Reagan Economic Success versus Obama Fairy Tales

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2011 3:03 AM GMT
    From a Forbes magazine article by Peter Ferrara:

    http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/

    Contrary to Statist propaganda, President Reagan inherited a worse economic mess than Obama did. Unemployment was at 10.8%. The inflation rate was 11.3 % in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980. Interest rates were at 21.5% in 1980.

    Reagan's approach was to (1) cut tax rates (2) reduce government spending (3) strengthen the dollar, and (4) deregulate.

    "These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months."

    "During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."

    "During this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom – the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007, … net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years."

    Is it any wonder that Reagan was reelected in a landslide?

    300px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Rea

    Statist Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's. (1) Obama seeks to raise tax rates. (2) His administration has massively increased spending, starting with the failed $1 trillion "stimulus" bill. (3) He and his Fed Chairman are feverishly debasing the dollar. (4) Obama wants markedly increased government regulation, especially in the healthcare, finance, and energy sectors.

    The results of Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's: High unemployment. A dollar losing more of its value every day. Mountains of debt which no one can repay. Anemic economic growth. "The worst "economic recovery since the Great Depression."

    mrz042811dAPR20110426074521.jpg

    Failed economic policies are all Statist ideologues like Obama have to offer. He has never created a private sector job, never had a job in the private sector, never managed a business and made a payroll, distrusts the private sector, and seeks only to increase big, bloated, intrusive, counterproductive government.

    Who can we thank for sacrificing the nation's freedom and prosperity to Statism? The "progressives" who support the Fraud in the White House. Despite the mounting evidence that he is the worst president of modern times, Obama can count on the support of "progressives" for his destructive policies.

    Obama lectures the American people as though they're stupid. After all, they elected a Fraud. Are they stupid enough to re-elect him and endure four more years of Statist snake oil? They probably aren't that stupid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2011 4:03 AM GMT
    I didn't realize the Grimm Brothers wrote for Forbes... icon_lol.gif
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    May 17, 2011 11:06 AM GMT
    Let me ask the OP a question

    Are you that severely dyslexic or do you not understand actual facts

    The reagan republican economic plan has put us where we are
    and you only have to have lived for the last 30 years to see that
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2011 1:06 PM GMT
    From the italicized print at the bottom:

    Peter Ferrara is director of policy for the Carleson Center for Public Policy and senior fellow for entitlement and budget policy at the Heartland Institute. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as associate deputy attorney general of the United States under President George H. W. Bush. He is the author of America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb, forthcoming from HarperCollins.

    I smell a load of bias........... and a large one at that!
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    May 17, 2011 1:06 PM GMT
    mr. ferrera's residence is in orlando, FL ..... at FANTASYLAND in disneyworld.

    icon_lol.gif
  • Bigolbear

    Posts: 528

    May 17, 2011 3:34 PM GMT
    Peter J. Ferrara is an American policy analyst and columnist.

    His proposal to privatize Social Security was championed by the George W. Bush administration.[1]

    Ferrara took money from erstwhile lobbyist Jack Abramoff to write op-ed pieces favorable to Abramoff clients. (Ferrara did not disclose which pieces he was paid to write, but Business Week noted that he wrote favorable articles in the Washington Times about the Northern Marianas Islands and the Choctaw Indian tribe, both Abramoff clients.) Ferrara argued those writings were entirely consistent with his independently held views, remained unrepentant, and intended to pursue the practice in the future: "I do that all the time. I've done that in the past, and I'll do it in the future."[2]

    Ferrara is a senior policy adviser at the conservative Institute for Policy Innovation and has worked for the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation. He was a Senior Fellow of the Free Enterprise Fund ("FEF"), a free market advocacy group.

    Peter Ferrara is known[3] for his essay, "What Is An American?", published September 25, 2001, just after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.[4] In the essay, he claims that "there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan."[4]




  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2011 8:03 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock saidLet me ask the OP a question

    Are you that severely dyslexic or do you not understand actual facts

    The reagan republican economic plan has put us where we are
    and you only have to have lived for the last 30 years to see that


    Wait a minute.... I thought the flock was instructed to keep squawking:

    "BUSH DID IT!"

    "IT'S BUSH'S FAULT!"

    "EXTREME POLICIES OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!"

    Get your talking points straight please and give the rest of the liberal hens a refresher on the current set of lies they're supposed to repeat over and over.


    douchebags.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2011 8:55 PM GMT
    jockfever saidFrom a Forbes magazine article by Peter Ferrara:

    http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/

    Contrary to Statist propaganda, President Reagan inherited a worse economic mess than Obama did. Unemployment was at 10.8%. The inflation rate was 11.3 % in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980. Interest rates were at 21.5% in 1980.

    Reagan's approach was to (1) cut tax rates (2) reduce government spending (3) strengthen the dollar, and (4) deregulate.

    "These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months."

    "During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."

    "During this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom – the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007, … net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years."

    Is it any wonder that Reagan was reelected in a landslide?

