Jump to content

10 things conservatives don't want you to know about Ronald Reagan


Recommended Posts

10 things conservatives don't want you to know about Ronald Reagan

 

 

Warning CON-SCUM this post contains FACTS and LINKS!

 

1. Reagan was a serial tax raiser. As governor of California, Reagan “signed into law the largest tax increase in the history of any state up till then.” Meanwhile, state spending nearly doubled. As president, Reagan “raised taxes in seven of his eight years in office,” including four times in just two years. As former GOP Senator Alan Simpson, who called Reagan “a dear friend,” told NPR, “Ronald Reagan raised taxes 11 times in his administration — I was there.” “Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes,” said historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan’s memoir. Reagan the anti-tax zealot is “false mythology,” Brinkley said.

 

 

2. Reagan nearly tripled the federal budget deficit.
During the Reagan years, the debt increased to nearly $3 trillion, “
as much as the first 80 years of the century had done altogether.” Reagan enacted a major tax cut his first year in office and government revenue dropped off precipitously. Despite the conservative myth that tax cuts somehow increase revenue, the government went deeper into debt and Reagan had to raise taxes just a year after he enacted his tax cut. Despite ten more tax hikes on everything from gasoline to corporate income, Reagan was
to get the deficit under control.

3. Unemployment soared after Reagan’s 1981 tax cuts.
Unemployment
after Reagan enacted his much-touted tax cut, and it took years for the rate to get back down to its previous level. Meanwhile,
income inequality exploded
. Despite the myth that Reagan presided over an era of unmatched economic boom for all Americans, Reagan
the poor and middle class, but the economic growth of the 1980’s did little help them. “Since 1980, median household income has risen only 30 percent, adjusted for inflation, while average incomes at the top have tripled or quadrupled,” the New York Times’
.

4. Reagan grew the size of the federal government tremendously.
Reagan promised “to move boldly, decisively, and quickly to control the
,” but federal spending “
” under Reagan. He bailed out Social Security in 1983 after attempting to privatize it, and set up a progressive taxation system to keep it funded into the future. He promised to cut government agencies like the Department of Energy and Education but ended up
adding
one of the largest — the
, which today has a budget of nearly $90 billion and close to
. He also
by over $100 billion a year to a level not seen since the height of the Vietnam war.

5. Reagan did little to fight a woman’s right to choose.
As governor of California in 1967, Reagan signed a bill to liberalize the state’s abortion laws that “
.” When Reagan ran for president, he advocated a constitutional amendment that would have prohibited all abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother, but once in office, he “
” curbing choice.

MORE TO FOLLOW...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reagan was a duddering old fool.

A B actor who never exceeded that level of mediocrity.

He was like Trump ..always took credit for others doing the work.

Many of you may not be old enough to see this corrupt presidency up close and personal. Still has the record of most indictments and convictions of any administration in history.

Most corrupt ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus ronnie ray-gun is the one who implemented the taxing of SS benefits in 1983. That's on him. His massive tax cut for the wealthy didn't work out to well, he needed money from somewhere and Social Security got taxed.

 

reagan-fondling_zpsa2ygcjyy.jpg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6. Reagan was a “bellicose peacenik.” He wrote in his memoirs that “[m]y dream…became a world free of nuclear weapons.” “This vision stemmed from the president’s belief that the biblical account of Armageddon prophesied nuclear war — and that apocalypse could be averted if everyone, especially the Soviets, eliminated nuclear weapons,” the Washington Monthly noted. And Reagan’s military buildup was meant to crush the Soviet Union, but “also to put the United States in a stronger position from which to establish effective arms control” for the the entire world — a vision acted out by Regean’s vice president, George H.W. Bush, when he became president.

7. Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants. Reagan signed into law a bill that made any immigrant who had entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty. The bill was sold as a crackdown, but its tough sanctions on employers who hired undocumented immigrants were removed before final passage. The bill helped 3 million people and millions more family members gain American residency. It has since become a source of major embarrassment for conservatives.

