Reagan, worst prez in our lifetime

[Mad_Cabbie]

Excellent points, but he doesn't care. Obama doesn't care. No Dems care. The ends justify the means.

So 5.5 million people lost their insurance. Many of them will not get coverage by the 1st if the year, so what. Analysis says the average American will pay 41% higher insurance premiums and much higher deductibles....but that is okay also.

All that matters is the Government taking more control of your life and taking away more of your personal liberty. It is all about power and control. Period.

What the hell does Obama have to do with Reagan?

Trying to smear Obama to bolster Reagan is unnecessary.

 

[Freewill]

Hummmmm ..... It got under your skin that an American ambassador was killed on Obama's watch. Hummmm.... Below is a list of the embassy attacks under bush along with a listing of the numbers killed.
WHY DIDN'T THESE GET UNDER YOUR SKIN?
January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

bush looked the other way when warned about al Qaida's desire to strike America. When 3000 were killed in the twin towers, why didn't that get under your skin?

When 4500 American soldiers died in a war based on lies about WMD that did not exist, why didn't that get under your skin?

When didn't it get under your skin when almost 1800 people died in the Katrina natural disaster because bush had appointed a political hack who was incapable of doing the job?

You will bitch and moan about the Ambassador and a few others being killed in Libya but you will shut your eyes to the almost 10,000 Americans who died because of the actions bush took. Then you will tell us that Obama is the worst president ever while ignoring what bush did to this country. Do you have even the remotest idea how stupid that makes you look?

Far left propaganda

[MENTION=35790]ron4342[/MENTION]

Alright, I've seen enough of this little timeline. In most of those events, no Americans were killed, by my count no more than four Americans were killed in all of those events combined. When it says "people are killed" it doesn't bother to tell you whom. It is an attempt to appeal to irrational hatred. In Benghazi specifically, four Americans were killed, more specifically Ambassador Chris Stevens and his entourage. In all of those events listed, only one Ambassador along with his driver were killed. However, unlike Benghazi, help came promptly and facilitated a cessation of the violence. There were no stand down orders given. No conspiracy by the Bush Administration. To define the parameters of what a "Benghazi style attack" would be, a minimum of four Americans and one Ambassador would need to die.

Sigh. You can ask "Well only counting only the American deaths would not be a sound theory, what about the other non Americans?" Well, given that we as Americans naturally show concern for any of our countrymen working overseas in consulates and embassies, one can assume that we would be more concerned with their fates rather than the victims of other nationalities. The four men who died in Benghazi were all Americans, not of any other nationality. My reasoning? Let those countries mourn their dead, while we mourn ours.

So to say 10,000 Americans died in similar events is incorrect by itself. Not even that many died in either theater of the War on Terror, where only 6,778 Americans died as of this year. It is a patent mistruth. To say that Bush directly facilitated or helped play a role in them would also be a lie. It took 13 separate instances to kill four Americans under Bush, it took only one to kill the same amount in September 2012, under Obama's watch.

5 April 2010 Peshawar, Pakistan An attack near the U.S. Consulate in Peshawar, Pakistan, kills two consulate security guards and at least six others 8

11 September 2012 Cairo, Egypt, Benghazi, Libya, Sana'a A group of terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya -- killing the U.S. Ambassador, one staff member, and two security contractors. (more details) 4

14 September 2012 Tunis, Tunisia

1 February 2013 Ankara, Turkey A suicide bomber attacked the American Embassy in the Turkish capital, Ankara, on Friday, detonating himself inside a security entrance to the compound. (more details) 1

13 September 2013 Herat, Afghanistan A group of 7 Taliban militants attacked the U.S. Consulate in Herat, Afghanistan using truck bombs, assault rifles, and rocket-propelled grenades, killing 2 Afghan security guards and wounding 20 others (more details) 2

Let us add this one:

Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013, two pressure cooker bombs exploded at 2:49 pm EDT (18:49 UTC), killing 3 people and injuring an estimated 264 others.[3]

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Excellent points, but he doesn't care. Obama doesn't care. No Dems care. The ends justify the means.

So 5.5 million people lost their insurance. Many of them will not get coverage by the 1st if the year, so what. Analysis says the average American will pay 41% higher insurance premiums and much higher deductibles....but that is okay also.

All that matters is the Government taking more control of your life and taking away more of your personal liberty. It is all about power and control. Period.

What the hell does Obama have to do with Reagan?

Trying to smear Obama to bolster Reagan is unnecessary.

It's called contrast.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Excellent points, but he doesn't care. Obama doesn't care. No Dems care. The ends justify the means.

So 5.5 million people lost their insurance. Many of them will not get coverage by the 1st if the year, so what. Analysis says the average American will pay 41% higher insurance premiums and much higher deductibles....but that is okay also.

All that matters is the Government taking more control of your life and taking away more of your personal liberty. It is all about power and control. Period.

What the hell does Obama have to do with Reagan?

Trying to smear Obama to bolster Reagan is unnecessary.

It's called contrast.

Right - make Obama look bad for comparison? It isn't necessary - Reagan does not need that.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

What the hell does Obama have to do with Reagan?

Trying to smear Obama to bolster Reagan is unnecessary.

It's called contrast.

Right - make Obama look bad for comparison? It isn't necessary - Reagan does not need that.

To my mind it is. Reagan is great by the standards of the last century. But he is not the myth that Republicans perpetuate either. There's a reason a lot of Democrats love him. He was still big government at the end of the day.

 

[Meathead]

Reagan is a man for the ages. Obama will be a footnote as America's first black president <he pretty much already is>.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

It's called contrast.

Right - make Obama look bad for comparison? It isn't necessary - Reagan does not need that.

To my mind it is. Reagan is great by the standards of the last century. But he is not the myth that Republicans perpetuate either. There's a reason a lot of Democrats love him. He was still big government at the end of the day.

I know this isn't a popular contention, but presidents often do not get everything they want.

 

[candycorn]

Wait a second, libs hate Reagan. Why are you different ?

Don't know...

The left frequently refers to Reagan as "Raygun". They absolutely hate him. You love Carter, right ?

The comparisons between Carter and Obama are most accurate when they center on the two men not really understanding the power of their office. Every time I think Obama understands it he comes out with "contact your member of congress" when he wants Congress to do something. I don't think Carter ever understood it.

As for your question, I'm neutral on the Carter presidency since I was really young at the time. However, Carter the man is much more effective than Carter the President.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Reagan is a man for the ages. Obama will be a footnote as America's first black president <he pretty much already is>.

Posterity will decide that - not some guy on USMB.

 

[Meathead]

Reagan is a man for the ages. Obama will be a footnote as America's first black president <he pretty much already is>.

Posterity will decide that - not some guy on USMB.

There are times when neither success nor failure need wait for posterity. In the case of Obama, short of a miracle, failure is a given.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Reagan is a man for the ages. Obama will be a footnote as America's first black president <he pretty much already is>.

Posterity will decide that - not some guy on USMB.

There are times when neither success nor failure need wait for posterity. In the case of Obama, short of a miracle, failure is a given.

According to you and the ditto heads - everyone else does not necessarily see it that way.

 

[Meathead]

Posterity will decide that - not some guy on USMB.

There are times when neither success nor failure need wait for posterity. In the case of Obama, short of a miracle, failure is a given.

According to you and the ditto heads - everyone else does not necessarily see it that way.

Twenty five years on ditto heads are still whining about Reagan. No one will be trying to belittle Obama's legacy - there will be little need to.

 

[Redfish]

Attacking dead presidents---------in order to take the dialog off of the current disaster that you fools elected twice.

Pathetic

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Right - make Obama look bad for comparison? It isn't necessary - Reagan does not need that.

To my mind it is. Reagan is great by the standards of the last century. But he is not the myth that Republicans perpetuate either. There's a reason a lot of Democrats love him. He was still big government at the end of the day.

I know this isn't a popular contention, but presidents often do not get everything they want.

The implication being that he didn't want big government? Do some research and you'll find that's not true.

 

[Borillar]

I will remember Obabble more for our Libyan ambassador who was killed under the morons watch....THAT got under my skin. Meanwhile GFY. (Good for you)

Hummmmm ..... It got under your skin that an American ambassador was killed on Obama's watch. Hummmm.... Below is a list of the embassy attacks under bush along with a listing of the numbers killed.
WHY DIDN'T THESE GET UNDER YOUR SKIN?
January 22, 2002. Calcutta, India. Gunmen associated with Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami attack the U.S. Consulate. Five people are killed.

June 14, 2002. Karachi, Pakistan. Suicide bomber connected with al Qaeda attacks the U.S. Consulate, killing 12 and injuring 51.

October 12, 2002. Denpasar, Indonesia. U.S. diplomatic offices bombed as part of a string of "Bali Bombings." No fatalities.

February 28, 2003. Islamabad, Pakistan. Several gunmen fire upon the U.S. Embassy. Two people are killed.

