It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rewriting Ronald Reagan

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:42 AM
link   
How the Media Have Worked to Distort, Dismantle and Destroy His Legacy

Wow, just began reading this article over at Media Research. I grew up during the Reagan Era. I remember the attacks on his character from the media. I remember the way that the country listened to him even though every time you turned around the media was denigrating his character.

This is quite an extensive read.

Executive Summary


As the nation prepares to pay tribute to former President Ronald Reagan on the 100th anniversary of his birth, it is amazing to consider that his success at turning the U.S. away from 1960s-style liberalism was accomplished in the face of a daily wave of news media hostility. The media’s first draft of history was more myth than reality: that Reagan only brought the nation poverty, ignorance, bankruptcy, and a dangerously imbalanced foreign and defense policy.


Introduction


Think of everything Reagan did, and then add: He did it all before Fox News. He did it all before the Rush Limbaugh phenomenon. He did it all before the instant battle cry of his defenders could hit the Internet. He did it all before C-SPAN caught on and people could enjoy the game of watching entire speeches and debates and then observing how the network tricksters discombobulated them into liberal hatchet jobs. He did it all when the only conservative regular on the big networks was ABC’s George Will, who appeared once weekly as a panelist on This Week with David Brinkley.


1 Reagan, The Man

Wow and if you thought that the likes of Chris Mathews and Keith Olbermann have anything on vile and heinous rhetoric, have a time warp listen to some of these comments from that era-



■ “Pretty simplistic. Pretty old-fashioned. And I don’t think they have much application to what’s currently wrong or troubling a lot of people....Nor do I think he really understands the enormous difficulty a lot of people have in just getting through life, because he’s lived in this fantasy land for so long.”
— NBC anchorman Tom Brokaw speculating on Reagan’s values in Mother Jones, April 1983.

■ “So I think [Ronald Reagan] is going to have to pass two or three tests. The first is, will he get there, stand in front of the podium, and not drool?”
— ABC White House reporter Sam Donaldson on a planned Reagan press conference, NBC’s Late Night with David Letterman, March 18, 1987.


2 The Reagonomics Recovery


Few now remember that 1979 and 1980 were the nation’s worst economic years since the Great Depression. Reagan saved America from Jimmy Carter economics: he brought inflation down from 13.5 to 4.1 percent; unemployment, from 9.5 to 5.2 percent; the federal discount rate, from 14 to 6.5 percent. Under Reagan, the number of jobs increased by almost 20 million; median family income rose every year from 1982 to 1989. It was the greatest peacetime expansion in American history. Charitable giving more than doubled, to more than $100 billion in 1988.


Here are the other sections, they can be found at the links included before.

# III. Reagan and National Defense
# IV. Reagan and Race
# The Reagan Legacy
# EXTRA: Reagan, Slammed by Celebrities

Here is the PDF version of this-Media Research Center-Ronald Reagan 2011 PDF

I have only read through the first three sections. I will read the rest tomorrow. But one observation I will make now, I find it galling, hypocritical, vile, heinous (amongst a huge laundry list of adjectives that would probably get this comment deleted) for the current crop of propagandists to even ATTEMPT to compare the current President to Reagan.

Remember, Reagan did all of his work during the era where there was no Talk Radio. Where the left wing media pretty much controlled the narrative.

Give me your thoughts.

edit on 1-2-2011 by saltheart foamfollower because: fix quotes




posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
The only problem I have with President Reagan was his support for Free-trade, although I honestly believe in my heart if he knew exactly what he was signing America into he would have quickly dropped that pen and told those extortionists to leave his White House. Other than the free-trade ordeal he was great.

But the free-trade ordeal is critical in fact it is very critical, especially for someone like me and my family. Going back to when my family immigrated to this great country only 97 years ago from Hungary they landed in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania and immediately began working in the factories and on the railroads. Moving east to Bethlehem to continue working in the factories and eventually being the top boss at a major manufacturing corporation until the late ‘80s when it began to fall apart.

For many people who have family history in the rust belt free-trade is a big deal to them. So while I support Reagan in everything else I cannot support his trade policies and especially not Clinton’s. However as I stated earlier I do honestly believe if Reagan knew what those trade policies would result in he would never have signed them.

And I definitely see that during his administration the left-wing ‘60s liberals, the worst kind IMO, had absolute control over the media. So Reagan had an uphill battle.


edit on 2/1/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


But did Reagan begin the Free Trade agreements? I know that GATT and NAFTA were signed into law during the Clinton years. There is the Bush 1 years between Reagan and Clinton.

I do not remember any unilateral free trade agreements back then. There was trade agreements between individual countries, but one thing is for sure, we did not trade with communist nations. That is one thing I remember for sure.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


That is why I said he didn’t do nearly as much damage to America as Clinton had done in regards to trade. But yes he had signed free-trade agreements with individual nations and deepened ties with China which was started by Nixon. I remember reading about this from works by Buchanan who worked with Reagan in the White House.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Yeah, I think what I watched tonight is going to piss off both the progressives and the neo cons.

Someone that will remain nameless, was stating that the US should not be dealing with any of the countries where tyrants are in control. I thought he did a good show tonight. I think if some on the left would actually watch the show, they might find themselves agreeing with major parts. They would probably disagree with about 40% though on his conclusions regarding the religious components.

As for the trade agreements, I will have to do some research into that. That kind of stuff was not covered much at all back then and I am mainly going on memory.

Thanks for the comments. I better get some zzzzzs and finish up the article before discussing too much more.

One thing I have always wondered about, Reagan did not really stop the expansion of government, he seemed to do his best to attempt to reign it back the best he could. Then of course we had the Bush and Clinton dynasty that accelerated the expansion of government exponentially and expanded trade with tyrannical regimes.

Always comes back to the ol Ron Paul theory of non intervention doesn't it? Later Misoir.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Wow

Let me explain the deal with the president and the media. All of the bad thing that happen during the President’s time in office is ultimate responsibility of the President. As such he will be vilified. That seems reasonable.

Consider Obama. Obama is receiving stick from the media for what has gone wrong under his term office.

Frankly that is the way of the media and I see it as a function of living in a democracy.

Why should Reagan have received a free ride? Would you give Obama a free ride? Hell no.

I read the bit on race and found the Media Research Center rebuttal to be weak. I also read the on Reganomics and found it also to be weak. More importantly wasn’t it Regan who was responsible for the massive bank deregulation which led to our economy going into meltdown?

The Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980

hnn.us...

With Newt Gingrich the champion in the senate.

As an aside Obama seems to be going grey or is it me



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


There's just no enough time in my day to explain the Reagan era to you. it certainly won't disabuse you of the warm and comforting fantasy you cling to about the man.

What's a few dead Nicaraguans, anyway?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 05:16 AM
link   
reply to post by tiger5
 


Obama is seriously going grey. George Bush went from brown to grey in three years. Clinton went white.

This is the main clue that tells me that I never, ever, ever want that job.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Just look how your dear old ronnie raised thaes on the working man and lowered them on the rich. I remember his trem well and it wasn't pleasant. If I recall my taxes went up nearly 50%. Unemployment became taxiable and the interest deduction disappeared. Yup 50% doesn't sound out of line. he also killed the unions and took the country with them.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Destroying the industrial infrastructure of a country is a legacy? And imo he should have been impeached over the Iran–Contra affair.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Do you remember his failed economy? Do you remember him cutting funding for public health and turning thousands of mental patients out on the street? Do you remember him pretending to end the cold war when the Russian people where on the verge of full scale riots? I do...

The media was nothing like it is today.. If you had reporters like you see on FOX News then they would be laughed out of journalism.. So to sit and pretend some big left wing conspirecy was against him in the 80s.... Thats just not factual. We didnt have this grand age of Oriley and "opinion politics" we do now.

And you know who started that eh? But i will say Reagan was the best repub we have seen in 50+ years.
edit on 1-2-2011 by ShogunAssassins because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Misoir
 


Yeah, I think what I watched tonight is going to piss off both the progressives and the neo cons.

Someone that will remain nameless, was stating that the US should not be dealing with any of the countries where tyrants are in control. I thought he did a good show tonight. I think if some on the left would actually watch the show, they might find themselves agreeing with major parts. They would probably disagree with about 40% though on his conclusions regarding the religious components.


*COUGH* Glenn Beck Show *COUGH*

I watched it too, he did an outstanding job last night, at least that's my take on it.


As for the trade agreements, I will have to do some research into that. That kind of stuff was not covered much at all back then and I am mainly going on memory.


It was not covered much back then just as liberal expansion of government is not covered now outside of FOX and FOX Business in particular.


One thing I have always wondered about, Reagan did not really stop the expansion of government, he seemed to do his best to attempt to reign it back the best he could. Then of course we had the Bush and Clinton dynasty that accelerated the expansion of government exponentially and expanded trade with tyrannical regimes.


I don't believe Reagan was as anti-government as most give him credit for. Remember that before LBJ pursued the 'war on poverty' Ronald Reagan was a staunch Democrat, they were definitely not the anti-government type, so I just believe Reagan was more about restoring government to a previous order rather than trying to drastically cut it.


Always comes back to the ol Ron Paul theory of non intervention doesn't it? Later Misoir.


Well Ron Paul's Non-interventionism stems from the 'Old Right' beliefs of the inter-war period.

