Ronald Reagan was right!

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


Exactly.


Much like the whole "Game Theory" when in terms of an oligopoly, what seems to make sense in models does not necessarily lead to the same once the human factor is installed.

That's why demand-side economics is a better theory. It accounts for the human factor, and helps generate more spending by the lower and middle class.

So, yes, conservatives like to think they have a better understanding of economics, but I'd say it's debatable. Moreover, it is ignorant on their part to believe they are that much more superior.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]




posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Wonderful speech from 1964.

A lot sure changed between that man then and the man who served 2 terms from 81 to 89.

Maybe it was the stifling constraints of office that changed him?

I clearly remember...Mulroney and Reagan... the Gruesome Twosome as Jim Davies Of the Calgary Sun called them repeatedly I believe...

That was the beginning of Canada's troubles with the US.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by mybigunit
 


Exactly.


Much like the whole "Game Theory" when in terms of an oligopoly, what seems to make sense in models does not necessarily lead to the same once the human factor is installed.

That's why demand-side economics is a better theory. It accounts for the human factor, and helps generate more spending by the lower and middle class.

So, yes, conservatives like to think they have a better understanding of economics, but I'd say it's debatable. Moreover, it is ignorant on their part to believe they are that much more superior.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]


Since when did "models" predict anything? People arent cookie cutter beings and there are too many variables to rely on....Thats not even factoring in the grand puppet masters who actually dictate the fates of nations.....or the unexpected events that could muck up the best laid plans of mice and men (Thanks Shakespeare!)....

Trickle Down was aptly termed "VOODOO ECONOMICS by Reagan's own Vice President, Bush the Elder. It was nothing more than smoke and mirrors meant to mollify the masses into thinking that the one-time concept of Noblesse Oblige was alive and well.

We all know it isnt. Unless you're a banker that is...

edit for spelling.

[edit on 11/12/08 by irishgrl]



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck


So, yes, conservatives like to think they have a better understanding of economics, but I'd say it's debatable. Moreover, it is ignorant on their part to believe they are that much more superior.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Irish M1ck]


In my eyes its not even debatable. Neo Con economics just plain does not work. It gives all the tax breaks to the top in hopes of the trickle down affect which only make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Also because they dont justify the lower taxes with lower spending it adds on to the national debt which is a big part of our problem today. In a true free society there would be no taxes on individuals. Let the taxes be on corporations and other excise taxes. But right now your average joe making 100k a year pays around 33% in taxes while Warren Buffet pays 15%. Not really fair.

The democrats have the right idea because they at least pay for their big government hence the balanced budgets making them the lesser of the two economic evils in my eyes. But they are still evil in my eyes because of the big government they bring ie the nanny state, the police state, the welfare state, and the war state.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by irishgrl
 


Shakespeare?



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
I have the privelage of going to Ronald Reagans alma mater and everything we learn about was inspired by him. He was a great president and a great man.

Excellant video, kinda makes you wonder if that was the reason why there was an attempted assassination against him.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by irishgrl
 


Shakespeare?

yes. for the phrase "the best laid plans of mice and men"



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by irishgrl
 


I don't think that's his.


From the book, "Of Mice and Men", which made it famous.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loutty
I have the privelage of going to Ronald Reagans alma mater and everything we learn about was inspired by him. He was a great president and a great man.

Excellant video, kinda makes you wonder if that was the reason why there was an attempted assassination against him.


apparently they forgot the topic of spelling. And he was neither a great President nor a great man. Poor Brady took the bullet.....



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by irishgrl
 


I don't think that's his.


From the book, "Of Mice and Men", which made it famous.

alright, Wiki cites Robert Burns and I'll concede. My mistake.



the title is taken from Robert Burns's poem, To a Mouse, which is often quoted as: "The best-laid plans of mice and men/often go awry," though the phrase in the original Scots of the poem is "The best laid schemes o' mice an' men/Gang aft agley."


this however does not negate the spirit of the passage which infers that nothing is 100% predictable.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by irishgrl
 


Absolutely. I should have just PM'd you about it. I was just confused at first.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:43 PM
link   
by all means, keep me honest. thats what we ALL need. Thank you for correcting me.

Im not wrong about Reagan however. I knew what he was capable of back in the 70's.

[edit on 11/12/08 by irishgrl]



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
Some of you will scoff, but if you read the many posts here about the NWO and the take over of our country by special interests...maybe you will take the time to listen to this 1964 speech Reagan made on the very problems we here everyday complain about. The names have changed and the numbers have gotten worse, but this one speech actualy predicts our situation today!

video.google.com...

Zindo


Yea he was right... That's why they tried to kill him.

They straightened his act up real quick.

(my very small 2 cents)



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doomsday 2029

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
Some of you will scoff, but if you read the many posts here about the NWO and the take over of our country by special interests...maybe you will take the time to listen to this 1964 speech Reagan made on the very problems we here everyday complain about. The names have changed and the numbers have gotten worse, but this one speech actualy predicts our situation today!

video.google.com...

Zindo


Yea he was right... That's why they tried to kill him.

They straightened his act up real quick.

(my very small 2 cents)


Poor Hinkley, he had no idea his love for Jodi Foster was in reality manipulated by dark forces that um....were actually in control???? Reagan actually had the biggest shoe in of any President in recent memory, so Im not sure who you are insinuating wanted him dead besides a mentally ill person (who would have been locked up in a ward had Reagan not opened all their doors 10 years earlier....) oh well, isnt History a cool thing? you can revise it as you wish as long as you control all media outlets....



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 09:55 PM
link   
I am amazed at the creator of his thread, The Op. Ronald Reagan was right? Ronal Reagan was the the messiah of the old GOP. He did establish the culmination of the old conservative thought. It is fitting in a way that the current place the republican party, finds itself, is in a place divided.

What does it mean to be conservative? I don't necessarily find myself so far at odds to what that thought really means, I believe in removing an unredeemable soul from our burden. I believe in the sanctity of human life, (abortion), but I do not believe in my right to make that decision fo someone other than myself.


Come 2012, or ultimate judgement, I will stand for what I beleive, and that is tolerance and acceptance for that which doesn't fit, circle into square, of my own belief, I think my own freedom willl come from looking into the "bigger picture".

However I express myself. within my ability,the bigger part of this, "deny ignorance" community, will be there with me.

Ronald Reagan is right but way too subservant.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
Wow....great find Zindo.

Now this is a speech.


Absolutely! I'd like to see anyone give such an eloquent speech with this much substance and less rhetoric these days.



[edit on 12-11-2008 by manticore]



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   
iMO Reagan was the best president available for the time he served. He was able to fill a much needed role that the country needed during those years. I think he will be remembered as one of the top 5 presidents ever.

I did not vote for Obama but I hope like Reagan he is what the country needs at this time.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by irishgrl

Originally posted by Doomsday 2029

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
Some of you will scoff, but if you read the many posts here about the NWO and the take over of our country by special interests...maybe you will take the time to listen to this 1964 speech Reagan made on the very problems we here everyday complain about. The names have changed and the numbers have gotten worse, but this one speech actualy predicts our situation today!

video.google.com...

Zindo


Yea he was right... That's why they tried to kill him.

They straightened his act up real quick.

(my very small 2 cents)


Poor Hinkley, he had no idea his love for Jodi Foster was in reality manipulated by dark forces that um....were actually in control???? Reagan actually had the biggest shoe in of any President in recent memory, so Im not sure who you are insinuating wanted him dead besides a mentally ill person (who would have been locked up in a ward had Reagan not opened all their doors 10 years earlier....) oh well, isnt History a cool thing? you can revise it as you wish as long as you control all media outlets....



I really wish you were still logged on ATS so you could read my reply...

Uhhh... who killed Robert Kenedy? Was he mentally ill as well?

Were the the people at JonesTown mentally ill? Or Brainwashed?

It's not that hard to brainwash someone to do your dirty work... But I guess we have no proof.



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Loutty
Excellant video, kinda makes you wonder if that was the reason why there was an attempted assassination against him.


I didn't want to reopen this "can of worms", but since you brought it up, here goes!

Here's a quick summary as to why I believe there was an attempt on this great man's life.

1. George H.W. Bush lost the primary against Reagan.

2. Reagan did not like Bush Sr. but was forced (coerced) to choose him as his running mate.

3. The Bush cabal knew this was the quickest way to continue what Prescott
Bush started. In 1933 Prescott Bush organized a coup against F.D.R.. More on this: In 1933, Marine Corps Maj.-Gen. Smedley Butler was approached by a wealthy and secretive group of industrialists and bankers, including Prescott Bush the current President's grandfather, who asked him to command a 500,000 strong rogue army of veterans that would help stage a coup to topple then President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and would bring a fascist dictatorship a la Benito Mussolini. More on this here: External source

So in reality, what we saw on March 30, 1981 was another try at a coup d'état by the same Bush family. You may know how Hinkley's family was entrenched with the Bush family and were friends in the oil business and were strong financial supporters.

There you go. That's why there was an attempt on his life. Obiouvsly, the Bush saga continues... And I'm sure you know who said this: "It would be so much easier if this was a dictatorship. So long as I'm the dictator." The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree.

I'm embarrassed to say I voted for Bush Jr. twice. I'm also a Republican who voted for Obama because I believe he was the best choice (not that we have that many) at this critical moment (short of Ron Paul, IMHO).


[edit on 12-11-2008 by manticore]



posted on Nov, 12 2008 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by manticore
Absolutely! At first, I thought, TELEPROMPTERS. But wait, that was 1964. There were no teleprompters during that speech. I'd like to see anyone today give a speech like that without one. Impossible!!


The teleprompter was invented in the 1950's. (See this link: en.wikipedia.org...) So yes, they existed during Reagan's speech.

But that is immaterial.

WHY?

BECAUSE REAGAN WAS AN ACTOR for gods sake. He was used to memorizing pages of dialogue. He was used to delivering lines as if he believed in them.

Like Reagan, any good actor can deliver a speech like the one he did. I can easily do the same myself. And you can too. And so can anyone who is a member of, say, an organization like Toastmasters, or who has any theatrical training.

It's not hard.

And it's CERTAINLY NOT "impossible."

Ronald Reagan was a patsy to the early Neo-Cons. Reagan became a symbol for conservatism, even though Neo-Con conservatism was the very antithesis to true conservatism. (CONSERVE? Really? Think about that word. What does it mean to CONSERVE??? To preserve the land? YES! To conserve the environment? YES! To conserve our resources and NOT drill for oil in sensitive areas? YES!)

BUT NO! In a bizarre 180, conservatism has become the doctrine of exploitation, NOT conservation. Do you realize that the "conservatives" of 150 years ago would actually be labelled as liberal today? Do you realize that Abraham Lincoln (a Republican party member at the time) would actually be labeled a Democrat today?

The doctrine of "conservation of our world" - i.e. conservatism - is now held in the grip of Democrats in America, not Republicans.

Oh the irony of it all!

[edit on 12-11-2008 by astron1000]





new topics
top topics
 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join