    300px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Rea

    Statist Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's. (1) Obama seeks to raise tax rates. (2) His administration has massively increased spending, starting with the failed $1 trillion "stimulus" bill. (3) He and his Fed Chairman are feverishly debasing the dollar. (4) Obama wants markedly increased government regulation, especially in the healthcare, finance, and energy sectors.

    The results of Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's: High unemployment. A dollar losing more of its value every day. Mountains of debt which no one can repay. Anemic economic growth. "The worst "economic recovery since the Great Depression."

    mrz042811dAPR20110426074521.jpg

    Failed economic policies are all Statist ideologues like Obama have to offer. He has never created a private sector job, never had a job in the private sector, never managed a business and made a payroll, distrusts the private sector, and seeks only to increase big, bloated, intrusive, counterproductive government.

    Who can we thank for sacrificing the nation's freedom and prosperity to Statism? The "progressives" who support the Fraud in the White House. Despite the mounting evidence that he is the worst president of modern times, Obama can count on the support of "progressives" for his destructive policies.

    Obama lectures the American people as though they're stupid. After all, they elected a Fraud. Are they stupid enough to re-elect him and endure four more years of Statist snake oil? They probably aren't that stupid.




    TOTAL REVISIONIST BULLSHIT.
    Jesus, I read the first sentence you wrote - and it's a flat-out LIE.
    Why even continue reading the rest of the BS you wrote?
    FYI - the unemployment rate when Reagan took office was 7.5% - NOT 10.8% as you claim.
    It rose to "10.8%" in 1983 - TWO YEARS into Reagan's presidency.
    That 10.8 figure is NOT something he "inherited" from Carter.
    That was Reagan's own doing.

    You also neglect to mention that Reagan MORE THAN TRIPLED the National Debt.
    The National Debt was only 1 trillion dollars when Reagan took office.
    When he left office it was 3.5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

    Fiscal irresponsibility and insanity = Reagan/Bush economic policies
    Unsustainable yearly budget deficits = Reagan/Bush economic policies
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2011 9:21 PM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    jockfever saidFrom a Forbes magazine article by Peter Ferrara:

    http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/

    Contrary to Statist propaganda, President Reagan inherited a worse economic mess than Obama did. Unemployment was at 10.8%. The inflation rate was 11.3 % in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980. Interest rates were at 21.5% in 1980.

    Reagan's approach was to (1) cut tax rates (2) reduce government spending (3) strengthen the dollar, and (4) deregulate.

    "These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months."

    "During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."

    "During this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom – the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007, … net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years."

    Is it any wonder that Reagan was reelected in a landslide?

    300px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Rea

    Statist Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's. (1) Obama seeks to raise tax rates. (2) His administration has massively increased spending, starting with the failed $1 trillion "stimulus" bill. (3) He and his Fed Chairman are feverishly debasing the dollar. (4) Obama wants markedly increased government regulation, especially in the healthcare, finance, and energy sectors.

    The results of Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's: High unemployment. A dollar losing more of its value every day. Mountains of debt which no one can repay. Anemic economic growth. "The worst "economic recovery since the Great Depression."

    mrz042811dAPR20110426074521.jpg

    Failed economic policies are all Statist ideologues like Obama have to offer. He has never created a private sector job, never had a job in the private sector, never managed a business and made a payroll, distrusts the private sector, and seeks only to increase big, bloated, intrusive, counterproductive government.

    Who can we thank for sacrificing the nation's freedom and prosperity to Statism? The "progressives" who support the Fraud in the White House. Despite the mounting evidence that he is the worst president of modern times, Obama can count on the support of "progressives" for his destructive policies.

    Obama lectures the American people as though they're stupid. After all, they elected a Fraud. Are they stupid enough to re-elect him and endure four more years of Statist snake oil? They probably aren't that stupid.




    TOTAL REVISIONIST BULLSHIT.
    Jesus, I read the first sentence you wrote - and it's a flat-out LIE.
    Why even continue reading the rest of the BS you wrote?
    FYI - the unemployment rate when Reagan took office was 7.5% - NOT 10.8% as you claim.
    It rose to "10.8%" in 1983 - TWO YEARS into Reagan's presidency.
    That 10.8 figure is NOT something he "inherited" from Carter.
    That was Reagan's own doing.

    You also neglect to mention that Reagan MORE THAN TRIPLED the National Debt.
    The National Debt was only 1 trillion dollars when Reagan took office.
    When he left office it was 3.5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

    Fiscal irresponsibility and insanity = Reagan/Bush economic policies
    Unsustainable yearly budget deficits = Reagan/Bush economic policies


    Behold, the voice of eloquence!
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    May 17, 2011 9:47 PM GMT
    Yes, the Savings and Loan scandal, the Wall Street crash, and our current George W. Bush Great Depression are all a result of Ronald Reagan's wonderful policies.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    May 18, 2011 12:43 AM GMT


    The political fairy tale that is Ronald Reagan

    Both the towering slab of stone — and the untruths told in its shadow — epitomize what Ronald Reagan has become as the nation prepares to celebrate his centennial on February 6: Not a real flesh-and-blood man, but a myth. And this is not a harmless myth, but a political fairy tale that has brought disastrous real-world consequences for America and its citizens for more than a decade.

    The 1981 tax cut is grossly oversold as the cause of that decade's economic comeback, but a series of tax increases that Reagan signed, starting in 1982, are almost never mentioned. Also receiving short shrift are the facts that Reagan increased the size of government and created more debt than all the presidents who came before him -- or that under his watch the American consumer began to get hooked on credit cards.

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/03/bunch.reagan.myth/index.html?hpt=C2
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 3:09 AM GMT
    GQjock Are you that severely dyslexic or do you not understand actual facts
    The Reagan republican economic plan has put us where we are
    and you only have to have lived for the last 30 years to see that.


    jockfever: Bizarre. Very bizarre. Even for a Reagan-hating Lib.

    Reagan's economic policies were based on the sound recommendations of one of the greatest economists of modern times, Milton Friedman.

    Reagan was re-elected in a great landslide based on the success of those policies. (The hapless Mondull was lucky to win his own state and the District of Columbia.)

    Today, June 2 2011, over two years into the Obama administration we are warned about being on the verge of a double-dip. This is the worst fake recovery since the Great Depression. Why? Because the policies of the Fraud in the White House are based on Statist voodoo.


    Obama_speech.gif


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 4:08 AM GMT
    rickrick91: FYI - the unemployment rate when Reagan took office was 7.5% - NOT 10.8% It rose to "10.8%" in 1983 - TWO YEARS into Reagan's presidency. That 10.8 figure is NOT something he "inherited" from Carter.
    That was Reagan's own doing.


    You also neglect to mention that Reagan MORE THAN TRIPLED the National Debt. The National Debt was only 1 trillion dollars when Reagan took office. When he left office it was 3.5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

    jockfever: Reagan inherited a Carter recession. The key part of Reagan's recovery plan, across-the-board tax cuts, was not enacted until late in 1981. By the start of 1983, a little over a year later, unemployment began to drop and continued to drop.

    Spending bills originate in the House. Democrat revisionism blames Reagan for overspending by the Democrat-controlled House under Tip O'Neill. It gives credit to Clinton for the balanced budget prepared and enacted by the Republican-controlled House under Newt Gingrich (as part of the Contract with America). Needless to say, Clinton and accomplices fought hard against balancing the budget.

    "Obama-Pelosi-Reid added more to the National Debt in 19 Months than all presidents from Washington through Reagan combined, says Gov’t data."


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 11:11 AM GMT
    jockfever -

    The degree to which you've ingested and propagate right-wing disinformation is stunning. There is not a shred of truth to any of your claims about the history of Reaganomics, which started our country's 40-year decline as an economic powerhouse so that our wealthiest citizens could pay less taxes. Milton Friedman's "economics" have destroyed every single country that has enacted them, with virtually every one turning into a socialist state following the implosion of their economies. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 12:42 PM GMT
    I notice there was no comparison made to the unemployment levels or interest and mortgage rates when Obama took over.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 12:53 PM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    jockfever saidFrom a Forbes magazine article by Peter Ferrara:

    http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/

    Contrary to Statist propaganda, President Reagan inherited a worse economic mess than Obama did. Unemployment was at 10.8%. The inflation rate was 11.3 % in 1979 and 13.5% in 1980. Interest rates were at 21.5% in 1980.

    Reagan's approach was to (1) cut tax rates (2) reduce government spending (3) strengthen the dollar, and (4) deregulate.

    "These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months."

    "During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989."

    "During this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom – the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007, … net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years."

    Is it any wonder that Reagan was reelected in a landslide?

    300px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Rea

    Statist Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's. (1) Obama seeks to raise tax rates. (2) His administration has massively increased spending, starting with the failed $1 trillion "stimulus" bill. (3) He and his Fed Chairman are feverishly debasing the dollar. (4) Obama wants markedly increased government regulation, especially in the healthcare, finance, and energy sectors.

    The results of Obama's policies are the opposite of Reagan's: High unemployment. A dollar losing more of its value every day. Mountains of debt which no one can repay. Anemic economic growth. "The worst "economic recovery since the Great Depression."

    mrz042811dAPR20110426074521.jpg

    Failed economic policies are all Statist ideologues like Obama have to offer. He has never created a private sector job, never had a job in the private sector, never managed a business and made a payroll, distrusts the private sector, and seeks only to increase big, bloated, intrusive, counterproductive government.

    Who can we thank for sacrificing the nation's freedom and prosperity to Statism? The "progressives" who support the Fraud in the White House. Despite the mounting evidence that he is the worst president of modern times, Obama can count on the support of "progressives" for his destructive policies.

    Obama lectures the American people as though they're stupid. After all, they elected a Fraud. Are they stupid enough to re-elect him and endure four more years of Statist snake oil? They probably aren't that stupid.




