Identity

Its the party of projection.

Its the party of projection.

That’s a fake cowboy from Connecticut, not Maine, please. Let’s not count summer homes.)

That’s a fake cowboy from Connecticut, not Maine, please. Let’s not count summer homes.)

OH NOES A TELEPROMPTER

OH NOES A TELEPROMPTER

WHO PHOTOSHOPPED THAT TELEPROMPTER IN THERE?! It, it can’t be … the patron saint using a goddamn teleprompter? Could anything else about his legacy as the greatest modern president be false?

WHO PHOTOSHOPPED THAT TELEPROMPTER IN THERE?! It, it can’t be … the patron saint using a goddamn teleprompter? Could anything else about his legacy as the greatest modern president be false?

Hey, brutallygoddamnhonest,As far as modern Presidents go, he WAS the best. Unless you want to compare Cigar Bill and quivering-lip Jimmy? Or maybe you’d prefer LBJ?Sorry, I know there’s not much for Ronnie to beat, but that’s not his fault.

Hey, brutallygoddamnhonest,As far as modern Presidents go, he WAS the best. Unless you want to compare Cigar Bill and quivering-lip Jimmy? Or maybe you’d prefer LBJ?Sorry, I know there’s not much for Ronnie to beat, but that’s not his fault.

I’ll take Cigar Bill over Ronnie Reagan any day.

I’ll take Cigar Bill over Ronnie Reagan any day.

PPP -You are an idiot if you think he was a great president. The only thing he was great at waas transferring massive amounts of wealth into the upper .3% without any real wars. To beat Ronnie’s transfer rates W. had to invade two countries.Reagan started the war on the middle class. You have a strange notion of what makes a good president.

PPP -You are an idiot if you think he was a great president. The only thing he was great at waas transferring massive amounts of wealth into the upper .3% without any real wars. To beat Ronnie’s transfer rates W. had to invade two countries.Reagan started the war on the middle class. You have a strange notion of what makes a good president.

PPP -I didn’t realize you were easily propagandized. Perhaps you have gotten less gullible since the 80s. Reagan was an entire marketing propaganda job. Apparently you bought it. Reagan was no more the real president than W. was. By the last half of his last term he didn’t even know where he was.

PPP -I didn’t realize you were easily propagandized. Perhaps you have gotten less gullible since the 80s. Reagan was an entire marketing propaganda job. Apparently you bought it. Reagan was no more the real president than W. was. By the last half of his last term he didn’t even know where he was.

Reagan’s legacy: old men sitting in armchairs, quarterbacking his every move in obsessive detail?Sad.But you’ll get that great whale. Oh, yes. Yes, you will.

Reagan’s legacy: old men sitting in armchairs, quarterbacking his every move in obsessive detail?Sad.But you’ll get that great whale. Oh, yes. Yes, you will.

Git,I have to disagree with you about the wealth transfer thing. You recall that Reagan inherited a recession nearly as bad as our current one, where unemployment rocketed to 10.5%, and reagan dropped it to five percent by the end of his second term.President Obama will be begging the labor-gods to have the same success.And this, from WIKIPEDIA:

Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.

You can find that little tidbit here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

Git,I have to disagree with you about the wealth transfer thing. You recall that Reagan inherited a recession nearly as bad as our current one, where unemployment rocketed to 10.5%, and reagan dropped it to five percent by the end of his second term.President Obama will be begging the labor-gods to have the same success.And this, from WIKIPEDIA:

Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.

You can find that little tidbit here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

Pooper – That doesn’t mention state taxes skyrocketing to an amount easily overpowering income growth, and then some. My family paid nearly 25% in taxes during Raegan.

Pooper – That doesn’t mention state taxes skyrocketing to an amount easily overpowering income growth, and then some. My family paid nearly 25% in taxes during Raegan.

PPP, don’t depend on Wiki for everything. Try to keep in mind that there are people here who experienced life under Reagan. We saw the deficits sky-rocket & taxes skewed & it was not good. This economy? so much worse. there’s no comparison. And there was a huge transfer of wealth! Trickle-down economics…it was more like trickled-on economics.Unemployment did go up under St. Ron, but it hit 10.8% by the end of his 2nd year in office – how do you think the GOPers will react if at the end of Obama’s 2nd year the rate is at 10%? Not well, I imagine. At the end of Reagan’s 4th year, unemployment was still at 7%.By comparison, the unemployment rate was 7.5% when Carter took office & it hit a low of 5.6% in 2 1/2 yrs….

