Whats your stance?

[R13]

I haven't argued that he was a great/good president, he just isn't the terrible one portrayed...along with Reagan not being the great one he's portrayed. Carters appointment of Volcker saved the economy.

[Gotch]

One could argue that many of the problems laid at the feet of Bush were Clinton's fault. His free trade push destroyed the economy and his failure to act decisively against Islamic terrorists resulted in the current conflicts.

One could argue that, it wouldn't necessarily be correct or fair but one could argue it, just like the argument you are trying make. Not fair or correct, but one could argue it......

[Gotch]

Jimmy Carter said of Marshal Josef Tito - "a man who believes in human rights."
Jimmy Carter on Kim Il-Sung - "vigorous, intelligent, surprisingly well-informed about the technical issues, and in charge of the decisions about this country," I don't see that [North Koreans] are an outlaw nation."
Jimmy Carter to Nicolai Ceaucescu -"Our goals are the same: to have a just system of economics and politics . . . We believe in enhancing human rights."

Not exactly "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" is it?

The man is a disgrace

[R13]

One could argue that many of the problems laid at the feet of Bush were Clinton's fault. His free trade push destroyed the economy and his failure to act decisively against Islamic terrorists resulted in the current conflicts.

One could argue that, it wouldn't necessarily be correct or fair but one could argue it, just like the argument you are trying make. Not fair or correct, but one could argue it......

Inflation Unemployment

1961 1.0% 6.7%
1962 1.0 5.6
1963 1.3 5.6
1964 1.3 5.2
1965 1.6 4.5 < Vietnam war spending increases
1966 2.9 3.8
1967 3.1 3.8
1968 4.2 3.5
1969 5.5 3.5
1970 5.7 5.0
1971 4.4 6.0
1972 3.2 5.6
1973 6.2 4.9
1974 11.0 5.6 < First oil crisis
1975 9.1 8.5
1976 5.8 7.7
1977 6.5 7.1
1978 7.6 6.1
1979 11.3 5.9 < Second oil crisis
1980 13.5 7.2
1981 10.3 7.6
1982 6.2 9.7
1983 3.2 9.6
1984 4.3 7.5




Inflation had been rising long before he took office. Carter appointed Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, who put us through an intentional recession. Once the threat of inflation stopped in late 1982, Volcker cut interest rates and flooded the economy with money, causing Reagans great years. Truth is neither had much to do with the economy and if Carter was elected to a second term, the same result would have happened.

Jimmy Carter said of Marshal Josef Tito - "a man who believes in human rights."
Jimmy Carter on Kim Il-Sung - "vigorous, intelligent, surprisingly well-informed about the technical issues, and in charge of the decisions about this country," I don't see that [North Koreans] are an outlaw nation."
Jimmy Carter to Nicolai Ceaucescu -"Our goals are the same: to have a just system of economics and politics . . . We believe in enhancing human rights."

Not exactly "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" is it?

The man is a disgrace

Lets look at Reagan.

Reagan was a huge deficit spender, raised taxes as governor and president, gave amnesty to illegal aliens, "cut an ran" from a middle east conflict after the terrorist bombing of the marine barracks in 1983, proved he's just as scandalous as Nixon with Iran Contra, and the Berlin wall fell under H. W. Bush not Reagan. The only armed conflict Reagan ever led the nation through was Grenada, while Bush handled the first gulf war. Blast me all you want, but we'd been better off without Reagan and the world wouldn't have ended if Carter had won again. The economy was going to recover regardless, the debt/deficits wouldn't have been that outrageous and we would've made a whole lot more progress with alternative energy. Bush41 was probably a better president than Reagan.



Again, I've yet to see what so great about him that'd he'd be mentioned in the likes of our founding fathers, lincoln, FDR and company.

[Gotch]

Uh, Reagan enacted a 25% across the board tax cut.

Real economic growth averaged 3.2 percent during the Reagan years opposed to 2.8 percent during the Ford-Carter years and 2.1 percent during the Bush-Clinton years.

Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.

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

When Peanuthead's economic policies were in effect, family incomes fell by 9 percent. After Reagan's economic policies took effect (1982-89), family incomes rose by 11 percent.

Reagan's tax cuts were not passed by Congress until midsummer of 1981 and did not take effect until October 1, 1981. His first budget proposal was for fiscal year 1982. Now take another look at your chart and your argument.

