Ronald Reagan - Prophet

[Cecilie1200]

Your opinion, asserted with no substantiation. Ooh, yes, let me get RIGHT on ignoring everything I posted to believe YOU!

I realize it was a jump to expect a Reagan booster to know Reagan's positions and history on an issue as unimportant as Medicare. Let me help you out.

1) Just one of the many stupid anti-Medicare arguments he was paid to make by the AMA in 1961:

But let’s also look from the other side. The freedom the doctor uses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms, it’s like telling a lie. One leads to another. First you decide the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government, but then the doctors are equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him he can’t live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go some place else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.

Wow, prophetic!


2) Him covering his ass in the 1980 presidential debate and reminding us once and for all that no one ever opposed federal intervention to finance medical care for the elderly:



Future GOP candidates for president should get used to explaining how of course they supported the principles of Obamacare, there just must've been some other concurrent legislation they liked even better. Take a page from Reagan's book.

3) And yes, Reagan supported the transition away from Medicare paying what providers billed it to setting the prices it would pay itself. It was his administration's own proposal:

Carolyne K. Davis, head of the Federal Health Care Financing Administration [Reagan's Medicare chief], said the Government was justified in setting Medicare payment levels because it wanted to be a ''prudent buyer'' and had a legal responsibility for the hospital insurance trust fund, from which Medicare pays hospitals. She said there was no such justification for the Federal Government to audit and regulate spending by private insurers at this time.

Under the Administration proposal, hospitals could not bill patients for the difference between their normal charges and the standard Medicare payments. Jack Owen, executive vice president of the American Hospital Association, said hospitals should have ''the option'' to do so.

I realize it was a jump to expect a shithead leftist to substantiate his assertions without being asked at least three times, or to recognize a REAL source from a bullshit blog site EVER, but don't even try that pseudo-lofty "Oh, EVERYONE knows this, but I'll inconvenience myself and tell you what the fuck I'm talking about, instead of expecting you to just nod and agree" bullshit on me.

Oh, and sorry, Sparkles, but when your first link was a blog, I automatically assumed that you had nothing to say and were forfeiting the argument.

Eventually, you assmunches WILL learn that just because YOU like to live in a leftist echo chamber doesn't mean the rest of us are going to take it, or you, seriously.

Thanks for playing. Buh bye.

 

[Greenbeard]

Oh, and sorry, Sparkles, but when your first link was a blog, I automatically assumed that you had nothing to say and were forfeiting the argument.

Are you a moron? Reagan's 1961 Operation Coffee Cup recordings are available on YouTube. In fact, the one in question was embedded at the top of the transcript I posted.

I agree, the things he said were so stupid it's difficult to believe someone actually said them. Doubly so for you, I'm sure, since apparently you're completely unfamiliar with anything he's ever done. This all must come as quite a shock to you.

 

[regent]

"Blah-blah-blah-number of historians have said THIS. Yak-yak-yak-number of historians said THAT. Which historians? Where did I get this information from? Why would you want to know THAT? I said it, so you just take it as gospel, right?"

Call me when your post contains the words of someone intelligent, believable, and interesting . . . in other words, someone besides you.

What should I call you? Actually I don't do that name calling bit, I rely more on history and historians.
These historians were polled by the Siena Reseach Institute. But there have been a number of other polling of historians to rate the presidents. The first was the Schlesinger poll in 1948. This last poll used twenty criteria of presidential characteristics and rated the presidents on each.
What hurt the most, the Obama rating or the Reagan rating?

And still I see no link to a site, or even a more old-fashioned footnote notation, allowing one to actually verify the source and the citation. Hmmm.

Survey says . . . BULLSHIT!

What hurt most, that your citation wasn't impressive or that YOU aren't?

Did you try presidential ratings, or presidential ratings by historians, or historians presidential ratings or maybe presidential ratings polling historians, or historians rate the presidents or better yet, maybe there's someone around that could help.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why is the concept of "done with you now" so hard for leftists to grasp? They just keep talking and talking like they can't believe anyone would ever disregard their oh-so-important existence.

Pathological.

 

[S.J.]

Ronald Reagan- demented idiot. Ruined the country.

"made blaming the poor alright"- Mario Cuomo.

Yeah, he ruined the country by creating 20 million jobs, longest economic expansion in U.S. history, defeat of Soviet Union...He was so bad, he won re-election with 525 electoral votes. That's why every president since has tried to compare themselves to him, including Democrats, because he ruined the country. What an idiotic statement.

Wrong again, Reaganist dupe...

Yup- after first getting UE UP to 10.8%- LOTS pf Gov't jobs and tripled debt.

We're lucky he didn't RUIN Gorby and and give the USSR back to the hardliners...

Voodoo is a disaster:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 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% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

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% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 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 Probably 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.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers. | Fact Left

The worst was doing away with the fairness doctine, giving us demagogues and today's dupe hater moron RW and W as a legacy .

So, I guess that means Reagan is also responsible for Obama's $6 trillion addition to the national debt? You truly are stupid.

 

[francoHFW]

#204- And the ignorant dupe runs away...

#205- Not directly- It was W's DEPRESSION...of course.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What should I call you? Actually I don't do that name calling bit, I rely more on history and historians.
These historians were polled by the Siena Reseach Institute. But there have been a number of other polling of historians to rate the presidents. The first was the Schlesinger poll in 1948. This last poll used twenty criteria of presidential characteristics and rated the presidents on each.
What hurt the most, the Obama rating or the Reagan rating?

And still I see no link to a site, or even a more old-fashioned footnote notation, allowing one to actually verify the source and the citation. Hmmm.

Survey says . . . BULLSHIT!

What hurt most, that your citation wasn't impressive or that YOU aren't?

Did you try presidential ratings, or presidential ratings by historians, or historians presidential ratings or maybe presidential ratings polling historians, or historians rate the presidents or better yet, maybe there's someone around that could help.

I tried looking at your fucking posts. Didn't see it. Disregarded everything you had to say.

You're under the mistaken impression that it's MY job to verify YOUR assertions. Correct that misapprehension right now. IF you bother to provide your sources, and IF they aren't obviously partisan hack sites or blogs, I will click and take a look. But if I'm being expected to go out and find sources to prove YOU correct, I won't bother, because I'm already operating on the assumption that you're NEVER right, and YOU need to convince ME, not the other way around.

Source, or get used to derision.

 

[del]

i knew he had alzheimer's, but i didn't realize it was early onset.

sad

Typical liberal/Democrat comment, right in line with Obama snickering about the Special Olympics, when he displayed his awesome prowess in bowling, which, by the way, supersede his 'abilities' as President.

reagan wanted to participate in the special olympics, but he couldn't pass the written test.

 

[Meathead]

Reagan consistently comes out in the top five in public polling, and even in rankings by historians averages about 10th. In either case, Reagan's legacy is secure - left-wing whining not-with-standing.

Even from NBC, the socialist news organization:

List of presidential rankings - politics - White House | NBC News

President: 2009 rank, 2000 rank (Historians)
Abraham Lincoln: 1, 1
George Washington: 2, 3
Franklin D. Roosevelt: 3, 2
Theodore Roosevelt: 4, 4
Harry S. Truman: 5, 5
John F. Kennedy: 6, 8
Thomas Jefferson: 7, 7
Dwight D. Eisenhower: 8, 9
Woodrow Wilson: 9, 6
Ronald Reagan: 10, 11

Suck it up!

 

[HomeInspect]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

 

[Bfgrn]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

One Obama Deficit > Any Reagan Budget

One Obama Deficit > All Reagans Deficits

 

[HomeInspect]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

So the Obamabots don't think that Obama is spending.? He has borrowed more that every president combined from Geo Washington to the 5th month of W's first term. They all spend.. the difference is government control and dependency. Look at food stamps for instance... Two things I've learned about Dems in recent history, they need the government to survive in every aspect of life, and their politicians never saw a tax they didn't like.

 

[regent]

When Republicans look at their list of Republcan presidents, who can they come up with for the mythical Republican president? Lincoln was always a goodie, the best, but he was suspect of being a liberal, and is still unpleasant to some, particualry with the Republican new southern bloc. So skip Lincoln. Going on down the line, we come to Teddy Roosevelt, another liberal socialist bordering on communist. That leaves Ike, and Reagan. Of these two, certainly Reagan was the more mythical. I mean with his little homilies, his grin, his speaking ability, plus Ike did make those bad noises about the military industrial complex. So it's become Reagan. The job now is to make Reagan into a great president.

 

[FJO]

Reagan consistently comes out in the top five in public polling, and even in rankings by historians averages about 10th. In either case, Reagan's legacy is secure - left-wing whining not-with-standing.

Even from NBC, the socialist news organization:

List of presidential rankings - politics - White House | NBC News

President: 2009 rank, 2000 rank (Historians)
Abraham Lincoln: 1, 1
George Washington: 2, 3
Franklin D. Roosevelt: 3, 2
Theodore Roosevelt: 4, 4
Harry S. Truman: 5, 5
John F. Kennedy: 6, 8
Thomas Jefferson: 7, 7
Dwight D. Eisenhower: 8, 9
Woodrow Wilson: 9, 6
Ronald Reagan: 10, 11

Suck it up!

Those who are interested, there is a 2004 book, titled "Presidential Leadership" compiled and edited by various scholars, historians, professors and pundits, of all political affiliation.
(ISBN 0-7432-5433-3).

In this book, the Appendix shows several tables of ratings of presidents.

I am sure it is available at various outlets or in your local library. Buy it or borrow it and enjoy!

 

[regent]

Reagan consistently comes out in the top five in public polling, and even in rankings by historians averages about 10th. In either case, Reagan's legacy is secure - left-wing whining not-with-standing.

Even from NBC, the socialist news organization:

List of presidential rankings - politics - White House | NBC News

President: 2009 rank, 2000 rank (Historians)
Abraham Lincoln: 1, 1
George Washington: 2, 3
Franklin D. Roosevelt: 3, 2
Theodore Roosevelt: 4, 4
Harry S. Truman: 5, 5
John F. Kennedy: 6, 8
Thomas Jefferson: 7, 7
Dwight D. Eisenhower: 8, 9
Woodrow Wilson: 9, 6
Ronald Reagan: 10, 11

Suck it up!

Those who are interested, there is a 2004 book, titled "Presidential Leadership" compiled and edited by various scholars, historians, professors and pundits, of all political affiliation.
(ISBN 0-7432-5433-3).

In this book, the Appendix shows several tables of ratings of presidents.

I am sure it is available at various outlets or in your local library. Buy it or borrow it and enjoy!

Polls of the public are usually suspect, the average citizen usually know some of the presidents like Lincoln and Ike but how many can rate Van Buren, or John Tyler? One of the interesting bits is why historians rate as they do. What characteristics do they look for? It brings up still other questions, do the times create the best or worst presidents? Would Lincoln just be a so so president if not for the Civil War? There are a number of books on presidential qualities or lack thereof, and it might explain how we the people pick some awful duds. Think of it when America had five million people we had Washington and Jefferson, with 300 million we had....

 

[Bfgrn]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

One Obama Deficit > Any Reagan Budget

One Obama Deficit > All Reagans Deficits

Gee Frank...you know, back in 1971 my Dodge 3/4 ton pickup with a 318 cu. in. V-8 used to cost me < $8 to fill up. Now, my car with a 4 cylinder costs me almost $80 to fill up. So I outta go out and find me one of them there 1971 pickup...I could save $72 dollars!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, Reagan understood that Washington didn't solve problems, it created more problems. Obama and his types aren't happy without the biggest Washington possible.

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

So the Obamabots don't think that Obama is spending.? He has borrowed more that every president combined from Geo Washington to the 5th month of W's first term. They all spend.. the difference is government control and dependency. Look at food stamps for instance... Two things I've learned about Dems in recent history, they need the government to survive in every aspect of life, and their politicians never saw a tax they didn't like.

They're a cult, of course they "think" that

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The biggest difference I see in Reagan, compared to somebody like Obama is, right wingers have created a MYTH, and they worship a MYTH. There is NO real looking at the reality of Reagan by right wingers, it would destroy their MYTH.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

One Obama Deficit > Any Reagan Budget

One Obama Deficit > All Reagans Deficits

Gee Frank...you know, back in 1971 my Dodge 3/4 ton pickup with a 318 cu. in. V-8 used to cost me < $8 to fill up. Now, my car with a 4 cylinder costs me almost $80 to fill up. So I outta go out and find me one of them there 1971 pickup...I could save $72 dollars!!!

Your Lord and Savior has outspent every other country in human history

 

[Greenbeard]

Your Lord and Savior has outspent every other country in human history

You're going to pull that in a thread in which the OP muses "one presumes, at least, that [Reagan] was not a prophet in the true sense, and delivering directives straight from the Almighty, although I could be wrong about that"?