How long will it take to repair the damge to America done by the Bush regime

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by cia
But DuncanK,
Clinton didn't follow that agenda so that means he was great?
He slashed military spending, jacked taxes, but he did do the petty military thing.

Just reactionary (to a small degree) to the Republicans, just like the Republicans are reactionary to the Democrats. We are stuck in this raise taxes\cut taxes, increase military spending\decrease military spending and regulate business\deregulate business pendulum swing.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Ned
Duncan, You an I strongly disagree on Reagan.

What an inspirational presidency!

Why do you like him more than the other Republicans? He was a good compromiser. I have to admit that Republicans tend to be pretty good at that.

[cia]

That's just the way of the world. Radical actions cause radical reponses then it settles out until the next action. I for one see Bush as a polar opposite of Clinton, just as anticipated.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by cia
That's just the way of the world. Radical actions cause radical reponses then it settles out until the next action. I for one see Bush as a polar opposite of Clinton, just as anticipated.

I don't think they are much different at all. They just like to keep appearing as such.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No president has had any vision since Kennedy and Johnson.

Only a far lefty Dem would make this premise with a straight face.

Johnson, btw, really had no vision. He simply was a politico.

Reagan, without a DOUBT, had a vision. "The Shining City on the Hill". Relegating Communism to the 'asheap of history'. Making America 'strong again'. Very, very visionary President and was derided by the left for having too much vision (which they thought was too idealistic).

Clinton also had a vision. It wasn't as broad as Reagan's, but Clinton definetly wished for a more democratic, peaceful world. Clinton was practical, however, and realized that we couldn't do it by going around everywhere.

[DanS]

Clinton tended the alliances, but left a lot of foreign policy problems for his successor to deal with. He repeatedly deferred the tough decisions.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Johnson, btw, really had no vision. He simply was a politico.

First president to make government take some responsibility for poverty-Significantly changed the federal government.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Reagan, without a DOUBT, had a vision. "The Shining City on the Hill". Relegating Communism to the 'asheap of history'. Making America 'strong again'. Very, very visionary President and was derided by the left for having too much vision (which they thought was too idealistic).

Clinton also had a vision. It wasn't as broad as Reagan's, but Clinton definetly wished for a more democratic, peaceful world. Clinton was practical, however, and realized that we couldn't do it by going around everywhere.

Ah poo poo. All presidents, both Republican and Democrats, tried to do both things. That's no vision.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Only a far lefty Dem would make this premise with a straight face.

I don't consider myself a Dem. If one comes along who has a vision, and has a chance to win, I'll vote for him, but that hasn't happened yet.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ah poo poo. All presidents, both Republican and Democrats, tried to do both things. That's no vision.

Just because you don't agree with the vision doesn't mean they had no vision.

Reagan, especially, was probably the President with the greatest vision since 1800.

First president to make government take some responsibility for poverty-Significantly changed the federal government.

Poo poo. All presidents tried to do things. That's no vision.

See how silly your argument looks now.

Johnson wanted a War on Poverty, but I'm not sure how much vision was behind that. If he actually forsaw a US without poverty at all is something I'm not sure he really believed.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Reagan, especially, was probably the President with the greatest vision since 1800.

Why, other presidents cut taxes and fought the Cold War? Nothing new to offer.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Johnson wanted a War on Poverty, but I'm not sure how much vision was behind that. If he actually forsaw a US without poverty at all is something I'm not sure he really believed.

Johnson gave children with no income a place to live and food to eat. That is extremely visionary.

[Imran Siddiqui]

How is that visionary by itself?!

It's simply a policy choice. Visonary implies a view at how the future should be and what should happen in that future. If Johnson said that the future should be a lack of poverty, then there was vision there. However, I believe most of it was simply the help the poor, without a lot of vision behind it.

Only the most anti-Republican would claim Reagan had no vision, btw. Even his enemies know he had a vision, they just disagree with it.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Reagan, especially, was probably the President with the greatest vision since 1800.

Spoken like someone who was about 5 years old when Reagan was around. The man had all the intellect of a tea trolley. He was probably senile when still in office.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Even if that was true, does that have anything to do with vision? And anti-Reagan forces start their ultimatly losing assault. Again .

[Alexander's Horse]

Reagan wasn't visionary, he was a simpleton. Don't confuse vision with simpleness.