We need Ronald Reagan back, amirite?

Hey...you're awesome. Just thought you should know.

by Anonymous 14 years ago

Thanks, but I don't know why you're writing that about me here.

by Anonymous 14 years ago

why thank u:)

by Anonymous 14 years ago

No, we don't need to be any more in debt.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

oh shut up. reaganomics made our economy boom. you think obama has our debt under control? thats what i thought.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You think Reagan did anything to make the iron curtain fall? He had just as much to do with it as Obama does with the current Egypt and Tunisa revolutions, it is all the people inside the countries.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Are you kidding me? Ronald Reagan increased military spending, astronomically, to the point where -- Gorbachev wrote that Ronald Reagan spent the Soviet Union into oblivion. You should really study your history.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That has little to do with it. If the people inside USSR wanted to keep that, it would have been kept, Reagan's spending has little to do with it.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Of course the people didn't want it, but without Reagan there would've been no change

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Bullshit Reform has to come from the people within. We're seeing that in Iraq and Afghanistan now. Bush tried to go in and bring reform, but the people didn't want it, so it didn't happen.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It took the citizens, as well as Reagan!

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You don't know that. Look at Egypt and Tunisa. They are doing it by themselves, so help from the outside. If they can do it, why wouldn't the Iron Curtain been able to without Reagan?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

The fact is, they didn't do it by themselves. Whether or not they could have is both irrelevant and impossible to prove. The Cold War did, in fact, happen.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I'm not denying the fact that the Cold War happened. I'm saying that Reagan isn't the reason the Iron Curtain fell, it is the people inside that wanted out of the USSR. Reagan may have helped, if they could have done it alone will never be known, but ultimately it is the people inside that did it, not Reagan.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I beg to differ. To assume that the constant pressure from the most powerful nation in the Earth had no significant impact is ridiculous.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You don't know if it was or not. They may have been able to do it without help from the US, they may not have been able to do it without help from the US. It is impossible to know. Just because something was there does not mean that the outcome will differ. It may have been the same if the US hadn't gotten involved. I am saying it may not have had an impact, I'm not saying it did not have impact. I still stand by the biggest factor being the people inside, because that is ultimately needed for a revolution. For example, if the US wants the Canadians to overthrow their government, no matter how much we give them, if the Canadian people don't want reform, it won't happen.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Like I said, both are necessary. But I don't believe the citizens could've done it without America's help.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yeah, that may be true, it is certainly debatable, but look at Tunisia and Egypt, they are doing it without help from the US.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Well I don't claim to be an expert on the Cold War, and I was not alive while it was happening.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Agreed And may I say I rather enjoyed those few messages of debate. Most of the close-minded asshole comments about conservatives come from people like Amish_Allosaurus and scrantoncity, who have no respect for anyone's views but their own. You respectfully disagreed, and I really admire that. Thank you, you seem like a cool person.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

likewise. I've heard a lot about this Amish_Allosaurus guy, but I have yet to come across him on any comments... I'll have to look into it. You also seem pretty cool. I hate debating with people who just yell at me for being a conservative.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I look forward to our next debate

by Anonymous 13 years ago

haha. ditto.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

I love your arguments, I'm siding with panther tho as I'm conservative to and happen to believe the same, sorry :/ but ya I agree that reagan's impact helped the fall of the USSR. Just thought I could back him up.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

(this is at your military spending post): Exactly, he increased Military spending, which may not have been a bad thing except for the fact that he lowered taxes as well. One can't have it both ways, by increasing government spending and lowering taxes of the rich. At the point where the income tax was around 80% for the rich is when the government had it under control. Considering the way the Republican party is going today, it'd be pretty hard for him to get elected there if he was alive.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I agree, but you know, there's a reason we have a deficit, it's cause it gets shit done. However I do not, especially as a conservative, in any way, shape, or form, condole high taxes for the rich. The Laffer Curve proves it, and it's just punishment for being wealthy. It's fuckin ridiculous to me... Regardless, yes we probably don't exactly need the debt we had, but we could really use the progress he made.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Is there anyone on this website who actually LIVED through the Reagan Administration?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You don't need to have to know what kind of president he was.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Do you think Abraham Lincoln was a good president holding together a divided nation? Well you didn't live during his time? That doesn't mean you can't believe we could use him right now.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I never said that 'bringing him back' was a bad idea. I was just making an observation.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

yea that's true, but your comment related to the post didn't really follow through

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Lincoln pretty much ignored the constitution during his presidency. And he originally intended to allow the border states to keep their slaves during his emancipation proclamation. Honest my ass. Have you ever noticed he looks like Bill Nye though?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Who gives a fuck if he ignored the constitution? And the emancipation proclamation was a fail to begin with, most people know that considering a war broke out because of it. People who stick to documentation just because it's documentation make me sick. There's a reason laws are there, and it's not just to look pretty on paper. If they break a law, or a Constitution, and it avoids the reason it was made, then why not? Think of it this way: gun laws are made to stop murders. However, someone using a gun, illegally, in self defense, obviously was right in carrying that weapon. The person broke the law, but did he break it to murder someone? Well, yea, but you get the point. If you break a law, but NOT for the reason it was created, then fuck it!

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Nothing makes you look more intelligent than excessive vulgarity, and an oh-so-humble, shirtless mirror picture of yourself.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I said "fuck" two times, and my picture is without a shirt to show I don't have a bellybutton as I have a birth defect...not to mention I'm on your side bro. Anything else you wanna say to the handicapped?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Alright, I apologize. I guess I should've read your description first.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

it's cool, I don't blame you. Way too many people on the right wing that do what you explained 3 comments up and give a really bad name.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yeah, I have no idea what you just said. Something about it's okay to break the laws for the greater good of nation, maybe? Even If thats the case, one of the laws Lincoln broke was imprisoning people who spoke publicly against him without informing them they why they were imprisoned for many days, weeks even. He didn't let them go to trial or have any due process of law. He just kept them there until he was done with them. I don't care which way you spin it, that's not right. They should have at least been informed of why they were there. I'm not saying Lincoln was an awful president, because he did do a lot of good things as well, I just get tired of this idealistic "Honest Abe" thing when he clearly wasn't.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

We need Walt Disney back, amirite?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"Bonzo goes to Bitburg and goes out for a cuppa tea..."

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Why does everyone insist one giving the president credit for things he didn't actually do? I know he set ideas into motion but he doesn't deserve all the credit. It's like when a football team wins a big game and everyone congratulates the coach for how good he did. Yes, the coach helpedd, but he wasn't out there on the field. I'm pretty ignorant of the Reagan Administration so I have no opinion of him as a president, I just don't think it was all him. Give credit where credit is due.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I agree with your comment as long as you'd apply it to any president.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I apply it to any person, president or not, who gets credit for something someone else did. Kind of like how people keep giving Obama credit for killing Osama.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not giving Reagan all the credit. But I think he was a great president, and he is largely responsible for he resurgence of conservatism in America.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I am pretty darn ignorant of politics, but isn't conservatism a bad thing? From what I can tell, conservatives favor a small government, which is great, but they seem to want government intervention in things that don't really affect them or affect anyone negatively for that matter. Personally, I'm Libertarian. I favor a small government in ALL aspects of society, but I also favor simple things like human rights and whatnot.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Well I think a president should be libertarian in that social issues are the states' issues. Ronald Reagan did that.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

more like fdr dude, he didn't mess around and he got shit done. but him and Reagan are both my favorite presidents

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Reagan and FDR were on completely different sides of the political spectrum. It's weird how you love both of them....

