The Ronald Reagan that cut taxes only to raise them again, greatly increased government spending while doubling the national debt, bailed out an auto company, almost agreed to complete nuclear disarmament with the USSR, launched air strikes (one thing both Obama and Reagan have in common is they both bombed Libya) and even invaded another country without explicit Congressional approval.
I was at Soesterberg airbase when president Reagan launched that airstrike against Libya. Do you know the reason why? Two of my buddies were permanently paralyzed from injuries suffered at the Berlin disco bombing. I was supposed to go with them on that trip but had to stay back to get ready for my next match per my commander's order. I was so thankful for president Reagan, he did not have to go ask for permissions from those UN weasels. He just went after those terrorist bastards who killed our soldiers. I was a munition specialist and I wrote many personal messages for Gaddafi on those AIM9s and AIM7s we were sending his way.
Tell me again, why did Barry launch an attack against Libya? Did you support president Reagan's airstrike?
You know what mc mark, you seem like a nice fella, you just got lost in your ideology because of you naivete. I don't know about thegary though, I think he is just an elitist snob with a touch of diva in him.
You didn't answer my question. To answer yours I don't know who Barry is but President Obama launched an air strike because Libyan troops were about to enter Benghazi, the UNSC had authorized action against Libya and the US as a signatory to the UN Treaty is legally compelled to follow UNSC resolutions. Also let me add this wasn't a different regime in Libya. It was the same regime that was implicated in the Berlin bombing that Reagan attacked, it was also the regime that just recently feted the convicted Lockerbie bomber. At the time I didn't have an opinion on it. Any thoughts on anything else I listed? One more thing that Obama has in common with Reagan is they both bailed out Chrysler.
Well there's that whole Reagan raised taxes 7 out of 8 years in office. Obama? not once so far. And our little friend esteban thinks I'm the naive one. He needs to learn a little history.
I'm shock that you don't know who Barry is, perhaps you have heard of Barry and The Lefties' greatest hits: Obamacare, Cash for clunkers, Solyndra, I killed OSB(even though Bush did most of the heavy lifting). Your reason for attacking Libya is just weak. In 1986, 3 of our soldiers died and 79 seriously wounded, that is more than enough for me to go after Gaddafi. You support Barry because he has to follow through some UNSC regulations? That is some weak sauce even for you Judo.
Don't you sometimes pose as a libertarian? Why not hate the followers of the GOP who prefer to kill and torture more foreigners than even Obama? This is how Ron Paul and his followers show their main agenda is not war, peace, civil liberties, but trickle down and economics for the 1%. The Kochs and the funders of the movement know what they are doing.
So even though it's the same regime headed by the same dictator which never owned up to the Berlin disco bombing and even feted the Lockerbie bomber you didn't support attacking him in a cause that would remove him from power and ultimately led to his demise. So apparently your anger at him over the killings of 3 of our soldiers and the wounding of 79 others has dissipated since then. So did you forgive Gaddafi after the 1986 air raid? That was one of the reasons but whether you think that is weak sauce that is the law.
I have him on ignore, but I saw the quotes. He can't reply to judo because he has nothing. He can't explain why the supposed adoration of Ronald Reagan by today's Republican Party is a farce. He can't explain how Reagan, who's record is closer to Barack Obama's than it is to the current crop of absurd GOP presidential candidates, could even sniff a Republican nomination today. And why can't he explain it? Because, as I said, he has nothing. Sish, er, I mean judo has made several pointed comments about Reagan not fitting into today's Republican Party, as I have in the past here, and none of them can give an honest reply. The truth is that Ronald Reagan is too moderate for today's Republican Party. Just in case the chumps missed the point.
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/si0WTCMrksw?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/si0WTCMrksw?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
More evidence of the death march. Michael Tomasky: There Will Be No Saviors for the GOP in 2012 Prominent Republicans keep hoping for someone to rescue them from its slate of mediocre candidates. But the party’s biggest problem is the ideological bloodlust of its base. the money quote... So there is no savior. And let us please be clear on why there is no savior. Because there is no one who can satisfy the base of the GOP—a cohort so drunk on ideology and resentment that they cheer electrocutions and boo a soldier—and be elected president of the United States. Period. The standard journalistic trope the past few months has been to say that the Republican establishment would step in at some point and not let things get too out of hand. But that’s mostly nonsense. This GOP establishment is barely less loopy than the base. If the base is driving the party into a ditch, the establishment is riding shotgun holding a shovel. And there’s not one politician in sight who has the nerve to say anything about it. Romney is just a coward. If he were half the man his father was, he would do something like what his father did in 1964, when he warned the party nominating Barry Goldwater that it was headed off the rails. (Today Goldwater, considered a fanatic in his day, would be maybe about the 15th-most-conservative Republican senator.) But all Romney cares about, all any of them care about, is getting and keeping political power. They can’t see the obvious paradox—that their lust for the White House is making them submit to all the wishes of a fanatical base, which is exactly what will keep them from winning the White House.
Great article there. But I'd like to look even deeper if possible. Why is there a huge base of the GOP that is ignorant, and take pride in their ignorance, show a disdain for learning and science etc.? Looking at Santorum, the more off the deep end he goes the more approval he gets from these folks. What has our nation done to foster such an active group of extremist retroactive loonies? Is it the faulty education system? Because clearly these people are lacking in a good education especially where science is concerned. Is it that they've always been around but just more apathetic, until the change has become so visible that they feel they have to get active to preserve the ignorance they've always enjoyed? What is the cause for the number ignorant radicals, or at least their motivation to be active in politics and play such a significant role? I'm really curious about the cause.
