|
|
Topic started on 6-6-2009 @ 05:35 PM by grover
|
      
Ronald Reagan: Worst President Ever?
www.consortiumnews.com
 There’s been talk that George W. Bush was so inept that he should trademark the phrase “Worst President Ever,” though some historians
would bestow that title on pre-Civil War President James Buchanan. Still, a case could be made for putting Ronald Reagan in the competition.
Granted, the very idea of rating Reagan as one of the worst presidents ever will infuriate his many right-wing acolytes and offend Washington insiders
who have made a cottage industry out of buying some protection from Republicans by lauding the 40th President.
But there’s a growing realization that the starting point for many of the catastrophes confronting the United States today can be traced to
Reagan’s presidency. There’s also a grudging reassessment that the “failed” presidents of the 1970s – Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford and Jimmy
Carter – may deserve more credit for trying to grapple with the problems that now beset the country. (visit the link for the full news
article)
[edit on 6-6-2009 by grover]
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Politicians & People topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 05:35 PM by grover
|
  
I was never enamored with Reagan or his portrayal of a President.
He was great if you were a rich white male or wanted to be... and by playing off of the lower classes desire to be upper class... is how he got to the
oval office.
But if you were poor, a minority, a woman, had AIDS or were somehow part of the margins of society, he couldn't care less.
His promises to reign in government was totally hollow and we had a larger government and a bigger deficit than we did when he entered office...
Still I wouldn't call him the worst president but he was the first of what has become an ugly mantra of the current political situation in our
nation...
He was the first partisan president as opposed to a national president... by that I mean that he was the first for whom someone could say depending on
their political leanings that he's my president or he's not my president as opposed to our president regardless of party...
An ugly fact that has carried through since with both Bushes, Clinton and now Obama.
www.consortiumnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
[edit on 6-6-2009 by grover]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 05:39 PM by mostlyspoons
|
            
WRONG the starting point for everything goin to SH*T in this country was FDR's decision to borrow from the future to get out of the depression. Well
guess what? THAT future is NOW, and payment is DUE...
[edit on 6-6-2009 by mostlyspoons]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 05:42 PM by grover
|
    
reply to post by mostlyspoons
We've had several balanced budgets since FDR including the one Clinton left bush minor... but even with that you are wrong because the government has
been running periodic deficits since the beginning of the nation.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 05:42 PM by dooper
|
  
The irreversible decline in the United States was entirely due to changes made under the Wilson presidency.
It's been one turd after another - some are just larger than others.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 05:44 PM by grover
|
In case you didn't notice I actually disagreed with the article.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 06:06 PM by asmall89
|
reply to post by grover
Part of the reason we got such huge deficits under Reagan was because ever since Nixon abolished the Gold Standard we could print money how ever much
we liked and it just kept growing and growing ever since. Also the 80's is where America started to focus on consumerism more and outsourcing. You
can't solely blame that on Reagan, sure he gets way too much credit amongst conservatives, but he probably was one of the better republicans this
country has had in a long long long time.
You can't nesisarily pin point where America had a lot of it's problems, heck this country was born with problems, but financially you can see them
start with Woodrow Wilson then to Herbert Hoover and FDR, then to Lyndon Johnson & Nixon (to name the biggies).
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 06:31 PM by Leo Strauss
|
In a word ...yes.
GWBush comes in a close second.
They both have destroyed the dream of the United States and the rights of man.
Way to go Gipper!
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:02 PM by grover
|

As far as I am concerned Reagan's biggest fault is that he really had no serious grasp on the issues that confronted him. He was hired to portray a
president which he did faultlessly but all the strings were being pulled by the men behind the curtain... in many ways the same could be said for bush
minor...
That is in essence the biggest differences between Reagan and bush minor... and Bush senior, Clinton and Obama... They had/have substance while RR and
jr. were all show.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:13 PM by Leo Strauss
|

|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:16 PM by xxpigxx
|
   
Obama . . . substance?
Soory. There is no substance with Obama.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:17 PM by pavil
|
    
Originally posted by grover
As far as I am concerned Reagan's biggest fault is that he really had no serious grasp on the issues that confronted him. He was hired to portray a
president which he did faultlessly but all the strings were being pulled by the men behind the curtain... in many ways the same could be said for bush
minor...
That is in essence the biggest differences between Reagan and bush minor... and Bush senior, Clinton and Obama... They had/have substance while RR and
jr. were all show.
I whole heartily disagree. Reagan was very aware of the "big picture", which in his case, was the fall of the Soviet Empire. He knew that the
Soviets could barely keep their country going and that the arms race was a way to bankrupt them into collapse and then into serious negoatiations.
Take a look at at all his unpopular stances ie (Reykjavík, Medium Range missiles in Europe, Star Wars) and his risky decisions (supporting
Solidarity, Afghanistan). They were all targeting his major goal, the defeat of the Soviet Union. It wasn't happenstance, it was a grand design.
Reagan knew what outcome he wanted and worked towards that goal. Each one of those decisions were his. To claim otherwise is to be disingenuous. You
may not like the man but you have to admit his Presidency changed the world more than any President since.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:22 PM by Leo Strauss
|
 