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Reagan started deregulating the financial industry which led to the housing bubble which burst in 2007/8. So unless you want that again...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'd say Franklin Roosevelt's Welfare and Social Security programs led to the burst due too all the abusers of the system.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Not really...Reagan much more so, if it was all still regulated, we would not have had an issue

by Anonymous 12 years ago

That's totally inaccurate. The housing market crashed because of Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Actually, not really. Reagan started a policy of deregulation of the financial industry so that really risky loans could be given out and bet on, which led to companies like Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac and AIG collapsing, because then when the debtors failed to fulfill their loan, the companies had to pay those that bet against them, and rather than money coming in, money was going out by the bucketfull and the companies collapsed. Had Reagan not deregulated it, those loans wouldn't have been given out, much less bet on. So yes, it is accurate.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Actually, it was regulation that required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give out loans to people who couldn't pay them back.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Deregulation allowed investors to bet on these loans. It wasn't the failing loans that causing the companies to fail, it was the investors who had bet the company that the loan would fail. The risky loans weren't failing, so the banks got more and more money, so they kept giving out loans that had no way to be paid back. Then guess what happened when the loans failed? The banks had to pay back all those people that bet they would fail and mass bankruptcy occurred. This is why regulation is necessary, people are greedy and care about only themselves and how they can gain money.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Then why is it that states with heavier regulation imposed on landowners and developers, such as California and Florida, had their housing markets collapse, whereas states like Texas and Georgia, who had little regulation, saw very little trouble in their housing market? Between 2000 and the bubble's peak, inflation- adjusted housing prices in California and Florida more than doubled, and since the peak they have fallen by 20 to 30 percent. In contrast, housing prices in Georgia and Texas grew by only about 20 to 25 percent, and they haven't significantly declined. In other words, California and Florida housing bubbled, but Georgia and Texas housing did not.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It wasn't the landowners and developers that caused the problem, it was all the banks and the greedy CEO's

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Banks and "greedy" CEOs are present all over America. But only certain communities witnessed a housing market crash.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, greedy CEO's exist everywhere, but the only place where the crash occurred was where there was deregulation. It still stands that it would NOT have happened if it weren't for the deregulation. The regulations stopped risky bets like those that caused the housing crisis. And why do you put greedy in quotes?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

To the contrary, I just pointed out that California and Florida both experienced crashes, despite increased regulations, whereas Texas and Georgia maintained a rather steady housing market, while having deregulation. Because I think it is a rather socialistic viewpoint to label people who want to earn profit as greedy. It's the so-called greedy that employ people in this country.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Yes, and the crashes happened partially due to the federal decrease in regulation of the financial industry. Had the regulations been in place, the risky loans would not have been made and much less bet on to fail, so the banks would be less apt to give them out. Not in this case. The housing crisis was caused by the CEO's seeing a chance for a lot of short term profit and they jumped on it, wanting the money, not seeing or caring about the long run. All they cared about was short-term gain. I would call that greedy, making lots of short term profit regardless of long term effects. And the CEO's of Lehman Brothers, Bearstearns, and AIG all got hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses after their companies completely collapsed. And why? Because they cared more about their own bonus than the welfare of the company. If that isn't greedy, I don't know what is.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_XTmpRKhr-hw/TU6n5AbZkJI/AAAAAAAB0qE/yTPo6v0PIaI/s1600/Ronald_Reagan_in_Cowboy_From_Brooklyn_trailer.jpg People always forget that Reagan was a sexy movie star before he was a politician.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Personally, I think we need Polk. He didn't let the power go to his head and he got all his goals done in an efficient manner. He wasted no time.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

America needs a man who raised taxes 7+ times? A man who essential gave amnesty to all illegals? Obama can't control the debt, but neither could the man in your picture. Unless we should ignore the skyrocketing debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion. Oh wait, Reagan was a Conservative so any crap about him should be completely ignored. So you should continue to praise his great presidency achieved on a few hardleft wing principles. Ha. Conservatives these days...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How dare you, Ronald Reagan, unlike the Socialist Obama would have eliminated the debt. and any smart person, i.e Conservative, would have shown you that his tripling of debt proves that his ability to handle debts... Somehow.. did you just try to put facts into this? Facts have a Liberal bias, you idiot. Don't need that shit here.

by Anonymous 12 years ago