The Myth of Ronald Reagan

Lots of people want to deify this president. There has even been the absurd notion of putting his likeness on Mt. Rushmore
Take a look at this perspective of the Reagan legacy. Reagan legacy

Stew,
"Lots of people want to deify this president"

Is “deify” the word you really want here?

My mother worked for the California Republican Party during the time Reagan was governor. She was in the capital with insiders, including Reagan, lots of times. She changed her party affiliation soon after this. I have a very low opinion of Reagan and never voted for him.

Well I could use "canonize" like they are doing to Mother Therasa but thought that a bit strong.

The definition of deify
Pronunciation: 'dE-&-"fI, 'dA-
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -fied; -fy·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French deifier, from Late Latin deificare, from Latin deus god + -ficare -fy
Date: 14th century
1 a : to make a god of b : to take as an object of worship
2 : to glorify as of supreme worth

Yes Keta this is exactly what I had in mind.

[ 10-30-2003, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

That is the most pathetic, stupid, idiotic article I have ever read regarding Ronnie, Stew. Purely nothing more than hate mail for the board. Go fishing dude. It will make you feel better.

Would you like me to post some Kennedy stuff? He was a real nice guy ya know.

[foxer]

It was a good OPINION piece. Nothing substantial to back it up however

[Straydog]

Originally posted by CATCH AND EAT:
That is the most pathetic, stupid, idiotic article I have ever read regarding Ronnie, Stew. ........ Go fishing dude. It will make you feel better.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Not sure it is Stew that needs the therapy, based on your reply! :whazzup:

Originally posted by CATCH AND EAT:
That is the most pathetic, stupid, idiotic article I have ever read regarding Ronnie, Stew. Purely nothing more than hate mail for the board. Go fishing dude. It will make you feel better.

Would you like me to post some Kennedy stuff? He was a real nice guy ya know.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well if you feel you need to Bernie then go ahead I am addressing the myth of Reagan's presidency and not attacking him personally. So if you want to attack JFK's presidential record Bernie then go ahead but I feel that it was incomplete. I'm sure you had something more personal about JFK in mind didn't you Bernie?
BTW I went fishing yesterday :tongue:

[ 10-30-2003, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: Stew ]

Stew,
K.
I'd rather see him crucified but whatever. We do need to show some him some respect due to his present health condition.

[CATCH AND EAT]

Originally posted by Straydog:

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Not sure it is Stew that needs the therapy, based on your reply! :whazzup: [/QB][/QUOTE]

You're right! I need theorpy. I am totally a disfunctional republican that just happened to like Ronnie. :tongue:

I found the article to be insulting and one sided but why should that have suprised me. Sorry you hate Ronnie so much Stew. Darn shame.

Guess I kinda feel the same about Kennedy and Clinton. Did ya notice I did not say Carter? He is a man I can respect. He's done more in his post Presidential years than he ever accomplished as President. Jimmy would be welcome in my home anytime.

Most importantly, did you catch anything during your theropy session yesterday Shane?

[ 10-30-2003, 11:24 AM: Message edited by: CATCH AND EAT ]

Originally posted by Keta:
Stew,
K.
I'd rather see him crucified but whatever. We do need to show some him some respect due to his present health condition.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">He seemed to be a very affable likeable man but he was an overrated president.

[Straydog]

No, C and E, I didn't originally post that........ you did.

Looks like you got your quotes confused a bit. :smile:

[Joe Schwab]

Stew, you have "stewped" to a new low on this one. Can't let it go unchallenged. Who wrote this piece, Michael Moore?

I became a police officer in 1969 and watched the deterioration of respect for law enforcement and government in general as result of liberal court rulings and the hippie culture mindset of the pot generation. The worst four years were when Carter was in office. (By the way I voted for him and regretted it).

When Reagan took over it was like a breath of fresh air. People became much more optimistic and a respect for law enforcement and patriotism flourished.

This was Reagan's legacy, the great communicator. I know liberals will take their potshots at this so go ahead. It's a free country. You will never convince anyone with trash articles like this.

[ 10-30-2003, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Capt. Hook ]

Capt'n,
My dislike for Reagan is on a personal level not a political level like my dislike of Clinton/Gore and that crowd.

[TheRogue]

Well, then this should be interesting...

Reagan TV movie

TR

Originally posted by Capt. Hook:
Stew, you have "stewped" to a new low on this one.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">That's a good one Joe
You are absolutely right about Reagan being a great communicator alright which is just a nice way of saying he was a good BS'er.
No this isn't Michael Moore either
This is just an article on Reagan's presidency...nothing personal :smile:

[CATCH AND EAT]

Kyle, looks lilke another sad attempt to defame him. :depressed: I wont be watching.

[Joe Schwab]

"BS" Isn't that what makes a good leader? Being able to make people feel good at what they are doing and gain a little positive perspective on life in general?

Kennedy did this as well as anyone including FDR.

[ 10-30-2003, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: Capt. Hook ]

[BrionLutz]

Thumper,

Ronald Reagan is going down in history, and will continue to increasingly do so, as one of our greatest presidents.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">History is fairly cruel to Ronnie, as the less lasting waters of feelings recede the islands of facts rise up (Defict, Debt, low GDP, crime, income shift, poverty, etc).

And perhaps in ways he had no clue about.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well to be fair, he didn't have a clue about any of it except putting his feet on the outlines on the floor and reading his script.

As a result of his abiding hatred of the Soviet Union he literally spent the "Evil Empire" to death in building up our military.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Actually Soviets did that, for some 40 years prior to Ronnie. Ronnie spent us into record Deficits and Debt, mostly useless stuff like B1 Bombers, Star Wars, WWII battleships.

More of those cruel facts that historians see.

Brion

[Bounty Hunter]

A lot of that Reagan TV movie is going to be total fiction. The writers have already admitted to making a lot of the important dialogue up.

I think it's sad that people are taking pot-shots at him like that when he is in his current state.

[Pilar]

Hey, Thumper, what a crock!

The Soviet Union collapsed under it's own weight. Reagan was just there when it happened. The vaunted Soviet military was far better on paper and in studies done by the government and military-defense complex to justify defense spending than it ever was in reality.

Just a few highlights.

Liquid fueled ballistic missiles on Soviet submarines. Far more dangerous to the crew of the boat than to the cities they would likely never be able to fly to and nuke. Fueled by Nitrogen tetraoxide and Hydrazine. Nitrogen Tetraoxide + Seawater = poisonous Nitric acid in liquid and gaseous form. This was the armament on Soviet 'Yankee' or Navaga class submarines with 2 warhead, RSM-25 missiles. Ask the crew of the K-219 about poison gas and what happens when a missile silo leaks seawater. That boat or I should say what is left of it lies in 6000 meters of water a few hundred miles NE of Bermuda. BTW the 'Yankee' designation is given because this class of SSBN resembles one of the first US subs to carry nukes. The design was stolen by Soviet spies. These boats were incredibly noisy and easy to trail. Not a credible threat.

The same fuel combination is used in many of the land based missiles. Highly corrosive and required major efforts to maintain readiness of the strategic missile forces in the USSR.

The very structure of the military in the former Soviet Union was intrinsically weak. Poorly trained and poorly motivated 2 year conscripts made up the bulk of the force. They completely lacked the senior enlisted troops that enable the US forces to operate with limited supervision. All Soviet forces were led top down from central control locations making them vulnerable to attacks on command and control.

I could go on but let me just say that what happened to the USSR was just a matter of time. That our intelligence community made them into a 'superpower' and the defense hawks used that excuse to spend billions of deficit dollars on the military industrial complex is inexcusable.

Reagan was a dinosaur and embraced the cold war philosophy. His real legacy is a 4 trillion dollar deficit. How can you feel good about that? His monument should be a bottomless pit in the ground.

[ 10-30-2003, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: Pilar ]

[BrionLutz]

Eek!

