Ronald Reagan

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
5) Launched a sneak attack on the nation of Greneda, which was the moral equivant of the Japanese sneak attack at Pearl Harbor.

I've never heard this description of Grenada before. Gotta love all the crackpot theories and hyperbole on display here at 'Poly.

[Asher]

This has been the first thread in a while where I enjoyed reading it. Quite educational and a few viewpoints at the same time.

[Pius Popprasch]

He was really good for America. And just good for the rest of the world. Together with Alan Greenspan he fought inflation and unemployment. He didn't seem to be very brightminded, otoh pretty honest for a politian.

[SlowwHand]

Better diction???? Well, maybe compared to the majority of cockneyed Brits.

[MrBaggins]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Better diction???? Well, maybe compared to the majority of cockneyed Brits.

and certainly to Ronnie Raygun

[Sava]

The worst president of the 20th Century. The arms races and socio/economic political battles against Communism are the root of all problems in the current world. Reagan effectively armed half of the third world to the teeth. But he's not entirely to blame. The commies are equally as bad.

As for his domestic policy. Making the top 1% richer and raising the poverty line. How can anyone see this as good? Well, other than the greedy people who profited from it at least.

[DanS]

He slew the inflation dragon that had been building from the late 60s. This necessarily caused some adjustments, but I think we're better off for it.

The Reagan-Vatican axis was also quite instrumental in Glastnost and ultimately the fall of the Soviet Union. While the covert operation they launched together didn't cost a lot, this was the origin of the political reforms that came after.

He had a wonderful feel for speaking. "Tear down this wall" is one of the best classic lines we will ever hear. Right up there with "I have a dream today." Prophetic, in hindsight.

[Capt Dizle]

Moral decline is in evidence everywhere ...here and abroad. If America had no presidents like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush to levy out the Carters and Clintons, she would decline and become indistiquisable from European nations...

[Sava]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Moral decline is in evidence everywhere ...here and abroad. If America had no presidents like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush to levy out the Carters and Clintons, she would decline and become indistiquisable from European nations...

European countries have a better sense of morals than the United States. You don't see 12 year old trailer park trash having sex with 30 guys in France.

[Ethelred]

European countries have a better sense of morals than the United States. You don't see 12 year old trailer park trash having sex with 30 guys in France.

How many trailer parks are in France anyway.

However Gérard Depardieu participated in a gang rape when he was young and it was at most a misdemeanor at the time.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Moral decline is in evidence everywhere ...here and abroad. If America had no presidents like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush to levy out the Carters and Clintons, she would decline and become indistiquisable from European nations...

Reagan is the reason I quit the Republican Party. I still think his eight years was good for the world and the US generally but it sure was bad for El Salvador and Nicaragua. Somebody else would have been better.

Ronnie and Nancy had their first kid together seven months after they got married.

Full term.

Family values started later I guess.

[Capt Dizle]

Sometimes I think their are only two kinds of people in the world.

1. People who acknowledge moral standards despite the fact that they often fall short of them. Humans are prone to mistakes. I think this type of person is the bulwark of civilization and I admire people who, knowing they are subject to criticism, take a stand.
2. People who attack type number one. I don't understand these people, their motivations or thought processes. They are a mystery to me.

There might be other kinds of people but most often these two types stand out.

[Provost Harrison]

I fall into category 3.

3. Perfect in every possible way

[AnnC]

I think it would be more accurate to define the categories this way:

1. People who believe in moral standards and follow them. These people usually do not dismiss moral failures with cheap rationalizations like "humans are prone to mistakes".

2. People who attack the moral failures of others, even though they are not moral themselves. These people are hypocrites.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Sometimes I think their are only two kinds of people in the world.

1. People who acknowledge moral standards despite the fact that they often fall short of them. Humans are prone to mistakes. I think this type of person is the bulwark of civilization and I admire people who, knowing they are subject to criticism, take a stand.
2. People who attack type number one. I don't understand these people, their motivations or thought processes. They are a mystery to me.

There might be other kinds of people but most often these two types stand out.

You forgot hypocrites. Ron and Nancy and a lot other people in the Family Values crusade are hypocrites.

I am in the first group Jimmy. I am moral. I do make mistakes. I don't try to force others to be that way however.

Actually Ron and Nancy weren't part of the Family Values crap. Its Reagans worshippers that did that. I am just pointing out the god of the Republicans and the Relgious Right was not what they pretend he was.

Reagan even signed the law that legalized abortion in California. Pretended later that he didn't forsee the implications. He always talked more conservative than he acted even as President when he was more conservative than as Governor of California.

I voted for Reagan. Twice for President plus once for governor. I still quit the party though.