    TOTAL REVISIONIST BULLSHIT.
    Jesus, I read the first sentence you wrote - and it's a flat-out LIE.
    Why even continue reading the rest of the BS you wrote?
    FYI - the unemployment rate when Reagan took office was 7.5% - NOT 10.8% as you claim.
    It rose to "10.8%" in 1983 - TWO YEARS into Reagan's presidency.
    That 10.8 figure is NOT something he "inherited" from Carter.
    That was Reagan's own doing
    .

    Good, so you no longer blame Bush for the current state of the economy or are you going to be the hypocrite we all know you are

    You also neglect to mention that Reagan MORE THAN TRIPLED the National Debt.
    The National Debt was only 1 trillion dollars when Reagan took office.
    When he left office it was 3.5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

    And obama had ADDED THREE TRILLION DOLLARS to the nation debt in the short 2 1/2 years he's been in office, as much as Bush added in eight years plus it looks like its going to be another 1.6 TRILLION this year. This figure is NOT something he "inherited" from Bush. This is Omaba's own doing

    Fiscal irresponsibility and insanity = Reagan/Bush economic policies
    Unsustainable yearly budget deficits = Reagan/Bush economic policies
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 12:58 PM GMT
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Employment-growth-brakes-rb-325963585.html?x=0&.v=3

    Yeah you got it you dipshit lefties. Obama has it all fixed, no doubt about that.

    9.1
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Jun 03, 2011 1:03 PM GMT
    GQjock said

    The political fairy tale that is Ronald Reagan

    Both the towering slab of stone — and the untruths told in its shadow — epitomize what Ronald Reagan has become as the nation prepares to celebrate his centennial on February 6: Not a real flesh-and-blood man, but a myth. And this is not a harmless myth, but a political fairy tale that has brought disastrous real-world consequences for America and its citizens for more than a decade.

    The 1981 tax cut is grossly oversold as the cause of that decade's economic comeback, but a series of tax increases that Reagan signed, starting in 1982, are almost never mentioned. Also receiving short shrift are the facts that Reagan increased the size of government and created more debt than all the presidents who came before him -- or that under his watch the American consumer began to get hooked on credit cards.

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/02/03/bunch.reagan.myth/index.html?hpt=C2



    AWESOME Joey, thanks for that... I really got a laugh out of it. and VERY true indeed......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 2:41 PM GMT
    Reagan also cut funding for the poorest of the poor and created an explosion of lower income people and homeless people.

    50% of people in America do not pay income taxes because they don't make enough.

    Around the same time corporations decided that their regular workers weren't worth as much as executives and started hoarding money instead of giving it ot their employees. If that had not changed, every person in america would make an average of $22,000 more. Thats about 1.3 trillion dollars in payroll taxes alone for the government.

    So don't kid yourself about Reagan, he just shifted the debt to the poor people and helped the rich become richer. But then again most presidents are part of that class so they don't cry over it too much.
  • ZacktheMan

    Posts: 340

    Jun 03, 2011 4:30 PM GMT
    It's sad reading this thread. Ignorance must be bliss.

    "The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might." Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain.

    "Lie--an abomination before the Lord and an ever present help in time of trouble." Mark Twain, 1901.

    Lying is Man's most universal weakness. Mark Twain

    One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has only nine lives.
    Mark Twain - Pudd'nhead Wilson

    I posted on another thread the fact it is not the President who determines the final approved US Budget, only the congress (US House of Representatives and the US Senate) determines the US Budget. Since 1974, the president must submit his Federal Budget plan by February 1st of each year.

    There are three possibilities, (the 4th possibility I will ignore as it seldom occurs).

    1. After the President sends his budget, which usually reflects his Political Party's desires, to Congress, but Congress has the final say on what the US Budget will be. If congress is the same party, the President's Budget, which is primarily prepared by his party, will prevail, because they have the 50 % plus votes to pass the Budget.

    2. If either the House or the Senate is dominated by the opposite party, mutually agreed compromises will be made by both the Republicans and the Democrats.

    3. If congress (House and Senate) is controlled by the same Party, they exclusively control what the final US budget will be.

    Now please try to understand this. Throughout Reagan's Presidency, The House and Senate was fully controlled by the Democrats. Thus the Democrats solely determined the final US Budgets throughout Ronald Reagan's Presidency. ALL THE BUDGETS DURING THE REAGAN PRESIDENCY WAS EXCLUSIVELY DETERMINED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY. Thus all the deficits during that period belong to the Democrats.

    To anyone who disagrees with this, you have the right to speak your mind (via print), but I will know you are incredibly stupid.

