protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 57,429
- 18,520
- 2,250
Reagan Neocon? Why do so many people use that term without knowing what it meant. Reagan was a fiscal conservative, he wasn't a big government spender.
What was even his military use that justifies the label? Grenada? OK, he toppled the government, but clearly nation building was not his primary objective in selecting an Island in the Caribbean to topple a Communist government. He didn't topple Lebanon even though he was involved in it. He didn't topple Libya, he just retaliated against them for terrorism like the German disco attack. He wrecked the USSR financially.
You realize "Neocon" has an actual definition. How does it make sense more than tangentially to Reagan?
Who are you talking to ???????????![]()
I was talking to you. I wrote a great rebuttal ... to a point you didn't make. I thought you called him a neo-conservative, you called him a non-conservative. Yes, I do have reading glasses, no, I wasn't wearing them. I'm not sure I agree with your view, but I do understand your confusion. Damn, one letter is one letter off, and yet such a different meaning. I need to be punished...
Bad kaz, read better, bad kaz! Twenty lashes for you...
![]()
No harm done. We all mistakes. At least you're not makin them on every post, like all the design-of-nature refuters on this board.
As for Reagan's non-Conservatism, well, first one must have a distinct perception of what REAL Conservatism is. This might vary from person to person, but the biggest distinction is a generational one. In general, I've found that people under 40, who call themselves Conservatives, are what I call Psuedo-Conservatives (or Reaganists). They are too young to remember the days before Reagan lowered the marginal individual tax (top bracket) down to 28%, and it's never risen above 39.6% since. Before Reagan though, that tax varied from 70-94%. Reagan singlehandedly changed the definition of Conservative from it's true definition (CONSERVING America's values, principles and culture, and providing a strong National Defense and infrastructure), to one of simply protecting the fortunes of the super rich from taxation, thereby supporting a small, weak govt, with low taxes and low spending. Quite amazing how one greedy guy with one of the highest employee incomes in America, could change an entire national political philosophy, just to pad his own pocket.
Maybe the best way to show the distinction between Reagan's non-Conservatism and REAL Conservatism is to compare him to a REAL conservative and observe the stark difference. For the REAL Conservative, I'll choose the guy in my avatar > Dwight D. Eisenhower.
1. For his whole 8 years of presidency, the top bracket tax was never less than 91%. This supported the FBI, the CIA, INS, DEA, all the military, etc. Reagan lowered this tax to 28%.
2. Eisenhower created the US interstate highway system, while under Reagan's admin, infrastructure was largely ignored.
3. Eisenhower chased huge numbers of illegal aliens back to Mexico, with his Operation Wetback in 1954. 32 years later, Reagan gave them amnesty.
4. Eisenhower did and said nothing to support homosexuals. Reagan condemned the Briggs initiative in California, helping to prevent the law which would have kept queers out of schools.
5. Lastly, while Ike, as Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe in World War II, was grinding his way across Germany, and on his way to victory in Berlin, in 1945, Reagan was in Hollywood making movies about it.
Last edited: