Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And this is the problem.
The REAL Reagan tripled the debt, raised taxes after cutting them, dramatically increased government spending, appointed moderates to the courts, gave amnesty to 3 million illegal aliens, and did dozens of other things that Republicans would never forgive a Bush for.
But he gave a really pretty speech in Berlin and a few years later, the wall came down.
And thus a legend is born.
We can explain it as many time as we need to: Reagan had to work with a Democrat Controlled congress who lied to him and the people about cutting spending
Coming up with excuses is not the same as explaining. Coming up with excuses is what one does when one can not explain or justify.
[
We can explain it as many time as we need to: Reagan had to work with a Democrat Controlled congress who lied to him and the people about cutting spending
We can explain it as many time as we need to: Reagan had to work with a Democrat Controlled congress who lied to him and the people about cutting spending
Coming up with excuses is not the same as explaining. Coming up with excuses is what one does when one can not explain or justify.
It's not an "excuse"...Reagan's deal with Tip O'Neil to cut spending was one that Democrats later reneged on. That's a fact.
[
We can explain it as many time as we need to: Reagan had to work with a Democrat Controlled congress who lied to him and the people about cutting spending
No, not really. the only difference between Reagan's numbers and the Democrats numbers is that Reagan wanted to spend more on defense, and the Democrats wanted to spend more on social programs, but BOTH increased dramatically on Reagan's watch while revenues shrank.
[
We can explain it as many time as we need to: Reagan had to work with a Democrat Controlled congress who lied to him and the people about cutting spending
No, not really. the only difference between Reagan's numbers and the Democrats numbers is that Reagan wanted to spend more on defense, and the Democrats wanted to spend more on social programs, but BOTH increased dramatically on Reagan's watch while revenues shrank.
Revenues "shrank"?
How do you define "Shrank"?
No, not really. the only difference between Reagan's numbers and the Democrats numbers is that Reagan wanted to spend more on defense, and the Democrats wanted to spend more on social programs, but BOTH increased dramatically on Reagan's watch while revenues shrank.
Revenues "shrank"?
How do you define "Shrank"?
You know. We went from 1 Trillion in debt in the first 200 years of our history to 4 trillion when Ray-Gun left office in an Alzheimer's induced daze.
Why did the Republican majority senate pass the house's spending bills?That might be true, Joe but it doesn't change the fact that Reagan and Tip O'Neil worked out a compromise that the Democratically controlled House then reneged on. If the cuts had been done per the agreement reached, Reagan wouldn't have spent as much.
What happened between Reagan and the Democrats underscores one of the problems that we now face...conservatives don't trust liberals to keep their word because quite frankly, they've been burned before when doing so. When Harry Reid says that he needs a "clean bill" and THEN he'll be ready to negotiate on anything...conservatives (from experience) don't believe him. They think that ole' Harry will get what he wanted and then give zero in return.
No, not really. the only difference between Reagan's numbers and the Democrats numbers is that Reagan wanted to spend more on defense, and the Democrats wanted to spend more on social programs, but BOTH increased dramatically on Reagan's watch while revenues shrank.
Revenues "shrank"?
How do you define "Shrank"?
You know. We went from 1 Trillion in debt in the first 200 years of our history to 4 trillion when Ray-Gun left office in an Alzheimer's induced daze.
Revenues "shrank"?
How do you define "Shrank"?
You know. We went from 1 Trillion in debt in the first 200 years of our history to 4 trillion when Ray-Gun left office in an Alzheimer's induced daze.
Revenue didn't "shrank." However, it did not grow as fast as it should have given the economic expansion.
Lol how droll do you not know anything but what is spoon fed you why you for ever going to be ignorant but actually happened but you're young still and too f****** stupid to realize what the 80's actually were like
I was there. Spent large amounts of time and money helping fight the Agent Orange battle with the Reagan Administration and finding shelter for homeless vet's.
Uh huh. Agent Orange. Sure. Paraquat too, amiright?
Why did the Republican majority senate pass the house's spending bills?That might be true, Joe but it doesn't change the fact that Reagan and Tip O'Neil worked out a compromise that the Democratically controlled House then reneged on. If the cuts had been done per the agreement reached, Reagan wouldn't have spent as much.
What happened between Reagan and the Democrats underscores one of the problems that we now face...conservatives don't trust liberals to keep their word because quite frankly, they've been burned before when doing so. When Harry Reid says that he needs a "clean bill" and THEN he'll be ready to negotiate on anything...conservatives (from experience) don't believe him. They think that ole' Harry will get what he wanted and then give zero in return.
Why didn't Reagan veto the spending bills you claim he was against? or did he veto them and congress over rode the vetoes with 2/3 rds voting to do such?
[
You're confusing the US economy with the federal government. The economy did great under Reagan
[quo
Unlike Barack Obama...Ronald Reagan understood that in order for a divided government to function each side had to make compromises. Reagan had a good working relationship with Tip O'Neil throughout his Presidency. Obama doesn't even understand the concept.
Revenues "shrank"?
How do you define "Shrank"?
You know. We went from 1 Trillion in debt in the first 200 years of our history to 4 trillion when Ray-Gun left office in an Alzheimer's induced daze.
Revenues shrank?
[quo
Unlike Barack Obama...Ronald Reagan understood that in order for a divided government to function each side had to make compromises. Reagan had a good working relationship with Tip O'Neil throughout his Presidency. Obama doesn't even understand the concept.
Tip O'Neill didn't come out on day one and say, "I hope he Fails".
You know. We went from 1 Trillion in debt in the first 200 years of our history to 4 trillion when Ray-Gun left office in an Alzheimer's induced daze.
Revenues shrank?
Yup. After adjusting for inflation, the government was bringing in less money.
Reagan & Conservatives -- Revisonist History 101
1988: Reagan Abandoned, Mocked by Hardline Conservatives
This is why the GOP lost in 2008 and 2012: They are living in a past that never existed, just like Reagan did. Reagan raised taxes, grew government, backed socialist programs, and more. When a political party lives on myth, sooner or later it all just collapses into a warm pile of shit
1988: Reagan Abandoned, Mocked by Hardline Conservatives
George Will
As the end of President Reagans final term approaches, conservatives and hardliners have radically changed their view of him. They originally saw him as one of their owna crusader for good against evil, obstinately opposed to communism in general and to any sort of arms reduction agreement with the Soviet Union in specific. But recent eventsReagans recent moderation in rhetoric towards the Soviets (see December 1983 and After), the summits with Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev (see November 16-19, 1985 and October 11-12, 1986), and the recent arms treaties with the Soviets (see Early 1985 and December 7-8, 1987) have soured them on Reagan.
Hardliners had once held considerable power in the Reagan administration (see January 1981 and After and Early 1981 and After), but their influence has steadily waned, and their attempts to sabotage and undermine arms control negotiations (see April 1981 and After, September 1981 through November 1983, May 1982 and After, and April 1983-December 1983), initially quite successful, have grown less effective and more desperate (see Before November 16, 1985). Attempts by administration hardliners to get soft officials such as Secretary of State George Shultz fired do not succeed. Conservative pundits such as George Will and William Safire lambast Reagan, with Will accusing him of moral disarmament and Safire mocking Reagans rapport with Gorbachev: He professed to see in Mr. Gorbachevs eyes an end to the Soviet goal of world domination. It will not be until after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the tearing down of the Berlin Wall (see November 9, 1989 and After) that conservatives will revise their opinion of Reagan, in the process revising much of history in the process. [Scoblic, 2008, pp. 143-145]
Entity Tags: George Will, George Shultz, William Safire, Mikhail Gorbachev, Ronald Reagan
So it was Reagan's becoming more liberal towards the Soviets, that brought about Reagan's deals with the Soviets, that led to a warming of the cold war and the end of the Soviets' hostility distrust of the west and the USA
[quo
Unlike Barack Obama...Ronald Reagan understood that in order for a divided government to function each side had to make compromises. Reagan had a good working relationship with Tip O'Neil throughout his Presidency. Obama doesn't even understand the concept.
Tip O'Neill didn't come out on day one and say, "I hope he Fails".
[quo
Unlike Barack Obama...Ronald Reagan understood that in order for a divided government to function each side had to make compromises. Reagan had a good working relationship with Tip O'Neil throughout his Presidency. Obama doesn't even understand the concept.
Tip O'Neill didn't come out on day one and say, "I hope he Fails".