• Opposition to New Deal policies
• Opposition to League of Nations
• Opposition to foreign involvement
• Support for protectionist import tariffs
• Support for limiting size of government
• Support for natural rights not civil rights
• Strict Constitutionalism and Federalism
• Support for the nuclear family
• Opposition to all forms of Socialism and/or Internationalism


That’s where I believe Ron Paul comes from, the same as Pat Buchanan. If you are interested in learning about it here are some links, I particularly like the ‘Old Right’ ideology.

Old Right
Paleoconservatism
Paleolibertarianism
edit on 2/1/2011 by Misoir because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Well, I have gotten through the next 10 pages, lots of stuff to breakdown.

But one thing that came across that I had forgotten about, was the drug war.

Reagan was the implementer of a drive to implement this. Being a Constitutionalist and Libertarian, both of these beliefs is directly against this tenet.

Link to an argument regarding this component, well as soon as I find it. I know I wrote an article on the prohibition amendments that set the groundwork that nothing can be deemed illegal, if it took a Constitutional Amendment to make alcohol illegal. Will include if I find it.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Sorry to rain on your parade but Regan was not a great president. The way the Conservatives idolize Reagan is eerily similar to North Korea's Juche. Reagan was a warmonger who only cared about the rich and probably help the stock market crash in 1980. And then there's the Iran-Contra affair...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Throwback
 


Just a question, if he was SUCH a bad president, why did the propagandist stations compare Obama to Reagan after the SOTU?

Also, one magazine presented a cover that had Reagan with his arm around Obama. By the way, I loved this pic-

bigjournalism.com...




posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
So you want me to listen to propaganda? I never said was "such a bad president", I said he wasn't a great president for the reasons listed above. What does Obama have to do with him being "not a great president"?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Throwback
 


Media Research Center attempts to get to the bottom of media bias.

If you do not want to read the article, that is fine, but why attempt to subvert the discussion? Being that I am 43 and grew up during that time, I remember things that today are complete FABRICATIONS.

Also, why is it that the MSM is attempting to equate Obama to Reagan? Especially if Reagan was so bad?

Come on, open your eyes and brain, something is wrong in one of the two narratives. Either Reagan was the devil incarnate, an idiot, an imbecile, a power hungry tyrant, a darn good President or something all together different.

But explain to me why the MSM is attempting to equate Obama to Reagan if he was such a bastard?

There has to be some sort of dysfunctional relevance to the story, RIGHT?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Throwback
 


Just a question, if he was SUCH a bad president, why did the propagandist stations compare Obama to Reagan after the SOTU?

Also, one magazine presented a cover that had Reagan with his arm around Obama. By the way, I loved this pic-

bigjournalism.com...



Reagan was a paid shill for GE if you want to talk about irony - (aren't they tied to ACORN, Osama Bin Laden SOROS, A.I.D.S, MMGW and the NAZIs?)
corporatism heavy was a gift he bestowed upon us.

Ronald Reagan IS the father of the modern governmental spending in this nation - he raised the deficit ceiling
150% - he created more debt than 30 years worth of presidents before him, this is a FACT. Further more
he expanded many agencies and grew the shadow government tremendously. He went well beyond constitutional power by attacking several nations in secret, this is also where the neocons got extensive experience in engineering conflict for profit... This extended to his Drug policy which funded both sides of that conflict,
talk about government spending, sheesh...

His policies helped set the stage for Iraq and Afghanistan where his administration tried to control and manipulate
the "terrorists", by training and funding their Jihad, then leaking key intel to ensure the conflict remained. Then you can go on to his South American policy he funded the Contras, and provided aid to the Khmer Rouge



In fact I would say if you want to blame anyone for the death of REAL conservatism I would blame him.

When he was governor he enacted the largest tax increase in Californian history, ironic (again) it took Jerry Brown Socialist to decrease taxes that the REAL AMERICAN Reagan increased.

I reckon he was a nice person, in fact I know it personally, but I don't get you again FOAM, is your attachment emotional??? Cause the facts do not back up any logical love for this guys policy



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Hey, I linked this story because I like it.

I have not read it all, plus I have already stated one thing I disliked about his presidency.

SEE, this is what I dislike about partisans. They CANNOT look above or beyond their ideology.

Yes Reagan had faults. I admit that. WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

SEE THAT, I admit he had faults. When the hell was the last time ANYONE admitted that the Democrats or Obama had faults?

HMMMMMMMM?



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Hey, I linked this story because I like it.

I have not read it all, plus I have already stated one thing I disliked about his presidency.

SEE, this is what I dislike about partisans. They CANNOT look above or beyond their ideology.

Yes Reagan had faults. I admit that. WOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

SEE THAT, I admit he had faults. When the hell was the last time ANYONE admitted that the Democrats or Obama had faults?

HMMMMMMMM?


www.abovetopsecret.com...


You and many other Tea Partiers now us this political idiocy to pose as if you are against the system, which is only true if you tack on President Numb Nut's contribution



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join