May 12, 2003. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Armed al Qaeda terrorists storm the diplomatic compound, killing 36 people including nine Americans. The assailants committed suicide by detonating a truck bomb.

July 30, 2004. Tashkent, Uzbekistan. A suicide bomber from the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan attacks the U.S. Embassy, killing two people.

December 6, 2004. Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda terrorists storm the U.S. Consulate and occupy the perimeter wall. Nine people are killed.

March 2, 2006. Karachi, Pakistan again. Suicide bomber attacks the U.S. Consulate killing four people, including U.S. diplomat David Foy who was directly targeted by the attackers. (I wonder if Lindsey Graham or Fox News would even recognize the name "David Foy." This is the third Karachi terrorist attack in four years on what's considered American soil.)

September 12, 2006. Damascus, Syria. Four armed gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar" storm the U.S. Embassy using grenades, automatic weapons, a car bomb and a truck bomb. Four people are killed, 13 are wounded.

January 12, 2007. Athens, Greece. Members of a Greek terrorist group called the Revolutionary Struggle fire a rocket-propelled grenade at the U.S. Embassy. No fatalities.

March 18, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Members of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Jihad of Yemen fire a mortar at the U.S. Embassy. The shot misses the embassy, but hits nearby school killing two.

July 9, 2008. Istanbul, Turkey. Four armed terrorists attack the U.S. Consulate. Six people are killed.

September 17, 2008. Sana'a, Yemen. Terrorists dressed as military officials attack the U.S. Embassy with an arsenal of weapons including RPGs and detonate two car bombs. Sixteen people are killed, including an American student and her husband (they had been married for three weeks when the attack occurred). This is the second attack on this embassy in seven months.

bush looked the other way when warned about al Qaida's desire to strike America. When 3000 were killed in the twin towers, why didn't that get under your skin?

When 4500 American soldiers died in a war based on lies about WMD that did not exist, why didn't that get under your skin?

When didn't it get under your skin when almost 1800 people died in the Katrina natural disaster because bush had appointed a political hack who was incapable of doing the job?

You will bitch and moan about the Ambassador and a few others being killed in Libya but you will shut your eyes to the almost 10,000 Americans who died because of the actions bush took. Then you will tell us that Obama is the worst president ever while ignoring what bush did to this country. Do you have even the remotest idea how stupid that makes you look?

Far left propaganda

You mean inconvenient truths?

 

[birddog]

Reagan overall was a great President! Period!

Comparing him to the lying fraud we have now is beyond hilarious!

 

[francoHFW]

So, dupes, tell us when the nonrich and the country went to hell...

Memorize the facts, hater dupes:

1. WORKERS past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor&#8217;s share of income (1992 = 100%):1950 = 101%1960 = 105%1970 = 105%1980 = 105% &#8211; Reagan1990 = 100%2000 = 96%2007 = 92%A 13% drop since 1980A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.Share of National Income going to Top 10%:1950 = 35%1960 = 34%1970 = 34%1980 = 34% &#8211; Reagan1990 = 40%2000 = 47%2007 = 50% TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.Household Debt as percentage of GDP:1965 = 46%1970 = 45%1980 = 50% &#8211; Reagan1990 = 61%2000 = 69%2007 = 95% An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.1950 = 6.0%1960 = 7.0%1970 = 8.5%1980 = 10.0% &#8211; Reagan1982 = 11.2% &#8211; Peak1990 = 7.0%2000 = 2.0%2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

4.Household Debt as percentage of GDP:1965 = 46%1970 = 45%1980 = 50% &#8211; Reagan1990 = 61%2000 = 69%2007 = 95%A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%and the bottom 80%:1980 = 10%2003 = 56%A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.The Probabilityy of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:1945 = 12%1958 = 6%1990 = 3%2000 = 2%A 10% Decrease.

Links:1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Researc...s/No7Nov04.pdf1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)2 &#8211; Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/imag...ving_thumb.gif3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...&LastYear=20104 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php...or-debt-of-gdp4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Financial Accounts of the United States--June 6, 20135/6 = Wealth And Inequality In America - Business Insider

AND his final legacy, George W. BOOOSH...BARF...

 

[Meathead]

Reagan overall was a great President! Period!

Comparing him to the lying fraud we have now is beyond hilarious!

Agreed, and the "Period!" is not an Obaman "period".

 

[francoHFW]

See sig, para 1, dumbasses...

 

[francoHFW]

One actual Obama lie, brainwashed shytteheads- NOT a blocked promise...