8. Reagan illegally funneled weapons to Iran. Reagan and other senior U.S. officials secretly sold arms to officials in Iran, which was subject to a an arms embargo at the time, in exchange for American hostages. Some funds from the illegal arms sales also went to fund anti-Communist rebels in Nicaragua — something Congress had already prohibited the administration from doing. When the deals went public, the Iran-Contra Affair, as it came to be know, was an enormous political scandal that forced several senior administration officials to resign.

9. Reagan vetoed a comprehensive anti-Apartheid act. which placed sanctions on South Africa and cut off all American trade with the country. Reagan’s veto was overridden by the Republican-controlled Senate. Reagan responded by saying “I deeply regret that Congress has seen fit to override my veto,” saying that the law “will not solve the serious problems that plague that country.”

10. Reagan helped create the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. Reagan fought a proxy war with the Soviet Union by training, arming, equipping, and funding Islamist mujahidin fighters in Afghanistan. Reagan funneled billions of dollars, along with top-secret intelligence and sophisticated weaponry to these fighters through the Pakistani intelligence service. The Talbian and Osama Bin Laden — a prominent mujahidin commander — emerged from these mujahidin groups Reagan helped create, and U.S. policy towards Pakistan remains strained because of the intelligence services’ close relations to these fighters. In fact, Reagan’s decision to continue the proxy war after the Soviets were willing to retreat played a direct role in Bin Laden’s ascendancy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reagan wasn't bad compared to slime like Bush 1 and 2, Romney and now Trump and his pedophile partner Pence.

 

Right after Reagan signed the windfall profits tax on oil companies he was targeted for assassination. Google Reagan Assassination Bush Connection.

 

Reagan was smarter than both Bushes but like Bush 1 and 2 he was a borrow and spender. He was not a war monger like Bush 1 and 2 and he understood the futility of getting involved in the Middle East and that is why he "cut and ran" after the Bierut bombing.

 

I have posted Reagan's policies and quotes on other forums and today's CONS call him a commie when they don't know that it is Reagan. Reagan certainly was not a fiscal conservative and Bill Clinton was

 

Overall, Reagan was a social moderate and a borrow and spender. He was everything CONS say they hate.

 

Friends of Liberty - Ronald Reagan's Liberal Legacy

 

The fact is, the Clintons are center right and the Trump is crazier than a shit house rat and a fascist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Reagan was a serial tax raiser. As governor of California, Reagan “signed into law the largest tax increase in the history of any state up till then.” Meanwhile, state spending nearly doubled. As president, Reagan “raised taxes in seven of his eight years in office,” including four times in just two years. As former GOP Senator Alan Simpson, who called Reagan “a dear friend,” told NPR, “Ronald Reagan raised taxes 11 times in his administration — I was there.”

HOWEVER, if you sum up the effect of the various tax measures during the Reagan years, all told, the tax burden was reduced significantly by Reagan (not increased, as it has been under Obama). Raising taxes is NOT what got the economy going under Reagan. It was cutting them and regulations which Reagan most certainly did. When Reagan did finally increase certain taxes, the amount of those taxes ($214 billion over the next five years) was small potatoes in an economy that would grow over $1.5 TRILLION in that same 5 year period because of earlier cuts in taxes and regulations. The tax burden as a percentage of GDP went down.

 

2. Reagan nearly tripled the federal budget deficit. During the Reagan years, the debt increased to nearly $3 trillion, “roughly three times as much as the first 80 years of the century had done altogether.”

HOWEVER, almost all economists (even the liberal ones at the time) agreed that the debt under Reagan was sustainable. Not so, under Obama, where even his own economic advisors have warned that the ratio of debt to GDP he's created is unsustainable. And who was it who really ran up the deficits under Reagan anyway? Reagan predicted a reduction in the federal deficit based on the premise that Democrats (who controlled Congress at the time) would abide by an agreement they'd made with him to cut government spending (see for example, http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/20/us/reagan-planning-to-cut-spending-on-deadline-today.html). But they didn't, they reneged on that promise. So if anyone is really responsible for the deficit/debt increasing under Reagan, it would appear to be Democrats. Furthermore, Reagan's increase in the debt ratio was of a completely different character than Obama's increase. Reagan was fighting the Cold War and we weren't going to win that war without spending. And it needed to be won. Just like WW2 needed to be won (another time when the debt/GDP ratio climbed dramatically. But once the Cold War was won, that spending could go down … as opposed to the way *entitlement* programs, that Obama and Democrats so love, work. Entitlement spending goes on forever ... until bankruptcy. Just ask Greece. And when Republicans did finally meet a Democrat (Clinton) who was willing to cut entitlement spending (somewhat) and there was a period with no major war (thanks to Reagan's Cold War victory) and terrorism was not a threat (thanks to Reagan's policy in dealing with terrorists … just ask Gaddafi), the ratio stabilized and then went down (that is, after Republicans took back control of Congress under Gingrich). The cause of Reagan's debt increase was of a different character than Obama's. It could have been a temporary. Unfortunately, President Clinton then took his eyes off the ball (too much philandering going on, I suspect) and allowed the terrorist threat to grow to dangerous levels ... leading to once again the requirement for massive spending to fight that threat. And of course, it was George Bush (Jr) who was left that task. But again, even that spending would have been temporary … if we had properly finished the job in Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan, rather than pulling out prematurely, as Obama has and is now still doing. Obama is letting the terror threat return. And there will be expensive consequences for that. Just watch. And look what has happened to that debt as a % of GDP ratio under Obama even without considering those renewed threats? Thanks to his entitlement and misguided/bogus stimulus efforts, even his own economic experts have said that ratio has become completely unsustainable. And Hillary wants to make it even worse. Talk about Stuck On Stupid.

 

3. Unemployment soared after Reagan’s 1981 tax cuts. Unemploymentjumped to 10.8 percent after Reagan enacted his much-touted tax cut, and it took years for the rate to get back down to its previous level. Meanwhile, income inequality exploded.

HOWEVER, Reaganomics turned a 7.5% unemployment rate at the beginning of his administration into a 5% unemployment rate, and did this with the labor force participation rate going UP from 64% to 66%, not DOWN 2% like it has under Obama (which is why his unemployment number improvements are just another scam). The problem now is that the lessons of Reaganomics have been forgotten and abandoned, primarily because liberals never seem to learn from history. As for income inequality, blacks did much better under Reagan than they’ve done under Obama. Just saying …

 

4. Reagan grew the size of the federal government tremendously. Reagan promised “to move boldly, decisively, and quickly to control the runaway growth of federal spending,” but federal spending “ballooned” under Reagan.

HOWEVER, see the NYTimes article I liked above as to who was responsible for that? Democrats.

 

He bailed out Social Security in 1983 after attempting to privatize it, and set up a progressive taxation system to keep it funded into the future.

If only progressives like you hadn’t gotten in the way of privatizing SS. Here’s how it likely would have turned out … http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/south-america/item/10521-chile-s-privatized-social-security-program-is-30-years-old-and-prospering “Chile’s Privatized Social Security Program is 30 Years Old, and Prospering”. If only he hadn’t been demagogued into supporting Social Security’s theft of so many Americans’ futures. Yes indeed, this is one area where Reagan deserves to be castigated. Because he let Democrats talk him into continuing a bad idea.

 

5. Reagan did little to fight a woman’s right to choose. As governor of California in 1967, Reagan signed a bill to liberalize the state’s abortion laws that “resulted in more than a million abortions.”