    Now, during the 1st four years of the masturbation President [and I suppose most here are pro-masturbation, that's why we love him] icon_smile.gif - Bill Clinton's 1st term, all four years the Federal budgets contained major deficit spending (not to mention the numerous scandals). When the Republicans took over the congress (House and Senate), They submitted a balanced budget, but President Clinton did what most President's would not do, He vetoed it. This caused the government to shut down. The liberal media, uniformly in step wept in every news report on how cruelly the Republican effort tp a balanced budget was stealing Christmas from our poor laid off Federal workers will have no money to buy their children Christmas presents, and other stupid pity stories they fabricated (RFOL). How sick can the liberal media be??? The final budget was just under 1% above the balanced budget the republicans wanted. Over the next three years, this remarkable Republican Congress successfully passed a US balanced Budgets, and many more reforms that benefited US Citizens. A most remarkable congress they were.

    Talk about your dirty politics:

    In their efforts to sabotage the Republicans popularity among the electorate, the Democrats kept throwing mud at the new Republican congressmen, trumping up false charges against its' leaders. Of over 200 judicial charges against Newt Gingrich, and plenty of name calling, over several years and many investigations, only 1 charge succeeded, and Newt only agreed to plead guilty to that charge to stop the harassment, which took a great toll on him over those years in office.

    On another matter, I did not care for George Herbert Bush's Presidency. And though I like George W. Bush personally, I do not consider him to be a good President. His biggest fault was surrounding himself with His fathers' advisers, and they steered him wrong. A serious 2nd fault was letting his fellow Republicans officeholders spend as much on their personal pork projects as the Democrats did when they were in power. A 3rd failure, GWB could not handle the liberal media, they boxed him in and essentially he went into exile away from Washington DC, an extremely liberal town.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 03, 2011 7:59 PM GMT
    ZacktheMan saidIt's sad reading this thread. Ignorance must be bliss.

    "The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might." Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain.

    "Lie--an abomination before the Lord and an ever present help in time of trouble." Mark Twain, 1901.

    Lying is Man's most universal weakness. Mark Twain

    One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has only nine lives.
    Mark Twain - Pudd'nhead Wilson

    I posted on another thread the fact it is not the President who determines the final approved US Budget, only the congress (US House of Representatives and the US Senate) determines the US Budget. Since 1974, the president must submit his Federal Budget plan by February 1st of each year.

    There are three possibilities, (the 4th possibility I will ignore as it seldom occurs).

    1. After the President sends his budget, which usually reflects his Political Party's desires, to Congress, but Congress has the final say on what the US Budget will be. If congress is the same party, the President's Budget, which is primarily prepared by his party, will prevail, because they have the 50 % plus votes to pass the Budget.

    2. If either the House or the Senate is dominated by the opposite party, mutually agreed compromises will be made by both the Republicans and the Democrats.

    3. If congress (House and Senate) is controlled by the same Party, they exclusively control what the final US budget will be.

    Now please try to understand this. Throughout Reagan's Presidency, The House and Senate was fully controlled by the Democrats. Thus the Democrats solely determined the final US Budgets throughout Ronald Reagan's Presidency. ALL THE BUDGETS DURING THE REAGAN PRESIDENCY WAS EXCLUSIVELY DETERMINED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY. Thus all the deficits during that period belong to the Democrats.

    To anyone who disagrees with this, you have the right to speak your mind (via print), but I will know you are incredibly stupid.

    Now, during the 1st four years of the masturbation President [and I suppose most here are pro-masturbation, that's why we love him] icon_smile.gif - Bill Clinton's 1st term, all four years the Federal budgets contained major deficit spending (not to mention the numerous scandals). When the Republicans took over the congress (House and Senate), They submitted a balanced budget, but President Clinton did what most President's would not do, He vetoed it. This caused the government to shut down. The liberal media, uniformly in step wept in every news report on how cruelly the Republican effort tp a balanced budget was stealing Christmas from our poor laid off Federal workers will have no money to buy their children Christmas presents, and other stupid pity stories they fabricated (RFOL). How sick can the liberal media be??? The final budget was just under 1% above the balanced budget the republicans wanted. Over the next three years, this remarkable Republican Congress successfully passed a US balanced Budgets, and many more reforms that benefited US Citizens. A most remarkable congress they were.

    Talk about your dirty politics:

    In their efforts to sabotage the Republicans popularity among the electorate, the Democrats kept throwing mud at the new Republican congressmen, trumping up false charges against its' leaders. Of over 200 judicial charges against Newt Gingrich, and plenty of name calling, over several years and many investigations, only 1 charge succeeded, and Newt only agreed to plead guilty to that charge to stop the harassment, which took a great toll on him over those years in office.

    On another matter, I did not care for George Herbert Bush's Presidency. And though I like George W. Bush personally, I do not consider him to be a good President. His biggest fault was surrounding himself with His fathers' advisers, and they steered him wrong. A serious 2nd fault was letting his fellow Republicans officeholders spend as much on their personal pork projects as the Democrats did when they were in power. A 3rd failure, GWB could not handle the liberal media, they boxed him in and essentially he went into exile away from Washington DC, an extremely liberal town.






    THAT IS A TOTAL PILE OF STINKING BULLSHIT AND A LIE.