TheRogue's agreeing with me. I'm agreeing with Pilar and Mr. Carp.

When's Halloween? I'm already terrified by what I'm seeing.

Of course, El Shaddai is still trying to get me out on the water to re-enact the alternative version of the opening scene on the back of the boat in Titanic.

Pilar thanks for the facts! I remember reading about a MIG fighter that we got our hands on via Japan. The American engineers who examined it we amazed at how arcaic and obsolete the technolgy was.
I think there has been too many people reading Tom Clancy novels :grin:

[willametteriveroutlaw]

Every thread I see Someone bemoaning the fact theat there are ultra rich people and poor people. Many rich people got there because either they worked for it or there familys worked for it. Please get over your petty liberal jealousy.. if you are truly that troubled by someone working hard to earn money, then maybe you should move to a socialist county where everyone, no matter how hard they work, is equal.

[CATCH AND EAT]

You guys are truly hopeless.

[Tanner]

Stew,
I don't get it. Just last week you were talking about the "venom" that right wing conservatives spew but 9 times out of ten the mud slinging gets started by a lefty.

Originally posted by Tanner:
Stew,
I don't get it. Just last week you were talking about the "venom" that right wing conservatives spew but 9 times out of ten the mud slinging gets started by a lefty.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Why Tanner? Because instead posting personal attacks on political individuals, like alot of people have done in this forum I post facts about their record? How is that venemous? Did I say even one thing about RR's personal life or did I say anything about Nancy? No! I attacked his record as president and the myths surrounding it. Better get your facts straight before taking me to task dude Then go back into the archives and see how many attacks there have been on the personal lives of political figures.

[Pilar]

Stew, yeah reading is good. Read a book called 'Hostile Waters' about the last patrol of the K-219 in 1986.

Also another thing is to watch the PBS show Nova and an episode called 'Top Gun over Moscow'. In some ways the Russians had advantages over the US and our technology. In this show a pilot, journalist and writer named Jeffery Ethell goes to Moscow to fly as a passenger on a Russian jet fighter plane with a few other rich thrill seekers. For like $25,000 you could do this too. Mr. Ethell was killed a few years ago when he crashed a restored P-38 that he flew from the Tillamook air base somewhere in the coast range. Anyway the Nova crew interviewed various Russian enlisted men and Officers at the airbase. They laughed at our planes and the fact that it takes like a hundred highly skilled and trained ground crew to maintain a squadron of F-16s. American jets are technically superior they acknowledged but fragile and too dependent on technology. The same size squadron of Russian jets could be serviced (fueled and armed) by just a few relatively unskilled troops on anything from a dirt strip to a modern airfield.

At one point they showed a Russian jet fighter taxiing on runways covered with gravel, trash, debris, sheets of corrugated roofing tin, grass growing between the concrete joints and chickens pecking the dirt, the pilots unconcerned about F.O.D. to the engines.

This aircraft had louvers in the top surfaces of the wings and doors to block the main intakes for ground operations like taxi, take off and landing. The scoop air intakes for the engines were only used in flight. Our high tech. jets must take off and land on strips groomed of any foriegn objects to prevent engine damage. Just one instance where the Russian 'low tech' way of doing things is actually better.

[Birdnest]

Pilar,

Interesting stuff. I, like many Americans, if asked if Reagan outspent the USSR and caused the eventual collapse, would respond with a big ol yes. Right place at the right time. Kinda of like Clinton with the upswing in the economy during his time in office.

Joe

[Thumper]

I am truly surprised by the responses here.

The inventory of the Soviet Union included 15,000 nuclear weapons and associated delivery systems. Those archaic, obsolete delivery systems still had the ability to deliver nuclear weapons, not perhaps with surgical precision, but with devastating, end-of-the-world results.

To say that the Soviet submarines were in all ways inferior to ours is perhaps true. To say that they were "not a credible threat" is unbelievable! It only took one launch, one weapon, by one "obsolete" submarine to end civilization on earth.