And you’re complaining about this? Heck, you want to elect a woman who supports this so bad you will turn a blind eye to ANY crime she committed OR COMMITS. Now what you are glossing over is the fact that Reagan felt guilt at the unintended consequences of his action on abortion back then. All that is documented in this article (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/223437/reagans-darkest-hour-paul-kengor-patricia-clark-doerner ). But in any case, it might come as a shock to you *Hound*, but many of us conservatives aren’t opposed to what Reagan did on this issue. We aren’t one topic voters like so many of you on the left. We aren’t like the leftist women of NOW, who argued it was ok if Bill raped women … as long as he was a friend when it came to abortion. Just saying …

 

6. Reagan was a “bellicose peacenik.” He wrote in his memoirs that “[m]y dream…became a world free of nuclear weapons.” “This vision stemmed from the president’s belief that the biblical account of Armageddon prophesied nuclear war — and that apocalypse could be averted if everyone, especially the Soviets, eliminated nuclear weapons,” the Washington Monthly noted. And Reagan’s military buildup was meant to crush the Soviet Union, but “also to put the United States in a stronger position from which to establish effective arms control” for the the entire world — a vision acted out by Regean’s vice president, George H.W. Bush, when he became president.

I’m not sure why you think what Reagan did is bad, *Hound*. Isn’t Obama trying to rid the world of nuclear weapons? And aren’t most people in the military “peaceniks”? Or didn’t you know that? In any case, Reagan’s idea on Star Wars is one area where I significantly disagreed with him. You can read my posts elsewhere on this forum on why I think a world free of nuclear weapons would be a VERY BAD IDEA and why I viewed Star Wars, in particular, as increasing the likelihood of nuclear war with the Soviets, not decreasing it. But all in all, I think Reagan was very good for the military and America’s national defense, and bad for the Soviets and Chinese.

 

7. Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants. Reagan signed into law a bill that made any immigrant who had entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty. The bill was sold as a crackdown, but its tough sanctions on employers who hired undocumented immigrants were removed before final passage. The bill helped 3 million people and millions more family members gain American residency.

I’m really not sure what you think you accomplishing, *Hound*, by attacking Reagan for doing things that your party FULLY SUPPORTS? Truth is, had later DemocRATS enforced the provisions of the law that Reagan helped enact where border security and penalties for hiring illegals are concerned, illegal immigration would likely not be the problem it has become today. And now, hopefully, under Trump we will do what we should have done back then … build a wall. A big beautiful wall. Since politicians of both parties seem incapable of enforcing laws. Be they having to do with immigration … or national security. :D

 

8. Reagan illegally funneled weapons to Iran. Reagan and other senior U.S. officials secretly sold arms to officials in Iran, which was subject to an arms embargo at the time, in exchange for American hostages. Some funds from the illegal arms sales also went to fund anti-Communist rebels in Nicaragua — something Congress had already prohibited the administration from doing. When the deals went public, the Iran-Contra Affair, as it came to be know, was an enormous political scandal that forced several senior administration officials to resign.

What do you mean conservatives don’t want you to know about this? Because we were part of the solution. Unlike you DemocRATS with regards to what Obama and Hillary have done in Libya, Syria and Iran of a similar nature, Republicans both investigated and punished the Reagan administration in these earlier scandals. You Hillary/Obama sycophants are always chanting “where are the indictments” in defense of Obama’s and Hillary’s activities. Well in these Reagan era scandals there were 14 CONVICTIONS because of Iran-Contra. During a time when Congress, the FBI and the DOJ were controlled by REPUBLICANS. I’m PROUD that Republicans back then stood up and did the right thing. I’m PROUD that Republicans forced Nixon to resign for his crimes or face impeachment BY REPUBLICANS. If only DemocRATS today were A TENTH as interested in upholding our laws and doing what’s right. But they aren’t, which is in large part why we’ve now become a banana republic.

 

9. Reagan vetoed a comprehensive anti-Apartheid act. which placed sanctions on South Africa and cut off all American trade with the country. Reagan’s veto was overridden by the Republican-controlled Senate. Reagan responded by saying “I deeply regret that Congress has seen fit to override my veto,” saying that the law “will not solve the serious problems that plague that country.”

Again, unlike Obama, Reagan didn’t have the luxury of being a one issue President. Race wasn’t the only thing that mattered … the only thing he had had to worry about … at that moment in history. Unlike you folks, he actually was (rightly) concerned about communism and it’s spread. We were engaged in a HUGE war (albeit a cold war) against the Soviets over that issue. In THAT struggle, the government of South Africa was an important US ally. The folks who took over after that government fell were and are communists. Reagan was a lot like Lincoln. He didn’t like apartheid (you can read his writings) just as Lincoln didn’t like slavery. But like Lincoln, he saw the bigger picture. Lincoln didn’t start out fighting the Civil War to free the slaves. He did it to preserve the Republic. Reagan vetoed that act because he was more focused on fighting Soviet aggression (a war he eventually won, just like Lincoln won his). As Reagan said after his veto, the debate wasn’t about “whether or not to oppose apartheid but, instead, how best to oppose it and how best to bring freedom to that troubled country." Soviets were a threat to EVERYONES freedom. Just saying …

 

10. Reagan helped create the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. Reagan fought a proxy war with the Soviet Union by training, arming, equipping, and funding Islamist mujahidin fighters in Afghanistan. Reagan funneled billions of dollars, along with top-secret intelligence and sophisticated weaponry to these fighters through the Pakistani intelligence service. The Talbian and Osama Bin Laden — a prominent mujahidin commander — emerged from these mujahidin groups Reagan helped create, and U.S. policy towards Pakistan remains strained because of the intelligence services’ close relations to these fighters. In fact, Reagan’s decision to continue the proxy war after the Soviets were willing to retreat played a direct role in Bin Laden’s ascendancy.

And what would you have done, Hound? Let the Soviets take over Afghanistan? And what country would you have next sacrificed to the Soviets? Hmmmmm? And your version of history is full of mistakes. Carter was the first to provide money to the Afghan resistance. It was a Democrat controlled US Congress that decided to form a partnership with Pakistan’s ISI and recruit Mujahideen to fight the Soviets. They even made a movie about that. Yes, Reagan vigorously supported the effort but he didn’t instigate it. Once the Soviets retreated, the US lost interest and pulled the funding for the Mujahadin (one year after the Soviet withdrawal). Others (Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait) keep the Mujahidin funded. It was after that, an action you modern DemocRATS would no doubt approve, that bin Laden filled the vacuum and the Taliban was formed, led by Afghan Arabs. In fact, a major cause of that was the US coalition to stop Iraq after their invasion of Kuwait. That is when they stopped looking to the Saudis and Kuwait for support and went to Iran, Libya and Iraq for support. Here’s a more thoughtful analysis of the origin of the Taliban (http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/who-is-responsible-for-the-taliban ). And we no more created bin Laden then we created the Taliban. Just saying …

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HOWEVER, if you sum up the effect of the various tax measures during the Reagan years, all told, the tax burden was reduced significantly by Reagan (not increased, as it has been under Obama). Raising taxes is NOT what got the economy going under Reagan. It was cutting them and regulations which Reagan most certainly did. When Reagan did finally increase certain taxes, the amount of those taxes ($214 billion over the next five years) was small potatoes in an economy that would grow over $1.5 TRILLION in that same 5 year period because of earlier cuts in taxes and regulations. The tax burden as a percentage of GDP went down.

 

