In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 705
On this Board 14Record: 2477 (2/6/2013)
Online now 817Record: 6507 (2/14/2012)
The place for Irish fans to engage in hardcore discussion about Notre Dame athletics
Talk with Irish fans from around the globe about college football's most storied program
The spot for anything on your mind outside of Notre Dame athletics
The place for Notre Dame fans to trade and exchange tickets
You have no favorite boards.
not have 1,000 votes
POLITICO44 is a new and innovative way to cover the Obama presidency, minute-by-minute. Powered by the largest White House staff around, it will be the go-to place for news and analysis about the president, the staff, the first lady, the vice president, and the new administration.
3 time POTW, member since 2006, MLWTI: 4-3
Earth to Morgan Freeman.....BHO has only himself to blame. He inherited a bad economy and made it worse. Reagan inherited a country in the ditch (thanks Carter) and returned her to greatness.
Give me specific information on how Reagan turned this country into a great one? I won't discount Obama being a worthless president. You and anyone else using BHO to refer to him are obviously kool-aid drinking morons so I try to usually disregard anything you say. However, I would like proof on how Reagan brought this country into greatness, can you provide it?
Supply-side economics (Voodoo economics is what the first Prez Bush called it)? I've seen plenty of objective information on how Reagan was just a puppet being used by corporations to finally get their way. I've seen how he lowered taxes then realized that didn't work so raised them and right before he got out again lowered them. It wasn't fiscal policy it was ignorant math. I just enjoy when Reagan lovers come on here claiming everything was so perfect in America at the time. It might have been pretty good for his duration for a lot of people, but what he created and allowed in Washington was cancerous. Supply-side economics, corporate takeover of politicians as the norm, dissent for all social programs, and worst of all this non-stop rhetoric that has been proven to just plain not work (cut the taxes of the wealthy and it will trickle down). I could name many other things he started or continued to advance where he wasn't reaching to obtain freedom or equality, but to take them away. He put the idea (propaganda) in people's heads and now we have a problem in our country where we're not free and income inequality is larger than ever before. Welcome to pre-revolutionary America!
I'll happily accept proof and admit my ignorance if you can find some rational explanation on how everything he did set America up for a prosperous future. Even show me how he helped make Americans obtain more liberty. It can't be done all we can ever show is President's from even the beginnings of our country, who take away liberty rather than secure more of it. Equality is another story and they are different and it seems like we've tried harder to advance that than true liberty. If I hear one more time that the free-market is the only way to go I'll
Even as a Democrat I have a great deal of respect for President Reagan's leadership. But I find it hilarious that current Republican candidates and Republican pundits have used his name and revisionist history in the same discussion.
Reagan raised taxes in California, as governor, and while he was the President. The tax increases in California are still the largest in state history, his 1982 federal tax increase was the largest since World War II. His tax increases on corporations were the largest ever seen.
In California, Reagan signed legislation which made abortion legal in our nations largest state.
As governor, Reagan signed laws to create the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Air Resources Board, which regulates air emissions.
Why is there such a disconnect to the truth?
For the same reason @ 40% of America think Obama's doing a good job?
What has Reagan and his performance as President have to do with Obama?...
--- we aren't going back, so forget the sophistry.
Even a simple bean counter with an accountancy degree can figure out that the two have nothing in common.
If you are a supporter of Obama, the factual evidence pertaining to his performance (unless you are in denial) is ...
--- overwhelming negative...nothing Obama has done to date is a positive for the economy.
Blaming everything on Bush and "inherited policies and problems" is getting lame...
--- 3 years in and it is time to turn the ship around before it sinks.
@solidsnake02. It's tough to have an adult conversation when someone starts off by calling the other one a "kool-aid drinking moron".....but here's some data that is readily accessible to anyone with a search engine..
"Congress passed the 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act, which called for a 25% income tax reduction for all taxpayers. It also lowered corporate tax rates.
