• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sarah Palin to Contribute to Fox News

Dirty Harry said:
In ”Reagan and Gorbachev,” Jack F. Matlock Jr. says that Mikhail Gorbachev deserves “at least” double billing for the demise of the Cold War. And he should know since he was a veteran foreign service officer and respected expert on the Soviet Union, he reached the pinnacle of his career under Reagan, serving first as the White House’s senior coordinator of policy toward the Soviet Union, then as ambassador to Moscow.

Reagan himself went even farther. Asked at a press conference in Moscow in 1988, his last year in office, about the role he played in the great drama of the late 20th century, he described himself essentially as a supporting actor. ”Mr. Gorbachev,” he said, ”deserves most of the credit, as the leader of this country.”
Click to expand...

And what would you expect a great Statesman to say? :roll:
 
Conservative said:
Reagan took office with a 900 billion debt and left it at 2.6 trillion. His tax cuts grew govt. revenue that Congress spent. Reagan set a record for vetoes during his Administration but without the line item veto Reagan had to accept Congressional pork to get his legislative agenda passed.

You have a distorted view of the debt, 2.6 trillion is management in a 14 trillion dollar economy, 13 trillion isn't
Click to expand...

You have made my point about Reagans irresponsible fiscal policies. He trippled the national debt during good times, a time when we were not at war. Deficits should have dropped and the debt paid down. Instead he mortgaged the countries future.
The GDP was 6.3 trillion in 88.
 
Last edited:
Dirty Harry said:
You have made my point about Reagans irresponsible fiscal policies. He trippled the national debt during good times, a time when we were not at war. Deficits should have dropped and the debt paid down. Instead he mortgaged the countries future.
Click to expand...

Answer this question..... who holds the purse strings in our government?
 
Crunch said:
Answer this question..... who holds the purse strings in our government?
Click to expand...

Well the president submits the budget and congress can approve it and the president has the power of veto to stop any spending so the answer is both the congress and the president control spending.
It's a little too simplistic to believe only one entity controls the purse strings.l

If congress controls the purse strings then they should get the credit for Reagans success. Right?
 
Last edited:
Dirty Harry said:
Well the president submits the budget and congress can approve it and the president has the power of veto to stop any spending so the answer is both the congress and the president control spending.
It's a little too simplistic to believe only one entity controls the purse strings.l

If congress controls the purse strings then they should get the credit for Reagans success. Right?
Click to expand...

So you believe the budget is the key to our economic growth or prosperity? Interesting, I believe it is HOW the money is spent and the leadership of the President that generates the results. Reagan didn't get the nickname the Great Communicator by accident and it was Reagan's leadership and attitude that led to the economic growth.
 
Dirty Harry said:
Well the president submits the budget and congress can approve it and the president has the power of veto to stop any spending so the answer is both the congress and the president control spending.
It's a little too simplistic to believe only one entity controls the purse strings.l

If congress controls the purse strings then they should get the credit for Reagans success. Right?
Click to expand...

Wrong..... Article I, section7, clause 1

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Click to expand...

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

It's really a simple, fairly short document, you should read it sometime.
 
Conservative said:
So you believe the budget is the key to our economic growth or prosperity? Interesting, I believe it is HOW the money is spent and the leadership of the President that generates the results. Reagan didn't get the nickname the Great Communicator by accident and it was Reagan's leadership and attitude that led to the economic growth.
Click to expand...

It is a key, not the key. The budget does say HOW the money is to be spent.
Trippling the debt will lead to a temporary economic boom. Reagan proved that. It was more of a factor than Reagans speeches that he didn't even write. Reagan's leadership consisted mostly of napping while the monkeys ran the circus.
Reagan was a great communicator, probably came from his years as an actor.
 