    FYI - THE FACT IS THAT THE SENATE WAS CONTROLLED BY THE REPUBS FOR THE FIRST 6 YEARS OF REAGAN'S PRESIDENCY.
    LOOK IT UP AND EDUCATE YOURSELF SO YOU DON'T LOOK LIKE SUCH A DUMBASS.

    Also, President Reagan sent budgets to the Congress requesting MORE spending than ended up actually getting passed by the Congress - NOT less.
    http://zfacts.com/p/57.html
    So, Reagans was NOT forced to spend more than he wanted to by a Dem Congress.
    In fact, Reagan didn't get quite as much spending as he requested.

    You Repubs are shameless in your attempts to try to rewrite history.

    THE REPUBS WILL SAY ANYTHING
    DON'T TRUST THEM - THEY WILL LIE TO YOUR FACE.
  • ZacktheMan

    Posts: 340

    Jun 03, 2011 10:16 PM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    ZacktheMan saidIt's sad reading this thread. Ignorance must be bliss.

    "The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might." Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain.

    "Lie--an abomination before the Lord and an ever present help in time of trouble." Mark Twain, 1901.

    Lying is Man's most universal weakness. Mark Twain

    One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has only nine lives.
    Mark Twain - Pudd'nhead Wilson

    I posted on another thread the fact it is not the President who determines the final approved US Budget, only the congress (US House of Representatives and the US Senate) determines the US Budget. Since 1974, the president must submit his Federal Budget plan by February 1st of each year.

    There are three possibilities, (the 4th possibility I will ignore as it seldom occurs).

    1. After the President sends his budget, which usually reflects his Political Party's desires, to Congress, but Congress has the final say on what the US Budget will be. If congress is the same party, the President's Budget, which is primarily prepared by his party, will prevail, because they have the 50 % plus votes to pass the Budget.

    2. If either the House or the Senate is dominated by the opposite party, mutually agreed compromises will be made by both the Republicans and the Democrats.

    3. If congress (House and Senate) is controlled by the same Party, they exclusively control what the final US budget will be.

    Now please try to understand this. Throughout Reagan's Presidency, The House and Senate was fully controlled by the Democrats. Thus the Democrats solely determined the final US Budgets throughout Ronald Reagan's Presidency. ALL THE BUDGETS DURING THE REAGAN PRESIDENCY WAS EXCLUSIVELY DETERMINED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY. Thus all the deficits during that period belong to the Democrats.

    To anyone who disagrees with this, you have the right to speak your mind (via print), but I will know you are incredibly stupid.

    Now, during the 1st four years of the masturbation President [and I suppose most here are pro-masturbation, that's why we love him] icon_smile.gif - Bill Clinton's 1st term, all four years the Federal budgets contained major deficit spending (not to mention the numerous scandals). When the Republicans took over the congress (House and Senate), They submitted a balanced budget, but President Clinton did what most President's would not do, He vetoed it. This caused the government to shut down. The liberal media, uniformly in step wept in every news report on how cruelly the Republican effort tp a balanced budget was stealing Christmas from our poor laid off Federal workers will have no money to buy their children Christmas presents, and other stupid pity stories they fabricated (RFOL). How sick can the liberal media be??? The final budget was just under 1% above the balanced budget the republicans wanted. Over the next three years, this remarkable Republican Congress successfully passed a US balanced Budgets, and many more reforms that benefited US Citizens. A most remarkable congress they were.

    Talk about your dirty politics:

    In their efforts to sabotage the Republicans popularity among the electorate, the Democrats kept throwing mud at the new Republican congressmen, trumping up false charges against its' leaders. Of over 200 judicial charges against Newt Gingrich, and plenty of name calling, over several years and many investigations, only 1 charge succeeded, and Newt only agreed to plead guilty to that charge to stop the harassment, which took a great toll on him over those years in office.

    On another matter, I did not care for George Herbert Bush's Presidency. And though I like George W. Bush personally, I do not consider him to be a good President. His biggest fault was surrounding himself with His fathers' advisers, and they steered him wrong. A serious 2nd fault was letting his fellow Republicans officeholders spend as much on their personal pork projects as the Democrats did when they were in power. A 3rd failure, GWB could not handle the liberal media, they boxed him in and essentially he went into exile away from Washington DC, an extremely liberal town.







    [quote][cite]rickrick91 said[/cite]THAT IS A TOTAL PILE OF STINKING BULLSHIT AND A LIE.

    FYI - THE FACT IS THAT THE SENATE WAS CONTROLLED BY THE REPUBS FOR THE FIRST 6 YEARS OF REAGAN'S PRESIDENCY.
    LOOK IT UP AND EDUCATE YOURSELF SO YOU DON'T LOOK LIKE SUCH A DUMBASS.


    Hey, Cool it guy. I'm only a partial Dumbass. I was wrong when I wrote the that the Democrats controlled both houses for the 8 years, the Senate was only controlled by the Democrats for the last two years of Reagan's Presidency. And I genuinely am thankful for your correction. Had I proofread all that I wrote, I may have caught this error. I spent more time on getting the quotes.

    Please note that my post was not about how evil the democrats are, it was not. My point was that it is the US Congress that determines the annual budget, and not the President. A commonly misunderstood comment in this thread and others before it, that it is that the President who determines whether the Budget will be balanced or a deficit increasing Budget. This simply is not true. I've seen posts here claiming that President Clinton is the last President to balance the budget, and I can't blame them because there is so much propaganda on the internet showing these balanced budgets were Clinton's achievement, which is total nonsense. I'm sure you agree.

    The President can request many things on the budget, but my main point stands, only the congress can pass the actual US annual Budgets. The President has no say in that unless he uses his veto power, which is seldom done. And if you feel those budgets was wasteful, the Democrats share an equal responsibility by approving them. The last two years are 100% the Democrats controlled both houses.

    And of the fact that you brought up, That "President Reagan sent budgets to the Congress requesting MORE spending than ended up actually getting passed by the Congress - NOT less." is oar for the course for both parties. And surely you do not really believe that President Reagan actually came up with those figures, they come not from the President, they are a combination of pork desired by elected members of the Republican and Democrat parties and the inflated estimated budgets of every Federal Agency and Department whom always ask for more money then they need and spend every penny of what they are allotted to avoid having their budget cut the following year.

    And I assure you that I do not rewrite history. I confessed to my mistake about the Senate, but the point I was focused on was that it is a fact that congress alone determines every US budget. President Clinton did not balance any budgets.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 04, 2011 2:57 AM GMT
    rickrick91 said
    ZacktheMan saidIt's sad reading this thread. Ignorance must be bliss.

    "The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might." Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain.

    "Lie--an abomination before the Lord and an ever present help in time of trouble." Mark Twain, 1901.

    Lying is Man's most universal weakness. Mark Twain

    One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has only nine lives.
    Mark Twain - Pudd'nhead Wilson

    I posted on another thread the fact it is not the President who determines the final approved US Budget, only the congress (US House of Representatives and the US Senate) determines the US Budget. Since 1974, the president must submit his Federal Budget plan by February 1st of each year.

    There are three possibilities, (the 4th possibility I will ignore as it seldom occurs).

    1. After the President sends his budget, which usually reflects his Political Party's desires, to Congress, but Congress has the final say on what the US Budget will be. If congress is the same party, the President's Budget, which is primarily prepared by his party, will prevail, because they have the 50 % plus votes to pass the Budget.

    2. If either the House or the Senate is dominated by the opposite party, mutually agreed compromises will be made by both the Republicans and the Democrats.

    3. If congress (House and Senate) is controlled by the same Party, they exclusively control what the final US budget will be.

    Now please try to understand this. Throughout Reagan's Presidency, The House and Senate was fully controlled by the Democrats. Thus the Democrats solely determined the final US Budgets throughout Ronald Reagan's Presidency. ALL THE BUDGETS DURING THE REAGAN PRESIDENCY WAS EXCLUSIVELY DETERMINED BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY. Thus all the deficits during that period belong to the Democrats.

    To anyone who disagrees with this, you have the right to speak your mind (via print), but I will know you are incredibly stupid.

    Now, during the 1st four years of the masturbation President [and I suppose most here are pro-masturbation, that's why we love him] icon_smile.gif - Bill Clinton's 1st term, all four years the Federal budgets contained major deficit spending (not to mention the numerous scandals). When the Republicans took over the congress (House and Senate), They submitted a balanced budget, but President Clinton did what most President's would not do, He vetoed it. This caused the government to shut down. The liberal media, uniformly in step wept in every news report on how cruelly the Republican effort tp a balanced budget was stealing Christmas from our poor laid off Federal workers will have no money to buy their children Christmas presents, and other stupid pity stories they fabricated (RFOL). How sick can the liberal media be??? The final budget was just under 1% above the balanced budget the republicans wanted. Over the next three years, this remarkable Republican Congress successfully passed a US balanced Budgets, and many more reforms that benefited US Citizens. A most remarkable congress they were.

    Talk about your dirty politics:

    In their efforts to sabotage the Republicans popularity among the electorate, the Democrats kept throwing mud at the new Republican congressmen, trumping up false charges against its' leaders. Of over 200 judicial charges against Newt Gingrich, and plenty of name calling, over several years and many investigations, only 1 charge succeeded, and Newt only agreed to plead guilty to that charge to stop the harassment, which took a great toll on him over those years in office.

    On another matter, I did not care for George Herbert Bush's Presidency. And though I like George W. Bush personally, I do not consider him to be a good President. His biggest fault was surrounding himself with His fathers' advisers, and they steered him wrong. A serious 2nd fault was letting his fellow Republicans officeholders spend as much on their personal pork projects as the Democrats did when they were in power. A 3rd failure, GWB could not handle the liberal media, they boxed him in and essentially he went into exile away from Washington DC, an extremely liberal town.






    THAT IS A TOTAL PILE OF STINKING BULLSHIT AND A LIE.

    FYI - THE FACT IS THAT THE SENATE WAS CONTROLLED BY THE REPUBS FOR THE FIRST 6 YEARS OF REAGAN'S PRESIDENCY.
    LOOK IT UP AND EDUCATE YOURSELF SO YOU DON'T LOOK LIKE SUCH A DUMBASS.

    Also, President Reagan sent budgets to the Congress requesting MORE spending than ended up actually getting passed by the Congress - NOT less.
    http://zfacts.com/p/57.html
    So, Reagans was NOT forced to spend more than he wanted to by a Dem Congress.
    In fact, Reagan didn't get quite as much spending as he requested.

    You Repubs are shameless in your attempts to try to rewrite history.

    THE REPUBS WILL SAY ANYTHING
    DON'T TRUST THEM - THEY WILL LIE TO YOUR FACE.


    And democraps will lie when they're rimming you.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jun 04, 2011 10:54 AM GMT
    And democraps will lie when they're rimming you

    Hehe ... oh Really OG?
    What did the previous poster say that was a lie then ?

    I'd suggest you do a little reading on the republican Saint Ronnie
    because the next words out of my mouth will be .... Oh there you go again icon_rolleyes.gif
    Ronald Reagan Myth Doesn't Square with Reality
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20030729-503544.html

    Debunking the Reagan Myth
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2011 3:29 AM GMT
    Bigolbear quote: His proposal to privatize Social Security was championed by the George W. Bush administration.

    jockfever: By the way, do progressives have any ideas about reforming Social Security, other than to demagogue whatever Republicans propose?

    Bigolbear quote: Ferrara took money from erstwhile lobbyist Jack Abramoff to write op-ed pieces favorable to Abramoff clients.

    jockfever: Ask a noted author to write a piece, and he or she normally isn't going to do it for free.

    Bigolbear quote: He was a Senior Fellow of the Free Enterprise Fund ("FEF"), a free market advocacy group.

    jockfever: Advocating free market economics will be a crime if Obama and his accomplices have their way (kidding, maybe).

    Bigolbear quote: Peter Ferrara is known[3] for his essay, "What Is An American?", published September 25, 2001, just after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.[4] In the essay, he claims that "there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan."[4]

    jockfever: Maybe he got his Muslim data from your hero: “...if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world” (Barrack Hussein Obama).

    Here's the essay with the controversial line removed. In your wildest dreams would Obama write an essay like this?

    What Is An American?
    By Peter Ferrara, an associate professor of law at the George Mason University School of Law.
    September 25, 2001 9:20 a.m.

    You probably missed it in the rush of news last week, but there was actually a report that someone in Pakistan had published in a newspaper there an offer of a reward to anyone who killed an American, any American.
    So I just thought I would write to let them know what an American is, so they would know when they found one.

    An American is English…or French, or Italian, Irish, German, Spanish, Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may also be African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Australian, Iranian, Asian, or Arab, or Pakistani, or Afghan.

    An American is Christian, or he could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim. In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan. The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of them choose.

    An American is also free to believe in no religion. For that he will answer only to God, not to the government, or to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.

    An American is from the most prosperous land in the history of the world. The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes the God-given right of each man and woman to the pursuit of happiness.

    An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need. When Afghanistan was overrun by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country. As of the morning of September 11, Americans had given more than any other nation to the poor in Afghanistan.

    An American does not have to obey the mad ravings of ignorant, ungodly cruel, old men. American men will not be fooled into giving up their lives to kill innocent people, so that these foolish old men may hold on to power. American women are free to show their beautiful faces to the world, as each of them choose.

    An American is free to criticize his government's officials when they are wrong, in his or her own opinion. Then he is free to replace them, by majority vote.

    Americans welcome people from all lands, all cultures, all religions, because they are not afraid. They are not afraid that their history, their religion, their beliefs, will be overrun, or forgotten. That is because they know they are free to hold to their religion, their beliefs, their history, as each of them choose.

    And just as Americans welcome all, they enjoy the best that everyone has to bring, from all over the world. The best science, the best technology, the best products, the best books, the best music, the best food, the best athletes.

    Americans welcome the best, but they also welcome the least. The nation symbol of America welcomes your tired and your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, tempest tossed.

    These in fact are the people who built America. Many of them were working in the twin towers on the morning of September 11, earning a better life for their families.

    So you can try to kill an American if you must. Hitler did. So did General Tojo and Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung, and every bloodthirsty tyrant in the history of the world.

    But in doing so you would just be killing yourself. Because Americans are not a particular people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit of freedom. Everyone who holds to that spirit, everywhere, is an American.

    So look around you. You may find more Americans in your land than you thought were there. One day they will rise up and overthrow the old, ignorant, tired tyrants that trouble too many lands. Then those lands too will join the community of free and prosperous nations.

    And America will welcome them.