• 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!

Ron Reagan Saw Signs of Father's Alzheimer's at White House

he couldn't be telling the truth now could he?

How silly of me. Gods don't get mental problems. Do they?

Democrats are trying to prove that a president with alzheimers had a better reputation than the two clowns they got into office. :lamo
 
Democrats are trying to prove that a president with alzheimers had a better reputation than the two clowns they got into office. :lamo

Which Democrats are trying to prove exactly that?
 
Not sure what "reality" you live in. Prior to Reagan....it was not only possible but very likely that a one-wage earner household was possible. Today....even two wage households are struggling. Look at the manufacturing outlook prior to 1980 and after 1990. The reality is....Reaganomics may not have had the immediate impact...but the hangover is what we are feeling today. Since Reagan there has been a drastic reduction in the manufacturing base in this country. THAT is a reality...but then again....your messiah will never be anything but a GOD in your eyes....so I'm wasting my time.

You are indeed wasting your time and the time of a huge number that actually lived and worked during the Reagan years. His 10-10-5% tax cuts put more people back to work and led to the creation of 18 million jobs. That is reality, sorry you missed out. It has been 26 years since Reagan left office and still you cannot get the facts straight. sorry keeping more of your money is such a struggle.
 
You give us one study - I give you a boat filled with them - 16 to be specific - from all parts of the political spectrum.
Your LOL is hilarious. Do you even look at the links I provide or is this just the usual knee jerk response?

Yes, I went to your posting and found it typical liberal spin where a liberal picks and chooses what he wants because it supports his point of view. Anyone that beleives Reagan ranked 40th is out of touch with reality which I see in most of your post. Historians judged Reagan, I saw Wikipedia which can be changed and altered. Results matter a lot more than rhetoric.
 
Yes, I went to your posting and found it typical liberal spin where a liberal picks and chooses what he wants because it supports his point of view. Anyone that beleives Reagan ranked 40th is out of touch with reality which I see in most of your post. Historians judged Reagan, I saw Wikipedia which can be changed and altered. Results matter a lot more than rhetoric.


Have you ever considered approaching politics from a standpoint OTHER than this Cowboys and Indians style of yours?
 
Have you ever considered approaching politics from a standpoint OTHER than this Cowboys and Indians style of yours?

Since I have been a "cowboy and an Indian" I have a little credibilty in that area. The Democrat Party today isn't the party that I belonged to for 20 years. It left me and is so far left it may never get back on the page. Presidents are judged by historians, not public opinion polls most of which are skewed by the flavor of the day.
 
Yes, I went to your posting and found it typical liberal spin where a liberal picks and chooses what he wants because it supports his point of view. Anyone that beleives Reagan ranked 40th is out of touch with reality which I see in most of your post. Historians judged Reagan, I saw Wikipedia which can be changed and altered. Results matter a lot more than rhetoric.

Obviously you did not read too carefully as there were studies there sponsored by conservatives and libertarians also. How did you miss those?

btw- the ones from conservatives and libertarians also ranked FDR as a GREAT President..... in case you missed that also.
 
Obviously you did not read too carefully as there were studies there sponsored by conservatives and libertarians also. How did you miss those?

btw- the ones from conservatives and libertarians also ranked FDR as a GREAT President..... in case you missed that also.

All the polls were popularity polls and not based upon economic results. Personal opinion polls are different from non partisan historian rankings. The results of Reagan are a lot different than the rhetoric of liberals here just like the results of Obama are a lot different than the rhetoric. Liberals seem to love rhetoric and ignore results.
 
All the polls were popularity polls and not based upon economic results. Personal opinion polls are different from non partisan historian rankings. The results of Reagan are a lot different than the rhetoric of liberals here just like the results of Obama are a lot different than the rhetoric. Liberals seem to love rhetoric and ignore results.

You need to go back and read them because I have no idea where you got this stuff from but it does not at all reflect the standards used in these polls of expert opinion. Even when the Federalist Society made up of libertarians and conservatives and the conservative Wall Street Journal united in a poll, the results were still much the same.
 
You need to go back and read them because I have no idea where you got this stuff from but it does not at all reflect the standards used in these polls of expert opinion. Even when the Federalist Society made up of libertarians and conservatives and the conservative Wall Street Journal united in a poll, the results were still much the same.

Yet the historian poll I posted doesn't matter? Interesting. It is probably more interesting that here we are 23 years after Reagan left office and still arguing about him. That speaks volumes about the good job he actually did and the one that you and others want to ignore. We all saw the outpouring of affection and respect the American people had for Reagan at his funeral and the national honors he received therefore that is all that really matters not any polls that you or I post. Reagan is gone and the results speak for themselves. bea.gov, bls.gov paint a different picture than all those "young" liberals here seem to believe. It doesn't look to me like you really care at all about results but instead only buy rhetoric.
 
Last edited:
You need to go back and read them because I have no idea where you got this stuff from but it does not at all reflect the standards used in these polls of expert opinion. Even when the Federalist Society made up of libertarians and conservatives and the conservative Wall Street Journal united in a poll, the results were still much the same.

Yet these polls come to a different results showing again that polls can be provided to support whatever position one wants. One thing that never changes however are non partisan actual results, you know those that you refuse to acknowledge?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5055404.ece

Presidential Rankings — Infoplease.com

List of presidential rankings - Politics - White House - msnbc.com

Presidential Rankings As I See Them

Forums - USATODAY.com
 
Exactly. They couldn't do it with Reagan and in recent history, Dubya. Twice. Pretty embarrassing.

Isn't it amazing that two absolutely stupid individuals, Reagan and Bush, were able to fool so many Americans including Democrats that controlled Congress?
 
Ron Reagan Saw Signs of Father's Alzheimer's at White House - ABC News

It is always the family that see the sign's first, but if the family and his advisor's hid this fact from the rest of the world... then damn.. Why on earth if they knew, did they allow him to run for a second term? Who ran the country for the whole of Reagan's second term then?

"Ron, my brother was an embarrassment to his father when he was alive and today he became an embarrassment to his mother," Michael Reagan, a radio talk-show host, writes on Twitter
 
Since I have been a "cowboy and an Indian" I have a little credibilty in that area. The Democrat Party today isn't the party that I belonged to for 20 years. It left me and is so far left it may never get back on the page. Presidents are judged by historians, not public opinion polls most of which are skewed by the flavor of the day.

Yes... I agree - it's no longer the party of desegregation, racism, Storm Thurmond, white pride. Those Democrats became Republicans.
 
Yes... I agree - it's no longer the party of desegregation, racism, Storm Thurmond, white pride. Those Democrats became Republicans.

Or they stayed in the Democrat party and had their sins absolved because of a D in front of their name *Robert Byrd.* The Republican party is not a party of racism or racist principals.
 
Yes... I agree - it's no longer the party of desegregation, racism, Storm Thurmond, white pride. Those Democrats became Republicans.

Figured that is how you would see it, I see it as there is no room in the Democrat Party today for Conservatives. Look at your paycheck, then look at the national debt and tell me liberalism works? Oh, wait, it does work for the liberal elite, big govt. bureaucrats while destroying the average American. You see, there is only one ideology today that really doesn't care how much YOU make and that ISN'T the Democrat Party.
 
Or they stayed in the Democrat party and had their sins absolved because of a D in front of their name *Robert Byrd.* The Republican party is not a party of racism or racist principals.