The average annual growth rate of the GDP from 1981 to 1989 was 3.2 percent per year, compared with 2.8 percent from 1974 to 1981 and 2.1 percent from 1989 to 1995. The 3.2 percent growth includes the recession of the early 1980s, which was a side effect of Peanuthead's high-inflation policies.

The economy grew by an annual rate of 3.8 percent. By the end of the Reagan years, the American economy was almost one-third larger than it was when he took office. Real median family income rose by $4,000 in the Reagan years. Went from $37,868 in 1981 to $42,049 in 1989. RMFI was completely static the 8 years prior to Reagan. It fell by $1,438 in the Bush / Clinton years.

The U.S. average 2 million new jobs per year under Reagan, since Reagan the yearly average has been 1.3 Mil.

[Gotch]

gave amnesty to illegal aliens

"The Attorney General shall adjust the status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence if the alien meets the following requirements:"

Wow!!!! What a scandal.

[Gotch]

"cut an ran" from a middle east conflict after the terrorist bombing of the marine barracks in 1983

LOL @ cut an ran....considering the source. Take a look at the situation and then tell me what would have been the appropriate response. This was not a 9/11 situation...geeze..you see LOL online all the time...I really am chuckling and grinning ear to ear at that one.

[Gotch]

proved he's just as scandalous as Nixon with Iran Contra, and the Berlin wall fell under H. W. Bush not Reagan.

Last first. Bush had nothing to do with it except eyeballing it. So Reagan owed the economic turnaround to Carter but Bush gets credit for a mass collapse of Communism?

One of the reasons the "scandal" charge fails to stick to Reagan is that the vast majority supported the goals in principle that were in play. Then there is the fact that there was nothing to indicate that Reagan lied in any way about what he knew. In fact I think even many of his critics believed that he did not. Only the "haters" think otherwise.

*I know it's not "scientific" but I once saw an expert use a voice stress detector (supposedly more accurate than a polygraph) to analyse what Reagan said about Iran-Contra, it showed that he was embarrassed, but not lying.* That's just a little personal antidote.

[Gotch]

I'll address your other lies and spins tomorrow.

[R13]

Uh, Reagan enacted a 25% across the board tax cut.

And you do realize he hiked taxes numerous times after the 81' cuts. I'm pretty sure he did it twice in 82' with TEFRA and several more times during his tenure.

Real economic growth averaged 3.2 percent during the Reagan years opposed to 2.8 percent during the Ford-Carter years and 2.1 percent during the Bush-Clinton years.

Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.

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

When Peanuthead's economic policies were in effect, family incomes fell by 9 percent. After Reagan's economic policies took effect (1982-89), family incomes rose by 11 percent.

Reagan's tax cuts were not passed by Congress until midsummer of 1981 and did not take effect until October 1, 1981. His first budget proposal was for fiscal year 1982. Now take another look at your chart and your argument.

The average annual growth rate of the GDP from 1981 to 1989 was 3.2 percent per year, compared with 2.8 percent from 1974 to 1981 and 2.1 percent from 1989 to 1995. The 3.2 percent growth includes the recession of the early 1980s, which was a side effect of Peanuthead's high-inflation policies.

The economy grew by an annual rate of 3.8 percent. By the end of the Reagan years, the American economy was almost one-third larger than it was when he took office. Real median family income rose by $4,000 in the Reagan years. Went from $37,868 in 1981 to $42,049 in 1989. RMFI was completely static the 8 years prior to Reagan. It fell by $1,438 in the Bush / Clinton years.

The U.S. average 2 million new jobs per year under Reagan, since Reagan the yearly average has been 1.3 Mil.

And most of that growth during those 7 years are due to Volcker, plain and simple. I sure hope you don't think it "trickled down" in that small amount of time, or contributed to the massive growth?Reagan can thank Volcker and did by reappointing him in 1983.

Last first. Bush had nothing to do with it except eyeballing it. So Reagan owed the economic turnaround to Carter but Bush gets credit for a mass collapse of Communism?

Neither really, they self-destructed with failed policies and failing economy.

I'll address your other lies and spins tomorrow.

And I'll address your other lies and exaggerations tomorrow.


Btw there is an edit button, just saying it's more handy than making 5 separate posts.