reply to post by pavil
The Soviet Union was DOA before Reagan was elected.
That is a simple fact. 2nd line.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:24 PM by grover
|

reply to post by pavil
Right after the fall of the Soviet Union it actually came out that the CIA and the American intelligence agency was surprised at how fragile they were
so no you are wrong... all during the 70's and 80's we thought they were actually stronger than they were.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:25 PM by pavil
|
   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
Huh? The Soviets and their proxies were expanding their sphere of influence in Carter's four years just prior to Reagan. Without Reagan's
initiatives, the Soviet Union would have lasted far longer then it did.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:25 PM by Veritas26
|
 
Originally posted by mostlyspoons
WRONG the starting point for everything goin to SH*T in this country was FDR's decision to borrow from the future to get out of the depression. Well
guess what? THAT future is NOW, and payment is DUE...
[edit on 6-6-2009 by mostlyspoons]
I Fully Agree...WE are still paying off his debt because our Government thinks it's a bright idea to KEEP borrowing
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:25 PM by Southern Guardian
|

Reagan was not a good president, despite the major drive the immortalize the man back in the late 90s. He tripled the debt Carter left, he lowered
taxes but in place of that towards the end of his presidency other taxes such as welfare taxes and certain product taxes increased.... Reagan also
raised corporate taxes by $120 billion in total. The number of workers on the federal payroll rose by 61,000 under Reagan, compared to a decrease in
over 300,000 under Clinton. He also agreed to $165 billion bail out of social security.
There was a short boom during the 80s under Reagan that many conservatives continue to reference, however this was an artificial boom, that would
suffer the consequences for time to come. What this boom left was a nation triple in the amount of debt, more folks depending of "socialist"
programmes than the previous administration and another rightwing presidency to once again double that debt.
I'll say this time and time again. Reagan played the part of president well. He was an actor nevertheless.
[edit on 6-6-2009 by Southern Guardian]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:27 PM by Veritas26
|
reply to post by pavil
Everything Panned out exactly the way our Government wanted it too...
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:29 PM by Veritas26
|
Originally posted by Southern Guardian
and another rightwing presidency to once again double that debt.
[edit on 6-6-2009 by Southern Guardian]
seems as though he should of known this before he did it..I wonder why No one tried to stop him? hhmm
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 6-6-2009 @ 07:29 PM by SLAYER69
|
 
Originally posted by grover
I was never enamored with Reagan or his portrayal of a President.
He was great if you were a rich white male or wanted to be... and by playing off of the lower classes desire to be upper class... is how he got to the
oval office.
He was the first partisan president as opposed to a national president... by that I mean that he was the first for whom someone could say depending on
their political leanings that he's my president or he's not my president as opposed to our president regardless of party...
Strapping on my asbestos Undies. I'm going to get flamed. But So What.
The problem with that opinion is that some tend to forget who voted him in and then who reelected him.
Reagan Democrat
Reagan Democrat is an American political term used by political analysts to denote traditionally Democratic voters, especially white working-class
Northerners, who defected from their party to support Republican President Ronald Reagan in both the 1980 and 1984 elections. It is also used to refer
to the smaller but still substantial number of Democrats who voted for George H. W. Bush in the 1988 election. The term can also be used to describe
moderate Democrats who are more conservative than liberal on certain issues like national security and immigration.
The work of Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg is a classic study of Reagan Democrats. Greenberg analyzed white ethnic voters (largely unionized auto
workers) in Macomb County, Michigan, just north of Detroit. The county voted 63 percent for John F. Kennedy in 1960, but 66 percent for Reagan in
1980. He concluded that "Reagan Democrats" no longer saw Democrats as champions of their working class aspirations, but instead saw them as working
primarily for the benefit of others: the very poor, the unemployed, African Americans, and other groups. In addition, Reagan Democrats enjoyed gains
during the period of economic prosperity that coincided with the Reagan administration following the "malaise" of the Carter administration. They
also supported Reagan's strong stance on national security and opposed the 1980s Democratic Party on such issues as pornography, crime, and
taxes.[1]
As far as I am concerned Reagan's biggest fault is that he really had no serious grasp on the issues that confronted him. He was hired to portray a
president which he did faultlessly but all the strings were being pulled by the men behind the curtain...
Soviet Union? Who? What? When? Oh yeah Never more!
I say what good is a balanced budget if we all went up in a Nuclear Holocaust.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |