seriously, I'm so sick of politicians talking about the reagan legacy and wanting to carry his mantle... who the hell would want to pick up the mantle of a borderline criminal senile old guy who spent his time in the white house hiding his alzheimer's with his hand on the button?
does reagan matter
- Thread starter nageov3t
- Start date
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
If the Iraqi war had gone well, the Republicans would be talking about the brilliance of the Bush Doctrine. But they are facing a fractured base, and low approval polling numbers.
So they have to go back to Reagan to find the "good old days" to talk about.
GroundedSailor
Platinum Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 2,502
- 0
- 76
The problem is the adage "Perception is Reality". Reagan was a likeable person who spoke well to a large audience. His policies were disastrous for the the country and I would add for the American Society as a whole. Iran Contra, SDI, Tax cuts (big cuts in 1981, followed by tax increases in the years 1982 thro 1987 - the largest %age tax increases by any recent president), deficits, bringing religious forces into politics, weakening the National Labor Relations Board , inequality, deregulation - which resulted in th S&L crisis, the list goes on....
But since the perception is Shining city on a hill, It's morning again in America, that has become the reality and is what people tend to remember as his legacy. Its sad when people forget the issues, whether in history or today, and go for the gloss over substance.
Comparing the present republican President/administration to Reagan's makes him look even better.
Reagan's appeal was entirely irrational while he lived, so it's not surprising that repubs would seek to evoke those same sort of feelings now that he's gone, elevated to the realm of myth and legend as a god-like figure...
It doesn't hurt that they can employ revisionist history to buff up his image, turn wingnuts all teary-eyed over the good old days, the 80's, which generally sucked unless you were already rich, or a high-rolling shyster, in which case they were great...
Ronnie made economic victims feel good about having been selected as sacrifices on the altar of capitalism...
I'll grant that he had the good sense and the humanity to recognize that the Soviets under Gorbachev were entirely sincere in their efforts to end the Cold War. That came at Rejkavic, when he realized that his own country had to re-evaluate, change course, and that he had to overrule his advisors to avoid international embarassment and debasement, achieve peace.
It doesn't hurt that they can employ revisionist history to buff up his image, turn wingnuts all teary-eyed over the good old days, the 80's, which generally sucked unless you were already rich, or a high-rolling shyster, in which case they were great...
Ronnie made economic victims feel good about having been selected as sacrifices on the altar of capitalism...
I'll grant that he had the good sense and the humanity to recognize that the Soviets under Gorbachev were entirely sincere in their efforts to end the Cold War. That came at Rejkavic, when he realized that his own country had to re-evaluate, change course, and that he had to overrule his advisors to avoid international embarassment and debasement, achieve peace.
Jaskalas
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2004
- 35,856
- 10,165
- 136
We will make sure this hatred is returned to you and your own.
As for Reagan, I was born during his second term. What the hell would I know about his policies other than championing everything the Republican Party stands for (as they say).
The conga-line of anti-Republican posts in this topic is hilarious, but typical for P&N. Obviously Reagan was the devil incarnate for all of you. Him and every single other Republican, but you save them for other topics.
As for the constantly mentioning him. Remember it was CNN that picked the Reagan library, wasn't it? It was their debate. So I figure the stark contrast between a library of a 20 year old legacy with a few lawn chairs as the audience was played up in stark contrast to the gigantic Hollywood theater. Wonderful tactic employed by that channel.
It has been 19 years since he was out of office, so of course he doesn?t matter. I think Republicans hold onto a time when the country was centered enough to elect a Republican who had conservative values, instead of pro-government Bushes/Romnies and McCains. Today someone who is religious and expresses conservative values comes in 4th place in Florida, is scorned by all the national media, AND is demonized by all of you.
Any 12 year old can point to the history books and tell you the country has been moving towards more government and more secular (anti-religious) since the 1800s. Like any stock market it has ups and downs, usually counter to one-another, but it is always making ?progress? in a single direction. This country and its people continue to believe less in conservative values and Republicans are entering a very troubling time for the party.
They only wish it were the 1980s again.
No, Reagan doesn't matter. But I find it comical how so many people around here slam Reagan for his presidency, when the guy won re-election in 1984 by winning 49 out of 50 states including California and New York, very liberal states. He wouldn't have been re-elected in such a a landslide if he was so bad. Not only that, but his VP won the 88 race as well.......Liberals are the ones who keeping trying to revise the 80's as the worst decade in the history of mankind. Oh, by the way, I will take Reagan anyday over Carter ........
I guess it must the mass communication we have now. It took centuries for legends like King Arthur and Robin Hood to come together. It only took a generation to create the imaginary tale of Reagan, idyllic leader, champion of good vs evil.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
The love is strong in this thread... :roll:
Reagan was a very good president. I'll never understand why so many people try to tear him down.
Reagan was a very good president. I'll never understand why so many people try to tear him down.
BeauJangles
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2001
- 13,941
- 1
- 0
Reagan helped end the Cold War, but I think it's poor history to claim that he single-handedly brought down the Soviets.
Edit: Anybody who voted "no" to the "does Reagan matter".... why?! I don't like him, but he was very important in terms of US history. He helped found the modern conservative movement and his policies and actions have repercussions that still exist today.