Oh I get it, somebody who makes a few mistakes in their youth and spends 60 years trying to make up for it is a racist. However the Republican party which absorbed all the Democrat racists who left as a result of the 1964 civil rights movement is not racist at all. Where does the right wing dishonesty on this topic end? How can a party which creates what is called the Southern Strategy not be a party of racism or racist principles? Do you know why the Republican party is so popular with whites? I'll give you a clue:

Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and Forces Against Brown | Journal of Negro Education, The | Find Articles at BNET

President Richard Nixon reacted to the 1971 Court decision in Swann v. CharlotteMecklenburg School District, a school desegregation case that approved the use of race to assign students to schools by the use of busing, by instructing the U. S. Justice Department to draft a constitutional amendment to nullify the Court's decision (Kruger, 1975). In 1984, President Ronald Reagan, campaigning for reelection in Charlotte, North Carolina (the site of the 1971 Swann Court decision), criticized the Democrats for their support of "busing that takes innocent children out of the neighborhood school and makes them pawns in a social experiment that nobody wants" (Gillard, 1988, p. xv). Reagan continued the "Southern Strategy" began by President Richard Nixon in order to win White southern votes (Carter, 2000).\

...

At the national level, Richard Nixon ordered his Attorney General to draft a constitutional amendment to replace the 14th Amendment, and ordered the Attorney General and other government agencies not to enforce the Brown decree as recommended in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress reenacted all the laws passed during Reconstruction (Motley, 1988). The 1964 Civil Rights Act authorized the U.S. Attorney General to bring legal action against school systems practicing school segregation and to assume the costs of these legal cases. Nixon ordered a slow down of such cases, if not an absolute halt to such actions; and a halt to the collection of racial data on school enrollment by the U.S. Department of Education. His opposition to Brown formed the basics of his party's "Southern Strategy" to win White votes in the South.


...

The genesis of the school-choice movement or "Southern Strategy" in education was with Brown that declared state-supported school segregation unconstitutional (Levin, 1999). Brown motivated school systems, first in the southern schools and later in northern schools, which were opposed to school desegregation to experiment with school choice as opposition to the racial integration of public schools. The backlash against school desegregation increased after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Law that gave the U.S. Justice Department the authority and resources to seek through the federal courts compliance with Brown. School desegregation in the South and race riots in urban centers in the North combined to give the Republican Party a powerful weapon to attract White conservative voters using the rhetoric of school "choice."

You're being VERY naive if you don't think the modern day Republican Party is filled with the racists who made up the Democrat Party 20-30-40 years ago.

However, I welcome you to refute what are facts.
 
Last edited:
Uh, Ron, what must it be like to be an embarassment to your father. Especially, YOUR great father.
 
Oh I get it, somebody who makes a few mistakes in their youth and spends 60 years trying to make up for it is a racist. However the Republican party which absorbed all the Democrat racists who left as a result of the 1964 civil rights movement is not racist at all. Where does the right wing dishonesty on this topic end? How can a party which creates what is called the Southern Strategy not be a party of racism or racist principles? Do you know why the Republican party is so popular with whites? I'll give you a clue:

Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and Forces Against Brown | Journal of Negro Education, The | Find Articles at BNET



You're being VERY naive if you don't think the modern day Republican Party is filled with the racists who made up the Democrat Party 20-30-40 years ago.

However, I welcome you to refute what are facts.

Reagan won re-election by taking 49-50 states in 1984. Seems that you continue to live in the past while ignoring the actual history of the past. What are facts is this country is a Center-Right country, not a left country that today's liberal party wants us to believe. They showed that by electing Obama in 2008 with 52% of the vote believing him to be closer to the center. In 2010 Obama lost 10% of his base and was shellacked in the midterm. Those are the facts that matter now what happened decades ago.
 
Reagan won re-election by taking 49-50 states in 1984.

Yes and we have an electoral college. So what? 80 million Americans voted in that election with a population of 220 million. Hardly indicative of anything really.

Seems that you continue to live in the past

This from the guy who keeps talking about how great Reagan, supporter of dictatorships, was.

while ignoring the actual history of the past.

Like the Southern Strategy? You can ignore that all you want. Doesn't mean it didn't actually happen.

