Ronald Reagan: The Greatest President Ever

thanks for proving your in denial,your in denial mode about corrption like 9/11 AND reagan as well.someone WOULD have to be retarded to accept the official version of it. accorind to your logic,the laws of physics that scientists have gone by for thousands of years no longer applies anymore.gotcha.

 

No, you will not see any connection between Obama, and supply side economics. Obama does not practice failed concepts like SSE. That is what bush did and he got us into another Great Depression.

Republicans took us into the Great Depression in the 30s and they did the same here. Republicans are weak on the military and they are weak on the economy.

Nixon. Yeah, it does not surprise me that you would like to ignore him. Still he was better than reagan the failure.


Book. I could pick it up and read it, but that is not going to help you at all. Sorry.

Everything republican politicians do =fail. Everything.

 

But there are so many different "Truther" theories, that they all essentially shoot each other.



Just like any other conspiracy theory, there are hundreds of different ones, all claiming that they are the right one and all the others are wrong.

And it is also funny that when you turn over a Truther, you find their normal exit route is full of 100 other nutcase conspiracy theories and beliefs.

 

The law of physics do apply. Gravity brought down the towers after Islamists flew planes into them. It is on video. Live TV. Really? You still question what happened? You don't feel a need to question your sanity just a little?

Here is another law (axiom actually) you should learn...it is called:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

The simplest explanation will be the most plausible.

 

I would argue with you, but what would be the point. You are so very wrong, anyone reading your posts would know it is pointless and you are a hopeless case. Do me a favor, don't even bother with me anymore, I will put you on ignore anyway. I don't have anyone else on ignore, but you are really, really special.

 

Pretty crooked, it seems to me.

For one thing, Reagan did approve the sale of arms to Iran. Saying that he didn't is simply supporting the idea of mutability of the past. Talk about living in a fantasy world!

The real story is more as follows:

 

Again, Reagan did not ship arms to Iran. Whoever wrote that piece for PBS has their facts wrong.

 

Reagan?
Ronald Reagan?
Are we talking about that war criminal who supported the FARC in the 80s?

 

I see that democrats still are finding the racist FDR a very popular president...Perhaps that says a lot about the democrats racist views today.

 

You should read these posts too:
http://www.politicalforum.com/4848832-post69.html
http://www.politicalforum.com/4851526-post123.html

 

That av is certainly more believable.

The fish in my avatar is not dead, but was caught on a fly with a barbless hook and then released to swim free and grow to trophy size.

and I never fish bare, I always wear clothes.

 

That was hardly PBS. I had an inkling you would simply dismiss it as a "liberal" site of one sort or another.

Ollie North, the American traitor, sold arms to Iran with the knowledge of his president. In order to be a hero worshipper, it is necessary to ignore that little fact.

I won't bring up the S and L mess or the amnesty for illegals, as that, in your parallel universe, never happened and/or was the fault of Democrats.

I voted for Reagan in '80, one of three presidents I've voted for who actually won. All three disappointed me in one way or another. Looking back, I still think he was a better choice than his opponent, but he was hardly a great president.

 

Your link was PBS website. In the article you quoted, it does not say that Reagan sold arms to Iran. It says, "McFarlane sought Reagan's approval". It does not say he got it.
Reagan didn't cause the S and L mess. And the amnesty was a bi-partisan effort. So what if they happened under his watch?
Those votes for Mondale, Dukakas, Gore and Kerry went to waste, eh?

 

No, a different Ronald Reagan. The one who was president.

I posted a bunch of information about FDR being a racist, and he gained 4 more votes! Racist democrats.

 

My bad. I didn't notice the little PBS icon in the top left of the screen. Here's a site that doesn't have the taint of "liberalism" on it.

It says:

and, of course, I knew that Reagan had no part in amnesty or the S and L mess, despite being president during those unfortunate events, at least, not in the parallel universe in which Reagan is the greatest president in history.

Further, no i didn't vote for Dukakis, or Gore. If you want an example of a candidate who got railroaded, it was Kerry, but that's just water under the bridge now.

 

Now you are getting into the tin-foil-hat realm. Is that the October surprise in which Bush got on the SR-71 (while Jimmy Carter was commander in chief) which only seats 2, dashed off to this secret meeting and flew back at 5 times the speed of sound so that nobody would notice?

 

Actually, he did, and it was done for two reasons.

First, to gain the influence of Iran over the people holding many Americans and others hostage (mostly in Lebanon).

Also, it was done to help prevent Iraq (which we also provided weapons to) from crushing Iran. Be supplying both sides, we could both clain neutrality in the conflict, as well as keep them so busy attacking each other they left the rest of the region alone.

The best quote I can think of for this conflict is from the 2005 movie Lord Of War. In it, Yuri Orlov is asking an older Arms dealer how he could justivy selling weapons for the US to both sides of the conflict. I think his answer describes that situation perfectly.

I don't take sides. Did you ever consider that I wanted both sides to lose? Bullets change governments far surer than votes.

 

YOu go from a PBS reference, to one that talks about "October Surprise"? Sorry, but when you go to a weblink that clearly talks about conspiracy theories, all my respect goes out the window.

To begin with, there was no "October Surprise". Iran had been intending for a long time to hold them until after the election. Because they knew they had the power to force a change of administration. They simply wanted to be able to brag to the world that they caused President Carter to loose the election. Nothing more or less.

And 2 different bipartaisan Congressional investigations have both determined that nothing of the sort happened. And most make claims as to those involved (William Casey and George Bush Sr) were in secret meetings in Europe or the Middle East, when at those times they were both accounted for in the US.

And if you look, in every election there is a claim of an "October Surprise", going back to the Lyndon Johnson administration.

Sorry, I have this tendency to reject all conspiracy theories, and to also reject any other nonsense spewed out with them.

 

I know that people will try to rewrite history for the rest of time.

Let me give a brief review of the Iran-Contra scandal:

1. The Iranians, our enemies, who need weapons to fight our other enemy, Saddam Hussein, got weapons in this deal from Israel.
2. The proceeds from the sales went from the Israelis to the Contras fighting communist Sandinistas in Nigaragua.
3. American hostages were released.
4. The Boland Amendment, which underminded the president's ability to fight communist expansionism was circumvented. The leftist democrats that ran the congress didn't like it that the president was fighting their communist allies in Central America. So they made the Boland Amendment which undermined American national security.
5. Oliver North got new tires on his SUV.

Win, win, win, win and win. This was a scandal that was a win for everyone.

 

Hahahaha. Um...could of sworn the excuse for building up Saddam was that he was fighting our enemy, Iran. LMAO. Israel didn't make large conventional weaponry in those days. It was either ours, or Russian, which it could've been either, as Israel has always been in bed with both. Only truth to modern history is Americans are war PIMPS. LMAO. 2nd only to Israel. The only problem these days is the war profiteers pimp tax payers as much as the foreign nations involved, and since the wealth is being concentrated by the top who can pay politicians to get out of taxes, the shrinking upper-middle class on down tax bracket can't afford the system Kissinger invented. Well, maybe not invented, but took to unprecedented modern levels. Reagan was a tool as much as North. At least our original presidents, even though upper class, were implementing their own ideas. To suggest any modern president was our greatest is an insult, to yourself, to those reading, and to presidents who actually were great men.

Kissinger was basically commander and chief from 1969, if not prior, through 1992, when his "neocon" policies became mainline republican philosophy, and he took a step back. Democrats, while still war mongers, do the bidding of the "international community", or U.N. Sometimes the wants overlap, but every now and then they go after different targets. As close to "conflict" as globalists can get. Still more alike than they will ever be different. Tough to say which side is the bigger traitor, as one puts Israel over American interests, and one puts the whole globe, mainly Europe, over American interests. I wouldn't mind seeing all hang.

 

From the link you gave (maybe that one will be acceptable, since you're the one who posted it):

Senior Reagan administration officials secretly facilitated the sale of arms to Iran.

Further:

So, he may not have authorized the diversion of money to subvert the will of Congress, and it is not clear just what he knew and didn't know at the time.

The possibilities are that he was unaware that senior officials in his own administration were engaged in arms sales to the enemy, that he was and let it happen, or that he actively supported it.

Personally, I think he was pretty competent, and so had to have been at least aware of what his administration was doing.

Either way, he hardly deserves hero worship IMO.

 

Gee, and nowhere does it say he authorized the sale of arms to Iran. Okay folks, no news here, move along.

 

The alternative is that he just allowed his own officers to do their own thing, maybe didn't even know or care what they were doing. What a great leader, huh?

 

See: http://www.politicalforum.com/5004010-post94.html

 

I notice patriotnews never responded to this post. Reagan is one of our worst presidents, and the only thing he is given credit for which is listed as his great accomplishment, is a fantasy invented by right-wing propagandists, and propagated by the "liberal media." Reagan won the cold war, in the same way Jimmy Carter did. They both continued a long tradition of containment, which over the long-term weakened the Soviets. However, Reagan did ABSOLUTELY nothing more than any other president to bring about the end of the cold war. He just happened to be president a few years before the inevitable happened.