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.
The reason that Rs are losing influence is because they just want to constantly LIE and hope that somehow everyone's memory of things more than 2 years ago will fade, and that all video of the past will somehow disappear from the earth.
The most laughable thing I heard him say was the "Republicans got away from our principles". FTW? He (and every other R spokesman) pretends that W was a special case in big spending republicanism, he WASN'T. When Reagan came in the total debt was about ONE TRILLION, and Reagan claimed he was "shocked". 8 years later, under his "lean and mean" budgets the debt had doubled to TWO TRILLION. When Bush the elder actually tried to do something about the exploding debt the "base" of the party reviled him, leading to his defeat by Clinton.
Racism? An absolutely horrible and insulting performance by an Indian-American is still an absoultely horrible and insulting performance. Deal with it. You can go ahead and stick a fork in your boy...he's done...
When Reagan came in the total debt was about ONE TRILLION, and Reagan claimed he was "shocked". 8 years later, under his "lean and mean" budgets the debt had doubled to TWO TRILLION. When Bush the elder actually tried to do something about the exploding debt the "base" of the party reviled him, leading to his defeat by Clinton.
One trillion is pretty hefty, that is why Reagan tried to balance the budget. His obsession with expanding the defense budget was the thorn in his side. Yes, we did need to update our military, but Reagan went overboard with spending. He should have just enjoyed the tax revenue from the booming economy and sat on it.
However, Reagan's spending did help usher in the collapse of the USSR, ending the Cold War that brought about the deaths of many thousands of people worldwide. I prefer a leap in national debt, as opposed to hundreds of millions of deaths.
In an alternate world, Reagan would not have spend so much on defense, Bush would not have to incur the debt and have to raise taxes, and he would have enjoyed the economic growth resulting from the expanding dot com bubble such as Clinton did. Bush would have been re-elected in 1992, and Dole probably would have won in 1996.. So if I was a Democrat I would be thankful that Reagan spent so much money on defense, else Clinton, the hero of the Democratic party, might never have been elected.
What is it about southern Republicans? They find the biggest, loudest, dumbest fool available and let him shoot is mouth off in public. Is it shameful to be smart, educated and thoughtful in the south? I’m just asking.
However, Reagan's spending did help usher in the collapse of the USSR, ending the Cold War that brought about the deaths of many thousands of people worldwide.
Hogwash believed only by US right-wingers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117
In an alternate world....
In an alternate world, Andropov and Chernenko don't die so quickly, the Soviets decide (as they easily could have) to match any US military buildup, World War III results, and none of us is still here to sit around wondering how we could have been so dumb as to have elected such a reckless militarist just because he could persuasively play the role of kindly grandfather on TV....
, Reagan would not have spend so much on defense, Bush would not have to incur the debt and have to raise taxes, and he would have enjoyed the economic growth resulting from the expanding dot com bubble such as Clinton did. Bush would have been re-elected in 1992, and Dole probably would have won in 1996.. So if I was a Democrat I would be thankful that Reagan spent so much money on defense, else Clinton, the hero of the Democratic party, might never have been elected.[/quote]
I do not see how anyone with 'Keep the Illegals, Depot the Republicans' as their status line can be taken seriously, but here goes nothing:
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Hogwash believed only by US right-wingers.
Well, there must be a LOT of right-wingers not only in this country, but also worldwide, per your logic. A lot of people died because of the proxy conflict between the Soviets and the US.
Korean War - Over 2 million civilians killed, the US lost around 36,000
Vietnam War - Nearly 3 million civilians killed, and the US lost another 60,000
Soviet-Afghan War - 1 million civilians, ~30,000 additional casualties.
Are you still going to deny any deaths resulting from the conflict? Or are you also going to doubt Reagan's involvement, or are you just going to pass it off as 'hogwash' again?
Hell, what about the 80s oil glut, spurred on by Reagan? He managed to destroy the value of the #1 Soviet export, and once again helped bring about their collapse. If it wasn't for Reagan and later Gorbachev, maybe even the physcological effects of the SDI, we might still be in a Cold War with the USSR.
The war cost us around $8 trillion, and 100,000 thousand lives of our own troops. That kind of commitment would have tied our hands for many years to come, and you should be thankful that the Cold War fiasco has been over for so many years now..
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
In an alternate world, Andropov and Chernenko don't die so quickly, the Soviets decide (as they easily could have) to match any US military buildup
Except they could not. They were already suffereing from the same symptoms of stagflation as the United States was in the late 1970s. The Soviets never matched our technological advances, they only built up their numerical advantage. And based on their economy at the time, it would have brought about their collapse even sooner.
But then again, the US military was nothing compared to that of the USSR by 1980. However, once we stepped up develompent again, the USSR was unable to compete.
What is it about southern Republicans? They find the biggest, loudest, dumbest fool available and let him shoot is mouth off in public. Is it shameful to be smart, educated and thoughtful in the south? I’m just asking.
Jindal is not lieing. He just does not remember.
What is it about Northeastern Republicans? Three of them would betray the party and go along with the porkapalooza bill while all the other Republicans held strong in their opposition to it..
What is it about Northeastern Republicans? Three of them would betray the party and go along with the porkapalooza bill while all the other Republicans held strong in their opposition to it..
You just don't get it do you. The 3 Republicans were desiginated hitters by the Republican party to secure passage of this bill. The Republicans WANTED this bill to pass but they did not want their fingerprints on it. Overall they want to secure plausable deniability.
This is politics as usual, Republican 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.
The 3 Republicans were desiginated hitters by the Republican party to secure passage of this bill. The Republicans WANTED this bill to pass but they did not want their fingerprints on it.
Overall they want to secure plausable deniability. 