Crunch said:
Wrong..... Article I, section7, clause 1



The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

It's really a simple, fairly short document, you should read it sometime.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should read for comprehension.
Raising revenues? We are talking about spending not raising revenues and that process begins with the president submitting the budget.



http://budget.house.gov/crs-reports/98-472.pdf

First Monday in February President submits budget to Congress.
February 15 Congressional Budget Office submits economic and budget
outlook report to Budget Committees.
Six weeks after President
submits budget
Committees submit views and estimates to Budget Committees.
April 1 Senate Budget Committee reports budget resolution.
April 15 Congress completes action on budget resolution.
May 15 Annual appropriations bills may be considered in the House, even
if action on budget resolution has not been completed.
June 10 House Appropriations Committee reports last annual
appropriations bill.
June 15 Congress completes action on reconciliation legislation (if
required by budget resolution).
June 30 House completes action on annual appropriations bills.
July 15 President submits mid-session review of his budget to Congress.
October 1 Fiscal year begins.
 
Dirty Harry said:
It is a key, not the key. The budget does say HOW the money is to be spent.
Trippling the debt will lead to a temporary economic boom. Reagan proved that. It was more of a factor than Reagans speeches that he didn't even write. Reagan's leadership consisted mostly of napping while the monkeys ran the circus.
Reagan was a great communicator, probably came from his years as an actor.
Click to expand...

It doesn't appear that any President is ever going to meet your standards as you are always looking for someone to blame. try looking in the mirror first.

The outpouring of affection for Reagan went far and above anything I had seen since the assassination of JFK. Apparently the American people are out of touch with reality, right?
 
Conservative said:
It doesn't appear that any President is ever going to meet your standards as you are always looking for someone to blame. try looking in the mirror first.

The outpouring of affection for Reagan went far and above anything I had seen since the assassination of JFK. Apparently the American people are out of touch with reality, right?
Click to expand...

So a lot of people liked Reagan. He was a likeable, father figure type of guy. At one time I adored him.
The American people are totally out of touch with realty. How else could Obama get elected? How did Clinton and Bush get elected? Look at the clowns in congress. We keep electing the worst people possible, so yes they are out of touch with reality.

I have extremely high standards for a president. Too bad everyone doesn't have them.
 
Last edited:
Dirty Harry said:
So a lot of people liked Reagan. He was a likeable, father figure type of guy. At one time I adored him.
The American people are totally out of touch with realty. How else could Obama get elected? How did Clinton and Bush get elected? Look at the clowns in congress. We keep electing the worst people possible, so yes they are out of touch with reality.

I have extremely high standards for a president. Too bad everyone doesn't have them.
Click to expand...

You are out of touch with reality - Bush is one of the best presidents any nation has ever had.

As for congress - John Boehner, John Thule, Jeff Flake, Jon Kyl, Ralh Hall, Charles Grassley, Mike Pence, Mitch McConnell, Tom Coburn, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Pat Roberts, John Ensign, John Sununu, Gordon Smith, John Warner, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Adam Putman, Zach Wamp, MArsha Blackburn, Connie Mack, and Mary Bono Mack are pretty good, especailly when put up against the Dems.
 
Tom Jones said:
You are out of touch with reality - Bush is one of the best presidents any nation has ever had.
.
Click to expand...

See. Right there you have proven that you are out of touch with reality.
Bush, Obama and Clinton will go down in history as the worst three presidents in history.
 
Dirty Harry said:
See. Right there you have proven that you are out of touch with reality.
Bush, Obama and Clinton will go down in history as the worst three presidents in history.
Click to expand...

With Clinton an entire new industry was recognized. The internet, granted there was bubble but yahoo and google are still here. And so are several other businesses that rely on the internet. As a matter of fact what business at this point in time does not rely on the the internet in one way or another?
 
Last edited:
winston53660 said:
With Clinton an entire new industry was recognized. The internet, granted there was bubble but yahoo and google are still here. And so are several other businesses that rely on the internet are still here. As a matter of fact what business at this point in time not rely on the the internet in one way or another?
Click to expand...

Clinton really had nothing to do with the tech bubble. However if it not happened Clintons presidency would have had several recessions.
 
winston53660 said:
With Clinton an entire new industry was recognized. The internet, granted there was bubble but yahoo and google are still here. And so are several other businesses that rely on the internet are still here. As a matter of fact what business at this point in time not rely on the the internet in one way or another?
Click to expand...

I thought Algore invented the internet.... silly me, it was Clinton who recognized it.
 