PPP, don’t depend on Wiki for everything. Try to keep in mind that there are people here who experienced life under Reagan. We saw the deficits sky-rocket & taxes skewed & it was not good. This economy? so much worse. there’s no comparison. And there was a huge transfer of wealth! Trickle-down economics…it was more like trickled-on economics.Unemployment did go up under St. Ron, but it hit 10.8% by the end of his 2nd year in office – how do you think the GOPers will react if at the end of Obama’s 2nd year the rate is at 10%? Not well, I imagine. At the end of Reagan’s 4th year, unemployment was still at 7%.By comparison, the unemployment rate was 7.5% when Carter took office & it hit a low of 5.6% in 2 1/2 yrs….

It really isn’t possible to defend Reagan.At the time, everything he did seemed great. Carter tried peace but was undermined by the neo-cons that eventually took control both here and abroad. Most of the current hacks don’t want true peace because then their fear-based attacks don’t work anymore.Carter was ultra-close in actually obtaining true middle-east peace. NO PRESIDENT after Carter was ever as close as he was in actually obtaining peace. Reagan started this whole “American Exceptionalism” idea; that somehow not only were we to be proud but that in every way we are better than everyone else at everything. On top of that, he turned the people against their government. Instead of the focus being fixing the government he made people despise their government.Hence weaker local, state, and federal programs to deal with the problems we have now.EVERY MAJOR initiative and program of Reagan is now coming home to roost. Deregulation, bullying allies, spend but not tax.I’ll admit, Reagan was an excellent salesman. But that’s about it.

It really isn’t possible to defend Reagan.At the time, everything he did seemed great. Carter tried peace but was undermined by the neo-cons that eventually took control both here and abroad. Most of the current hacks don’t want true peace because then their fear-based attacks don’t work anymore.Carter was ultra-close in actually obtaining true middle-east peace. NO PRESIDENT after Carter was ever as close as he was in actually obtaining peace. Reagan started this whole “American Exceptionalism” idea; that somehow not only were we to be proud but that in every way we are better than everyone else at everything. On top of that, he turned the people against their government. Instead of the focus being fixing the government he made people despise their government.Hence weaker local, state, and federal programs to deal with the problems we have now.EVERY MAJOR initiative and program of Reagan is now coming home to roost. Deregulation, bullying allies, spend but not tax.I’ll admit, Reagan was an excellent salesman. But that’s about it.

ceu,I don’t depend on WIKI for everything. That little bit is just something I keep in my hip pocket whenever a liberal starts trash talking Reagan.As for lower taxes for the wealthy, yes, he did cut the ridiculous 70% tax rates down to a ridiculous 50% tax rate down to a still ridiculous 40% tax rate. At the same time, he also lowered the tax rates for the 20% lowest earners, from near 12% to 9%, AND raised their median income, while lowering inflation.See, it’s easy to spin against someone from a party you DESPISE. But when you are forced to look at the whole picture, Reagan comes off looking better than anyone since, and definitely better than Nixon, Ford, and Carter.The fact is, if your government requires over forty percent of your income in order to make their programs work, then maybe you ought to take your government to task, rather than taking the wealthy to task.But, no, we can’t do that. We’re Republicans, or we’re Democrats, and so long as there’s even one Democrat on the ballot, I’m voting for him, no matter how much of a bribed hack he is.Most of you bash Reagan because he was a Republican. Most Republicans bashed Clinton because he was a Democrat. But to bash a President because nowadays, Keith Olberman or some other media dingbat thinks it’s vogue to do so is just plain dumb. Most partisans don’t even know the facts, and they recite whatever partisan media hack they happened to hear last. THAT HOLDS TRUE FOR CONSERVATIVES, TOO.Finally, on this bit about deregulation, I agree that we went too far. But some deregulation was needed. The tight controls on our economy and investment sector directly caused the stagflation of the late seventies and early eighties. Government was huge, unwieldly, and unproductive. And for those results, the top tax bracket was seventy percent, and many paid more than fifty percent.Imagine earning $160,000 today, and having your government take more than 50% of it.You’d scream about it if it happened to you. You are a liar if you say you wouldn’t. No sane person wants to pay high taxes.Besides, the more you raise the tax rates, the more the wealthy pay YOUR partisan politicians to draft special legislation just for them, so they can hide most of their income from taxation. Your partisan politicians are only too happy to do that for their largest contributors.Don’t jump down my throat for that fact. Maybe you should throttle your congressperson or senator. But I suppose if you are a Democrat and he’s a Democrat, you’ll vote for him again no matter how much of an ass he is, and you’ll vote for him every time he’s on that ballot.

ceu,I don’t depend on WIKI for everything. That little bit is just something I keep in my hip pocket whenever a liberal starts trash talking Reagan.As for lower taxes for the wealthy, yes, he did cut the ridiculous 70% tax rates down to a ridiculous 50% tax rate down to a still ridiculous 40% tax rate. At the same time, he also lowered the tax rates for the 20% lowest earners, from near 12% to 9%, AND raised their median income, while lowering inflation.See, it’s easy to spin against someone from a party you DESPISE. But when you are forced to look at the whole picture, Reagan comes off looking better than anyone since, and definitely better than Nixon, Ford, and Carter.The fact is, if your government requires over forty percent of your income in order to make their programs work, then maybe you ought to take your government to task, rather than taking the wealthy to task.But, no, we can’t do that. We’re Republicans, or we’re Democrats, and so long as there’s even one Democrat on the ballot, I’m voting for him, no matter how much of a bribed hack he is.Most of you bash Reagan because he was a Republican. Most Republicans bashed Clinton because he was a Democrat. But to bash a President because nowadays, Keith Olberman or some other media dingbat thinks it’s vogue to do so is just plain dumb. Most partisans don’t even know the facts, and they recite whatever partisan media hack they happened to hear last. THAT HOLDS TRUE FOR CONSERVATIVES, TOO.Finally, on this bit about deregulation, I agree that we went too far. But some deregulation was needed. The tight controls on our economy and investment sector directly caused the stagflation of the late seventies and early eighties. Government was huge, unwieldly, and unproductive. And for those results, the top tax bracket was seventy percent, and many paid more than fifty percent.Imagine earning $160,000 today, and having your government take more than 50% of it.You’d scream about it if it happened to you. You are a liar if you say you wouldn’t. No sane person wants to pay high taxes.Besides, the more you raise the tax rates, the more the wealthy pay YOUR partisan politicians to draft special legislation just for them, so they can hide most of their income from taxation. Your partisan politicians are only too happy to do that for their largest contributors.Don’t jump down my throat for that fact. Maybe you should throttle your congressperson or senator. But I suppose if you are a Democrat and he’s a Democrat, you’ll vote for him again no matter how much of an ass he is, and you’ll vote for him every time he’s on that ballot.

Don’t be too hard on trebleP. Reagan was a better actor than his movies would lead you to believe. He’s not alone in falling for the con job.

The same people ran his administration as w’s – they were both somewhat likable figureheads – , they were just a bit more open about it the second time with the fear mongering 9-11 giving them a great opportunity. PS: where’s the discussion of the out of control deficit spending under uncle ronnie? The part where they felt they were above the law? Iran-Contra? Yeah we knew what we were doing was illegal, but we meant well. Ends justifying the means sound familiar?

Carter’s biggest problem was his naivete. He really thought he could fix the world and that congress would do what was right. Sucker. The dems made it impossible for him to succeed.

Cigar Bill? Really? That’s your beef? So he was stupid over the sex and stupidly lied about it. I was very disappointed in him, but he didn’t run the country into the ground. I was deployed on one of those big floaty things when the lewinsky story broke. We were in a Persian Gulf port where we couldn’t leave the pier because some previous assholes couldn’t follow the liberty rules. So while drinking warmish beers under a tent someone starting bitching about how horrible bill’s lying was. I asked the speaker if he had claimed any of the Persian rugs he bought on his customs forms (remember they were illegal at the time). His reply was that he had a certificate that said they were made in China so he was covered. When I pointed out that signing the form while knowingly providing false information was a similar crime I got the standard comeback: Dude, you’re an asshole.

There was a very successful perception management campaign to give Reagan a great legacy. There will be/is one for w, too. Hopefully that “liberal media” won’t be complicit this time.

Don’t be too hard on trebleP. Reagan was a better actor than his movies would lead you to believe. He’s not alone in falling for the con job.

The same people ran his administration as w’s – they were both somewhat likable figureheads – , they were just a bit more open about it the second time with the fear mongering 9-11 giving them a great opportunity. PS: where’s the discussion of the out of control deficit spending under uncle ronnie? The part where they felt they were above the law? Iran-Contra? Yeah we knew what we were doing was illegal, but we meant well. Ends justifying the means sound familiar?

Carter’s biggest problem was his naivete. He really thought he could fix the world and that congress would do what was right. Sucker. The dems made it impossible for him to succeed.