HOWEVER, almost all economists (even the liberal ones at the time) agreed that the debt under Reagan was sustainable. Not so, under Obama, where even his own economic advisors have warned that the ratio of debt to GDP he's created is unsustainable. And who was it who really ran up the deficits under Reagan anyway? Reagan predicted a reduction in the federal deficit based on the premise that Democrats (who controlled Congress at the time) would abide by an agreement they'd made with him to cut government spending (see for example, http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/20/us/reagan-planning-to-cut-spending-on-deadline-today.html). But they didn't, they reneged on that promise. So if anyone is really responsible for the deficit/debt increasing under Reagan, it would appear to be Democrats. Furthermore, Reagan's increase in the debt ratio was of a completely different character than Obama's increase. Reagan was fighting the Cold War and we weren't going to win that war without spending. And it needed to be won. Just like WW2 needed to be won (another time when the debt/GDP ratio climbed dramatically. But once the Cold War was won, that spending could go down … as opposed to the way *entitlement* programs, that Obama and Democrats so love, work. Entitlement spending goes on forever ... until bankruptcy. Just ask Greece. And when Republicans did finally meet a Democrat (Clinton) who was willing to cut entitlement spending (somewhat) and there was a period with no major war (thanks to Reagan's Cold War victory) and terrorism was not a threat (thanks to Reagan's policy in dealing with terrorists … just ask Gaddafi), the ratio stabilized and then went down (that is, after Republicans took back control of Congress under Gingrich). The cause of Reagan's debt increase was of a different character than Obama's. It could have been a temporary. Unfortunately, President Clinton then took his eyes off the ball (too much philandering going on, I suspect) and allowed the terrorist threat to grow to dangerous levels ... leading to once again the requirement for massive spending to fight that threat. And of course, it was George Bush (Jr) who was left that task. But again, even that spending would have been temporary … if we had properly finished the job in Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan, rather than pulling out prematurely, as Obama has and is now still doing. Obama is letting the terror threat return. And there will be expensive consequences for that. Just watch. And look what has happened to that debt as a % of GDP ratio under Obama even without considering those renewed threats? Thanks to his entitlement and misguided/bogus stimulus efforts, even his own economic experts have said that ratio has become completely unsustainable. And Hillary wants to make it even worse. Talk about Stuck On Stupid.

 

HOWEVER, Reaganomics turned a 7.5% unemployment rate at the beginning of his administration into a 5% unemployment rate, and did this with the labor force participation rate going UP from 64% to 66%, not DOWN 2% like it has under Obama (which is why his unemployment number improvements are just another scam). The problem now is that the lessons of Reaganomics have been forgotten and abandoned, primarily because liberals never seem to learn from history. As for income inequality, blacks did much better under Reagan than they’ve done under Obama. Just saying …

 

HOWEVER, see the NYTimes article I liked above as to who was responsible for that? Democrats.

 

If only progressives like you hadn’t gotten in the way of privatizing SS. Here’s how it likely would have turned out … http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/south-america/item/10521-chile-s-privatized-social-security-program-is-30-years-old-and-prospering “Chile’s Privatized Social Security Program is 30 Years Old, and Prospering”. If only he hadn’t been demagogued into supporting Social Security’s theft of so many Americans’ futures. Yes indeed, this is one area where Reagan deserves to be castigated. Because he let Democrats talk him into continuing a bad idea.

 

And you’re complaining about this? Heck, you want to elect a woman who supports this so bad you will turn a blind eye to ANY crime she committed OR COMMITS. Now what you are glossing over is the fact that Reagan felt guilt at the unintended consequences of his action on abortion back then. All that is documented in this article (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/223437/reagans-darkest-hour-paul-kengor-patricia-clark-doerner ). But in any case, it might come as a shock to you *Hound*, but many of us conservatives aren’t opposed to what Reagan did on this issue. We aren’t one topic voters like so many of you on the left. We aren’t like the leftist women of NOW, who argued it was ok if Bill raped women … as long as he was a friend when it came to abortion. Just saying …

 

I’m not sure why you think what Reagan did is bad, *Hound*. Isn’t Obama trying to rid the world of nuclear weapons? And aren’t most people in the military “peaceniks”? Or didn’t you know that? In any case, Reagan’s idea on Star Wars is one area where I significantly disagreed with him. You can read my posts elsewhere on this forum on why I think a world free of nuclear weapons would be a VERY BAD IDEA and why I viewed Star Wars, in particular, as increasing the likelihood of nuclear war with the Soviets, not decreasing it. But all in all, I think Reagan was very good for the military and America’s national defense, and bad for the Soviets and Chinese.

 

I’m really not sure what you think you accomplishing, *Hound*, by attacking Reagan for doing things that your party FULLY SUPPORTS? Truth is, had later DemocRATS enforced the provisions of the law that Reagan helped enact where border security and penalties for hiring illegals are concerned, illegal immigration would likely not be the problem it has become today. And now, hopefully, under Trump we will do what we should have done back then … build a wall. A big beautiful wall. Since politicians of both parties seem incapable of enforcing laws. Be they having to do with immigration … or national security. :D

 

What do you mean conservatives don’t want you to know about this? Because we were part of the solution. Unlike you DemocRATS with regards to what Obama and Hillary have done in Libya, Syria and Iran of a similar nature, Republicans both investigated and punished the Reagan administration in these earlier scandals. You Hillary/Obama sycophants are always chanting “where are the indictments” in defense of Obama’s and Hillary’s activities. Well in these Reagan era scandals there were 14 CONVICTIONS because of Iran-Contra. During a time when Congress, the FBI and the DOJ were controlled by REPUBLICANS. I’m PROUD that Republicans back then stood up and did the right thing. I’m PROUD that Republicans forced Nixon to resign for his crimes or face impeachment BY REPUBLICANS. If only DemocRATS today were A TENTH as interested in upholding our laws and doing what’s right. But they aren’t, which is in large part why we’ve now become a banana republic.

 

Again, unlike Obama, Reagan didn’t have the luxury of being a one issue President. Race wasn’t the only thing that mattered … the only thing he had had to worry about … at that moment in history. Unlike you folks, he actually was (rightly) concerned about communism and it’s spread. We were engaged in a HUGE war (albeit a cold war) against the Soviets over that issue. In THAT struggle, the government of South Africa was an important US ally. The folks who took over after that government fell were and are communists. Reagan was a lot like Lincoln. He didn’t like apartheid (you can read his writings) just as Lincoln didn’t like slavery. But like Lincoln, he saw the bigger picture. Lincoln didn’t start out fighting the Civil War to free the slaves. He did it to preserve the Republic. Reagan vetoed that act because he was more focused on fighting Soviet aggression (a war he eventually won, just like Lincoln won his). As Reagan said after his veto, the debate wasn’t about “whether or not to oppose apartheid but, instead, how best to oppose it and how best to bring freedom to that troubled country." Soviets were a threat to EVERYONES freedom. Just saying …

 

And what would you have done, Hound? Let the Soviets take over Afghanistan? And what country would you have next sacrificed to the Soviets? Hmmmmm? And your version of history is full of mistakes. Carter was the first to provide money to the Afghan resistance. It was a Democrat controlled US Congress that decided to form a partnership with Pakistan’s ISI and recruit Mujahideen to fight the Soviets. They even made a movie about that. Yes, Reagan vigorously supported the effort but he didn’t instigate it. Once the Soviets retreated, the US lost interest and pulled the funding for the Mujahadin (one year after the Soviet withdrawal). Others (Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait) keep the Mujahidin funded. It was after that, an action you modern DemocRATS would no doubt approve, that bin Laden filled the vacuum and the Taliban was formed, led by Afghan Arabs. In fact, a major cause of that was the US coalition to stop Iraq after their invasion of Kuwait. That is when they stopped looking to the Saudis and Kuwait for support and went to Iran, Libya and Iraq for support. Here’s a more thoughtful analysis of the origin of the Taliban (http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/who-is-responsible-for-the-taliban ). And we no more created bin Laden then we created the Taliban. Just saying …

 

 

Well done.

 

The spin from the SOKhound proves he's really just dipshitnow.

 

Tip ONeill and the dimRats spent up all the tax money Reagan got and made headway in buying up loyalty from the lower classes.

 

 

 

"The conventional viewpoint says we need a jobs program and we need to cut welfare. Just the opposite! We need more welfare and fewer jobs." - Gov Moonbeam Brown.

 

 

kj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...