Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That truly is a ludicrous point. Wasn't Obama about hope and CHANGE? Both parties aren't equally guilty. Reagan and Bush were pikers Compared to Obama. Why pick on these two? According to your logic, the first President to run a deficit was guilty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch
So now the US Constitution is a mere "technicality", eh? To bad you have never bothered to read the document, otherwise you would have discovered that Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the US Constitution states that the House of Representatives originates all budgets, not Presidents.
The point is OP has absolutely no clue how his own government functions, and apparently neither do you. Only a complete idiot thinks a President has the power to spend. Take a civics course and get a clue.
What you are experiencing is called "cognitive dissonance". You believe that Reagan is a great president because of his fiscally conservative policies, but the facts are that he was not fiscally conservative at all. This is causing you to feel discord that you must make sense of somehow.
Wiki's explanation - Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions.[2] Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
What you are experiencing is called "cognitive dissonance". You believe that Reagan is a great president because of his fiscally conservative policies, but the facts are that he was not fiscally conservative at all. This is causing you to feel discord that you must make sense of somehow.
Wiki's explanation - Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions.[2] Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
LOL, cute but of course doesn't answer my question at all. Come on, you can do it, we all know.
Actually, it makes perfect sense to fiscal conservatives, instead of partisan hacks. Both parties are guilty of out of control defecit spending. It started far before Reagan, and hasn't let up. Obama is just ramping up the irresponsibility of past presidents, starting in about 1932.
Actually, it doesn't make sense. This is fine example of moral equivalence of the left. 5 miles over the speed limit and 105 miles over the speed limit are the same.
I want to thank you for making out of control spending politically possible. I would never have been able to get away with spending so much had you not made massive spending increases politically possible through your sound arguments that deficits are good and that military spending is always justified.
I have been able to take these arguments to the American people to justify my own out of control spending. Of course, my predecessor George W. Bush helped, but he was merely emulating your spending patterns. Today our deficit is higher than it has ever been and I want to let you know that I owe you a debt of gratitude for being the Godfather of crazy spending.
Sincerely,
President Obama
I still hold out some hope that he will start working towards a balanced budget. But overall, I can't argue with this statement.
What you are experiencing is called "cognitive dissonance". You believe that Reagan is a great president because of his fiscally conservative policies, but the facts are that he was not fiscally conservative at all. This is causing you to feel discord that you must make sense of somehow.
In the words of President Reagan, "there you go again..." demonstrating your vast ignorance of US civics and making personal attacks like a good liberal freak. Repeat after me: Presidents do not spend, Congress spends. So why would I care whether a President is fiscally responsible or not?
President Reagan was able to get his tax cuts and increases in military spending that he wanted by giving the Democrat controlled Congress the increases in social spending that they wanted. What resulted was yet another Democrat controlled Congress that was completely out of control when it came to spending, and a President who signed six of their eight budgets because they gave him what he wanted.
In the words of President Reagan, "there you go again..." demonstrating your vast ignorance of US civics and making personal attacks like a good liberal freak. Repeat after me: Presidents do not spend, Congress spends. So why would I care whether a President is fiscally responsible or not?
President Reagan was able to get his tax cuts and increases in military spending that he wanted by giving the Democrat controlled Congress the increases in social spending that they wanted. What resulted was yet another Democrat controlled Congress that was completely out of control when it came to spending, and a President who signed six of their eight budgets because they gave him what he wanted.
And also managed to get those taxes increases he wanted too...
I guess the OP never heard of FDR's New Deal (that arguably prolonged the Great Depression) or LBJ's completely wasteful and ineffective 'War on Poverty'.
I guess the OP never heard of FDR's New Deal (that arguably prolonged the Great Depression) or LBJ's completely wasteful and ineffective 'War on Poverty'.
Yeah, Reagan started it all.
No, just that he started the precedent of overspending and deficits. How is that hard to comprehend? Why go off topic?
Not to mention bailouts, expansion of militarism, and helped to exacerbate the decline of the egalitarian society present in the mid-century.
Beyond rhetoric, how was Reagan any different from the others?
No, just that he started the precedent of overspending and deficits. How is that hard to comprehend? Why go off topic?
Not to mention bailouts, expansion of militarism, and helped to exacerbate the decline of the egalitarian society present in the mid-century.
Beyond rhetoric, how was Reagan any different from the others?
'Egalitarian society'? In the mid-century? Really? African-Americans (and for that matter Jewish-Americans) would love to you explain how we were an 'egalitarian society' back then. Once you get your foot out of your mouth we can talk about what 'militarism' means.
I want to thank you for making out of control spending politically possible. I would never have been able to get away with spending so much had you not made massive spending increases politically possible through your sound arguments that deficits are good and that military spending is always justified.
I have been able to take these arguments to the American people to justify my own out of control spending. Of course, my predecessor George W. Bush helped, but he was merely emulating your spending patterns. Today our deficit is higher than it has ever been and I want to let you know that I owe you a debt of gratitude for being the Godfather of crazy spending.
Sincerely,
President Obama
If you can blame Reagan for anything you can blame him for:
1. Spending such a large amount of money on technology that it outgrew population usage and left only the very brightest in very very specialized fields. The consequences are what used to be considered "complicated" technologically can now be easily replicated and mass produced in some of the poorest countries on the planet. The ability to fill the "intelligence" deficit needed to keep up with that growth has become impossible.
2. The possibility of missile defense. He told us all it would be very difficult and that:
"Free people must voluntarily, through open debate and democratic means, meet the challenge that totalitarians pose by compulsion. It's up to us, in our time, to choose and choose wisely between the hard but necessary task of preserving peace and freedom and the temptation to ignore our duty and blindly hope for the best while the enemies of freedom grow stronger day by day. "
3. 600 ship navy which was actually short a few. But some act like Reagan built all 600. He started with 538.
4. Not Reagan so much but William Casey for showing the CIA how to use the dollar as a weapon.
5. For using the same tactics that were tried and true for overthrowing other governments that the CIA had perfected, Hollywood style!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
