Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Ronald Reagan: Hero? or Villain?

Page 4 of 17 [ 257 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 17  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Ronald Reagan was a:
Hero! 25%  25%  [ 14 ]
Villain! 53%  53%  [ 29 ]
Meh, I don't know. Just show the results. 22%  22%  [ 12 ]
Total votes : 55

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Jun 2012, 8:50 am

simon_says wrote:
Grunri wrote:
I too am not quite old enough to remember Reagan's presidency, being born during the presidency of his successor.

But I recommend anyone interested in forming an opinion of Reagan the actual man, as opposed to Reagan as he appeared, and is depicted in the media (by both parties), to read his published diaries that cover the period of his presidency. Yes, they are severely edited, sure they are filtered for sensitive information and of course they are somewhat censored in order to keep in check with the cult of personality, yet they do provide us with a very intimate view of his reasoning (which is often extremely shallow) and his reflections on matters of economics and politics, which, though simple and naïeve, are not quite those of a cunning villain.

Now, from what I have read and seen I cannot really dislike the man. He certainly had charisma, honesty and determination. That last quality alone made him a better presidential candidate then I could ever be. Besides, in contrast to his immediate successor (and his son) Reagan might perhaps indeed be called a hero.


I preferred Bush 41 to Reagan. His was smart with foreign policy (former CIA chief) and directly raised taxes to try to deal with debt. Despite having made a promise not to raise them. But the Republicans just did not forgive him because anti-taxation was already a religion with them. They think Jesus will balance the budget one day or something.


:idea:
How 'bout we learn to live within the tax revenue we have?
It's called living within your limit and millions of American families live by it.........



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

13 Jun 2012, 8:56 am

Raptor wrote:
simon_says wrote:
Grunri wrote:
I too am not quite old enough to remember Reagan's presidency, being born during the presidency of his successor.

But I recommend anyone interested in forming an opinion of Reagan the actual man, as opposed to Reagan as he appeared, and is depicted in the media (by both parties), to read his published diaries that cover the period of his presidency. Yes, they are severely edited, sure they are filtered for sensitive information and of course they are somewhat censored in order to keep in check with the cult of personality, yet they do provide us with a very intimate view of his reasoning (which is often extremely shallow) and his reflections on matters of economics and politics, which, though simple and naïeve, are not quite those of a cunning villain.

Now, from what I have read and seen I cannot really dislike the man. He certainly had charisma, honesty and determination. That last quality alone made him a better presidential candidate then I could ever be. Besides, in contrast to his immediate successor (and his son) Reagan might perhaps indeed be called a hero.


I preferred Bush 41 to Reagan. His was smart with foreign policy (former CIA chief) and directly raised taxes to try to deal with debt. Despite having made a promise not to raise them. But the Republicans just did not forgive him because anti-taxation was already a religion with them. They think Jesus will balance the budget one day or something.


:idea:
How 'bout we learn to live within the tax revenue we have?
It's called living within your limit and millions of American families live by it.........



How about you stop trying to live off of your grandchildren's future tax revenue while you crow about your principles?

If the books don't balance, they must be balanced. And since we live with divided government at most times, that means bargains that cover both revenue and spending.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Jun 2012, 9:12 am

simon_says wrote:
Raptor wrote:
simon_says wrote:
Grunri wrote:
I too am not quite old enough to remember Reagan's presidency, being born during the presidency of his successor.

But I recommend anyone interested in forming an opinion of Reagan the actual man, as opposed to Reagan as he appeared, and is depicted in the media (by both parties), to read his published diaries that cover the period of his presidency. Yes, they are severely edited, sure they are filtered for sensitive information and of course they are somewhat censored in order to keep in check with the cult of personality, yet they do provide us with a very intimate view of his reasoning (which is often extremely shallow) and his reflections on matters of economics and politics, which, though simple and naïeve, are not quite those of a cunning villain.

Now, from what I have read and seen I cannot really dislike the man. He certainly had charisma, honesty and determination. That last quality alone made him a better presidential candidate then I could ever be. Besides, in contrast to his immediate successor (and his son) Reagan might perhaps indeed be called a hero.