What are facts is this country is a Center-Right country,

History shows different. We have legalized abortion, gays rights, freedom of religion, press, equal rights between men and women. Hardly representative of a 'center-right country'.

not a left country that today's liberal party wants us to believe.

It's all a conspiracy. Yes. I know. 'The left' is hard at work trying to make you believe that even though homos are now allowed to kiss on the streets you're not living in a country that is more and more progressive by the day.

They showed that by electing Obama in 2008 with 52% of the vote believing him to be closer to the center.

Oh I get it, Barack Obama gets more votes than Reagan could have ever dreamed of and the country isn't more progressive.

In 2010 Obama lost 10% of his base and was shellacked in the midterm. Those are the facts that matter now what happened decades ago.

Uh - what?
 
Yes and we have an electoral college. So what? 80 million Americans voted in that election with a population of 220 million. Hardly indicative of anything really.



This from the guy who keeps talking about how great Reagan, supporter of dictatorships, was.



Like the Southern Strategy? You can ignore that all you want. Doesn't mean it didn't actually happen.



History shows different. We have legalized abortion, gays rights, freedom of religion, press, equal rights between men and women. Hardly representative of a 'center-right country'.



It's all a conspiracy. Yes. I know. 'The left' is hard at work trying to make you believe that even though homos are now allowed to kiss on the streets you're not living in a country that is more and more progressive by the day.



Oh I get it, Barack Obama gets more votes than Reagan could have ever dreamed of and the country isn't more progressive.



Uh - what?

Obama got more votes than Reagan 20 years later and that is your argument? There was no electoral college involved in 2010 when Republicans collected over 680 state offices from Democrats, nor does the electoral college look at the Obama results. BEA.gov, BLS.gov will give you non partisan data regarding both Reagan and Obama. If you have the guts do to those sites.

Reagan's funeral was an exceptional event that showed even you the love and support he got from the country. You obviously weren't around in 1980, didn't have to pay over 17% for a home mortage, experienced double digit inflation, and the malaise Carter left us. Keep living in your dream world.

Liberals think only with their heart and ignore their brain. If liberalism was so good the Great society would have worked. If liberalism was so good SS and Medicare would be trillions in the hole. If liberalism was so good more people would call themselves liberal vs. the 20% that claims to be liberal.
 
Yeah right.....take an economics course and study history.

I've actually taken several and passed with a 4.0. Such a classic liberal strategy. If you don't agree with their totally baseless claims about something, you must not understand it. :2rofll:

Give us some indisputable evidence (you know real data not just blind observations and feelings), and well talk.
 
reagan is history and the verdict is in---americans consider him one of the greatest chief execs we've ever known

his administration was entirely reaganite, he set the agenda, he ran the show

as for his second term---from his decision to go thru with bitburg to his inspirational response to the challenger---all comprehensively in character

character defined the man

and political principle and philosophy, which he wrote himself in thousands of pages of notes transcribed on yellow legal pads thru the 60's and 70's and going all the way back to his days touring for ge

Bookreporter.com - REAGAN, IN HIS OWN HAND: The Writings of Ronald Reagan That Reveal His Revolutionary Vision for America edited by Kiron K. Skinner, Annelise Anderson, and Martin Anderson

this supposed alzheimers sufferer is the same who KICKED GORBACHEV'S ASS at reykjavik in 1986

june 12, 1987---mr gorbachev, tear down this wall

junior, on the other hand, has always been a punk, he's selling a book and trying to get himself on msnbc more than once a year

Mike Reagan calls brother, Ron Reagan, an 'embarrassment' - James Hohmann - POLITICO.com

america always knew the man, he won 45 states in 80, and 49 in 84, morning in america

and some ask, "so what?"

LOL!

america always knew the man, but it wasn't until his funeral, the most amazing spontaneous outpouring, 50 miles of CA freeway traffic STOPPED in homage to his hearse...

it wasn't until his funeral that the elites came to recognize

once again, as always, he kicked their butts

rant on, revisionists
 
Back
Top Bottom