Edit: Anybody who voted "no" to the "does Reagan matter".... why?! I don't like him, but he was very important in terms of US history. He helped found the modern conservative movement and his policies and actions have repercussions that still exist today.
I think the people who Reagan made look like retards (like Arthur Schlesinger Jr, John Kenneth Galbraith, Paul Samuelson, James Reston, Lester Thurow, Stephen Cohen, Strobe Talbot, and a couple million other Liberals) simply went back to being retarded.
GroundedSailor
Platinum Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 2,502
- 0
- 76
He matters in a historical way. Today? not much, except we are paying for the policies he helped promulgate. What I'll never understand why people don't take a good hard look beyond him and look at the policies his administration followed. I guess they didn't call him the Teflon president for nothing.
BeauJangles
Lifer
- Aug 26, 2001
- 13,941
- 1
- 0
ProfJohn
Lifer
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
Reagan matters greatly because the times we live in were shaped by what happened while he was President.
The fall of the Soviet Union created an environment in which terrorism could thrive, in the old bi-polar world the Soviets would not have allowed AQ to get the power they have.
Also the fall of the Soviets allowed us cashing in a peace dividend worth $100 billion a year towards the end of Clinton's term, almost the entire surplus from the 90s was a result of defense cuts.
Also the incredible surge in the economy that we have seen the last 25+ years started in 1982. A result of his tax cuts, if you choose to believe that. Since 1982 we have had only 2 minor recessions both lasting less about eight months. So that is 25 years of economic growth and 16 months of recessions, hard record to beat.
Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions
1960-1982: 22 years 5 recessions lasting a total of 44 months.
1982-2007: 25 years 2 recessions lasting a total of 16 months.
The fall of the Soviet Union created an environment in which terrorism could thrive, in the old bi-polar world the Soviets would not have allowed AQ to get the power they have.
Also the fall of the Soviets allowed us cashing in a peace dividend worth $100 billion a year towards the end of Clinton's term, almost the entire surplus from the 90s was a result of defense cuts.
Also the incredible surge in the economy that we have seen the last 25+ years started in 1982. A result of his tax cuts, if you choose to believe that. Since 1982 we have had only 2 minor recessions both lasting less about eight months. So that is 25 years of economic growth and 16 months of recessions, hard record to beat.
Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions
1960-1982: 22 years 5 recessions lasting a total of 44 months.
1982-2007: 25 years 2 recessions lasting a total of 16 months.
I'll always remember Reagan for pulling out of Beruit mere days after the Marine Barracks were bombed there, thus sending the very first message to the jihadists that Americans were huge pussies who would run, tail between legs, at the first sign of a terrorist attack.
Way to go, Reagan, way to go! :roll:
Way to go, Reagan, way to go! :roll:
I think that both Reagan and JFK were overrated presidents. I never understood what people saw in either of them, aside from charm.
Wow, you're such a two-faced hack. Aren't you one of the global retreat cheerleaders? Yes, you are...
The fact that you cannot judge something in context and simply make blubbering partisan pronouncements means nothing to me. Why the fvck should we have kept soldiers there to die for in a useless cause? Reagan decision to intervene in Lebanon's Civil War was good intentioned but stupid. The Lebanese government's appeal to President Reagan to send American troops back into Beirut as a stabilizing factor should have been ignored. And Reagan properly withdrew when confronted with the facts: It's not worth it.
You can argue, like I do, that we should not have been there in the first place. It turned into a minor debacle. But when I hear leftwing stooges like yourself claim we were bad for cutting and running I have to just shake my head because that's your whole foreign policy in a nutshell. Disingenuous tool is not strong enough a word to describe you.
I suppose we should have sent more soldiers over there and escalated things. Right. For what again? Why is it you nuts want to get involved in every place it doesn't matter? There were a lot bigger things going on with the cold war and all to divert unnecessary attention away ... and since that much more important issue was a spectacular success for America, I'd say he was right and you -as usual- are wrong.
Aww... looks like Dealmonkey hit a nerve... that's gonna happen when the wingnuts get their own rhetoric comin' back at 'em...
Kinda like the truly empty partisan hackery in this post-
"I think the people who Reagan made look like retards (like Arthur Schlesinger Jr, John Kenneth Galbraith, Paul Samuelson, James Reston, Lester Thurow, Stephen Cohen, Strobe Talbot, and a couple million other Liberals) simply went back to being retarded."
Care to elaborate on that, or just let its emptiness speak for itself?
Kinda like the truly empty partisan hackery in this post-
"I think the people who Reagan made look like retards (like Arthur Schlesinger Jr, John Kenneth Galbraith, Paul Samuelson, James Reston, Lester Thurow, Stephen Cohen, Strobe Talbot, and a couple million other Liberals) simply went back to being retarded."
Care to elaborate on that, or just let its emptiness speak for itself?
What's there to elaborate on? So many high level people made so many ignorant comments and then had reality shoved into their wrinkled little faces it's kinda funny. After making a few under-inspired comments about how they were wrong they pretty much invented their own mythology concerning Reagan after a few short years and went back to being retards. You, Dealmonkey, et al, are the intellectual offspring of this mythological Lie and ignorant pawns of misinformation.
Not that I expect you to grasp the obvious.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter