Thursday, September 4, 2014
Ah, those heady days when U.S. policy was driven by an obscure astrologist!
How easily and quickly Americans forget!
And the righties are saying Mr. Obama is weak?
Well what do you call a revered president whose wife (and he) listened to and trusted an astrologer to run his day-to-day activities?
I'd call it dangerously nuts.
But, IOKIYAR!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
"Defenders and supporters of Obama, GET A CLUE! We are standing on the precipice of the abyss. Why can't you see that abyss?"
Hahaha! These are the same clueless people who worship Ronnie Raygun's presidency, a presidency that relied on hocus-pocus dip-shittery to run his affairs?
They didn't have a clue then and they don't have a clue now.
Thank God we have a president that is cautious, thoughtful, and uses his brains to make decisions, not a charlatan astrologer!
And what's wrong with letting an astrologer decide foreign policy? I let my big Uncle Dickie do it for me. Same thing.
Shaw, to reduce the foreign policy of President Reagan to the ruminations of an astrologer is stretching.
Long before Reagan took office, he was very critical of communism and it was a driving narrative of his presidency.
Many historians credit him at least to some degree, if not mostly, for the policies that finally broke the Iron Curtain.
It is true that he made some serious gaffes, most notably Iran/Contra, but I will error in giving him the benefit of the doubt.
On the whole, the world was a better place when he left office than when he was elected.
History will judge our current president.
Dave,
My point in posting this is not to reduce all of Reagan's foreign policy to reliance on an astrologer, but to remind the people who are howling about Mr. Obama's foreign policy at this period that even their great hero did dumb things while he was president. A reminder that all our presidents have feet of clay and are subject to human failings.
The point is that the people who revere President Reagan gave him a pass when he was involved in a major scandal (Iran-Contra) and choose to forget that Reagan, our CiC, and his wife were taking advice from and passing on state information to an astrologer for a period of who knows how long.
Some proportionality is due President Obama. He is not the America-hating-destroy fiend the people on conservative blogs make him out to be, and I will continue to document on my blog that Ronald Reagan shared many of President Obama's values about immigration and gun control.
I think those who are extreme Obama haters need to be reminded that all presidents, even Ronald Reagan, were and are not perfect.
Now watch one of their trained puppies copy and paste this all over their conservative blogs.
"On the whole, the world was a better place when he left office....."
it sure was. My astrelieger,osteologer,astrodogstar,skyskipper, ah, shit....when I want to know the future I aways ask my bartender what is in store for me. He always gets it right, "another beer."
Shaw, I can't watch, it's already been done... rather than enter into a reasoned debate, many of our most extreme friends have decided to copy and paste, accept flat out lies, see stating facts as apologizing, interpret posts like this providing context as blaming others and choose name calling as a standard response to difficult principles and questions.
The world today, because of the "internets" is way more difficult politically today than ever and people are struggling with this new reality.
It calls for so much more "grey" thinking to be public, as opposed to everything being black and white, easy to understand and solve.
That's why, as Octo posited, the Middle East conumdrum we face today is so vexing...
okjimm... for me, it's mezcal...
Joan Rivers called President Obama gay and Mrs. Obama a tranny so naturally the baggers loved her.
Rivers will not be missed, she was a coarse, foul, loud mouth. And she stabbed Johnny Carson in the back after he helped launch her career.
Nasty all around.
With all the problems we face today we are gleefully knock s president that actually oversaw a tremendous economic expansion.
Wonder what people will be saying about Obama 26 years from now. Hope I'm still alive to ear it.
Anonymous, the people who worship Mr. Reagan see nothing wrong with it, and they're the same people who whine about those who support Mr Obama. No sense there.
okjimm, where did that quote come from? Is it about Reagan?
Dave, not all conservative bloggers are as radical as the ones you and I read. And not all conservative blogs allow tricksters and multiple personalities on their comment boards.
Anon, I never cared that much for Rivers. She made her living at the end of her life by slandering and making fun of other people.
Plus she had so much surgery done on her that she had to sleep standing up so that the silicone wouldn't move.
Dude
Rivers?
Acetone.
RN, this post isn't "knocking" anyone.
It's reporting what went on during Reagan's administration.
Just a little reality check for those who demonize our present sitting president and his wife.
No president is perfect, and the president whose followers insist was the greatest fail to recognize that fact.
Yes, we'll see what history says about Mr Obama, and I'm pretty sure it won't be as vicious as what the conservatives are saying about him now.
If you read my post carefully, you'd see that I state that Mr. Obama and Mr. Reagan agreed on immigration and gun control.
That's not "knocking" anyone, that's finding common ground that most people prefer to ignore.
IMO, Reagan the movie guy played the president guy. A façade by
a B actor. History will judge him severely, given what he did to the US economic system.
BB-Idaho,
Agreed. Reagan isn't the greatest president that the right wingers make him out to be.
Shaw,
”… not all conservative bloggers are as radical as the ones you and I read. And not all conservative blogs allow tricksters and multiple personalities on their comment boards.”
Then why go there? Why not converse with less radical and more reasonable people in a mutually civil and honest discussion. Why subject your readers and followers to verbal abuse, harangues, and “flat out lies … and name calling as a standard response to difficult principles and questions” (Dave Miller - September 4, 2014 at 3:15 PM).
Seriously, I don’t get it.
Anyone who has read the commentary of Free Thinke, for example, is familiar with his anti-liberal, anti-progressive bias that is just as structurally toxic as any other form of inflammatory hate speech.
Even his moniker is the embodiment of hypocrisy, a pseudonym invoking an ideal of “free and independent thought” – claimed for himself but otherwise intolerant of other viewpoints.
FT: “It is -- and always has been -- about advancing THEIR Long March toward ABSOLUTE, DICTATORIAL POWER” (September 3, 2014 at 10:06 AM)
Translation:
Critical thinking is the insidious weapon of [blank]; [blank] is a threat to America; [blank] is a threat to civilization; [blank] is deserving of elimination.
Substitute the word “liberalism” for the words “African-American” or “Hispanic” or “Jew” or “Arab.” The structure of inflammatory hate speech snaps into sharp focus with sinister clarity.
With word substitution, his commentary is more worthy of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion or the neo-völkisch screeds of white supremacists, Aryan Nations, and the KKK, or the infamous website, Storm Front.
It shocks me how so many of you ignore the subtext of hate in his words.
The readers and followers of this forum deserve better than this.
Joan Rivers? Meh.
She was funny early in her career then she lost her edge and turned into a nasty old plastic surgery spokesperson.
Ugh.
You see it your way. Others see it differently.
Common ground indeed.
I've come to the conclusion that with respect to FreeThinke you are right. Indeed unfortunate as he is a quite educated individual with multiple abilities.
Our ecomony might be booming also if Obama tripled our debt like Reagan did.
I typically do not speak ill of the dead -- and have no respect for those who do. But I always think it's very respectful to allow people on my blog to trash the president and his wife by calling them Commies and monkeys. Now that's how I show respect!
Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase
> Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase
> George H.W. Bush’s Term – $1.587 trillion increase
> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase
> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase
> George W. Bush’s First Term – $1.885 trillion increase
> George W. Bush’s Second Term – $3.014 trillion increase
> Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase
Well by gum Jerry the numbers tell a different story.
SOURCE
I said, "...tripled our debt like Reagan did."
1981 US debt -- $998 billion
1989 US debt -- $2.857 billion
Sorry, I miss spoke. Reagan only increased the debt by 2.86 times, not 3 times. So sue me for rounding off.
SOURCE
shaw...I think I heard it from my bartender. truth.
I agree with BB...Reagan seemed only at ease while working with a prepared script. When speaking off the cuff, he seemed off the edge.
I also agree with Octo...some of the writing on some of the radical right bogs,...bogs, I say correctly as most are just a MORASS day old candy,stale cookies, and other bad snack food.
FT....spouted this on one of his posts.
'ALL the Left could see, and ALL they CARED about -- was getting a NEGRO in the White House. Of course he (or she) had to be the RIGHT KIND of Negro -- meaning one that would obey THEIR dictates and implement THEIR leftist Agenda.
Not to bear down too hard on the obvious, but the WRONG kind of Negro -- someone with a legitimate, up-from-the-bootstraps background and real accomplishments to her credit like Condoleezza Rice, let us say -- wouldn't do at all, because THAT kind of Negro would not support the Marxian-Fabian-Socialist-Statist-Dictocrat plans for the country.
A baseborn leftist bastard half-white Negro like Barack Hussein Obama on the other hand was the PERFECT candidate for the Left.'
sheesh...right Negro, wrong Negro...gimmee a break
Sorry, I miss spoke. Reagan only increased the debt by 2.86 times, not 3 times. So sue me for rounding off.
Naw Jerry, isn't that what a liberal would do? :-)
And, RN, let us not forget this graph when we speak of Obama and deficits.
Procecuting a war is quite costly.
I know all the gimmicks used in making figures say what you want then to say.
Bush was a huge spender. Not a fiscal conservative at all.
But water under the bridge and now moss is growing on the expanding budget.
To A Conservative Lurker,
Calling the POTUS and the FLOTUS "Communists" may well be idiotic. Us baggers blab on and on about Democrats redistributing wealth (sometimes using other terminology, but a terminology with the same meaning as redistribution of wealth), when we haven't a first graders understanding that this country has always "distributed wealth from taxes." We baggers are a bit slow, and may someday understand this simple truth but sadly I doubt it.
Calling the First Family "monkeys" is something of which I do not approve; but I do chuckle when I read other people say it. And the First Amendment covers one's right to refer to Africa-Americans as monkeys, and, in fact, GWB was often portrayed by caricaturists as a simian of sorts, even though white people were never demeaned and characterized as apes in order to dehumanize them as white people dehumanized people of African descent all through our shameful history.
Nevertheless, it's our world and what we think and how we behave is always correct, even if it's in bad taste and racist.
A.C.T. I have a feeling you're not who you pretend to be. I don't know what your point is.
My policy is to allow people to comment so long as they don't attack each other with vicious names. I'm not sure what your motives are.
Actually, the budget relative to income is decreasing as evidenced by the falling deficit.
I assure you Ms. Shaw that my point is easily understood.
"Indeed unfortunate as he is a quite educated individual with multiple abilities" (September 4, 2014 at 10:09 PM).
Indeed, the same can be said of Hannibal Lecter.
"The similarities between Obama and Hitler are terrifying!
German people in such distress? Because their government was in utter chaos, and the German leaders wanted to reassure the people that everything would be ok. The only fly in the ointment was that the Nazis had, behind the scenes, caused the distress themselves by creating the crisis, so that they could step in and solve it.
Sound familiar?
Barack Obama is changing times and laws in America, giving himself unprecedented power never before seen. His ObamaCare bill. now the law of the land, empowers him to create his own private army, forces citizens to abide by unconstitutional laws, and will use the IRS in much the same way that Hitler used his brown shirts to make people get in line behind his policies.
Many Americans will awake to[sic] late to the fact that Obama has subverted the United States Constitution, and stolen our precious liberties and freedoms."
That's why Obama's faithful and blind followers are encouraged and taught to follow and have so much faith in Obama.
As Ben Carson said in one of his speeches, “our government is using all of their tools to intimidate the population into being afraid to speak out against the government. Then he compared it to Nazi Germany and how Hitler used the same tactics to silence those who disagreed with him.
As in Germany then, the threat of retribution for speaking the truth is harming this country.”
Just remember.....we were warned!"
STCS,
It appears Hannibal & Company are pulling out all stops. Too bad they never heard of Godwin's Fallacy.
Post a Comment