The tenets of mutual assured destruction (MAD) made massive retaliation by both sides a committed response to any nuclear attack. One launch, one nuclear weapon delivered on the soil of the U.S. or the Soviet Union or any of our or their allies, meant the likely end of human existence, and maybe the end of life on our planet.

As C&E says, you guys are truly hopeless.

[freespool]

He was the first and last president in history the Audubon Society publicly critisized for his enviornmental policies. That's quite a distintion,perhaps a statue of him at Love Canel would be in order. The placard would read: IF YOU'VE SEEN ONE REDWOOD YOU'VE SEEN THEM ALL or Maybe: NO ARMS FOR HOSTAGES

[Tanner]

Stew,
First of all, my reply was addressed to you because you posted the link to Mike Hersh's article. I was not taking you specifically to task, I was taking the left wing to task.

Secondly,
You told me to get my facts straight so I went and checked out this Mike Hersh. He is writing all kinds of venomous articles that from what I can see are based mostly on his opinion and speculation. web page

I realize that this is no worse than what you see from a lot of right wing columnists. The point I am trying to make is you see it coming from both sides. In debating these issues usually the debate turns real ugly after the person on the left has in any way been offended.(At least that has been my personal experience).

How many offensive to the right bumper stickers do you see compared to offensive to the left. I bet it is 20 to 1.

[ 10-30-2003, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: Tanner ]

[finclipped]

I remember being 12 years old and watching the Reagon-Mondale election results. I don't know why, but I liked Reagan. For a 12 year old, I suppose it was because he was likable. That one little Blue state of Michigan and the rest were all red. I can even remember watching the states light up one by one, hoping for another "red." What a landslide.

The extreme deficit initiated by Reagan was actually a result of assumed government spending in relationship to inflation. Annual government spending had built in huge increases when inflation was high, so spending could keep up. But the congress & house could not agree on reductions to the annual increase fast enough as inflation came down (Imagine that?) So we had programs growing at 10-12% when inflation was only 3-4%. Hence, huge deficit.

Just for clarification, I am a Dem now.

[DanS]

Did you think everyone was going to agree with you, Jack?

[CATCH AND EAT]

Chill Stew. I did not see a reference of personal attacks in Tanners responce. You assumed his meaning.

Pilar, yes reading is good. Common sense is better. Certainly Soviet technology was archaic, obsolete yet still very deadly. We proved your first point in the war #1 with Iraq when we decimated Mig fighters and Soviet artillary. However as has been shown by milatants, you dont need a nuke to do a lot of damage.

Soviet missles can and will reach the USA. Ineffective you say. Bull-oney! It only takes one missle John and I know I do not have to educate you on this matter due to your experience in the school of submarines. But you also have to take into account that our so called high tech army can't find a bin-laudin or Sadam. :shocked:

Jack is right. The so called fregling armies of the world with archaic weapons will prove more dangerous in the future than any of us believe. It only takes one of these obsolete weapons to change mankind. just ask the Japanese.

[Pilar]

Jack, if the boat that was launching that ballistic missile was trailed by the US or a Nato country in a fast attack sub and the enemy stopped a Mk 48 torpedo as it surfaced to nuke the US how effective is that?

If the US and Nato countries built a SOSUS hydrophone net that spanned the Atlantic Ocean and could locate, catalogue and identify every vessel that crossed the SOSUS line how could they have slipped into our space with their clanky boats without being detected?

Almost every missile patrol the Ruskies made was tracked from the time they left their homeport until they returned. The US fast attack subs made it their business as hunter-killers to nullify the threat of Soviet ballistic missile subs that lurked near our shores.

Don't ask me how I know this.

We can thank Reagan for the 600 ship navy and the military buildup that created these weapons that defend our shores. He just did not think it was important to have the money to pay for it first and the result is the huge deficit.

[Jennie@ifish]

Hey! Does anyone know how to fish anymore?
:smile:

Come on, you guys... please kiss and make up. NOW!

:smile: :smile:

Jen

[happybrew]

Okay, just one post won't hurt me! I can quit anytime I want! Really! [img]graemlins/1zhelp.gif[/img]

Okay, no more rationalizing it.

Willpower!

Okay, all better now!



Almost!

Let me try again! :depressed:

Nope.

:smile:

Okay, now I'm all better. Just need willpower!

happybrew

[Pilar]

What's a fish anyway? How would I know when I saw one? Does it have Hooves? Fur? Feathers? a Beak?

Can't remember. Seems like I knew once but .. .nevermind.

Originally posted by Jennie@ifish:
Hey! Does anyone know how to fish anymore?
:smile:

Come on, you guys... please kiss and make up. NOW!

:smile: :smile:

Jen

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Fished yesterday and lost my best salmon jig on a fish :depressed: Come to think of it I also lost my second best jig on another fish. I just had to take it on on someone

[ 10-30-2003, 03:22 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[Thumper]

Originally posted by Pilar:
Almost every missile patrol the Ruskies made was tracked from the time they left their homeport until they returned.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Pilar --- The operative word is "almost". Do you believe that you could have stopped every sub, every launch, every time?

One error on your part and the world ends. "Not a credible threat." Unbelievable.

MAD was implemented by JFK's own Secretary Of State, Secretary Dean Rusk. It was operative for 40 years. Still is, I suspect.

[AuntyM]

All I know is.... Until Ronnie came along, my family was living in poverty. Hubby was active duty military. He was a 2nd class Petty Officer at the time. We lived in sub standard housing that had been slated for demolition, but kept open so that many families wouldn't have to try and live in town. Those who couldn't get into housing often would send spouses to live with family far away. No internet chatting back then! Long distance phone calls were only made in emergencies.

We had to save money for two pay periods just to go to the drive-in. Hubby ate as many meals on his ship/base as he could, so the food we bought would last till payday.

We took up striper fishing with some old gear hubby had as a teenager. I dug worms in the yard, then went down to the slough and caught bullheads and mudsuckers to use as bait. Caught enough stripers that we could freeze plenty and I could serve some decent meals besides pinto beans or split pea soup.

If Stew knew how hubby feels about Ronnie giving the military guys a fair shake and finally paying them enough to be proud of their military career, I doubt he would have even brought this thread up.

[BrionLutz]

WRO,

Many rich people got there because either they worked for it or there familys worked for it. Please get over your petty liberal jealousy.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Jeez...there's no winning. One minute we are city boy limousine liberals, too rich to understand the problems of the working folks, the next we are po'boys jealous of the rich Republicans.

Trouble with pigeon holes is that they have two ends and the pigeon ends up flying out the other end, leaving you empty handed.

Brion

What about us po conservatives? Just because someone else has more than I do I don't feel the government has the right to redistribute the wealth.

[ 10-31-2003, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[Thumper]

Ronald Reagan is going down in history, and will continue to increasingly do so, as one of our greatest presidents. And perhaps in ways he had no clue about.

As a result of his abiding hatred of the Soviet Union he literally spent the "Evil Empire" to death in building up our military. Faced with the inability to compete with the U.S., the economy of the old Soviet regime crumbled.

Reagan perhaps didn't know it at the time, but he literally saved civilization.

And that, in my book, makes him one of the greatest of all U.S. presidents.

Originally posted by Thumper:
Ronald Reagan is going down in history, and will continue to increasingly do so, as one of our greatest presidents. And perhaps in ways he had no clue about.

As a result of his abiding hatred of the Soviet Union he literally spent the "Evil Empire" to death in building up our military. Faced with the inability to compete with the U.S., the economy of the old Soviet regime crumbled.

Reagan perhaps didn't know it at the time, but he literally saved civilization.

And that, in my book, makes him one of the greatest of all U.S. presidents.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Jack you have a nice moustache :tongue: Overrated is a good way of putting it when talking about Ronnie as president.

[ 10-30-2003, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

This thread was not started to offend anyone. It is merely a political opinion of the presidency of Ronald Reagan and nothing more. I did not attack his character or him as a person at all. If anyone took it as a personal insult then they misinterpreted it because that was not why I started it.
Jennie has seen fit allow political discussions and opinions on this forum and I was just stating mine.
There are many people who have participated in this thread who, although I differ politcally with them, I still like and respect...yes even you Bernie

[ 10-31-2003, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[CATCH AND EAT]

Awhhhhhhhh.... Stewy, I love you man [img]graemlins/hearton.gif[/img] You're a good egg Shane, just kind of a yoke'l at times with those dirty little liberal politics of yours

[Thumper]

I like Stew, even though he has become a fly fisherman. That's even worse than a liberal democrat. [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Thumper:
I like Stew, even though he has become a fly fisherman. That's even worse than a liberal democrat. [img]graemlins/berry.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica"> You know something Jack you'd think as a dignified older gentleman you would turn to the more aesthetic types of fishing. I can picture you out there in your Orvis tweeds and split-can fly rod smoking a meerschaum pipe.
Seriously though I know there are people who admire Ronald Reagan and that's fine.
All I know is myself and my family suffered during his presidency and that's a fact.
Too easily we deify (there's that word again Keta) our leaders. Not so much from what they accomplished but the way they made us feel. JFK is a perfect example of that. His presidency was incomplete! We'll never know what could have been because his life was cut tragically short.I admired him because I thought he was a courageous leader but is he one of our greatest presidents? No.
My generation remembers well Nov.22,1963. It was the most profoundly stark and tragic national event in my lifetime. Sept.11 is another one!
Of course Capt.Hook and Thumper can probably remember how they felt when the Titanic sank
Anyway it's all good for the most part and thanks go to Jennie for allowing this forum.

[ 10-31-2003, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

[GutZ]

I was in the Air Force stationed at Rhein Main Air Force Base the day Ronald Reagan was inagurated. That was the last day of the Iranian hostage crisis.

The dollar also went from 1.70 mark to the dollar to 2.5 in a day. That significantly reduced the price of beer!

Deify the Man! Freedom and beer! on one day!

[BrionLutz]

GutZ,

The dollar also went from 1.70 mark to the dollar to 2.5 in a day.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">And totally wacked US exporting bizs, jumped the trade deficit and was a big contributor to the recession that started when that and other Reagan policies (Deficit spending) kicked in.

Brion

[Thumper]

Thank goodness for the deficit spending, regardless of whose "fault" it was (democrat-controlled Congress or the President). The Soviets interpreted the spending as evidence that Reagan was crazily building armaments (which he was) and that was a pivotal reason why they caved in.

I am convinced that history will judge Reagan's armaments build-up as the decisive final step in the cold war. We won it without firing a shot.

Incidentally, this is not my view, but that of many insiders in the Pentagon, where a very close relative of mine served as Assistant Secretary of the Air Force.

[Tanner]

Brion,
What does that have to do with cheap beer?? :tongue:

[ 10-31-2003, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Tanner ]

Hey Tanner come to the flyfishers get together tomorrow night so we can discuss you duties as president of the "Stew is My Idol" fan club.

[BrionLutz]

Thumper,

Thank goodness for the deficit spending, regardless of whose "fault" it was (democrat-controlled Congress or the President).

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well...Reagan took credit for it so we'll let him have it.

You won't find any economist, particlarly conservative ones, supporting the structural deficits and debt of the Reagan/Bush Sr era.

David Stockman, the OMB Director and the actual brains behind Reaganomics quit because Reagan was too crazy to stop the Deficit spending. Stockman's idea was to force cuts in spending by creating huge deficits. Not even the Republican controlled Congress of 1981-86 bought so Stockman felt it was irresponsible and damaging to the US to continue with the Deficits.

Reagan believed the fantasy that his tax cut would increase GDP growth to pay for it. That was never in Stockman's plan and was never going to happen,.

You see the same with Bush Jr, even high recent GDP growth is not significantly lowering his Deficits and Debt creation.

The Soviets interpreted the spending as evidence that Reagan was crazily building armaments (which he was) and that was a pivotal reason why they caved in.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">So you, like Reagan, believed the Soviet economic model was viable. Most folks did not think that. Our policy of containment was based on that view. The Soviets had already spent too much on defense and were beginning to cut back and change when Reagan came into office.

As for Reagan, winning the Cold War, puleeze. The Cold War started in 1945 to 1985 when Gobrachev took power.

Truman, Ike, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter and then Reagan. Reagan has the least impact.

By the Reaganauts "logic" Harry Truman "won" WWII.

Brion

[lingslayer]

Originally posted by BrionLutz:
Stockman's idea was to force cuts in spending by creating huge deficits. Not even the Republican controlled Congress of 1981-86 bought so Stockman felt it was irresponsible and damaging to the US to continue with the Deficits.
Brion

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Nice try brion. Another example of your "facts" I guess.

Reagan's congress was split, with a slight advantage to Republicans in the senate. Hardly a "Republican controlled congress". The balance of power on the hill at the time was widely regarded to be with the dems.
Look here for a history of congressional balance:

http://usliberals.about.com/library/...lcongressa.htm

The most powerful man in Washington at the time was "fat cat" dem Tip O'Neill, and the most influential committees on budget matters were/are in the house.
Jamie

[Albacore Tuna Captain]

Reagon was a great man. Carter too. Clinton was President of the United States as was Lincoln, Washington, etc. etc. Some were better than others. None had total support of the people who put them into office. I challenge any of the detractors to become President and do a better job, ie, not being drug over the coals by every dissatisfied Monday morning quarterback.

I believe all our Presidents have done the best job they could. If they didn't satisfy enough of us, they were replaced. To continuously harangue past or present Presidents based on our ideas as to what they should be doing is just an activity at hearing ourselves complain and hoping to get an audience to agree.....or disagree for the sack of argument.

In my opinion, Reagon was a good President. Carter was a great man but not so good in politics. I don't know what Kennedy did that was so great other than supporting the civil rights movement and getting killed on national t.v. and almost getting us into WWIII. But I think he was a great man too. Clinton I don't like because of his morales but he too was a great man. You see, you just don't get to that office unless you're a great man.

So let's give it a rest, okay? Yes, we have the right to voice our opinion, but come on.....

[BrionLutz]

Lingslayer,

Reagan's congress was split, with a slight advantage to Republicans in the senate.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">We call that a majority &lt;grin&gt;. You may remember how much it matters by how much fighting went on when Senate was 50-50 recently.

Hardly a "Republican controlled congress".

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Well..as noted, the Congress did pass Reagan's budgets, Reagan took credit for getting his programs passed and, more importantly, the results. The reason Reagan got everything he wanted from Congress from 1981-86 when the Republicans had a majority was due to number of "Democrats" in the House who supported Reagan and later changed to Republican. You may remember Democratic Congressman Phil Gramm of Texas who became Republican Senator Phil Gramm and Republican Presidential candidate Phil Gramm. He was even closer to Enron than Bush Jr and decided it was best not to run for re-election.

It always cracks me up to watch Republicans take credit for the "Reagan Revolution" until someone starts pointing out the hard numbers that resulted from Reagan/Bush Sr policies and then it's someone elses "revolution".

As noted, if every President/Congress combo Republican/Democrat reduced the Debt/GDP before and after Reagan/Bush Sr, clearly the radical deficit policies of Reagan/Bush Sr are to blame.

Brion

[BrionLutz]

Tuna Cap,

To continuously harangue past or present Presidents based on our ideas as to what they should be doing is just an activity at hearing ourselves complain and hoping to get an audience to agree.....or disagree for the sack of argument.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">It's like fishing. Understanding what worked and what didn't work so we don't make the same mistakes.

Look at the hard number results as number of fish caught to decide if you use the green spot spinner or the herring.

Brion