Dirty Harry said:
See. Right there you have proven that you are out of touch with reality.
Bush, Obama and Clinton will go down in history as the worst three presidents in history.
Click to expand...

2 out of 3's not bad.

Sure, the (lol) scholars will try to paint Bush as they always have, but their jealous crap will wear off over time - the majority of the people in this country know Bush was a great president and history will prove that he was one of the greatest.

You have to realize that the people who put Bush down the most are the geeks, twirps, nerds, and outright losers and loons - They don't like Bush because he is a man with balls and conviction - something his critics don't have. They see Bush as a man who sat in class in Harvard with his bomber jacket on while they sat there with their bowties - so, sure they attack him with the pen while hiding behind a desk and a computer screen.
Let's keep in mind that these same type of people accuse Bush of evading the Vietnam war by being in the Air Force National Guard - well, first off his being in school was a deferment, just like the ones who also went to school when he did - they were defered from service because they were attending school - but, here lies the difference between his critic twirps and himself, Bush was in the Guard to serve and protect his country on his own accord, as well as already being defered through school - he did something the twirps didn't have the balls to do - he signed his name on the bottom in the Armed Services of his country, and they despise him for it, because they despise their own coward lives.

Now, let's get back to the other two you mentioned - Clinton and Obama - Clinton evaded the draft by fleeing to Russia, and while he was there he spoke out against America. Obama - he never served a day in his life either, and his campaign rants about our troops doing whatever to civillians shows it.

Like I said - you got 2 out of 3 - Bush will go down in history as one of the best presidents ever.
 
Tom Jones said:
2 out of 3's not bad.

Sure, the (lol) scholars will try to paint Bush as they always have, but their jealous crap will wear off over time - the majority of the people in this country know Bush was a great president and history will prove that he was one of the greatest.

You have to realize that the people who put Bush down the most are the geeks, twirps, nerds, and outright losers and loons - They don't like Bush because he is a man with balls and conviction - something his critics don't have. They see Bush as a man who sat in class in Harvard with his bomber jacket on while they sat there with their bowties - so, sure they attack him with the pen while hiding behind a desk and a computer screen.
Let's keep in mind that these same type of people accuse Bush of evading the Vietnam war by being in the Air Force National Guard - well, first off his being in school was a deferment, just like the ones who also went to school when he did - they were defered from service because they were attending school - but, here lies the difference between his critic twirps and himself, Bush was in the Guard to serve and protect his country on his own accord, as well as already being defered through school - he did something the twirps didn't have the balls to do - he signed his name on the bottom in the Armed Services of his country, and they despise him for it, because they despise their own coward lives.

Now, let's get back to the other two you mentioned - Clinton and Obama - Clinton evaded the draft by fleeing to Russia, and while he was there he spoke out against America. Obama - he never served a day in his life either, and his campaign rants about our troops doing whatever to civillians shows it.

Like I said - you got 2 out of 3 - Bush will go down in history as one of the best presidents ever.
Click to expand...

Anyone that believes Bush was a great president must have eaten a lot of paint chips as a kid.

Was Nixon a great President in your mind, too?
 
Dirty Harry said:
Anyone that believes Bush was a great president must have eaten a lot of paint chips as a kid.

Was Nixon a great President in your mind, too?
Click to expand...

Paint chips? Nice thoughts you carry.

Anyway - let's see the ones of late:

JFK - whored it up in the White House just like Clinton - his brother Bobby told him he should send troops into Vietnam - seeing he was married to Jacqueline Bouvier, a French woman, he figured why not stay European, so helped out the French in Vietnam - he sent troops as his brother requested, but the French took off and left him holding the bag.
Then he lost Cuba to the Russians.

Johnson - his wife had a big stake in Colt Manufacturing Co., his friends other such companies - he escalated the Viet Nam war and got to introduce the Colt M-16 in a BIG way. He got out while he could - after the gettin' was gone.

The malaise days of Jimmy Carter - some of the worst in history.

Clinton doing nothing, to include his wife, except for whoring it up with everything he could get his hands on, then lying about it under oath and penalty of perjury.

Ya, Nixon was very good in comparison to his peers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom