We've been here before. Your take on Reagan continues to be off the wall. Truth is, conservatives want a return to the successful Reagan era policy agenda of the 1980`s, when we had solid leadership based on traditional American values and beliefs. And respect for the Constitution.
>>>>>Today you learned some history about the man whose name you use.
LOL I learned that you're still a clown. Lets set the record straight, bozo.
Reagan may have come into this world a liberal Democrat, but he died a conservative Republican. In between, Reagan was a Republican longer then he was a Democrat and a conservative longer then he was a liberal. Reagan started his political re-education and switch to ideas centered around conservatism, lower taxes and limited government during his years as a spokesman for General Electric in the 1950`s. In 1952 he voted for Eisenhower, then again for Ike in 1956 and later for Nixon in 1960.
While Reagan always admired FDR`s leadership style, he came to reject the New Deal. Even publicly stating that FDR wanted Social Security to be eventually privatized. Reagan's fading hope that the Democratic Party would reverse its march to the liberal-socialist left ended in 1962 when he finally joined the Republican Party. Btw, Reagan ran for President the first time in 1968, not 1976.
Reagan was firmly in the prolife camp and clearly did not favor abortion on demand, personally or as a matter of public policy. The 1967 Therapeutic Abortion Act that Reagan signed into law as Governor of California, DID NOT grant abortions on demand. It was advertised as a compassionate law that would be used to deal with the difficult abortion cases. The liberal medical community in California saw this as an opportunity to circumvent the system, expand and abuse a limited law into granting abortion on demand. Reagan's worst fears were realized, but reversing the Therapeutic Abortion Act wasn't an option. Even if Reagan had decided to veto it, he would have been overridden by the state legislature.
As Governor, Reagan returned $5-billion to California taxpayers in the form of four tax rebates. This offset the tax increases agreed to with the Democrat legislature. Reagan was successful in welfare reform, ultimately decreasing welfare rolls, reducing waste, fraud and abuse, saving billions of dollars for taxpayers. Reagan also left California with a balanced budget, along with a fiscally sound and growing economy.
For your information, a President doesn't control the purse strings. The Congress does. The Democrats controlled the House in the 1980`s and had control over the budgets during Reagan's Presidency. Reagan's good relations with conservative House Democrats and Speaker Tip O'Neill helped get his tax cuts and military build up through the House and passed into law.
Reagan left office in 1989 with the lowest tax rates since the 1920`s; a booming economy; historic deregulation of the federal bureaucracy; a smaller federal budget, as a percentage of GDP; reductions in welfare state spending and expansion; a falling annual deficit; a much stronger military and national defense; and a huge victory in winning the Cold War and dismantling the Sovet Empire, freeing some 500 million people from totalitarian rule.
From glancing at your FR homepage, looks like you want to return to the failed domestic policy agenda of Bush43 and the incompetents running the GOP. After losing in 2006 and 2008, looks like you've learned nothing.
lol.
We've been here before. Your take on Reagan continues to be off the wall. Truth is, conservatives want a return to the successful Reagan era policy agenda of the 1980`s, when we had solid leadership based on traditional American values and beliefs. And respect for the Constitution.
Truth is you have yet to refute one of my points.
>>>>>Today you learned some history about the man whose name you use.
LOL I learned that you're still a clown. Lets set the record straight, bozo.
Reagan may have come into this world a liberal Democrat, but he died a conservative Republican. In between, Reagan was a Republican longer then he was a Democrat and a conservative longer then he was a liberal. Reagan started his political re-education and switch to ideas centered around conservatism, lower taxes and limited government during his years as a spokesman for General Electric in the 1950`s. In 1952 he voted for Eisenhower, then again for Ike in 1956 and later for Nixon in 1960.
So you agree Reagan was a rat and a liberal before switching GOP. That was the gist of the 1st sentence of my "dumb post." I also aluded to Reagan's famous quote, "I didn't leave the rat party, the rat party left me." I'll take your silence as concession on that point.
While Reagan always admired FDR`s leadership style, he came to reject the New Deal. Even publicly stating that FDR wanted Social Security to be eventually privatized. Reagan's fading hope that the Democratic Party would reverse its march to the liberal-socialist left ended in 1962 when he finally joined the Republican Party. Btw, Reagan ran for President the first time in 1968, not 1976.
We now agree on my 2nd sentence...Reagan was an "Admirer of FDR and the New Deal." My 3rd sentence "Elected and re-elected 7 times as President of his union." was overlooked by you.
Reagan was firmly in the prolife camp and clearly did not favor abortion on demand, personally or as a matter of public policy. The 1967 Therapeutic Abortion Act that Reagan signed into law as Governor of California, DID NOT grant abortions on demand. It was advertised as a compassionate law that would be used to deal with the difficult abortion cases. The liberal medical community in California saw this as an opportunity to circumvent the system, expand and abuse a limited law into granting abortion on demand. Reagan's worst fears were realized, but reversing the Therapeutic Abortion Act wasn't an option. Even if Reagan had decided to veto it, he would have been overridden by the state legislature.
"Compassionate abortions" nice. So then I guess you believe signing "compassionate" abortion rights is OK especially if the rats will override a VETO. Sounds like expediency to me. So this very long paragraph along with the next one show we agree with my 4th sentence "Expanding abortion and raising taxes as Gov."
As Governor, Reagan returned $5-billion to California taxpayers in the form of four tax rebates. This offset the tax increases agreed to with the Democrat legislature. Reagan was successful in welfare reform, ultimately decreasing welfare rolls, reducing waste, fraud and abuse, saving billions of dollars for taxpayers. Reagan also left California with a balanced budget, along with a fiscally sound and growing economy.
For your information, a President doesn't control the purse strings. The Congress does. The Democrats controlled the House in the 1980`s and had control over the budgets during Reagan's Presidency. Reagan's good relations with conservative House Democrats and Speaker Tip O'Neill helped get his tax cuts and military build up through the House and passed into law.
One could say the same thing about Bush's bipartisanship. It helped get his tax cuts and military build up through the House and passed into law. we now agree with my 5th sentence "Constantly praising and hang out with the rat Speaker of the House."
Reagan left office in 1989 with the lowest tax rates since the 1920`s; a booming economy; historic deregulation of the federal bureaucracy; a smaller federal budget, as a percentage of GDP; reductions in welfare state spending and expansion; a falling annual deficit; a much stronger military and national defense; and a huge victory in winning the Cold War and dismantling the Sovet Empire, freeing some 500 million people from totalitarian rule.
Which has nothing to do with my 6th sentence "record breaking national debt...liberal like that?"
From glancing at your FR homepage, looks like you want to return to the failed domestic policy agenda of Bush43 and the incompetents running the GOP. After losing in 2006 and 2008, looks like you've learned nothing.
Also unresponsive to any of my points. It's not that I disagree with a word you wrote, aside from the personal attacks on me, it just that none of it is pertinent to the disagreement you have with me. You have conceded each point and offered up your opinion why my factual points don't count. Your search of my home page for more irrelevancies, with which to muddy the waters further, indicates you probably know your argument is weak. IMO Your hyperbolic personal attacks weaken your weak argument.
Washington rarely gets anything right. Bush got it pretty close to right in taking out rogue nations Afghanistan and Iraq as a response to 9-11. I would have preferred we take out Iran and N Korea too, but Dubya has a foreign policy record rivaling Reagan. I sure wish McCain was in charge of unfinished work.
Thank you for affirming my points even as you call me ignorant. If the definition of Neo-Con is a liberal whose been mugged then we have made a good argument that Reagan was a Neo-Con.