I preferred Bush 41 to Reagan. His was smart with foreign policy (former CIA chief) and directly raised taxes to try to deal with debt. Despite having made a promise not to raise them. But the Republicans just did not forgive him because anti-taxation was already a religion with them. They think Jesus will balance the budget one day or something.


:idea:
How 'bout we learn to live within the tax revenue we have?
It's called living within your limit and millions of American families live by it.........



How about you stop trying to live off of your grandchildren's future tax revenue while you crow about your principles?

If the books don't balance, they must be balanced. And since we live with divided government at most times, that means bargains that cover both revenue and spending.


:roll:
No, you trim your sails according to the wind you have to work with.
It's a money management issue and throwing more money at it only provides more money to mismanage.
Judging by the tone of your reply I get the feeling my idea of budgeting hit a little close to home. Afraid there might not be any more food stamps to buy beer with?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Jun 2012, 9:19 am

simon_says wrote:

Bill Clinton ruined what? Clinton was more fiscally responsible than Reagan. A brief lull between the spendthrift Reagan-Bush and then Bush again. Then it's back to tax cuts without spending reductions. Clinton also raised taxes (as did Reagan and Bush 41), and still the private sector created jobs.


Bill Clinton found a modus vivendi with conservative republicans and he ran a tight ship. I believe the last budget surplus the U.S. has had was on Clinton's watch. Clinton ran the same sort of administration as a moderate Republican would have.

ruveyn



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

13 Jun 2012, 9:20 am

Quote:
No, you trim your sails according to the wind you have to work with.
It's a money management issue and throwing more money at it only provides more money to mismanage.
Judging by the tone of your reply I get the feeling my idea of budgeting hit a little close to home. Afraid there might not be any more food stamps to buy beer with?


As to your point, real families also enhance revenue. They get 2cd and 3rd jobs. They don't hunker down with Ramen noodles, cooked on wood fires, and applaud themselves for living brutal lives.

As to your attempted insult. My opinion of you is long established. It hasnt improved.



MagicToenail
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 401

13 Jun 2012, 9:26 am

To be honest, a bit of both.
He was horrible environmentally, fiddled while AIDS burned, went to Bitburg and called the S.S. "victims," built up nuclear weapons when he really had no moral right to destroy everything on the planet, demonized black people as "welfare queens", killed the ERA, supported Apartheid era South Africa
In his favor, he did apologize for Japanese Internment (although I think he was personally opposed to do so), and didn't do anything really really crazy when it became clear the Soviet Bloc was going to fall, like declare war on them.



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

13 Jun 2012, 9:34 am

Austerity measures destroy the economy.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

13 Jun 2012, 9:37 am

androbot2084 wrote:
Austerity measures destroy the economy.


So does printing money with reckless abandon.

ruveyn



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

13 Jun 2012, 9:41 am

androbot2084 wrote:
Austerity measures destroy the economy.


Yes.

Even Romney knows that. He's already said he won't cut spending right away because it would create an immediate recession or depression. There is private sector job growth. It's the public sector that sucks with the states cutting back. It's the same "do it and we die" argument that other Republicans make about new taxes or allowing the Bush cuts to lapse.

If you cut a trillion dollars + out of the budget today (the deficit), we'd be near collapse.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

13 Jun 2012, 10:07 am

SpiritBlooms wrote:
Joker wrote:
The Economy was a lot better under Reagan then it is under Obama.

Obama's economy issues were inherited. Reagan's were not.

What? So the economy boomed under the leadership of President Carter?
As for President Reagan, his image is hyped a bit. The best thing he did was support the idea that the iron curtain should dissolve.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Jun 2012, 10:25 am

simon_says wrote:
Quote:
No, you trim your sails according to the wind you have to work with.
It's a money management issue and throwing more money at it only provides more money to mismanage.
Judging by the tone of your reply I get the feeling my idea of budgeting hit a little close to home. Afraid there might not be any more food stamps to buy beer with?


As to your point, real families also enhance revenue. They get 2cd and 3rd jobs. They don't hunker down with Ramen noodles, cooked on wood fires, and applaud themselves for living brutal lives.

As to your attempted insult. My opinion of you is long established. It hasnt improved.


I'm crushed.......
:roll:



SpiritBlooms
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Nov 2009
Age: 67
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,024

13 Jun 2012, 10:35 am

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
SpiritBlooms wrote:
Joker wrote:
The Economy was a lot better under Reagan then it is under Obama.

Obama's economy issues were inherited. Reagan's were not.

What? So the economy boomed under the leadership of President Carter?
As for President Reagan, his image is hyped a bit. The best thing he did was support the idea that the iron curtain should dissolve.

I lived under both economies, and Carter's, while bad, was not this bad. There was no global economic meltdown such as we've seen in the past decade. That happened under Bush. But apparently people have short memories when it comes to their own parties' shortcomings. Since the ripples of the Bush era meltdown are still being felt, short memories indeed. Reagan's fixes for the economy did not help the poor one iota, they only helped the wealthy. Same with Bush's. Most of the new jobs under Bush were minimum wage, while outsourcing became a flood of jobs out of the country. That did not happen under Carter.

But the president isn't the only one responsible for the economy, so any discussion of how the economy was under any president is only part of the picture. There was growth in Carter's era, until the energy crisis, in which he used the same strategy as Nixon had, but had a Congress that wouldn't cooperate - just as Obama has today, with the horrible economic problems he inherited.



Grunri
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 5

13 Jun 2012, 11:04 am

Perhaps I underestimate him too much, even in his capacity to deceive. I just think he would have needed some fine spin doctors to fabricate the excuses that where presented during his presidency, the same goes for Bush junior. Come on, they just do not appear cunning enough to handle their own filthy business. Now, compare that to Clinton - lawyer, liar, president - he knew like no other how to present himself as innocent while guilty. Yes, here is a man who has proven more then once that he can handle his own mess. He screwed around for sure, but he resisted being a puppet, not that he wasn't, but he was a fine leader and he handled the sax alright. He taught me that "when confronted with the exposure of something you know you shouldn't have done but did anyway and subsequently thought you had hidden safe... just keep cracking jokes." And take a look at his case. In the end it all works out.

I always respected Reagan as a great speaker, a showman, but now I wonder (who was naïve here?), did he actually write his own speeches? If he was just handed a script as in his acting days, that would severely deflate the magnitude of respect I hold for him in his capacity as orator.

But this thread was supposed to be about our regard of Reagan as president, was he a hero or a villain? Both designations do not fit him, I think. The man was a trained actor, which means that he had some experience in taking on a manifold of poses and appearing as something other then he actually was, like a cowboy, a doctor, or maybe even a president. But a villain? No, don't think so. Presidents, they come close to being mere puppets or actors. But as to who's pulling the strings or directs the whole comedy we are left guessing.


_________________
?Man starts over again everyday, in spite of all he knows, against all he knows.? - Cioran


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,834
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

13 Jun 2012, 4:24 pm

Grunri wrote:
Perhaps I underestimate him too much, even in his capacity to deceive. I just think he would have needed some fine spin doctors to fabricate the excuses that where presented during his presidency, the same goes for Bush junior. Come on, they just do not appear cunning enough to handle their own filthy business. Now, compare that to Clinton - lawyer, liar, president - he knew like no other how to present himself as innocent while guilty. Yes, here is a man who has proven more then once that he can handle his own mess. He screwed around for sure, but he resisted being a puppet, not that he wasn't, but he was a fine leader and he handled the sax alright. He taught me that "when confronted with the exposure of something you know you shouldn't have done but did anyway and subsequently thought you had hidden safe... just keep cracking jokes." And take a look at his case. In the end it all works out.

I always respected Reagan as a great speaker, a showman, but now I wonder (who was naïve here?), did he actually write his own speeches? If he was just handed a script as in his acting days, that would severely deflate the magnitude of respect I hold for him in his capacity as orator.

But this thread was supposed to be about our regard of Reagan as president, was he a hero or a villain? Both designations do not fit him, I think. The man was a trained actor, which means that he had some experience in taking on a manifold of poses and appearing as something other then he actually was, like a cowboy, a doctor, or maybe even a president. But a villain? No, don't think so. Presidents, they come close to being mere puppets or actors. But as to who's pulling the strings or directs the whole comedy we are left guessing.


Nope, Ronny didn't write his speeches. But then again, just about every president has had speech writers.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

13 Jun 2012, 4:28 pm

Image


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

13 Jun 2012, 4:57 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Image



LOVE IT :D