Due in large part to the tight money policies of the Federal Reserve (policies put into place to reduce inflation), the economy went into recession in 1981. By 1986 the nation was well into a 96-month-long economic recovery during which 20 million new jobs were created -- the longest peacetime expansion in modern American history. Inflation had fallen, as had interest rates. The stock market tripled in value. Unemployment was down. Government revenues doubled."
Also presided over winning the Cold War with no shots fired. Kinda important that we avoided WW III.
@sixyardsitko.....I brought up Reagan in order to show that Obama is not the first to inherit a recession yet their responses to it were completely different with polar opposite results.
I wasn't directing my comments towards you.
I was trying to motivate Matty to critically analyze what is occurring NOW....
--- rehashing what Lyndon Johnson did by creating Medicaid/Medicare (as an example) is futile.
But the word is that Bush Sr. ran the show and Reagan gave the kick ass speeches.
Now was that Anti-fed legislation passed before the assassination attempt or after?
Why the hell did Bush Sr. get his good buddy's son to try to kill Reagan?
That was really, really weird. Very risky, but Bush Sr. had a history of doing crazy things.
Now, it is very unfortunate that Reagan didn't get us back on the gold standard.
But I think that Bush and the Fed vetoed that thought.
Congressman Larry McDonald was going to run for president in 1988.
Bush didn't want him to gain any momentum, so he was killed in a black op on KAL flight 007.
It was named 007 for a reason. McDonald walked right into a trap.
Doubter: "No Lafortune, it was a coincidence"
Me: "No, damn-it! You listen here. Just try to think outside the box. Scrape that calcified fluoride from your pineal gland and use your damn critical thinking skills."
I think a lot of the cold war was just an act. I think that the US and the Soviets cooperated at the highest levels in secret, but put on a facade for the masses. The Hegelian Dialectic needs to be under control to properly control the masses. It worked out for both sides for a while, but we outlasted the soviets because they had a more expensive empire. So they lightened the load and they are Russia now. Russia is much stronger without the heavy load, now. Now, we have the massive empire and have gone bankrupt. It's all an act in a play. Empires rise and fall. Sometimes more happens in a year that happened in the previous decade. Enemies are created, enemies are destroyed. The controllers must keep things interesting to keep us distracted, afraid, and loyal.
*(There are people who say that flt 007 was forced to land and all surviving passengers were taken to siberian prison camps.) Not sure and don't claim to know, just wanted to mention that possibility.
Where are you getting this crap from?
We had to go off the gold standard because we didn't have enough gold...
--- pure and simple. Do the 3rd grade math.
As to Larry McDonald's unfortunate death, you are confusing the conspiracy...
--- try to at least get the conspiracy thread correct....The MIG shot it down because 007 violated Russian airspace.
By the way, McDonald never declared for Presidency, nor was it apparent he would do so.
There wasn't enough gold to print money endlessly to cause the inflation they wanted, true.
Don't tell me to do the math. Don't be so condescending and pretentious.
But if they didn't have those ridiculous designs, they'd have had plenty of gold.
Now, that they have been completely plundered, it's probably impossible.
The key is that this current system allows for royalty and robber baron super families to suck off of us without staking a thing. There gold is their private gold. They suck off of us and buy the gold for their personal fortunes. They don't have to put it up....and they won't. Not ever. We get the green cotton paper and they are all having a laugh about it.
You haven't heard about Bush Sr? That's ok.
Of course Larry McDonald hadn't declared to run for 88 in 83.
He was positioning himself to declare. He knew the real history of bush and viewed bush as the biggest threat to america. and he was correct.
I know about the official story that the sheep are told regarding 007. They'll buy anything. There is much much more to it. Don't you go getting yourself bamboozled again. Governments do cooperate to eliminate pesky patriots as you saw in poland recently. anti globalists are on the chopping block if you hadn't noticed.
This post was edited by lafortune on 8/25/2011 at 2:01 AM
"Poor Andy Defrane"
2 time POTW winner on some dates I can't remember from 2yrs ago at BNG,
POTW: 1/3/11- 1/9/11, 6/20/11-6/26/11
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports