts, and cling to lies and delusion. It's the very foundation of their worldview. Hence Reagan fetish.

 

[LightSpectra]

Of course he doesn't. You see, conservatives cling to the Reagan myth because conservatives have never had any success in any of their ventures, they realize that the burden of success is in favor of liberals, that all the good things have resulted from liberals, and the burden of facts is on the side of liberals. Consevatisim is from the beginning a failure of an ideology because it goes against progress and if history has shown us anything it's that progress cannot be impeded for long and conservatives are again, and again, and again defeated. So they really have nothing and nobody to look toward, so they invent myths, disregard facts, and cling to lies and delusion. It's the very foundation of their worldview. Hence Reagan fetish.

Don't forget that he's a Satanist, which (and I quote), is "confirmed in [your] readings, textbooks, and by [your] professors."

I'd take your opinion more seriously if (a) you didn't endorse the most hilariously biased and fringe articles you possibly could without reading them, and (b) you didn't have the gall to call conservatism "a failure of an ideology" while being a Marxist.

 

[Karalysia]

Don't forget that he's a Satanist, which (and I quote), is "confirmed in [your] readings, textbooks, and by [your] professors."

I'd take your opinion more seriously if (a) you didn't endorse the most hilariously biased and fringe articles you possibly could without reading them, and (b) you didn't have the gall to call conservatism "a failure of an ideology" while being a Marxist.

Reagan in a Satanist ritual:

Besides Ronald Wilson Reagan equaling the number on the head of beast or 666, when Ronald and Nancy Reagan left office they moved to a house in California with the address "666 Xxxxxxxxxx Drive." But they had it officially changed.

Coincidence? Are or were you deceived? The Radical Religious Right who claims to be Christian should have known. They did because I told them! But what did they do? Ronald Wilson Reagan was their God! They weren't about to warn the American people of what was happening. The Radical Religious Right and Ronald Wilson Reagan were in cahoots together and Radical Religious Right is still riding the coat tails of the American People's love for Ronald Reagan. It is human nature to try to find the best in a person and what they do.

Also you'll be surprised to find out that not only am I not a Marxist, but there are socialist philosophies that exist other than Marxism. Shocking I know. You may want to sit down and breathe deeply into a paper bag or something. Maybe lie down for a few minutes.

 

[LightSpectra]

If I lie down, the Satano-Marxist cults will abduct me.

 

[Plotinus]

Moderator Action: If you can't all discuss these things reasonably, calmly, and respectfully, then I'll close this thread too.

 

[rollo1066]

I didn't vote for Reagan in either 1980 or 1984 but think he was in general a sucessful President. I didn't like everything he did but think he had both courage and humor ("Honey I forgot to duck").