Cigar Bill? Really? That’s your beef? So he was stupid over the sex and stupidly lied about it. I was very disappointed in him, but he didn’t run the country into the ground. I was deployed on one of those big floaty things when the lewinsky story broke. We were in a Persian Gulf port where we couldn’t leave the pier because some previous assholes couldn’t follow the liberty rules. So while drinking warmish beers under a tent someone starting bitching about how horrible bill’s lying was. I asked the speaker if he had claimed any of the Persian rugs he bought on his customs forms (remember they were illegal at the time). His reply was that he had a certificate that said they were made in China so he was covered. When I pointed out that signing the form while knowingly providing false information was a similar crime I got the standard comeback: Dude, you’re an asshole.

There was a very successful perception management campaign to give Reagan a great legacy. There will be/is one for w, too. Hopefully that “liberal media” won’t be complicit this time.

PPP -Your willful ignorance of the transfer of wealth from everyone to the rich under the Reagan administration is astounding. The only other people I have heard denying it are the paid propagandists. It is taught as fact in our universities. If you wish to cling to fairy tales, by all means, don’t let me stop you. Your denial of reality is disturbing.Perhaps this scholar at SMU might persuade you. Reagan: The great American Socialist.

PPP -Your willful ignorance of the transfer of wealth from everyone to the rich under the Reagan administration is astounding. The only other people I have heard denying it are the paid propagandists. It is taught as fact in our universities. If you wish to cling to fairy tales, by all means, don’t let me stop you. Your denial of reality is disturbing.Perhaps this scholar at SMU might persuade you. Reagan: The great American Socialist.

TP posted while I was writing my previous response, so you get a second.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I bash reagan because I am personally offended by what that administration stood for (as did both bush admins – the minor exception is that poppy had some actual intellect and stood up to the neo-cons a little). I bought the lie for a while. I actually voted for him, but I started paying attention and noticed the actions didn’t match the words. Instead of being fiscally conservative, they were flushing money down the toilet and growing government) at least the parts of it they liked). The lawlessness combined with the link-up to hate groups calling themselves religious finally pushed me away. I was a democrat for a while but don’t agree with everything in that party either so I’m now an independent.

Over regulation is/was a direct result of people refusing to follow the rules and self regulate. Get eady for Deja vu. It’s very much like how we ended up with a lot of our intelligence collecting rules because some asshats were spying on their political enemies.

Concur the income tax system sucks. You know as well as I do that no one in the upper income levels pays anywhere near the published rate. Hell, I’m way down there (especially now on just my retired and disability pays) and it’s not even close. I have no problem with the people who benefit the most from the opportunity this Country provides picking up more of the tab. I’d prefer a flat rate or even a National sales tax – but that will never happen as to many people make their livings (including those at treasury) off the current screwed up system.

I will agree with you that most of what now passes for political discourse in this Country is just people yelling talking points at each other. Those in power wouldn’t have it any other way.

TP posted while I was writing my previous response, so you get a second.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I bash reagan because I am personally offended by what that administration stood for (as did both bush admins – the minor exception is that poppy had some actual intellect and stood up to the neo-cons a little). I bought the lie for a while. I actually voted for him, but I started paying attention and noticed the actions didn’t match the words. Instead of being fiscally conservative, they were flushing money down the toilet and growing government) at least the parts of it they liked). The lawlessness combined with the link-up to hate groups calling themselves religious finally pushed me away. I was a democrat for a while but don’t agree with everything in that party either so I’m now an independent.

Over regulation is/was a direct result of people refusing to follow the rules and self regulate. Get eady for Deja vu. It’s very much like how we ended up with a lot of our intelligence collecting rules because some asshats were spying on their political enemies.

Concur the income tax system sucks. You know as well as I do that no one in the upper income levels pays anywhere near the published rate. Hell, I’m way down there (especially now on just my retired and disability pays) and it’s not even close. I have no problem with the people who benefit the most from the opportunity this Country provides picking up more of the tab. I’d prefer a flat rate or even a National sales tax – but that will never happen as to many people make their livings (including those at treasury) off the current screwed up system.

I will agree with you that most of what now passes for political discourse in this Country is just people yelling talking points at each other. Those in power wouldn’t have it any other way.

PPP – in 1980 BEFORE Reagan was elected, the effective federal tax rate after credits on people with adjust gross income over $1,000,000 was 47.9%, not 70% and if you earned $160K, the gov’t took 33%, not 50%.I hated Reagan because I lived with his economic policies and I paid those taxes you’re bitching about, not because he was a Republican.Don’t jump down my throat for that fact.Trust me, I don’t want to be anywhere near your throat, but facts are facts and that particular myth (the 70% tax rate) AIN’T fact. It’s time that the record be set straight.

PPP – in 1980 BEFORE Reagan was elected, the effective federal tax rate after credits on people with adjust gross income over $1,000,000 was 47.9%, not 70% and if you earned $160K, the gov’t took 33%, not 50%.I hated Reagan because I lived with his economic policies and I paid those taxes you’re bitching about, not because he was a Republican.Don’t jump down my throat for that fact.Trust me, I don’t want to be anywhere near your throat, but facts are facts and that particular myth (the 70% tax rate) AIN’T fact. It’s time that the record be set straight.

A pertinent fact when discussing Reagan’s tax rates is that while income taxes were lowered, payroll taxes rose dramatically, placing a larger burden on lower and middle income workers.

A pertinent fact when discussing Reagan’s tax rates is that while income taxes were lowered, payroll taxes rose dramatically, placing a larger burden on lower and middle income workers.

Paul Volcker saved the economy in the early 80′s, not Reagan. Reagan got the credit because it happened on his watch.

Paul Volcker saved the economy in the early 80′s, not Reagan. Reagan got the credit because it happened on his watch.

Supporters of Judge Sotomayor are labeled racist and sexist for pointing out all the white males opposed to her confirmation.I have to ask: what’s it like to suck SO hard?

Supporters of Judge Sotomayor are labeled racist and sexist for pointing out all the white males opposed to her confirmation.I have to ask: what’s it like to suck SO hard?

Git,I’ve read Batra’s stuff before, in case you didn’t know. I’d love to see where he gets his stats from, because they simply do not match the IRS stats, whatsoever. You noticed that he didn’t cite any sources? His books rarely do, either.We’ve seen those stats before, Git, and if memory serves me correctly, you and some others here were directed, by me, to the IRS website so you could see the actual tax rates paid, and what kind of revenue that generated, and what the median family’s inflation adjusted income was.I have no use for an “expert” who refuses to cite his stats. There are many places here on the internet where you can find the actual numbers, rather than a bunch of rhetoric designed to get the faithful riled up and written by a guy with a liberal agenda.The deficit that Reagan built up was based not on his tax cuts, but on his military spending. Had he eliminated some of the tax cuts, yes, he would have reduced the deficit. But make no mistake; cutting taxes on corporations and wealthy people created an environment that reduced unemployment and lowered inflation.Reagan’s policies increased the median family’s inflation adjusted income by $4000/year, something that the pre-Reagan Presidents (like Kennedy and LBJ) couldn’t do (they had zero growth), and post-Reagan Presidents, including Clinton, have ended up reducing that inflation adjusted income by $1500/year.Those are the raw numbers, and no President since Reagan has met that standard. You talk about shifting wealth to the wealthy. Well, Git, what does it say about a Liberal President Clinton whose policies REDUCED the median families’ income by $1500/year?There is only ONE measure for wealth for a family or individual. That measure is, how much actual money do they have to spend, and how far does it go? No President before or after Reagan has come close to giving normal Americans as much money to spend as he did. You can talk all you want about transferring wealth to the wealthy, but the stats tell a completely different story.

Git,I’ve read Batra’s stuff before, in case you didn’t know. I’d love to see where he gets his stats from, because they simply do not match the IRS stats, whatsoever. You noticed that he didn’t cite any sources? His books rarely do, either.We’ve seen those stats before, Git, and if memory serves me correctly, you and some others here were directed, by me, to the IRS website so you could see the actual tax rates paid, and what kind of revenue that generated, and what the median family’s inflation adjusted income was.I have no use for an “expert” who refuses to cite his stats. There are many places here on the internet where you can find the actual numbers, rather than a bunch of rhetoric designed to get the faithful riled up and written by a guy with a liberal agenda.The deficit that Reagan built up was based not on his tax cuts, but on his military spending. Had he eliminated some of the tax cuts, yes, he would have reduced the deficit. But make no mistake; cutting taxes on corporations and wealthy people created an environment that reduced unemployment and lowered inflation.Reagan’s policies increased the median family’s inflation adjusted income by $4000/year, something that the pre-Reagan Presidents (like Kennedy and LBJ) couldn’t do (they had zero growth), and post-Reagan Presidents, including Clinton, have ended up reducing that inflation adjusted income by $1500/year.Those are the raw numbers, and no President since Reagan has met that standard. You talk about shifting wealth to the wealthy. Well, Git, what does it say about a Liberal President Clinton whose policies REDUCED the median families’ income by $1500/year?There is only ONE measure for wealth for a family or individual. That measure is, how much actual money do they have to spend, and how far does it go? No President before or after Reagan has come close to giving normal Americans as much money to spend as he did. You can talk all you want about transferring wealth to the wealthy, but the stats tell a completely different story.