Are You Radical or Conservative?

[Navy Pride]

Why do you classify him as my boy? He was, in my opinion, a better president than Dubya is. However, I don't think I've ever said he was the best president ever or anything.

You just don't get it....OK your hero.......Now lets try and concentrate like a laser beam and stay on the topic of this thread.......

 

[afr0byte]

You just don't get it....OK your hero.......Now lets try and concentrate like a laser beam and stay on the topic of this thread.......

Uh, duh, I was saying he's not my hero. Apparently you don't get it.

 

[Navy Pride]

Uh, duh, I was saying he's not my hero. Apparently you don't get it.

Now lets try and concentrate like a laser beam and stay on the topic of this thread.............

 

[afr0byte]

Now lets try and concentrate like a laser beam and stay on the topic of this thread.............

I was simply responding to your comment about him being my "Hero." Surely I'm allowed to respond to something you said? Anyways, stay focused on the topic.:roll:

 

[ptsdkid]

Couple of points here. In getting back to the original topic--Reagan was the consummate Conservative. Is there still any doubt in anyone's mind that Reagan was our greatest president?

You'll notice that our economy started to soar in 1995. This was the time that Newt Gingrich turned that once Democratically controlled congress around by shaking up that tax and spend crowd by submitting his contract with America proposal. This is when conservatism blossomed for America.

 

[Navy Pride]

Couple of points here. In getting back to the original topic--Reagan was the consummate Conservative. Is there still any doubt in anyone's mind that Reagan was our greatest president?

You'll notice that our economy started to soar in 1995. This was the time that Newt Gingrich turned that once Democratically controlled congress around by shaking up that tax and spend crowd by submitting his contract with America proposal. This is when conservatism blossomed for America.

You bring up Newt......I would love to seem him get the Republican nomination in 2008........He is a true Conservative........

 

[afr0byte]

In getting back to the original topic--Reagan was the consummate Conservative. Is there still any doubt in anyone's mind that Reagan was our greatest president?

Obviously there is still a lot of doubt in a lot of people's minds.

 

[Navy Pride]

Obviously there is still a lot of doubt in a lot of people's minds.

Only in liberals minds.......

 

[afr0byte]

Only in liberals minds.......

The minds of liberals or moderate minds (but who it is is irrelevant in this case, in response to ptsdKid). There are most likely some conservative minds too.

 

[Navy Pride]

The minds of liberals or moderate minds (but who it is is irrelevant in this case, in response to ptsdKid). There are most likely some conservative minds too.

Liberals and Conservatives are the direct opposite......Moderates are in the middle..........

 

[afr0byte]

Liberals and Conservatives are the direct opposite......Moderates are in the middle..........

Uh, no duh, what's your point? You were saying it was the liberals that don't think Reagan was the best president ever. I was saying the liberals don't thing Reagan was the best, but most likely neither do some moderates and some conservatives think Reagan was the best president ever.

 

[Navy Pride]

Uh, no duh, what's your point? You were saying it was the liberals that don't think Reagan was the best president ever. I was saying the liberals don't thing Reagan was the best, but most likely neither do some moderates and some conservatives think Reagan was the best president ever.

You were barely born when RR was President.......True Conservatives think RR was a great president.......A lot of Moderates had to vote for him to give him the landslide victory he got in 1984........

Liberals like you hated Reagan and everything he stood for.......

 

[afr0byte]

You were barely born when RR was President.......True Conservatives think RR was a great president.......A lot of Moderates had to vote for him to give him the landslide victory he got in 1984........

Liberals like you hated Reagan and everything he stood for.......

Are you senile? We're not talking about how much he won the presidency by. We're talking about who'd consider him the best president ever.

 

[Iriemon]

Well the last figure I saw was unemployment was at 4.9% the lowest in 40 years so somebody is doing something right.......

...

When Bush took office the unemployment rate was 5.8%.He inherited that from your boy......The dot.com boom had burst..........Bush enacted tax cuts that stimulated the economy and lowered the rate to the lowest in 40 years........

Again Clinton had nothing to do with the dot.com boom in the nineties.....It just happened on his watch...

Is that what Rush is saying?

According the to Department of Labor (which keeps unemployment statistics) the unemployment rate in Jan 2001 was 4.2%; contrary to both your statements.

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000

 

[Iriemon]

Couple of points here. In getting back to the original topic--Reagan was the consummate Conservative. Is there still any doubt in anyone's mind that Reagan was our greatest president?

You'll notice that our economy started to soar in 1995. This was the time that Newt Gingrich turned that once Democratically controlled congress around by shaking up that tax and spend crowd by submitting his contract with America proposal. This is when conservatism blossomed for America.

The economy was doing just fine in 93-94.

1993 2.7%
1994 4.0%
1995 2.5%
1996 3.7%
1997 4.5%
1998 4.2%
1999 4.4%
2000 3.7%

Real GDP change, BEA.gov.

The Gringrich GOP had little effect on tax rates. The GOP wanted to cut taxes, but Clinton threated veto. It wasn't until 2001 that the GOP got its wish and slashed taxes, and along with it, a huge deficits.

The GOP showed its true colors on spending in 2001, when it got control of the WH. Spending has skyrocketed, growing twice as fast as it did when Clinton had the veto power, since then.

 

[Indy]

The economy was doing just fine in 93-94.

1993 2.7%
1994 4.0%
1995 2.5%
1996 3.7%
1997 4.5%
1998 4.2%
1999 4.4%
2000 3.7%

Real GDP change, BEA.gov.

The Gringrich GOP had little effect on tax rates. The GOP wanted to cut taxes, but Clinton threated veto. It wasn't until 2001 that the GOP got its wish and slashed taxes, and along with it, a huge deficits.

The GOP showed its true colors on spending in 2001, when it got control of the WH. Spending has skyrocketed, growing twice as fast as it did when Clinton had the veto power, since then.

Why are you bothering showing these guys facts? You know they will juse use the whole "Nuh-Uh" deffense again. What's that you say? The GOV'T posted these numbers? Hmm, must be some disgruntled dem in there somewhere fiddling with things, they can't be true 'cause Rush says differently. Watch... here it comes:

 

[Iriemon]

Why are you bothering showing these guys facts? You know they will juse use the whole "Nuh-Uh" deffense again. What's that you say? The GOV'T posted these numbers? Hmm, must be some disgruntled dem in there somewhere fiddling with things, they can't be true 'cause Rush says differently. Watch... here it comes:

People are entitled to their opinion, but when they mistate published data, the truth can be told.

Certain folks around here have a regular practice of mistating facts. I'm not sure if it is evidence of a personality characteristic; or a just sign of regularly listening to Limbaugh.

 

[Goobieman]

The Gringrich GOP had little effect on tax rates. The GOP wanted to cut taxes, but Clinton threated veto. It wasn't until 2001 that the GOP got its wish and slashed taxes, and along with it, a huge deficits.

Yes - the recession had nothing to do with the revenue drop.

The GOP showed its true colors on spending in 2001, when it got control of the WH. Spending has skyrocketed, growing twice as fast as it did when Clinton had the veto power, since then.

At least you've been honest enough with yourself to change your gripe to "GOP" rather than "conservatives".

Now, tell me why anyone should believe that the democrats -- obviously more liberal the GOP -- will do better.

 

[Iriemon]

Yes - the recession had nothing to do with the revenue drop.

Essentially true. GDP actually rose 3.2% (0.7% inflation adjusted) during the "recession" in 2001; employment fell to about 94% from 96%. These events do not explain revenues dropping by hundreds of billions in '01-03; the tax deferrments, I mean "cuts" do.

At least you've been honest enough with yourself to change your gripe to "GOP" rather than "conservatives".

Whatever. The "conservatives" like to take credit for positive things, blame the "GOP" for everything that has gone wrong.

Now, tell me why anyone should believe that the democrats -- obviously more liberal the GOP -- will do better.

Obviously there is speculation. We can look at recent history; massive deficits generated under Reagan/Bush quadrupling the debt; Clinton and the Dems balancing the budget, making a surplus, paying down the debt; Bush throwing the country into 1/2 trillion deficits.

But at least the Dems are currently talking about the deficits and the debt. When was the last time you heard Bush say something about the problem with the deficits or the 2.5 trillion in debt incurred during his administration?

 

[Navy Pride]

People are entitled to their opinion, but when they mistate published data, the truth can be told.

Certain folks around here have a regular practice of mistating facts. I'm not sure if it is evidence of a personality characteristic; or a just sign of regularly listening to Limbaugh.

I personally very rarely listen to Limbaugh but aat least he is not anti U.S. like his counterparts on your side of the aisle like Michael Moore and Ward Churchill.........

 

[Goobieman]

Essentially true. GDP actually rose 3.2% (0.7% inflation adjusted) during the "recession" in 2001; employment fell to about 94% from 96%. These events do not explain revenues dropping by hundreds of billions in '01-03; the tax deferrments, I mean "cuts" do.

Yes. And you can prove that.
Show me, in specific terms, what the totat federal revenues would have been in FY2001 w/o the tax cuts.

Whatever. The "conservatives" like to take credit for positive things, blame the "GOP" for everything that has gone wrong.

Apparently, you arent able to understand the difference between an ideology and a political party.

Clinton and the Dems balancing the budget, making a surplus, paying down the debt;

:rofl

But at least the Dems are currently talking about the deficits and the debt.

Of course they are - to make polutucal hay.
Tell me:
When the Dems had Congress, where was the talk about deficits?
Only hr tuly oblivious vcould possibly give any credence to the idea that the Dems are the responsible fiscal alternative to the GOP>

 

[Donkey1499]

Why are you bothering showing these guys facts? You know they will juse use the whole "Nuh-Uh" deffense again. What's that you say? The GOV'T posted these numbers? Hmm, must be some disgruntled dem in there somewhere fiddling with things, they can't be true 'cause Rush says differently. Watch... here it comes:

Nuh-uh! You dirty pollock! :mrgreen:

 

[Donkey1499]

I personally very rarely listen to Limbaugh but aat least he is not anti U.S. like his counterparts on your side of the aisle like Michael Moore and Ward Churchill.........

Dude, you're a rep and don't listen to Rush? :shock:
Rush is AMERICA'S ANCHORMAN!!!!!!

 

[Iriemon]

I personally very rarely listen to Limbaugh but aat least he is not anti U.S. like his counterparts on your side of the aisle like Michael Moore and Ward Churchill.........

Fair enough. Where did you get the source for your erroneous statements that 4.9% (current rate is actually 4.7%) is the lowest in 40 years and that the rate was 5.8% when Bush took office?

 

[Iriemon]

Yes. And you can prove that.
Show me, in specific terms, what the totat federal revenues would have been in FY2001 w/o the tax cuts.

We have been through this before. I'll demonstrate how the tax cuts caused tax revenues to plummet by showing that GDP increased 12% from 2000-2003; yet despite that growth in the economy, tax revenues fell by $242 billion annually, a 12% decrease. You'll say that explains nothing, there are a lot of other factors that affect revenues. I'll say what factors; and you'll say the stock market and employment. And I'll show those are marginal factors that affect less than 10-15% of overall tax revenues. Then you'll say the data proves nothing; but won't be able to explain why revenues fell so dramatically in 2000-2003. Do I have it about right?

:rofl

I find it kind of tragic, what the Republicans/conservatives are doing to our country and our future by burndening the Govt with a huge debt. Do you think its funny because you are a Republican, Conservative, or neither?

Of course they are - to make polutucal hay.
Tell me:
When the Dems had Congress, where was the talk about deficits?
Only hr tuly oblivious vcould possibly give any credence to the idea that the Dems are the responsible fiscal alternative to the GOP>

Why do you think the Democrats (not the Republicans, they opposed it right down the line) passed a tax increase in 1993? Because they thought it would be a popular thing to do? So they could tell their constituents the great news that they have to pay more taxes? You think they thought that would make them more popular back home?

The Democrats passed the tax increase in 1993 because the Reagan/Bush had left this country with a $4 trillion debt and huge deficits -- $320 billion in 1992.

The conservatives/Republicans are willing to live with deficits and debt as long as they get their tax deferrments. The liberals/Democrats believe that we should pay taxes now for what our Govt spends, not pass the buck to the next generation in the form of trillions of debt.