Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on February 04, 2011, 09:19:08 PM
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Just another typical right wing extremist spreading panic with lies and deception.
"Ronald W. Reagan, as head of the Screen Actors Guild and as FBI stool pigeon, falsely fingered numerous fellow actors and actresses, as "Communists", making them unemployable and ruining their careers. His first wife, for this and related reasons, dumped him."
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
This is why Reagan is immortal and the rest are pretenders.
-
-
-
Man o man - this is what I remember of reagan. the best of the best.
-
-
-
-
-
What a great tribute.
-
-
(http://books.gigaimg.com/avaxhome/73/9d/00149d73.jpeg)
Since Ronald Reagan left office—and particularly after his death—his shadow has loomed large over American politics: Republicans and many Democrats have waxed nostalgic, extolling the Republican tradition he embodied, the optimism he espoused, and his abilities as a communicator.
This carefully calibrated image is complete fiction, argues award-winning journalist William Kleinknecht. The Reagan presidency was epoch shattering, but not—as his propagandists would have it—because it invigorated private enterprise or made America feel strong again. His real legacy was the dismantling of an eight-decade period of reform in which working people were given an unprecedented sway over our politics, our economy, and our culture. Reagan halted this almost overnight.
In the tradition of Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas?, Kleinknecht explores middle America—starting with Reagan’s hometown of Dixon, Illinois—and shows that as the Reagan legend grows, his true legacy continues to decimate middle America.
http://depositfiles.com/en/files/siysgjh94 (http://depositfiles.com/en/files/siysgjh94)
-
Talk to anyone with a clue, the 80's under Reagan were far better than most other periods.
-
-
-
-
I never really understood how he got to be the icon of Conservatism. He was an oligarch and a corporate puppet.
-
heres a great one
-
Talk to most people who lived during his term and they will tell you.
-
After the disaster that was carter, reagan saved the day w volker. Of course to far leftists and libs like mal carter is their hero and model for a potus. No wonder they love obama.
-
I used to regard 333 as a bit paranoid when it came to Obama. Now I am in total agreement with him that Obama is trying to collapse America on purpose.
-
Did the last wikileaks cable that obama is trying to sell UK nuke secrets to Russia put you over the line?
Lol. When I read that I thought it was April 1st, but realized this is obama, so its par for the course.
As for Reagan, leftist goons hate him because he called the communists what they are - evil.
-
Talk to most people who lived during his term and they will tell you.
I do.. and it wasnt good for black people
-
Ha ha ha - as if that's reagans fault.
Like they are doing better now under this present pofs? Ha ha ha.
-
Ha ha ha - as if that's reagans fault.
Like they are doing better now under this present pofs? Ha ha ha.
Dude you know nothing of the feelings of blacks towards Regan.. just leave that out of your argument.. your way of thinking wouldnt allow you to undertand
-
I don't give a rats ass what blacks think about reagan.
Same excuses and bullshit - different decade.
-
I don't give a rats ass what blacks think about reagan.
Same excuses and bullshit - different decade.
exactly
-
Reagan will go down rightfully as one of the leading figures who helped topple soviet communism.
I guess that's why you hate him.
-
I do.. and it wasnt good for black people
Im pretty sure black people as a whole did better under Regan than they previously did.
-
heres a great one
The creator of that cartoon needs to take a course in accounting. There are two sides to a ledger.
-
Blacks hate Reagan. Therefore, as we now know, he clearly must have been doing something positive for America during his tenure in office.
Blacks love Obama. Usually any politician with the overwhleming support of the black community is by and large a parasitic scumbag that is destructive to this country.
My personal favorite Reagan move to improve relations with the black community was his decision to send the national guard to restore order at UC Berkley after the black panthers and other affiliated hippie scum began rioting. A proud moment of hope and change. 1000000x more of an impressive acomplishment than Adolf Obongo's two year reign of terror so far and this was before he even became prez.
-
Im pretty sure black people as a whole did better under Regan than they previously did.
Forcing black people to stop using drugs and get jobs amounts to an extremely racist policy. Blacks should be able to do whatever they want with no consequences and should be supported by the American tax payer without holding a job of any kind.
-
heres a great one
Again? Really? I'm not going to bother to post the real numbers yet again ::)
-
Joint Center for Political Studies estimated the black middle class grew by one-third from1980 to 1988, from 3.6 million to 4.8 million. In addition, black employment from 1982 to 1987 grew twice as fast (up 24.9 percent) as white employment. Real black median family income rose 12.7 percent from 1981 to 1987, 46 percent faster than whites
so who is wanting to evaluate him on race issues?????? ::)
-
Joint Center for Political Studies estimated the black middle class grew by one-third from1980 to 1988, from 3.6 million to 4.8 million. In addition, black employment from 1982 to 1987 grew twice as fast (up 24.9 percent) as white employment. Real black median family income rose 12.7 percent from 1981 to 1987, 46 percent faster than whites
so who is wanting to evaluate him on race issues?????? ::)
It's always a bad time for black people didn't you get the memo. Its never their fault either, it the man keeping them down ::)
-
Ha ha ha - Mal was probably refering to RR using the term "welfare queens"
-
well anyone who sits around waiting on that check is a welfare queen, i didnt hear rr say black welfare queen did you? so is mal implying something?
-
I don't think I have ever seen someone KNEEPAD a former president in america like I see in this post today. Clearly a lengthy education in what happened in america during the time of Reagan is in order. Here was the same president who allowed the outsourcing of industry that has caused so much calamity in america today. He also was responsible for destroying what was once a great airline industry in america when pilots went on strike due to the ever growing cuts in benefits or which today pilots are flying without pensions, very low salaries, little training, and not much of a future...so as each plane falls from the sky and crashes you can thank Reagan for that.
Following quickly behind was the massive military spending...something still done in america to this day, for crazy nonsense like STAR WARS PROGRAMS...cuz in Reagan's mind aliens were coming to attack america. After BILLIONS were spent the program was scraped and then restarted secretly again.
WAR ON DRUGS...Was it not Nancy Reagan who started the slogan..:JUST SAY NO" and after initializing this war on drugs program, drugs exploded in america. Hmmm maybe Nancy should have said YES...
Iran COntra...Oh Yeah let us get into the whole america supporting Iran in attacking Iraq in order to try and steal Iraq's oil. This came after america spent BILLION funding Iraq to attack Iran in order to steal Iran's oil...AMERICA FAILED TO ACHIVE EITHER GOAL thanks to Reagan. How much taxpayer money in america was wasted on that? Now years later here is america still following Reagan's lead and after twenty years of war and death america is still attacking Iraq...thank you Reagan
Deregulation of the banking industry...Do I even need to elaborate on the catastrophe this turned out to be...thank you Reagan
Education... While Reagan was wasting untold BILLIONS on the military and trying to micromanage businesses as well as opened the door to outsourcing and off shore accounts...education was allowed to fall by the way side in america. There were more cuts to education and
programs facilitating education than I think under any other president...Thank you Reagan
Cold War with Russia/Soviet Union...Many say america won the cold war, but how do you win a cold war? Is it by squandering untold BILLIONS on weapons that were never used as america did? or is it by realizing it is easier to be friendly and end the need for war all together than to imagine enemies of which there is no end to weapon making.?
I could go on forever with Reagan and the disaster he was for america..I was a kid then, but still remember my parents talking about the problems he was creating. Anyone worshipping this clown obviously has deep mental issues.
Here is more on this clown of a president http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
-
SAMSON wants to elect a president that throws feces at the wall like he does and hates America. Oh wait. Nevermind. :-X
-
Seems like Reagan was trying very much to collapse the nation as well...
-
Seems like Reagan was trying very much to collapse the nation as well...
he rose taxes and did deficit spending too, baught hella cocaine into the US to fund the contra thing. But screw all that. He rocked
-
he rose taxes and did deficit spending too, baught hella cocaine into the US to fund the contra thing. But screw all that. He rocked
Yeah but he was a republican so its okay...
-
More Info On Reagan
RONALD REAGAN: ILLUMINATI TOOL
February 6, 2011
(http://www.henrymakow.com/reagan.jpeg)
The Reagan myth is still useful to the Illuminati in duping and misdirecting people who hold traditional values.
by Rollin Stearns
(for henrymakow.com)
The past few days have seen a burst of contrived media celebration of Ronald Reagan. The excuse has been the 100th anniversary of his birth.
The real reason is that Reagan -- the Reagan myth -- is still useful to the Illuminati in duping and misdirecting people who hold traditional values.
In truth, Reagan was an enemy of these values. He was a highly paid puppet of the Illuminati who let himself be used by those who want to destroy everything he pretended to stand for.
I have to admit he had me fooled too. Back in 1980, people wanted to be rid of the feckless Jimmy Carter. Reagan seemed strong and sincere, upbeat and conservative. To me, he seemed like a man you could trust.
A big mistake. Unfortunately, he's still got most people fooled. So let's review the career of Ronald Reagan, and see who the real man was.
THE REAL REAGAN
First, Reagan was a left-wing Democrat who admired Franklin Roosevelt, the president who revolutionized America by turning the Republic into an Empire. (See Burden of Empire by Garet Garrett.) Even to the end of his career, Reagan was praising Roosevelt.
Later, about the time he divorced his first wife (Jane Wyman) and met Nancy Davis (the daughter of one of Eleanor Roosevelt's intimates), he underwent a "conversion" to "anti-communism." This was the foundation of his reputation as a conservative.
No surprise here, though. In the late 1940s, lots of left-wing liberals were turning against the Communists -- many to save their own skins from the revelations of treason that were coming out.
Even when this was not the motive, their "anti-Communism" often meant no more than anti-Stalinism. Trotskyites -- who thought of themselves as true Communists -- hated Stalin's guts and hated the Soviet Union. Later, many of them became the so-called "neo-conservatives" who took over Buckley's National Review, and then, with the election of Reagan, the Republican Party.
But what about Reagan's opposition to the "evil empire"? What about his big defense build-up that forced the Soviet Union into insolvency? What about his partnership with John-Paul II to free Poland and Eastern Europe?
All this was just part of the Illuminati plan to take the dialectic (capitalist West vs. communist East) to the next level. Gorbachev and Reagan were the appointed leaders to bring about the end of the bipolar world, so that the age of globalization could emerge.
In fact, at their summit at Reykjavik in 1986, Reagan proposed to Gorbachev that America be radically disarmed. Even liberals were stunned by the scope of Reagan's offer.
But behind the scenes, the American military rebelled, and the accounts of the summit were sanitized and forgotten. The following year Reagan gave his "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" performance and when the wall did come down, Reagan became "the man who defeated Communism."
ILLUMINATI GO'FER
Reagan's "patriotism" suffered other lapses as well. In 1986 he signed off on amnesty for millions of illegal aliens. You would think as a man of common sense and alleged economic literacy, Reagan would have known that when you reward something, you get more of it. Was the Gipper out to lunch?
And then there was "Iran-Contra." Reagan was fearlessly fighting the Commies in Central America, but didn't know that Ollie North was selling arms to Iran to finance this holy war. Out to lunch again?
It was at this point that I ceased to be a "conservative." All the conservatives I knew seemed to be gaga over North. Where I come from, his actions are known as treason.
(http://www.henrymakow.com/fawnhall.jpg)
(An aside: Fawn Hall, North's personal secretary -- a sensitive position that is carefully vetted -- was the daughter of Henry Kissinger's personal secretary. And Reagan had put Kissinger in charge of Central American policy.)
CHAMPION OF SMALL GOVERNMENT
But what about other Reagan policies? Didn't he reduce taxes? Didn' t he reduce the size of government to "get it off our backs," as he pledged?
Reagan's career was the triumph of rhetoric over reality. When he ran for President, he promised to put an end to the Departments of Education and Energy. Instead, he strengthened and entrenched them. (He also added a new bureaucracy, the Department of Veterans Affairs.)
As for taxes, he cut them in 1981 -- one of his signature accomplishments. But the same year he increased Social Security taxes (excuse me, I mean "insurance premiums"), and in the following years he found other ways to raise taxes without seeming to do so. At the end of his two terms most Americans were paying more in taxes than ever.
After eight years of Reagan the government was larger than ever. The budget was more than 50 percent higher than it was under Carter. And the budget deficit had tripled.
This was due above all to the huge increase in military spending. The military-industrial complex (that Eisenhower had warned against) thrived as it hadn't since the days of World War II.
CHAMPION OF CHRISTIAN VALUES
Wasn't Reagan pro-life? A Christian? A family man? Once again, when it came to things like abortion, Reagan talked a great game. But his Supreme Court Justices gave us Roe v. Wade).
His first appointment was an unqualified woman (O'Connor) with little judicial experience and no discernible judicial philosophy. She was selected for the same reason that Sotomayor and Kagan were: she was a female. And she was no conservative.
In all, Reagan appointed three justices. Later, two of them (predictably including O'Connor) voted to uphold Roe v. Wade in Casey v. Planned Parenthood. (Casey was a critical case: a change in just one of those two votes would have undermined Roe.)
And then there was the Bork nomination. Robert Bork was the most qualified nominee in a generation. But when Teddy Kennedy launched his breathtakingly vitriolic attack on Bork, what did Reagan do?
Nothing. He remained silent. The man who extolled the presidency as a great "bully pulpit" -- who might have saved his own nominee if he had just fought for him -- instead let him hang out to dry.
So there we have Reagan -- the man who as Governor of California signed the first no-fault divorce bill into law; the man whose official schedule was set by his wife according to astrological conjunctions; the man whose whole political career was subsidized by global corporations (GE, Bechtel, etc.) -- the man who spent his whole life play-acting a script written by others.
Was he evil? Did he know what he was doing? Or was he truly out to lunch? The latter might explain Reagan's uncanny ability to seem anti-government even as he enlarged the government's role.
CONCLUSION
What was Reagan's overriding role? And why does it matter now? Picture two men, one at each end of a cross-cut saw. They're cutting down a tree.
To the casual observer it looks at first as if the two are working against each other: as one moves forward, the other goes back, and vice versa. But of course they're working together to achieve a common goal.
In the same way, "liberals" and "conservatives," Republicans and Democrats, seem to be working against each other. But they're really working together.
One part will move the country to the left, when the times permit (e.g., because of depression or war). Then, when people become alarmed and resist the move, the other ("opposition") party will come in.
But instead of restoring the balance, they will merely stop (or slow) the leftward movement. They will consolidate it, until it's time for the next move left.
In this way the center of gravity moves ever leftward. And what was unthinkable a generation ago becomes mainstream today.
To enact this little dialectic you need some good (or passable) actors, such as Ronald Reagan. That way you control the opposition. You get people who have traditional values to vote for their own destruction.
-
Reagan was far from perfect, but after the disaster that was Carter, his working with Volker to tame inflaton as well as end the energy crisis, directly helped lead to millions of jobs being created.
-
-
I bet the RR admin didn't go around crying (its the carter admin fault, look what we inherited waaaawaaaa, the previous admin .) He just fixed the shit!!
-
Or did the stock market have a hell of a boom which in turn created a bunch of tax rev for the fed. Na... that aint a good enough answer.. he "fixed" it.LMAO
-
I bet the RR admin didn't go around crying (its the carter admin fault, look what we inherited waaaawaaaa, the previous admin .) He just fixed the shit!!
Hahaha very funny ::)
-
he "fixed" it.. hahahahahahaha
-
Obama, Reagan and the economy
By: Frank J. Donatelli
July 27, 2010 04:34 AM EST
SOURCE: POLITICO
________________________ ________________________
It’s easy to understand why President Barack Obama’s friends don’t want to acknowledge that July represents 17 months since Congress passed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill — the president’s signature measure to jump-start the economy and fight unemployment.
Obama says the economy is headed in the right direction; jobs are being created, not lost, and he is doing everything possible to revive the “worst economy since the Great Depression.” Most of the national press has been remarkably accepting of this narrative — even if the president has been vague, at best, about when we might finally see an uptick in economic growth and job creation.
But in another economic time, President Ronald Reagan’s economic recovery program took 17 months to take hold. It took from the time Congress passed his tax cuts, in August 1981, until the recession he inherited finally ended in January 1983.
Unemployment hit a high of 10.8 percent in December 1982. But then economic growth spiked, and the unemployment rate began a long, steady decline throughout the 1980s. It was obvious the program was working when people stopped calling it “Reaganomics.”
Tax cuts were a part of Reagan’s effort to cut the size and scope of government to fight economic stagnation. “Government is not the solution,” Reagan said in his remarkably clear inaugural address. “It is the problem.”
In addition to tax cuts, Reagan reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. He believed that government should give individuals and businesses the proper incentives to grow and expand and not inhibit the private sector with high taxes and cumbersome regulations.
Reagan faced obstacles that Obama did not. The House he had to work with was always controlled by Democrats. More ominously, inflation was running at double-digit rates, and it took nearly a year for the Federal Reserve to squeeze those pressures out of the system.
Regardless, in the end, Reagan’s program worked. The turnaround began 17 months later.
Fast-forward to today. The Obama administration says that government-directed investment, via huge spending increases, can revive the economy. It’s now stimulus plus 17. Is there a turnaround in sight?
Apparently not. Obama’s own budget estimates, released just last week, project trillion-dollar deficits, anemic economic growth coming out of a recession and unemployment near 9 percent for 2011 and 8 percent for 2012.
You have to go back to the 1930s to find a period in which unemployment has been so high for so long. This economic record would make former President Jimmy Carter blush.
Yet Obama continues to get a pass on his version of recent economic events. He has said that he inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression. He didn’t. The economies inherited by both President Gerald Ford in 1974 and Reagan in 1981 were far worse.
Obama has said the stimulus has saved 3 million jobs. It hasn’t. We have nearly that many fewer jobs than before the stimulus was passed in February 2009, and the unemployment rate is 1½ percentage points higher than what he claimed would be the high point once his program was enacted.
Obama has said he is doing all he can to revive the economy. Actually, he’s doing too much. The economic uncertainty that his “historic” health care and budget bills have created is doing more to hold back economic growth than anything else. Companies are hoarding cash rather than invest in Obama’s uncertain economic climate.
As a result, the recovery is anemic by historic standards.
So we have two historic presidents. Both inherited bad economies. One cut spending and taxes, and then, 17 months later, the economy boomed. The other increased taxes and spending. It’s now 17 months later.
Mr. President, we’re waiting.
-
Now this deserves the
he "fixed" it.. hahahahahahaha
-
Obama, Reagan and the economy
By: Frank J. Donatelli
July 27, 2010 04:34 AM EST
SOURCE: POLITICO
________________________ ________________________
It’s easy to understand why President Barack Obama’s friends don’t want to acknowledge that July represents 17 months since Congress passed the $787 billion economic stimulus bill — the president’s signature measure to jump-start the economy and fight unemployment.
Obama says the economy is headed in the right direction; jobs are being created, not lost, and he is doing everything possible to revive the “worst economy since the Great Depression.” Most of the national press has been remarkably accepting of this narrative — even if the president has been vague, at best, about when we might finally see an uptick in economic growth and job creation.
But in another economic time, President Ronald Reagan’s economic recovery program took 17 months to take hold. It took from the time Congress passed his tax cuts, in August 1981, until the recession he inherited finally ended in January 1983.
Unemployment hit a high of 10.8 percent in December 1982. But then economic growth spiked, and the unemployment rate began a long, steady decline throughout the 1980s. It was obvious the program was working when people stopped calling it “Reaganomics.”
Tax cuts were a part of Reagan’s effort to cut the size and scope of government to fight economic stagnation. “Government is not the solution,” Reagan said in his remarkably clear inaugural address. “It is the problem.”
In addition to tax cuts, Reagan reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. He believed that government should give individuals and businesses the proper incentives to grow and expand and not inhibit the private sector with high taxes and cumbersome regulations.
Reagan faced obstacles that Obama did not. The House he had to work with was always controlled by Democrats. More ominously, inflation was running at double-digit rates, and it took nearly a year for the Federal Reserve to squeeze those pressures out of the system.
Regardless, in the end, Reagan’s program worked. The turnaround began 17 months later.
Fast-forward to today. The Obama administration says that government-directed investment, via huge spending increases, can revive the economy. It’s now stimulus plus 17. Is there a turnaround in sight?
Apparently not. Obama’s own budget estimates, released just last week, project trillion-dollar deficits, anemic economic growth coming out of a recession and unemployment near 9 percent for 2011 and 8 percent for 2012.
You have to go back to the 1930s to find a period in which unemployment has been so high for so long. This economic record would make former President Jimmy Carter blush.
Yet Obama continues to get a pass on his version of recent economic events. He has said that he inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression. He didn’t. The economies inherited by both President Gerald Ford in 1974 and Reagan in 1981 were far worse.
Obama has said the stimulus has saved 3 million jobs. It hasn’t. We have nearly that many fewer jobs than before the stimulus was passed in February 2009, and the unemployment rate is 1½ percentage points higher than what he claimed would be the high point once his program was enacted.
Obama has said he is doing all he can to revive the economy. Actually, he’s doing too much. The economic uncertainty that his “historic” health care and budget bills have created is doing more to hold back economic growth than anything else. Companies are hoarding cash rather than invest in Obama’s uncertain economic climate.
As a result, the recovery is anemic by historic standards.
So we have two historic presidents. Both inherited bad economies. One cut spending and taxes, and then, 17 months later, the economy boomed. The other increased taxes and spending. It’s now 17 months later.
Mr. President, we’re waiting.
Dude post an original thought please.. this cut and paste is getting old
-
I already posted it jackass. He broke the back of inflation and the energy crisis.
Obama the job killer is doing the opposite of Reagan with predictable results. Obama is causing inflation and is doing his hardest to force an energy crisis sohe can try his cap & tax scheme again.
-
Reagan was far from perfect, but after the disaster that was Carter, his working with Volker to tame inflaton as well as end the energy crisis, directly helped lead to millions of jobs being created.
Reagan did NOT create millions of jobs and as a matter of fact he was a job killer. He single handedly nearly destroyed the airline industry, which never recovered. His deregulation of businesses and removal of government from oversight caused a tremendous amount of fraud, unsafe work environments as well as allowed the petrochemical industry to sacrifice health, life, property etc etc all for the sake of profits. Reagan as I said was responsible for OUTSOURCING starting with the auto industry in sending factories to Canada, Mexico, Taiwan, Korea etc instead of keeping those industries and jobs in america. Soon following the auto industry was the textile industry, steel industry, appliance industry, sheet metal industry... everything right down to your dinner plates and flatware left america thanks to Reagan.
VOLKER!!!!!!...He was as bad if not worst than Greenspan and Bernanke combined!!!!...Again look at the banking industry at that time as well as the financial state of america at that time. Volker was a disaster for america. Clinton had the appearance of doing justice to america , but it was only because the computer technology and internet came into being during his presidency which spawned many industries ad businesses that helped lift america out of the near depression it was in after dealing with Bush Sr who following after Reagan immediately started the Persian Gulf war and the massive military spending that entailed.
Not one american president over the past twenty years or even more is worthy of any type of praise or recognition...and certainly not Reagan.
-
Reagan did NOT create millions of jobs and as a matter of fact he was a job killer. He single handedly nearly destroyed the airline industry, which never recovered. His deregulation of businesses and removal of government from oversight caused a tremendous amount of fraud, unsafe work environments as well as allowed the petrochemical industry to sacrifice health, life, property etc etc all for the sake of profits. Reagan as I said was responsible for OUTSOURCING starting with the auto industry in sending factories to Canada, Mexico, Taiwan, Korea etc instead of keeping those industries and jobs in america. Soon following the auto industry was the textile industry, steel industry, appliance industry, sheet metal industry... everything right down to your dinner plates and flatware left america thanks to Reagan.
VOLKER!!!!!!...He was as bad if not worst than Greenspan and Bernanke combined!!!!...Again look at the banking industry at that time as well as the financial state of america at that time. Volker was a disaster for america. Clinton had the appearance of doing justice to america , but it was only because the computer technology and internet came into being during his presidency which spawned many industries ad businesses that helped lift america out of the near depression it was in after dealing with Bush Sr who following after Reagan immediately started the Persian Gulf war and the massive military spending that entailed.
Not one american president over the past twenty years or even more is worthy of any type of praise or recognition...and certainly not Reagan.
LMAO.. dude is wild..IF we can Give credit to regan for econimic boom in the 80's we have to give credit to Clinton for the same in the early 2000s.. Someone dispute that
-
Reagan did NOT create millions of jobs and as a matter of fact he was a job killer. He single handedly nearly destroyed the airline industry, which never recovered. His deregulation of businesses and removal of government from oversight caused a tremendous amount of fraud, unsafe work environments as well as allowed the petrochemical industry to sacrifice health, life, property etc etc all for the sake of profits. Reagan as I said was responsible for OUTSOURCING starting with the auto industry in sending factories to Canada, Mexico, Taiwan, Korea etc instead of keeping those industries and jobs in america. Soon following the auto industry was the textile industry, steel industry, appliance industry, sheet metal industry... everything right down to your dinner plates and flatware left america thanks to Reagan.
VOLKER!!!!!!...He was as bad if not worst than Greenspan and Bernanke combined!!!!...Again look at the banking industry at that time as well as the financial state of america at that time. Volker was a disaster for america. Clinton had the appearance of doing justice to america , but it was only because the computer technology and internet came into being during his presidency which spawned many industries ad businesses that helped lift america out of the near depression it was in after dealing with Bush Sr who following after Reagan immediately started the Persian Gulf war and the massive military spending that entailed.
Not one american president over the past twenty years or even more is worthy of any type of praise or recognition...and certainly not Reagan.
Post of the day
-
Firing those union goons at the Airlines was a great move.
-
-
More cocaine= happier people with more energy having more sex and committing more violent crime= better for the economy
Reagan should be added to mount Rushmore.
-
Most leftists are at their core communists and share the same goals, whether they realize and acknowledge it or not.
They hated Reagan because faught against communism 24/7, and hence their own communistic dreams.
-
Won 49 States.
-
More cocaine= happier people with more energy having more sex and committing more violent crime= better for the economy
Reagan should be added to mount Rushmore.
and it got pumped into black neighborhoods which fuled the crack shit.. which fueled the gang shit and the arms race in the hood..but im sure youre all good with that..
White... ill prob laugh at that for years
-
and it got pumped into black neighborhoods which fuled the crack shit.. which fueled the gang shit and the arms race in the hood..but im sure youre all good with that..
White... ill prob laugh at that for years
So buy in to the CT that Reagan and the CIA did that?
-
So buy in to the CT that Reagan and the CIA did that?
Its not a CT.. it happened. Mounds of proof..
Get a clue ::) (in the words of you)
Look up Gary Webb, Rick Ross (the real one) and Danilo Blandon
Guy who broke the story and connection.. yeah.. he commited suicide by shooting himself in the head.. twice
-
Its not a CT.. it happened. Mounds of proof..
Get a clue ::) (in the words of you)
Look up Gary Webb, Rick Ross (the real one) and Danilo Blandon
Guy who broke the story and connection.. yeah.. he commited suicide by shooting himself in the head.. twice
Did Reagan create aids too?
-
Did Reagan create aids too?
where you get aids from.. i didnt say nothing about no aids.. i said coacaine.. coacaine and aids dont sound the same.. what the fuck are you talking about?
-
Usually the people who buy into Reagan CT's say he flooded the cites with crack intentionally as well as created or did nothing on AIDS on purpose.
Usually, its stuff from Mother Wheel Minister.
-
Usually the people who buy into Reagan CT's say he flooded the cites with crack intentionally as well as created or did nothing on AIDS on purpose.
Usually, its stuff from Mother Wheel Minister.
Read about Ross, Blandon and Webb.. then talk.. if not shut the fuck up
-
and it got pumped into black neighborhoods which fuled the crack shit.. which fueled the gang shit and the arms race in the hood..but im sure youre all good with that..
White... ill prob laugh at that for years
So what is your point? That black people have so little self control that they can't help themselves when cocaine/crack is available?
Same goes for gangs and guns, seems to me a little personal responsibility would go along way, instead of always pointing the finger at someone else.
-
Chapter 1: Conspiracy Theories Everywhere
from Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:S3zqBLzt7d0J:www.danielpipes.org/books/conspiracychap.php+reagan+crack+conspiracy&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ______
Conspiracy theories - the fear of nonexistent conspiracies - are flourishing in the United States. Republican, Democratic, and independent presidential candidates espouse them. Growing political institutions (the Nation of Islam, the militias) are premised on them. A majority of Americans say they believe John F. Kennedy was killed not by a lone gunman but by a conspiracy, and a majority of black Americans hold the U.S. government responsible for the spread of drugs. O. J. Simpson famously beat his criminal rap by convincing a jury of a conspiracy theory: that the Los Angeles police framed him. Two young men, their heads spinning with conspiracy theories about Washington taking freedoms away from Americans, blew up a government building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 (including 19 children) and wounding 550.
This suspicious approach even affects the actions of government. Legislation in New York State requires schools to teach about the Irish potato famine with the intent to show, as New York's Governor George E. Pataki commented while signing the bill, that the famine was "the result of a deliberate campaign by the British to deny the Irish people the food they needed to survive." A Conference of the States, planned for October 1995 in Philadelphia, was to have asserted state power at the expense of the Federal government. But when the extreme Right got wind of this meeting, it floated conspiracy theories about its being a sneaky effort to subvert the Constitution and submit the United States to a one-world government - proved by the fact that the conference had been scheduled to coincide exactly with the United Nations' fiftieth anniversary. So effective was this campaign that one state after another backed out, the conference had to be canceled, and the debate over federalism was ruptured.
A survey of conspiracy theories in American public life shows that these tend to come disproportionately from two broad groups of people: the politically disaffected and the culturally suspicious.
The Disaffected
Conspiracy theory is the sophistication of the ignorant.
- Richard Grenier
Among the politically disaffected, the black community and the hard Right are most overtly conspiracy theory-minded. Both dislike the existing order and offer radical ideas about changing it; both resort to an outlook that depends heavily on the existence of powerful forces engaged in plots.
Blacks
Conspiracy theories may well be most prevalent in black America. A columnist calls these "the life blood of the African-American community," and a clinical psychologist notes that there is "probably no conspiracy involving African-Americans that was too far-fetched, too fantastic, or too convoluted." She finds four recurring themes, all centered on the U.S. government: it uses blacks as guinea pigs, imposes bad habits on them, targets their leaders, and decimates their population.
But the sense of being surrounded by evildoers shows up in many ways, ranging from the petty to the cosmic, and does not always focus on the government. In a minor but indicative example, a new and inexpensive drink named Tropical Fantasy appeared throughout the northeastern United States in September 1990 and sold extremely well in low-income neighborhoods during the next half year. The fact that most of its Brooklyn, New York, employees were black made the beverage the more appealing. But anonymous leaflets turned up in black areas in early 1991, warning that the soft drink was manufactured by the Ku Klux Klan and contained "stimulants to sterilize the black man." Although journalistic and police investigations found this accusation to be completely fraudulent, it struck a chord among consumers, and sales plummeted by 70 percent. Other products, including Kool and Uptown cigarettes, Troop Sport clothing, Church's Fried Chicken, and Snapple soft drinks, suffered from similar slanders about the KKK and causing impotence, and they too went into a commercial tailspin.
On a larger scale, the assassinations of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr., continue to arouse suspicions among blacks. Nation of Islam leaders point to the FBI's not protecting Malcolm X; in King's case, they claim the U.S. government "set up his death." Joseph Lowery, another black leader, agrees: "We have never stopped believing for a moment that there was not some government complicity in the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr." The activist Dick Gregory, a comedian who long ago gave up laughs for conspiracy theories, also blames King's death on a government plot, as he does the mysterious murder of twenty-eight blacks in Atlanta in 1979-81 (which he ascribes to government scientists' taking the tips of their penises to use in a serum for countering cancer).
But the two main conspiracy theories concern fears that the U.S. government takes steps to sabotage blacks and the cluster of accusations promoted by Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
AIDS and Drugs. The disproportionate incidence of AIDS and drug use among blacks prompts prominent figures to endorse a conspiracy theory that the U.S. government is behind these epidemics. The comedian Bill Cosby asserts that AIDS was "started by human beings to get after certain people they don't like." The movie director Spike Lee announced (in an advertisement for the Benetton clothing shops, of all places) that "AIDS is a government-engineered disease." On late-night television, rap singer Kool Moe Dee portrayed AIDS as a genocidal plot against blacks, with no dissent from host Arsenio Hall. A mass-circulation magazine for blacks ran as its cover story, "AIDS: Is It Genocide?" Steven Cokely, a well-known former Chicago municipal official, gave the plot an antisemitic twist, telling of Jewish doctors who injected black babies with AIDS as part of a plot to take over the world. Drugs and crime inspire similar fears. In the acclaimed 1991 movie about black life, Boyz 'N' the Hood, a character proffers a full-blown conspiracy theory about crack and guns being available to blacks because "they want us to kill each other off. What they couldn't do to us in slavery, they are making us do to ourselves."
With a black leadership falling over itself to endorse such ideas, it comes as little surprise that a 1990 poll showed 29 percent of black New Yorkers stating their belief in AIDS' being "deliberately created in a laboratory in order to infect black people," and 60 percent thinking the government was "deliberately" making drugs available to poor blacks.
These views set the stage for the sensational reception given "Dark Alliance," a three-part series published in the San Jose Mercury News in August 1996. The author, Gary Webb, strongly implied that the Central Intelligence Agency knew about drug dealing in Los Angeles by anticommunist Nicaraguans but did not stop them because it welcomed the funds they sent to the contras fighting in Nicaragua. Cocaine, Webb states in the first article, "was virtually unobtainable in black neighborhoods before members of the Central Intelligence Agency's army started bringing it into South-Central in the 1980s at bargain-basement prices"; this drug network "opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles." The Nicaraguan traffickers, he also maintains, "met with CIA agents both before and during the time they were selling the drugs in L.A." This, the series suggested, made the government complicit in the spread of crack, a cocaine derivative.
The Mercury News drew this connection even more directly on the Internet. Its World Wide Web site showed the CIA insignia superimposed over a man smoking crack. In a talk-radio interview available on the Mercury News's state-of-the-art Web site, Gary Webb asserted that "the cocaine that was used to make the crack that flooded into L.A. in the early '80s came from the CIA's army."
In addition to reviews by the CIA, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the Los Angeles sheriff that found no evidence to support Webb's conspiracy theory, several investigative articles found his evidence lacking. The Washington Post determined that "available information does not support the conclusion that the CIA-backed contras - or Nicaraguans in general - played a major role in the emergence of crack as a narcotic in widespread use across the United States." The Los Angeles Times stated flatly that "The crack epidemic in Los Angeles followed no blueprint or master plan. It was not orchestrated by the Contras or the CIA or any single drug ring." The New York Times found "scant proof" to support the allegations. These and other debunkings did force the Mercury News to backtrack somewhat; the editor insisted that "Dark Alliance" had only stated that individuals associated with the CIA sold cocaine that ended up on the streets of Los Angeles, not that the CIA approved of the sales. In addition, the CIA insignia disappeared from the World Wide Web site.
This reversal had little impact on black opinion, however, which widely accepted "Dark Alliance" as truth. Leaders immediately endorsed it. Jesse Jackson accused the government, through the CIA, of being "involved in subsidizing drugs." Dick Gregory got himself arrested at the CIA headquarters and proclaimed that "There is evidence inside those buildings that confirms that the CIA helped to destroy black folks. That's called genocide." Maxine Waters, South-Central Los Angeles's member of Congress, told a rally that "People in high places, knowing about it, winking, blinking, and in South Central Los Angeles, our children were dying."
Black journalists picked up the topic and ran with it. Derrick Z. Jackson wrote in his Boston Globe column: "the only conclusion is that Ronald Reagan said yes to crack and the destruction of black lives at home to fund the killing of commies abroad." Wilbert Tatum, editor of the Amsterdam News, found the thesis "entirely plausible." An editorial cartoon showed a car full of CIA agents driving in a black part of town, throwing packets of crack out of windows. The conspiracy theory even developed its own form of commerce, as Los Angeles vendors sold baseball caps reading "C.I.A. Crack Inforcement Agency."
The CIA allegations then provided the basis for yet more sweeping accusations. Kobie Kwasi Harris, chairman of the department of Afro-American studies at San Jose State University, discerned a larger pattern: "If America had a choice they would choose a disorganized, criminal black community over an organized, radical one." Barbara Boudreaux of the Los Angeles school board announced the existence of "a master plan to have mass genocide for every child born in the world, especially in Los Angeles and Compton."
Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Louis Farrakhan deserves close attention, having become not just the leading black conspiracy theorist but also America's most prominent antisemite. In part, Farrakhan reflects Nation of Islam theology, which understands the white race's very existence as a conspiracy directed at the elimination of blacks. Along these lines, Farrakhan's associates at the Black Holocaust Nationhood Conference that took place just before the Million Man March of October 1995 held whites responsible for 600 million black deaths over the past six thousand years. Farrakhan's newspaper accuses whites of pursuing this goal through many avenues, foremost of which is AIDS, "a man-made disease designed to kill us all." (By "us," Farrakhan includes Africans: the U.S. government shipped a billion units of AIDS to Africa, he said, to annihilate that continent's entire population.) Other mechanisms include propaganda about black inferiority, substandard education, long prison terms, and making guns, drugs, and junk food available. Getting rid of black men through addiction, incarceration, or death also has the advantage of making black women conveniently available to white men, who then control them through a deadly combination of birth control, abortion, and welfare.
Farrakhan goes beyond the theology he inherited from his mentor, Elijah Muhammad, and displays an inclusive conspiracism of his own making. It began with the very death of Elijah Muhammad in 1975; Farrakhan rejected the official causes (heart failure and arteriosclerotic disease) and insisted that a conspiracy of family members, the U.S. government, and Sunni Arabs did him in. Farrakhan also focuses on Jews, a people the Nation of Islam had previously ignored, adopting many classic antisemitic themes. Jews, he says, are responsible for capitalism and communism, the two world wars, financing Hitler, controlling the Federal Reserve Board and Hollywood, and causing the U.S. government to go into debt. They dominate U.S. politics ("all presidents since 1932 are controlled by the Jews") and media ("any newspaper that refused to acquiesce to controlled news was brought to its knees by withdrawing advertising. Failing this, the Jews stop the supply of news print and ink"). In all, "85 percent of the masses of the people of earth are victimized" by Jews. The Nation of Islam purveys the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious antisemitic forgery, at its meetings and publishes its own literature of conspiratorial antisemitism.
Farrakhan also makes novel assertions about Jews. They carried out the transatlantic slave trade that he claims killed 100 million Africans. Jews owned three-quarters of all slaves, and they kept the slave system functioning. They inject the AIDS virus into black newborns and puncture a hole in the ozone layer. In a particularly clever bit of revisionism, Farrakhan turns around the active and lasting Jewish participation in black civil rights efforts, claiming that it was self interested. By helping integrate blacks, he says, Jews managed to destroy the autonomous black economic institutions and took over the business for themselves. By encouraging blacks to work within the system, rather than confront it, Jews kept them from escaping the strictures of white supremacy. In all, Jewish "bloodsuckers" have successfully blocked black advancement.
-
So what is your point? That black people have so little self control that they can't help themselves when cocaine/crack is available?
Same goes for gangs and guns, seems to me a little personal responsibility would go along way, instead of always pointing the finger at someone else.
So many factors go into it. I could say the same for meth and whites.. but its not a self control thing.. but it would take a month to explain to someone who already has their mind made up
-
Chapter 1: Conspiracy Theories Everywhere
from Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:S3zqBLzt7d0J:www.danielpipes.org/books/conspiracychap.php+reagan+crack+conspiracy&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ______
Conspiracy theories - the fear of nonexistent conspiracies - are flourishing in the United States. Republican, Democratic, and independent presidential candidates espouse them. Growing political institutions (the Nation of Islam, the militias) are premised on them. A majority of Americans say they believe John F. Kennedy was killed not by a lone gunman but by a conspiracy, and a majority of black Americans hold the U.S. government responsible for the spread of drugs. O. J. Simpson famously beat his criminal rap by convincing a jury of a conspiracy theory: that the Los Angeles police framed him. Two young men, their heads spinning with conspiracy theories about Washington taking freedoms away from Americans, blew up a government building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 (including 19 children) and wounding 550.
This suspicious approach even affects the actions of government. Legislation in New York State requires schools to teach about the Irish potato famine with the intent to show, as New York's Governor George E. Pataki commented while signing the bill, that the famine was "the result of a deliberate campaign by the British to deny the Irish people the food they needed to survive." A Conference of the States, planned for October 1995 in Philadelphia, was to have asserted state power at the expense of the Federal government. But when the extreme Right got wind of this meeting, it floated conspiracy theories about its being a sneaky effort to subvert the Constitution and submit the United States to a one-world government - proved by the fact that the conference had been scheduled to coincide exactly with the United Nations' fiftieth anniversary. So effective was this campaign that one state after another backed out, the conference had to be canceled, and the debate over federalism was ruptured.
A survey of conspiracy theories in American public life shows that these tend to come disproportionately from two broad groups of people: the politically disaffected and the culturally suspicious.
The Disaffected
Conspiracy theory is the sophistication of the ignorant.
- Richard Grenier
Among the politically disaffected, the black community and the hard Right are most overtly conspiracy theory-minded. Both dislike the existing order and offer radical ideas about changing it; both resort to an outlook that depends heavily on the existence of powerful forces engaged in plots.
Blacks
Conspiracy theories may well be most prevalent in black America. A columnist calls these "the life blood of the African-American community," and a clinical psychologist notes that there is "probably no conspiracy involving African-Americans that was too far-fetched, too fantastic, or too convoluted." She finds four recurring themes, all centered on the U.S. government: it uses blacks as guinea pigs, imposes bad habits on them, targets their leaders, and decimates their population.
But the sense of being surrounded by evildoers shows up in many ways, ranging from the petty to the cosmic, and does not always focus on the government. In a minor but indicative example, a new and inexpensive drink named Tropical Fantasy appeared throughout the northeastern United States in September 1990 and sold extremely well in low-income neighborhoods during the next half year. The fact that most of its Brooklyn, New York, employees were black made the beverage the more appealing. But anonymous leaflets turned up in black areas in early 1991, warning that the soft drink was manufactured by the Ku Klux Klan and contained "stimulants to sterilize the black man." Although journalistic and police investigations found this accusation to be completely fraudulent, it struck a chord among consumers, and sales plummeted by 70 percent. Other products, including Kool and Uptown cigarettes, Troop Sport clothing, Church's Fried Chicken, and Snapple soft drinks, suffered from similar slanders about the KKK and causing impotence, and they too went into a commercial tailspin.
On a larger scale, the assassinations of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr., continue to arouse suspicions among blacks. Nation of Islam leaders point to the FBI's not protecting Malcolm X; in King's case, they claim the U.S. government "set up his death." Joseph Lowery, another black leader, agrees: "We have never stopped believing for a moment that there was not some government complicity in the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr." The activist Dick Gregory, a comedian who long ago gave up laughs for conspiracy theories, also blames King's death on a government plot, as he does the mysterious murder of twenty-eight blacks in Atlanta in 1979-81 (which he ascribes to government scientists' taking the tips of their penises to use in a serum for countering cancer).
But the two main conspiracy theories concern fears that the U.S. government takes steps to sabotage blacks and the cluster of accusations promoted by Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam.
AIDS and Drugs. The disproportionate incidence of AIDS and drug use among blacks prompts prominent figures to endorse a conspiracy theory that the U.S. government is behind these epidemics. The comedian Bill Cosby asserts that AIDS was "started by human beings to get after certain people they don't like." The movie director Spike Lee announced (in an advertisement for the Benetton clothing shops, of all places) that "AIDS is a government-engineered disease." On late-night television, rap singer Kool Moe Dee portrayed AIDS as a genocidal plot against blacks, with no dissent from host Arsenio Hall. A mass-circulation magazine for blacks ran as its cover story, "AIDS: Is It Genocide?" Steven Cokely, a well-known former Chicago municipal official, gave the plot an antisemitic twist, telling of Jewish doctors who injected black babies with AIDS as part of a plot to take over the world. Drugs and crime inspire similar fears. In the acclaimed 1991 movie about black life, Boyz 'N' the Hood, a character proffers a full-blown conspiracy theory about crack and guns being available to blacks because "they want us to kill each other off. What they couldn't do to us in slavery, they are making us do to ourselves."
With a black leadership falling over itself to endorse such ideas, it comes as little surprise that a 1990 poll showed 29 percent of black New Yorkers stating their belief in AIDS' being "deliberately created in a laboratory in order to infect black people," and 60 percent thinking the government was "deliberately" making drugs available to poor blacks.
These views set the stage for the sensational reception given "Dark Alliance," a three-part series published in the San Jose Mercury News in August 1996. The author, Gary Webb, strongly implied that the Central Intelligence Agency knew about drug dealing in Los Angeles by anticommunist Nicaraguans but did not stop them because it welcomed the funds they sent to the contras fighting in Nicaragua. Cocaine, Webb states in the first article, "was virtually unobtainable in black neighborhoods before members of the Central Intelligence Agency's army started bringing it into South-Central in the 1980s at bargain-basement prices"; this drug network "opened the first pipeline between Colombia's cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles." The Nicaraguan traffickers, he also maintains, "met with CIA agents both before and during the time they were selling the drugs in L.A." This, the series suggested, made the government complicit in the spread of crack, a cocaine derivative.
The Mercury News drew this connection even more directly on the Internet. Its World Wide Web site showed the CIA insignia superimposed over a man smoking crack. In a talk-radio interview available on the Mercury News's state-of-the-art Web site, Gary Webb asserted that "the cocaine that was used to make the crack that flooded into L.A. in the early '80s came from the CIA's army."
In addition to reviews by the CIA, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the Los Angeles sheriff that found no evidence to support Webb's conspiracy theory, several investigative articles found his evidence lacking. The Washington Post determined that "available information does not support the conclusion that the CIA-backed contras - or Nicaraguans in general - played a major role in the emergence of crack as a narcotic in widespread use across the United States." The Los Angeles Times stated flatly that "The crack epidemic in Los Angeles followed no blueprint or master plan. It was not orchestrated by the Contras or the CIA or any single drug ring." The New York Times found "scant proof" to support the allegations. These and other debunkings did force the Mercury News to backtrack somewhat; the editor insisted that "Dark Alliance" had only stated that individuals associated with the CIA sold cocaine that ended up on the streets of Los Angeles, not that the CIA approved of the sales. In addition, the CIA insignia disappeared from the World Wide Web site.
This reversal had little impact on black opinion, however, which widely accepted "Dark Alliance" as truth. Leaders immediately endorsed it. Jesse Jackson accused the government, through the CIA, of being "involved in subsidizing drugs." Dick Gregory got himself arrested at the CIA headquarters and proclaimed that "There is evidence inside those buildings that confirms that the CIA helped to destroy black folks. That's called genocide." Maxine Waters, South-Central Los Angeles's member of Congress, told a rally that "People in high places, knowing about it, winking, blinking, and in South Central Los Angeles, our children were dying."
Black journalists picked up the topic and ran with it. Derrick Z. Jackson wrote in his Boston Globe column: "the only conclusion is that Ronald Reagan said yes to crack and the destruction of black lives at home to fund the killing of commies abroad." Wilbert Tatum, editor of the Amsterdam News, found the thesis "entirely plausible." An editorial cartoon showed a car full of CIA agents driving in a black part of town, throwing packets of crack out of windows. The conspiracy theory even developed its own form of commerce, as Los Angeles vendors sold baseball caps reading "C.I.A. Crack Inforcement Agency."
The CIA allegations then provided the basis for yet more sweeping accusations. Kobie Kwasi Harris, chairman of the department of Afro-American studies at San Jose State University, discerned a larger pattern: "If America had a choice they would choose a disorganized, criminal black community over an organized, radical one." Barbara Boudreaux of the Los Angeles school board announced the existence of "a master plan to have mass genocide for every child born in the world, especially in Los Angeles and Compton."
Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Louis Farrakhan deserves close attention, having become not just the leading black conspiracy theorist but also America's most prominent antisemite. In part, Farrakhan reflects Nation of Islam theology, which understands the white race's very existence as a conspiracy directed at the elimination of blacks. Along these lines, Farrakhan's associates at the Black Holocaust Nationhood Conference that took place just before the Million Man March of October 1995 held whites responsible for 600 million black deaths over the past six thousand years. Farrakhan's newspaper accuses whites of pursuing this goal through many avenues, foremost of which is AIDS, "a man-made disease designed to kill us all." (By "us," Farrakhan includes Africans: the U.S. government shipped a billion units of AIDS to Africa, he said, to annihilate that continent's entire population.) Other mechanisms include propaganda about black inferiority, substandard education, long prison terms, and making guns, drugs, and junk food available. Getting rid of black men through addiction, incarceration, or death also has the advantage of making black women conveniently available to white men, who then control them through a deadly combination of birth control, abortion, and welfare.
Farrakhan goes beyond the theology he inherited from his mentor, Elijah Muhammad, and displays an inclusive conspiracism of his own making. It began with the very death of Elijah Muhammad in 1975; Farrakhan rejected the official causes (heart failure and arteriosclerotic disease) and insisted that a conspiracy of family members, the U.S. government, and Sunni Arabs did him in. Farrakhan also focuses on Jews, a people the Nation of Islam had previously ignored, adopting many classic antisemitic themes. Jews, he says, are responsible for capitalism and communism, the two world wars, financing Hitler, controlling the Federal Reserve Board and Hollywood, and causing the U.S. government to go into debt. They dominate U.S. politics ("all presidents since 1932 are controlled by the Jews") and media ("any newspaper that refused to acquiesce to controlled news was brought to its knees by withdrawing advertising. Failing this, the Jews stop the supply of news print and ink"). In all, "85 percent of the masses of the people of earth are victimized" by Jews. The Nation of Islam purveys the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious antisemitic forgery, at its meetings and publishes its own literature of conspiratorial antisemitism.
Farrakhan also makes novel assertions about Jews. They carried out the transatlantic slave trade that he claims killed 100 million Africans. Jews owned three-quarters of all slaves, and they kept the slave system functioning. They inject the AIDS virus into black newborns and puncture a hole in the ozone layer. In a particularly clever bit of revisionism, Farrakhan turns around the active and lasting Jewish participation in black civil rights efforts, claiming that it was self interested. By helping integrate blacks, he says, Jews managed to destroy the autonomous black economic institutions and took over the business for themselves. By encouraging blacks to work within the system, rather than confront it, Jews kept them from escaping the strictures of white supremacy. In all, Jewish "bloodsuckers" have successfully blocked black advancement.
You myst be on Rock Cocaine if you think im about to read all that shit in your own words... what the fuck is all of that
-
Basically - all people who looked into this have determined its another CT without a shred of evidence.
Like I said - same bullshit excuses diferent decade.
-
So many factors go into it. I could say the same for meth and whites.. but its not a self control thing.. but it would take a month to explain to someone who already has their mind made up
It was a serious question, I have no sympathy for white meth heads either, no one is forcing the fuckers to use the drug. Again it is personal responsibility. You either accept the fact that you made the choice to use, or you decide that it is someone else's fault.
-
Oh ok Kazan ill give a quick overview..
Basically..Blacks didnt have the opportunities educationally as whites here in LA.. i think that is widley accepted..
So most of them worked Factory jobs, all on the east side near watts.. there were hella factories. Like tons,,....lumber, steel, rubber was a huge one.. but they worked decent jobs until the factories started to close..
That gave way to massive unemployment in the 70's.. While still going to under funded schools they couldnt really compete like they should have been able to.
When unemployment hits, crime rises as wellas drug use.. most hard drug users are broke and educated.. .. I think we can all agree on that
Well in the 80s the economy was at it absolute worst and in comes in this product that you can buy for cheap and sell for an extreme profit margin.. its hard to turn that down..
Its more in depth than that but its my theory.. Addiction is a disease not a choice..
-
It was a serious question, I have no sympathy for white meth heads either, no one is forcing the fuckers to use the drug. Again it is personal responsibility. You either accept the fact that you made the choice to use, or you decide that it is someone else's fault.
It's a stupid argument. Poor people with no work ethic and no brains become addicted to drugs at a higher rate than everyone else. In black areas with lots of poor people (kind of a redundant characterization) crack cocaine is the order of the day. In rural white areas with lots of poor people, meth is king. In both cases, addicts will steal, kill and endanger the lives of everyone in the community for a fix. Making this a racial issue is a cop out so blacks can blame Ronald Regan for the ineptitude of the proud Nubian people.
See, many blacks are also of the same mindset (shared by Neo-Cons and castrated liberals which is interesting) that "Aint no poppy field up in Harlem, aint no coca leaves in da ghetto". So the argument goes that if people in America stop using drugs, the drug business becomes less lucrative and poor people will stop selling drugs. Neo-cons make that idiotic argument with respect to drug users indirectly funding terrorism. Liberal filth makes the same argument about Mexico. "Oh Mexico would be a Utopia if it werent for greedy Americans taking drugs!"
All of these arguments are hogwash. It's human nature to want to feel good and take drugs. Everywhere in the world people get high. Even in countries where drug trafficking a few bags of weed is a death sentence, people find a way to get high. You will only eliminate recreational drug use by eliminating humanity and eliminating the monetary system.
Addiction may in fact be a disease, but there are physical addictions ( heroin) and pscyhological addictions (cocaine). There are levels of addiction and different factors which increase the likelihood of becoming addicted. Either way, it all starts with choice and it all ends with willpower.
-
Oh ok Kazan ill give a quick overview..
Basically..Blacks didnt have the opportunities educationally as whites here in LA.. i think that is widley accepted..
So most of them worked Factory jobs, all on the east side near watts.. there were hella factories. Like tons,,....lumber, steel, rubber was a huge one.. but they worked decent jobs until the factories started to close..
That gave way to massive unemployment in the 70's.. While still going to under funded schools they couldnt really compete like they should have been able to.
When unemployment hits, crime rises as wellas drug use.. most hard drug users are broke and educated.. .. I think we can all agree on that
Well in the 80s the economy was at it absolute worst and in comes in this product that you can buy for cheap and sell for an extreme profit margin.. its hard to turn that down..
Its more in depth than that but its my theory.. Addiction is a disease not a choice..
Yes but taking the first hit, drink...... is a choice, I will not refer to addiction as a disease, it lets the person off the hook for poor choices.
-
Ha h ha - old school. Go to love the Reagan mask.
-
Read about Ross, Blandon and Webb.. then talk.. if not shut the fuck up
So you think th govt is capable of doing this yet at the same time trust it to handle health care, energy, and alll sorts of crap. ha ha ha ha what a freaking joke.
-
It's a stupid argument. Poor people with no work ethic and no brains become addicted to drugs at a higher rate than everyone else. In black areas with lots of poor people (kind of a redundant characterization) crack cocaine is the order of the day. In rural white areas with lots of poor people, meth is king. In both cases, addicts will steal, kill and endanger the lives of everyone in the community for a fix. Making this a racial issue is a cop out so blacks can blame Ronald Regan for the ineptitude of the proud Nubian people.
See, many blacks are also of the same mindset (shared by Neo-Cons and castrated liberals which is interesting) that "Aint no poppy field up in Harlem, aint no coca leaves in da ghetto". So the argument goes that if people in America stop using drugs, the drug business becomes less lucrative and poor people will stop selling drugs. Neo-cons make that idiotic argument with respect to drug users indirectly funding terrorism. Liberal filth makes the same argument about Mexico. "Oh Mexico would be a Utopia if it werent for greedy Americans taking drugs!"
All of these arguments are hogwash. It's human nature to want to feel good and take drugs. Everywhere in the world people get high. Even in countries where drug trafficking a few bags of weed is a death sentence, people find a way to get high. You will only eliminate recreational drug use by eliminating humanity and eliminating the monetary system.
Addiction may in fact be a disease, but there are physical addictions ( heroin) and pscyhological addictions (cocaine). There are levels of addiction and different factors which increase the likelihood of becoming addicted. Either way, it all starts with choice and it all ends with willpower.
Good argument.. but this seems to me that you think Drugs should be legal? i could be reading this wrong
-
By your logic of RR making cocaine more easily available and that why blacks used it then do you hold bill clinton responsible for all of the internet child molestation , id theft, and internet fraud and abuse, issues of today? Clinton was in house when the net all came about.
-
By your logic of RR making cocaine more easily available and that why blacks used it then do you hold bill clinton responsible for all of the internet child molestation , id theft, and internet fraud and abuse, issues of today? Clinton was in house when the net all came about.
how old are you?
Are you for real or just saying shit to start an argument
-
just trying to figure out your logic? surely you dont have issues with what i said bout clinton, its the same logic.
-
just trying to figure out your logic? surely you dont have issues with what i said bout clinton, its the same logic.
you got it bro.. im not going there with you.. its just dumb
-
alot of cocaine became available to blacks under RR which you claim made blacks have cocaine probs,
internet happens under clinton so using your logic , all the bad things associated with the net must be clintons fault, you cant use that logic one one thing that makes your argument look good but try not to when it doesn't.
-
you got it bro.. im not going there with you.. its just dumb
Why not - you are going based on the statements of one guy with your crack CT?
-
Why not - you are going based on the statements of one guy with your crack CT?
i thought you were better than this. you disapoint me.
anyway
internet= used for information access..
cocaines sole purpose was to get people high.. cmon man.. put on your thinking cap
-
i thought you were better than this. you disapoint me.
anyway
internet= used for information access..
cocaines sole purpose was to get people high.. cmon man.. put on your thinking cap
I am, I am looking for evidence of the crack CT. I looked up that guy Gary Webb and there was not much there that could be verified.
-
I am, I am looking for evidence of the crack CT. I looked up that guy Gary Webb and there was not much there that could be verified.
do you look at his story.. rick ross and blandon? Please think
-
do you look at his story.. rick ross and blandon? Please think
Yes!
Here is the problem Mal - I approach this from a different vantage point than you do. The same govt CIA that could not get OBL, screwed up the Bay of Pigs, screwed up the intel on Sadam, etc etc, is not all of a sudden ging to become a criminal mastermind in this CT.
Its the same arguments I have wih the 911 CT'ers.
-
well just cause cocaine was in the area dint mean anyone had to do it, just like how just because someone has a computer doesn't mean they have to commit id theft. Like Kazan said, it all is a personal choice. RR didn't drive down to the hood and make them snort and shoot it, clinton didn't drive to anyones house and make them look at child porn.
-
Yes!
Here is the problem Mal - I approach this from a different vantage point than you do. The same govt CIA that could not get OBL, screwed up the Bay of Pigs, screwed up the intel on Sadam, etc etc, is not all of a sudden ging to become a criminal mastermind in this CT.
Its the same arguments I have wih the 911 CT'ers.
my argument is the government know exactly what its doing..
-
just because your car may 150mph does that mean you have to go 150mph? and when you get pulled over are you gona give the excuse that your cars speedometer goes up to 150 so you had to do it? and expect that cop to believe you?
-
my argument is the government know exactly what its doing..
Thats' where we disagree.
-
just because your car may 150mph does that mean you have to go 150mph? and when you get pulled over are you gona give the excuse that your cars speedometer goes up to 150 so you had to do it? and expect that cop to believe you?
who are you.. whats your background. introduce yourself..
-
I am just someone who doesnt walk around with blinders on thats all.
-
I am just someone who doesnt walk around with blinders on thats all.
lol.. A/S/L?..lmao jk thats gay..
-
Firing those union goons at the Airlines was a great move.
That was an IDIOTIC move as it jeopardized the safety of the passengers as well as killed many of the BIG airlines that no longer exist in america. Remember TWA, Piedmont, Eastern and so many others....they no longer exist...THANK YOU REAGAN.
Now it is understood why you are KNEEPADDING...you are on your knees before Reagan simply because in your eyes he did a good thing by attacking the unions. That attack cost thousands their jobs and now your airline industry is being manned by people who are not making much more money than a bartender. Don't you remember the lengthy speech Sullenberger (not spelled correctly) made after safely landing his plane in the Hudson. He spoke before your senate on the horrendous condition in the airline industry and the SEVERE problems with everything from maintenance to inexperienced pilots. Many senators walked out of the meeting when he began talking of the loss of benefits (he had no pension at all), severely decreased salary, overworked pilots like himself and the inability for pilots to maintain any living standard being that they had no security without contracts while the CEOs and executive management luxuriated themselves with bonuses and benefits.
-
Just flew to NC and back for $130 - cant beat that. Driving would probably cost more.
-
and it got pumped into black neighborhoods which fuled the crack shit.. which fueled the gang shit and the arms race in the hood..but im sure youre all good with that..
White... ill prob laugh at that for years
Dude you are almost as idiotic as three with that opinion. Cocaine like all other drugs goes through THE WHITE NEIGHBORHOODS. 90 percent of all drugs that enter into america hits the REAL INNER CITY GHETTO called the white community. It is all too well known. You even had your DEA admit that fact as well as Michael Ruppert who exposed the drug trafficking by the CIA, FBI, local Police. Mr Ruppert was a former CIA agent as well as LAPD. He became so sick of the corruption that he became a whistle blower. He was threatened with death from the CIA and LAPD, but because he was so public with his claim and many supported him neither the CIA or LAPD dared kill or harm him out of fear of being implicated in what he said. A youtube search on Michael Ruppert will show him meeting with FBI, CIA and LAPD officials where he exposed the whole matter before the news cameras.
So far as crack goes that drug was in the WHITE COMMUNITY many years before whites took it into the Black and Hispanic communities... and even with that still 90 percent of crack was and is still in use in the white communities. Now you have SALVIA, CRYSTAL METH, OXYCOTIN, VICODIN, and a host of devastatingly addictive drugs flooding the white community all over america. If you are denying that it is because you are an abuser and wish to deflect attention to another group/race.
THe so called gangs particularly in the Hispanic communities are no more than arms of the local police forces which are used to terrorize communities and to traffic drugs and promote prostitution...again something long done in the white communities.
-
Dude you are almost as idiotic as three with that opinion. Cocaine like all other drugs goes through THE WHITE NEIGHBORHOODS. 90 percent of all drugs that enter into america hits the REAL INNER CITY GHETTO called the white community. It is all too well known. You even had your DEA admit that fact as well as Michael Ruppert who exposed the drug trafficking by the CIA, FBI, local Police. Mr Ruppert was a former CIA agent as well as LAPD. He became so sick of the corruption that he became a whistle blower. He was threatened with death from the CIA and LAPD, but because he was so public with his claim and many supported him neither the CIA or LAPD dared kill or harm him out of fear of being implicated in what he said. A youtube search on Michael Ruppert will show him meeting with FBI, CIA and LAPD officials where he exposed the whole matter before the news cameras.
So far as crack goes that drug was in the WHITE COMMUNITY many years before whites took it into the Black and Hispanic communities... and even with that still 90 percent of crack was and is still in use in the white communities. Now you have SALVIA, CRYSTAL METH, OXYCOTIN, VICODIN, and a host of devastatingly addictive drugs flooding the white community all over america. If you are denying that it is because you are an abuser and wish to deflect attention to another group/race.
THe so called gangs particularly in the Hispanic communities are no more than arms of the local police forces which are used to terrorize communities and to traffic drugs and promote prostitution...again something long done in the white communities.
How the hell do you remember all this stuff?
-
Did Reagan create aids too?
AIDS magically appeared during REAGANS term as president
AIDS was created by the US military as a SOFT KILL weapon. It was originally started in Europe...NOT AFRICA. And was spread from europe into america and then america put the virus into the small pox vaccine and shipped it off to India, Africa, France and South America. England first broke the news that something in the american vaccine was killing people and stopped its use. Soon France did the same. By then many were exposed through the vaccine in Africa and India and South America. You should acquaint yourself with Dr. Leonard Horowitz a microbiologist who wrote books like EMERGING VIRUSES where he exposes the US biological warfare program and exposes the creation of AIDS, West Nile, Ebola and a host of supposed NEW diseases.
-
its true.... cocke was way before crack... it did start with the rich folks. crack was a nice way to water it down and stretch it out and get a whole new buying audience.
-
How the hell do you remember all this stuff?
It's not hard when she conjures up the majority of the shit she posts right out of thin air. Ask yourself why she never defend herself in any thread she's called out on? She usually relies on most people not caring enough to bother digging around. The second someone does she's gone from the thread.
-
How the hell do you remember all this stuff?
Multiple reasons. I worked part time in substance abuse before getting completely involved in the health insurance field. With that exposure was a lot of learning not only from the two industries I was and am involved in, but also from a tremendous amount of documentaries I have seen over this time. I don't bother with a lot of sports, sitcoms or nonsense entertainment...TOO DISTRACTING. And am quite glad I have learned what has and is going on in america and Europe (both of whom have the same problems) and can not be deceived by those wishing to push their own agendas of deception and blame.
-
Dude you are almost as idiotic as three with that opinion. Cocaine like all other drugs goes through THE WHITE NEIGHBORHOODS. 90 percent of all drugs that enter into america hits the REAL INNER CITY GHETTO called the white community. It is all too well known. You even had your DEA admit that fact as well as Michael Ruppert who exposed the drug trafficking by the CIA, FBI, local Police. Mr Ruppert was a former CIA agent as well as LAPD. He became so sick of the corruption that he became a whistle blower. He was threatened with death from the CIA and LAPD, but because he was so public with his claim and many supported him neither the CIA or LAPD dared kill or harm him out of fear of being implicated in what he said. A youtube search on Michael Ruppert will show him meeting with FBI, CIA and LAPD officials where he exposed the whole matter before the news cameras.
So far as crack goes that drug was in the WHITE COMMUNITY many years before whites took it into the Black and Hispanic communities... and even with that still 90 percent of crack was and is still in use in the white communities. Now you have SALVIA, CRYSTAL METH, OXYCOTIN, VICODIN, and a host of devastatingly addictive drugs flooding the white community all over america. If you are denying that it is because you are an abuser and wish to deflect attention to another group/race.
THe so called gangs particularly in the Hispanic communities are no more than arms of the local police forces which are used to terrorize communities and to traffic drugs and promote prostitution...again something long done in the white communities.
Dont be an idiot.. you have no clue who you are talking to or what yo are talking about.. I was born and raised on the turf where it went down I know Cornell Ward. Rick Ross. I know how the drug flowed.. dont come on here and assume to know what you are talking about.. i stalled your ass out because you caught heat from everyone else on here and you stayed away from my posts. but you got to be by in large the biggest dumbass on here.. i actually thought you were joking with half your posts.
-
I'm just saying - the way you belt out these posts, one wonders how you remember all this stuff or where it comes from.
-
Dont be an idiot.. you have no clue who you are talking to or what yo are talking about.. I was born and raised on the turf where it went down I know Cornell Ward. Rick Ross. I know how the drug flowed.. dont come on here and assume to know what you are talking about.. i stalled your ass out because you caught heat from everyone else on here and you stayed away from my posts. but you got to be by in large the biggest dumbass on here.. i actually thought you were joking with half your posts.
Your babbling means absolutely nothing... Option D must mean DUMBASS because you sure live up to the standard.
Because someone was so called RAISED ON THE TURF means absolutely NOTHING. How many people are clueless to what is happening in their own neighborhood, city, state and even country?...MANY. Sadly because of the DENIAL many americans live in, the obvious walks right pass them. Rather than trying to dismiss or ridicule what I said, you should take the advice and research further and be educated by the information you will find out by doing so.
-
I'm just saying - the way you belt out these posts, one wonders how you remember all this stuff or where it comes from.
it comes from his head... true story
-
Your babbling means absolutely nothing... Option D must mean DUMBASS because you sure live up to the standard.
Because someone was so called RAISED ON THE TURF means absolutely NOTHING. How many people are clueless to what is happening in their own neighborhood, city, state and even country?...MANY. Sadly because of the DENIAL many americans live in, the obvious walks right pass them. Rather than trying to dismiss or ridicule what I said, you should take the advice and research further and be educated by the information you will find out by doing so.
Fam... being raised where i was raised gives me a closer look.. being around the people i was around gave me a view that others didnt. I dont claim to know about a lot.. but crack and its effect, that was something i was very close too.. so its tough to hear someone who is looking from a far... i respect that you think you read something somewhere what happened... but its different
-
Fam... being raised where i was raised gives me a closer look.. being around the people i was around gave me a view that others didnt. I dont claim to know about a lot.. but crack and its effect, that was something i was very close too.. so its tough to hear someone who is looking from a far... i respect that you think you read something somewhere what happened... but its different
Wait a minute - how old are you Mal?
-
Wait a minute - how old are you Mal?
28 now.. 29 in may
-
28 now.. 29 in may
So when this was allegedely all going on you were a toddler right?
-
So when this was allegedely all going on you were a toddler right?
crack sales in LA were a part of my life.. i was born in 82 and i went to Atl in 2000.. that whole time its been around..the dealers and the users.. please please please dont come on and try to discredit what im saying because of my age.. Like i said.. i personally know Rick Ross.. i personally know Cornell Ward.. i spoke with him twice today....
So if thats where you are going.. can it.. because you have no clue what youre talking about
-
who are you.. whats your background. introduce yourself.. I am a partial business owner in 3 separate businesses. I have traveled this country from top to bottom and east to west for almost 20 years. And seen first hand how every presidents policies and ideas have influenced communities, white , black , Asian Mexican, you name it, rich , poor , middle class all of them. And i have seen drug infested trailer parks full of white people , just as bad and often as i have seen drug run hoods. that why I don't really buy into what you are saying about RR. RR didn't go into the hoods and make these black people do drugs, they chose to. Just like nobody went into the drug infested trailer parks and make them do drugs. I grew up near Chicano park by San Diego, which is strait ghetto and i chose not to do drugs. just like how everyone else makes their own choices
-
Fam... being raised where i was raised gives me a closer look.. being around the people i was around gave me a view that others didnt. I dont claim to know about a lot.. but crack and its effect, that was something i was very close too.. so its tough to hear someone who is looking from a far... i respect that you think you read something somewhere what happened... but its different
Here is where you need to check your facts. I am not foreign to america ...I just decided not to continue living there. Originally from South Carolina, lived in New York, Philadelphia and Maryland and attended Temple University, so you are not talking to someone who is NOT in the know. You nor anyone else is gonna pull the wool over my eyes. i know all too well just how out of touch american are with their reality...sadly. Many are still clueless about politics/government of their own country, don't know what is happening in their own communities, have not traveled anywhere outside of america and therefore don't know the rest of the world other than what is reported on their TVs and their print media, still believe america is a beacon to the world yet complain furiously about the injustices there. No one expects perfection in their country, but come on.... the grossness and miscarriage of justice from the US government right down to truth about various races, religions, Cultures etc is profoundly ridiculous is america. And those same differences and warped opinions are what will become the race, religious and political war that will soon overtake america. Look at Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, Iraq, Oman, Yemen etc etc... It will all soon be in america.
-
who are you.. whats your background. introduce yourself.. I am a partial business owner in 3 separate businesses. I have traveled this country from top to bottom and east to west for almost 20 years. And seen first hand how every presidents policies and ideas have influenced communities, white , black , Asian Mexican, you name it, rich , poor , middle class all of them. And i have seen drug infested trailer parks full of white people , just as bad and often as i have seen drug run hoods. that why I don't really buy into what you are saying about RR. RR didn't go into the hoods and make these black people do drugs, they chose to. Just like nobody went into the drug infested trailer parks and make them do drugs. I grew up near Chicano park by San Diego, which is strait ghetto and i chose not to do drugs. just like how everyone else makes their own choices
I can dig it.. i like to know who im talking to
-
So when this was allegedely all going on you were a toddler right?
Webb's reporting generated fierce controversy, and the San Jose Mercury News backed away from the story, effectively ending Webb's career as a mainstream media journalist. In 2004, Webb was found dead from two gunshot wounds to the head, which the coroner's office judged a suicide. Though he was criticized and outcast from the mainstream journalism community, his reportage was eventually vindicated as many of his findings have since been validated: since Webb's death, both the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune have defended his "Dark Alliance" series. Renowned journalist and former Webb colleague Al Giordano states that "the CIA’s internal investigation by Inspector General Frederick Hitz vindicated much of Gary’s reporting" and observes that despite the campaign against Webb, "the government eventually admitted to more than Gary had initially reported" over the years.
so before you talk crazy... read up
-
No one expects perfection in their country, but come on.... the grossness and miscarriage of justice from the US government right down to truth about various races, religions, Cultures etc is profoundly ridiculous is america. And those same differences and warped opinions are what will become the race, religious and political war that will soon overtake america. Look at Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, Iraq, Oman, Yemen etc etc... It will all soon be in america.
Rarely do I agree with sma but i think this is spot on. And also many of the people in this country that bitch and complain about every fucking thing under the sun, should really spend some time outside of America.
-
I can dig it.. i like to know who im talking to
my name is James bro!! Good to meet you.
-
Webb's reporting generated fierce controversy, and the San Jose Mercury News backed away from the story, effectively ending Webb's career as a mainstream media journalist. In 2004, Webb was found dead from two gunshot wounds to the head, which the coroner's office judged a suicide. Though he was criticized and outcast from the mainstream journalism community, his reportage was eventually vindicated as many of his findings have since been validated: since Webb's death, both the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune have defended his "Dark Alliance" series. Renowned journalist and former Webb colleague Al Giordano states that "the CIA’s internal investigation by Inspector General Frederick Hitz vindicated much of Gary’s reporting" and observes that despite the campaign against Webb, "the government eventually admitted to more than Gary had initially reported" over the years.
so before you talk crazy... read up
Link andsources?
-
my name is James bro!! Good to meet you.
You too bro.. Malcolm is my name.. but i go by Option D round these here parts.. you dont want to know why
-
Here is where you need to check your facts. I am not foreign to america ...I just decided not to continue living there. Originally from South Carolina, lived in New York, Philadelphia and Maryland and attended Temple University, so you are not talking to someone who is NOT in the know. You nor anyone else is gonna pull the wool over my eyes. i know all too well just how out of touch american are with their reality...sadly. Many are still clueless about politics/government of their own country, don't know what is happening in their own communities, have not traveled anywhere outside of america and therefore don't know the rest of the world other than what is reported on their TVs and their print media, still believe america is a beacon to the world yet complain furiously about the injustices there. No one expects perfection in their country, but come on.... the grossness and miscarriage of justice from the US government right down to truth about various races, religions, Cultures etc is profoundly ridiculous is america. And those same differences and warped opinions are what will become the race, religious and political war that will soon overtake america. Look at Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, Iraq, Oman, Yemen etc etc... It will all soon be in america.
You've been caught out on so many lies here that anything you say is immediately rendered as bullshit. Don't blame anyone but yourself. You getting caught out on most of the trash lies that you post and then your refusal to debate anything after being called out on them is why you're a joke on here.
You're no American. And you're definitely not college educated, either.
Mal's running circles around you in this thread....par the course for any thread you open that suckhole of yours in.
-
Link andsources?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb
Statement of CIA Inspector General to The House Committee On Intelligence - March 16, 1998
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/CIA_Inspector_General_Frederick_P._Hitz
LA times article
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/aug/18/opinion/oe-schou18
The LA Times piece criticizes its own unfair portrayal of Webb -- "we dropped the ball" -- and notes that "spurred on by Webb’s story,
the CIA conducted an internal investigation that acknowledged in March 1998 that the agency had covered up Contra drug trafficking for more than a decade" and concludes that "History will tell if Webb receives the credit he’s due for prodding the CIA to acknowledge its shameful collaboration with drug dealers. Meanwhile, the journalistic establishment is only beginning to recognize that the controversy over “Dark Alliance” had more to do with poor editing than bad reporting [on Webb's part]".[14]
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb
Statement of CIA Inspector General to The House Committee On Intelligence - March 16, 1998
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/CIA_Inspector_General_Frederick_P._Hitz
LA times article
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/aug/18/opinion/oe-schou18
The LA Times piece criticizes its own unfair portrayal of Webb -- "we dropped the ball" -- and notes that "spurred on by Webb’s story,
the CIA conducted an internal investigation that acknowledged in March 1998 that the agency had covered up Contra drug trafficking for more than a decade" and concludes that "History will tell if Webb receives the credit he’s due for prodding the CIA to acknowledge its shameful collaboration with drug dealers. Meanwhile, the journalistic establishment is only beginning to recognize that the controversy over “Dark Alliance” had more to do with poor editing than bad reporting [on Webb's part]".[14]
Sorry - you have to do better than that. Show me NYT, WAPO, WSJ or something like that. Wikipedia is far from Gospel.
-
So what is it called now when our president knows and has reports everyday that there are more drugs being traffic ed into this country than ever before from the south, and he does nothing except gives the OK for Mexican trucks to go across the boarder unchecked?
-
Sorry - you have to do better than that. Show me NYT, WAPO, WSJ or something like that. Wikipedia is far from Gospel.
One is from the LA times.. and one is the actual transcripts from the Investegation..
3.^ a b U.S. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. Drugs, Law Enforcement, and Foreign Policy. (S. Rpt.100-165). Washington: Government Printing Office, 1988. [1]PDF (9.47 MiB) (9.5MB)
Published on Thursday, January 6, 2005 by the Chicago Tribune
Dangers of Questioning Government Actions
by Don Wycliff
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0106-34.htm
-
So what is it called now when our president knows and has reports everyday that there are more drugs being traffic ed into this country than ever before from the south, and he does nothing except gives the OK for Mexican trucks to go across the boarder unchecked?
Its called your racist and wing nut if you point that pout.
-
Its called your racist and wing nut if you point that pout.
so now you can go ahead and get some reading done on and and form an educated opinion.. dont just disregard it because you want to challenge me on a topic..
Unlike you.. i wait till shit has been researched and confirmed before i just spouting shit..
-
so now you can go ahead and get some reading done on and and form an educated opinion.. dont just disregard it because you want to challenge me on a topic..
Unlike you.. i wait till shit has been researched and confirmed before i just spouting shit..
No, I am looking in to this, but common dreams is not a credible source at all. Like I said, WAPO looked in to this and claims the so called evidence is flimsy at best.
-
-
anyone watching HBO? They are absolutely crucifying Reagan.
-
He won 49 states for a reason.
-
He won 49 states for a reason.
his competition wasn't exactly stellar either.
-
It's a stupid argument. Poor people with no work ethic and no brains become addicted to drugs at a higher rate than everyone else. In black areas with lots of poor people (kind of a redundant characterization) crack cocaine is the order of the day. In rural white areas with lots of poor people, meth is king. In both cases, addicts will steal, kill and endanger the lives of everyone in the community for a fix. Making this a racial issue is a cop out so blacks can blame Ronald Regan for the ineptitude of the proud Nubian people.
See, many blacks are also of the same mindset (shared by Neo-Cons and castrated liberals which is interesting) that "Aint no poppy field up in Harlem, aint no coca leaves in da ghetto". So the argument goes that if people in America stop using drugs, the drug business becomes less lucrative and poor people will stop selling drugs. Neo-cons make that idiotic argument with respect to drug users indirectly funding terrorism. Liberal filth makes the same argument about Mexico. "Oh Mexico would be a Utopia if it werent for greedy Americans taking drugs!"
All of these arguments are hogwash. It's human nature to want to feel good and take drugs. Everywhere in the world people get high. Even in countries where drug trafficking a few bags of weed is a death sentence, people find a way to get high. You will only eliminate recreational drug use by eliminating humanity and eliminating the monetary system.
Addiction may in fact be a disease, but there are physical addictions ( heroin) and pscyhological addictions (cocaine). There are levels of addiction and different factors which increase the likelihood of becoming addicted. Either way, it all starts with choice and it all ends with willpower.
Nice post
-
-
hahaha Regan started the "War on Drugs" hahahahahahah Government Welfare at its finest
-
And your messiah obama conitinues it and says its not a failure as late as this past week.
-
There you go...i told you, you do that.... admit a repug does something.. and you say "but but but...Obama..did.". ;)
Yes its bad when regan Introduced it and its bad that it continues now..
apparently you cant help youself... "but but but..."
Palin writes on her hand "but but but..obama teleprompter"
hahahahahah
-
Reagan was far from perfect and did a few things that sucked. However - the facts don't lie , moron , he was one of the best potus' we had in the 20th century, far greater than the messiah.
He inspired confidence for businesses to grow and expand and hire people. By now - reagns recovery was producing 7 percent gdp growth and tons of jobs.
Now - its debt, more debt, more debt and regulation, and few burger jobs sprinkled about.
-
There you go...i told you, you do that.... admit a repug does something.. and you say "but but but...Obama..did.". ;)
The Dems have been doing this since the day Obama took office.
-
I don't agree with the drug war and don't agree w everything he did, but on balance he was a great potus.
Most blacks hated reagan because they felt they were being insulted by the welfare queen stuff.
Tough shit - most people don't give a flying shit anymore.
-
hahaha Regan started the "War on Drugs" hahahahahahah Government Welfare at its finest
No, Nixon did.
-
I don't agree with the drug war and don't agree w everything he did, but on balance he was a great potus.
Most blacks hated reagan because they felt they were being insulted by the welfare queen stuff.
Tough shit - most people don't give a flying shit anymore.
This was published in 1988 by the Libertarian Ludwig von Mises Institute, it shows that Reagan was the most protectionist president of recent times:
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=489
Ronald Reagan: Protectionist
by Sheldon L. Richman
Mark Shields, a columnist for the Washington Post, recently wrote of President Reagan's "blind devotion to the doctrine of free trade." If President Reagan has a devotion to free trade, it must be blind because he has been way off the mark. In fact, he has been the most protectionist president since Herbert Hoover.
Admittedly, his rhetoric has been confusing. In 1986 Reagan said, "Our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets. I recognize. . . the inescapable conclusion that all of history has taught: the freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides of human progress and peace among nations."
But he advocated protectionism early in his 1980 campaign, saying to the U.S. auto industry: "Japan is part of the problem. This is where government can be legitimately involved. That is, to convince the Japanese in one way or another that, in their own interests, that deluge of cars must be slowed while our industry gets back on its feet..."
When he imposed a 100% tariff on selected Japanese electronic products for allegedly "dumping" computer memory chips, he said he did it "to enforce the principles of free and fair trade." And Treasury Secretary James A. Baker has boasted about the protectionist record: Reagan "has granted more import relief to U.S. industry than any of his predecessors in more than half a century."
It's true that the administration has fought with protectionists in Congress, but only over who should have the power to restrict trade. As Reagan put it, "It's better policy to allow for presidents—me or my successors—to have options for dealing with trade problems."
Defenders of the Reagan policies will say that he has engaged in protectionism to open foreign markets. But they cannot deny that one-quarter of all imports are today restricted, a 100% increase over 1980.
Nor are foreign markets more open. The Reagan administration talks about exporting free enterprise, but in fact it has exported economic intervention to Japan, South Korea, and other nations.
When the United States imposes import quotas or pressures a foreign government to do so, a compulsory cartel must arise in the exporting country, since its government will assign the quotas among private firms and administer the system. Ronald Reagan has forced nations that export textiles, apparel, sugar, steel, and other products to cartelize these industries.
Can trade restrictions open foreign markets? The use of government power to regulate trade is more likely to produce conflict of which American consumers and exporters become the victims. It is also naive, because it ignores the political pressure to maintain existing restrictions. The United States, for example, could impose new limits on Japanese autos to force Japan to accept beef exports from Iowa. But, as syndicated columnist Stephen Chapman asks, "Does anyone believe that when Japan starts buying Iowa beef, Ford and Chrysler will stop trying to keep out Japanese cars?"
Considering our own intricate web of trade restrictions, it is sanctimonious for the U.S. government to lecture others about opening their markets. It might be in a better position to make demand~ if it first stripped our economy of those restrictions. But wouldn't we be giving up bargaining chips? Yes. But the objective is not to negotiate; it is to enjoy the benefits of productivity and the international division of labor. The bonanza of unconditional free trade would be so great for the United States that it would set a good example for the rest of the world.
The value of free trade does not depend on open markets abroad. It is good for the nation that practices it, regardless of what others do. The purpose of an economic system is not to produce jobs or sell products abroad. Those are means. The end is satisfaction of our material wants. Free trade is good because our standard of living depends on how easily we can get the products and services we want.
One is led to ask: with free-traders like this, who needs
protectionists?
The administration has thus far:
* Forced Japan to accept restraints on auto exports;
* Tightened considerably the quotas on imported sugar;
* Negotiated to increase the restrictiveness of the Multifiber Arrangement governing trade in textiles and apparel;
* Required 18 countries, including Brazil, Spain, South
* Korea, Japan, Mexico, South Africa, Finland, Australia, and the European Community, to accept "voluntary restraint agreements" that reduce their steel imports to the United States;
* Imposed a 45% duty on Japanese motorcycles for the benefit of Harley Davidson, which admitted that superior
* Japanese management was the cause of its problems;
* Raised tariffs on Canadian lumber and cedar shingles;
* Forced the Japanese into an agreement to control the price of computer memory chips;
* Removed third-world countries on several occasions from the duty-free import program for developing nations;
* Pressed Japan to force its automakers to buy more American-made parts;
* Demanded that Taiwan, West Germany, Japan, and Switzerland restrain their exports of machine tools;
* Accused the Japanese of dumping roller bearings on grounds that the price did not rise to cover a fall in the value of the yen;
* Accused the Japanese of dumping forklift trucks and color picture tubes;
* Extended quotas on imported clothes pins;
* Failed to ask Congress to end the ban on the export of Alaskan oil and timber cut from federal lands;
* Redefined dumping so domestic firms can more easily charge foreign competitors with unfair trade practices;
* Beefed-up the Export-Import Bank, an institution dedicated to distorting the American economy at the expense of the American people in order to artificially promote exports of eight large corporations.
The World Bank estimates that import restrictions in 1984 had the same effect as a 66% income tax surcharge on America's poorest citizens. Less obvious is the harm to American producers, who lose exports and pay more for capital goods because of protectionism. For example, everyone, including the beleaguered American auto industry, has to pay more for steel because of the Reagan administration's restrictions on imports. Even the steel industry is hurt because artificially high prices stimulate the search for alternative materials.
President Reagan missed a unique opportunity to begin freeing the American economy from the shackles of trade restrictions. He need not have given the American people a technical lesson in economics. He could have said that free trade requires no more justification than domestic economic freedom; indeed, it requires no more justification than the traditional American values of a humane and open society.
-------
Sheldon Richman is now editor of The Freeman, published by the Foundation for Economic Education. Send him mail or comments
-
I would argue that JFK was our last "real" president. He had to be erased though since he was going to end the Federal Reserve and didn't want to go to war in Vietnam.
-
(http://books.gigaimg.com/avaxhome/73/9d/00149d73.jpeg)
http://depositfiles.com/en/files/siysgjh94 (http://depositfiles.com/en/files/siysgjh94)
-
No, Nixon did.
Right.. but who took it to the next level and threw shit tons of money at it...
Let the CIA and military get in on the fund.. I call that government Welfare
-
BUMP for D Day
-
Reagan was far from perfect and did a few things that sucked. However - the facts don't lie , moron , he was one of the best potus' we had in the 20th century, far greater than the messiah.
He inspired confidence for businesses to grow and expand and hire people. By now - reagns recovery was producing 7 percent gdp growth and tons of jobs.
Now - its debt, more debt, more debt and regulation, and few burger jobs sprinkled about.
Dude ushered in the Crack Cocaine Epidemic. Read Dark alliance...Gary Webb.. The one that made the connection. Oh shit you know he is dead now... shot "himself" twice in the head..
Now i know you dont have any knowledge of this, but just read up on it before you go all 8th grader on me and type dumb ass moronic sarcastic gay shit and put stupid ass rolley eyes.
I dont doubt that America was at its highest pride point in patriotism and he handled the cold war. But he did raise taxes. He did raise the Federal Work force by 60k and expanded the budget while yelling "small government"
He had a 165 billion bailout program. Im not sure what that translates to in todays terms.
Im sure he raised the defecit from like 700bil to something like 2.5-3trillion
Meanwhile, following that initial tax cut, Reagan actually ended up raising taxes - eleven times. That's according to former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Reagan friend who co-chaired President Obama's fiscal commission that last year offered a deficit reduction proposal.
"Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes," historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan's diaries, told NPR. "He knew that it was necessary at times. And so there's a false mythology out there about Reagan as this conservative president who came in and just cut taxes and trimmed federal spending in a dramatic way. It didn't happen that way. It's false"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20030729-503544.html
Im not saying he was a bad president. i was like 2.. but the facts and the myth are not adding up...
All presidents suck.. thats the bottom line.. Except clinton.. Dude Rocked.. then Newt tried to get him kicked out for gettin a BJ..
-
People offer me drugs and nasty shit all the time - doesnt mean i induge in it.
and please - ask anyone who remembers the 1980's - it was far better compared to the 70's Carter I era. The only issue now is do we get a Reagan 2.0 after Carter 2.0
-
Yep Clinton & Reagan, the last 2 presidents I didn't hate. HAHAHAHAH
-
I would argue that JFK was our last "real" president. He had to be erased though since he was going to end the Federal Reserve and didn't want to go to war in Vietnam.
JFK is greatly overrated. Only 2 things he is known for his presidency. Bay of Pigs and turning the White House into a whore house.
-
People offer me drugs and nasty shit all the time - doesnt mean i induge in it.
and please - ask anyone who remembers the 1980's - it was far better compared to the 70's Carter I era. The only issue now is do we get a Reagan 2.0 after Carter 2.0
I just stated some facts... i sure the 80s were good for some especially since we we creating an entirely new industry with the Tech age. But Again.. Dude raised taxes to fund medicare and social Security... ... am i right
-
JFK is greatly overrated. Only 2 things he is known for his presidency. Bay of Pigs and turning the White House into a whore house.
I didnt want to sound like an asshole.. but im inclined to agree.. I would say his brother and the DOJ did more to progress the country in race relations and civil rights.....
I always wonder how scary i could have been during the CMC... i heard there were like Bomb Drills in schools in anticipation of a missile attack
-
I didnt want to sound like an asshole.. but im inclined to agree.. I would say his brother and the DOJ did more to progress the country in race relations and civil rights.....
I always wonder how scary i could have been during the CMC... i heard there were like Bomb Drills in schools in anticipation of a missile attack
Duck and Cover. LMAO.
-
Duck and Cover. LMAO.
Im just saying.. i wasnt alive.. but i saw videos.. muthafuckas were in class jumpin under desks and what not.. i would just move to iceland
-
Right.. but who took it to the next level and threw shit tons of money at it...
Let the CIA and military get in on the fund.. I call that government Welfare
The CIA was already laundering drug money for Vietnam in the 70's. Reagan upped it yes, but the idea was older.
-
The CIA was already laundering drug money for Vietnam in the 70's. Reagan upped it yes, but the idea was older.
Ill give you that.. but i didnt hear about the laundering of the drug money until the crack thing
-
Ill give you that.. but i didnt hear about the laundering of the drug money until the crack thing
You mean until you started smoking it yourself? ??? ??? ???
-
Ill give you that.. but i didnt hear about the laundering of the drug money until the crack thing
It started in the 70's when they helped to transport heroine throughout the region.
-
It started in the 70's when they helped to transport heroine throughout the region.
OHHHHHHHH you mean in an un Official Capacity....
-
OHHHHHHHH you mean in an un Official Capacity....
Do you blame your crack and drug abuse on Reagan?
-
OHHHHHHHH you mean in an un Official Capacity....
Or maybe official.. Sure the Govt wouldn't give up that revenue stream.. Damn near like free money that isnt counted by congress and used for bullshit
-
OHHHHHHHH you mean in an un Official Capacity....
CIA black operations are never official.
-
CIA black operations are never official.
ever see that movie with Damon and joe pesci?
-
ever see that movie with Damon and joe pesci?
Which one?
-
Which one?
The one about the founding of the CIA? Good Shepard - good movie.
-
The one about the founding of the CIA? Good Shepard - good movie.
I'll have a look. Thanks
-
I'll have a look. Thanks
Long - but really good movie. About the start of the CIA.
-
Bump.
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Washington Post Reporter: Reagan Was ‘The Quintessential Leader’
CNSNews.com ^ | 6/10/11 | Terence P. Jeffrey
Posted on June 11, 2011 7:09:34 AM EDT by rhema
Del Quentin Wilber, a Washington Post reporter and author of Rawhide Down: The Near Assassination of Ronald Reagan, says that after studying Reagan’s character and the actions Reagan took when his life was in imminent danger, he came to the conclusion that the 40th president of the United States was “the quintessential leader.”
“I found him to be kind of the quintessential leader,” Wilber said in an interview with CNSNews.com’s Online With Terry Jeffrey. “I found that the portrayal of him in the media at the time and even today as someone who just read what was put in front of him like a script was not true.”
Wilber, who reviewed historical documents and recordings and interviewed more than 125 witnesses to reconstruct a narrative of the day Reagan was shot, believes Americans were given a unique view of Reagan’s true character and courage in the way he responded to the attempt on his life.
“As he’s being wheeled into surgery, he sees Baker, Meese and Deaver, his three top advisers, and he says: “Who’s minding the store?” Because, you know, he’s kind of poking fun of himself with his hands-off management style with the troika,” said Wilber.
But Reagan had an even better joke for the surgeons who would cut open his chest to find the would-be assassin’s bullet and stop the internal bleeding. “He gets into surgery,” said Wilber, “he gets up on an elbow, dramatically takes off the oxygen mask, and says: ‘I hope you’re all Republicans.’ Puts it on and goes back to sleep.”
Even more remarkably, Wilber reports that Reagan actually used the hope-you’re-all-Republicans line more than once at the hospital before being anaesthetized for surgery. He used it first in the emergency room on Secret Service agent Jerry Parr and again in the operating room to the surgeons. Wilber interviewed multiple eyewitnesses who testified to Reagan’s use of wit at these moments as he lay wounded and facing the possibility of death.
“He’s lying in the ER, oxygen mask on, he sees Jerry Parr. And he had tried to do some jokes,” says Wilber. “He says to Jerry: ‘I hope they’re all Republicans.’”
“And Jerry Parr looks down: Uh, huh,” said Wilber. “Jerry doesn’t remember quite if he smiled or not because, frankly, Jerry Par is going out of his mind: Okay, this guy just got shot, and he is trying to protect him, and he’s cracking a joke.
“And, I wasn’t sure if Jerry was correct, frankly,” said Wilber. But then an ER nurse and technician told Wilber the same story.
“He said it,” said Wilber. “I interviewed a nurse: Did Reagan say anything? She’s in the ER. Did Reagan say anything? Oh yeah: ‘I hope they’re all Republicans.’ What? A technician said he said the same thing. I go: Oh my God, Reagan said the line, and put it in his back pocket, and delivered it again.”
He also delivered a comforting witticism to First Lady Nancy Reagan when she was first allowed into the emergency room to see him.
“He sees his wife, Nancy Reagan, in the ER, and what’s the first thing he says? ‘Honey, I forgot to duck,’” said Wilber. “Okay, that’s a joke. He’s not crying or whining.”
Wilber believes that whether facing life-or-death surgery after an assassination attempt, dressing appropriately in the Oval Office, or making policy decisions, Reagan never lost sight of the fact that he had a moral responsibility as president of the United States to act in a way that did credit to the office.
“In everything he did, he never wanted to diminish the office,” said Wilber.
History, Wilber believes, will make a positive judgment on Reagan.
“I think Reagan will be viewed by historians as one of the probably more successful U.S. presidents over time in terms of getting his agenda through and his goals accomplished--whether they were accomplished after he left or not,” said Wilber.
“You know, he left office with the highest approval rating of any president,” said Wilber. “Now, he is looked at as having accomplished winning the Cold War, reducing the threat of nuclear war, altering the face of basically the entire Europe, changing the debate about taxes in this country--for it will never be the same again. He even helped save Social Security.”
Wilber knows that some people may find his assessment of Reagan surprising coming from a Washington Post reporter.
“People see me and say you’re a Washington Post guy, Del, and you’re writing about Ronald Reagan?” said Wilber. “And I say: Listen, journalists, I think, get an unfair needle stuck in us for being biased. I’m not biased. I approached this with wide open eyes; I knew nothing about it. I came to admire Ronald Reagan as a guy and as a leader. Do I agree with all of his policy positions? No, but who does with anybody? But I can judge him on his success, right. He was a huge success.”
-
Just got done reading the Reagan Diaries in his own words.
Anyone saying the man was an idiot is truly a moron.
-
heres a great one
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=365293.0;attach=401243;image)
Where is Obama in this picture? ???
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Washington Post Reporter: Reagan Was ‘The Quintessential Leader’
CNSNews.com ^ | 6/10/11 | Terence P. Jeffrey
Posted on June 11, 2011 7:09:34 AM EDT by rhema
Del Quentin Wilber, a Washington Post reporter and author of Rawhide Down: The Near Assassination of Ronald Reagan, says that after studying Reagan’s character and the actions Reagan took when his life was in imminent danger, he came to the conclusion that the 40th president of the United States was “the quintessential leader.”
“I found him to be kind of the quintessential leader,” Wilber said in an interview with CNSNews.com’s Online With Terry Jeffrey. “I found that the portrayal of him in the media at the time and even today as someone who just read what was put in front of him like a script was not true.”
Wilber, who reviewed historical documents and recordings and interviewed more than 125 witnesses to reconstruct a narrative of the day Reagan was shot, believes Americans were given a unique view of Reagan’s true character and courage in the way he responded to the attempt on his life.
“As he’s being wheeled into surgery, he sees Baker, Meese and Deaver, his three top advisers, and he says: “Who’s minding the store?” Because, you know, he’s kind of poking fun of himself with his hands-off management style with the troika,” said Wilber.
But Reagan had an even better joke for the surgeons who would cut open his chest to find the would-be assassin’s bullet and stop the internal bleeding. “He gets into surgery,” said Wilber, “he gets up on an elbow, dramatically takes off the oxygen mask, and says: ‘I hope you’re all Republicans.’ Puts it on and goes back to sleep.”
Even more remarkably, Wilber reports that Reagan actually used the hope-you’re-all-Republicans line more than once at the hospital before being anaesthetized for surgery. He used it first in the emergency room on Secret Service agent Jerry Parr and again in the operating room to the surgeons. Wilber interviewed multiple eyewitnesses who testified to Reagan’s use of wit at these moments as he lay wounded and facing the possibility of death.
“He’s lying in the ER, oxygen mask on, he sees Jerry Parr. And he had tried to do some jokes,” says Wilber. “He says to Jerry: ‘I hope they’re all Republicans.’”
“And Jerry Parr looks down: Uh, huh,” said Wilber. “Jerry doesn’t remember quite if he smiled or not because, frankly, Jerry Par is going out of his mind: Okay, this guy just got shot, and he is trying to protect him, and he’s cracking a joke.
“And, I wasn’t sure if Jerry was correct, frankly,” said Wilber. But then an ER nurse and technician told Wilber the same story.
“He said it,” said Wilber. “I interviewed a nurse: Did Reagan say anything? She’s in the ER. Did Reagan say anything? Oh yeah: ‘I hope they’re all Republicans.’ What? A technician said he said the same thing. I go: Oh my God, Reagan said the line, and put it in his back pocket, and delivered it again.”
He also delivered a comforting witticism to First Lady Nancy Reagan when she was first allowed into the emergency room to see him.
“He sees his wife, Nancy Reagan, in the ER, and what’s the first thing he says? ‘Honey, I forgot to duck,’” said Wilber. “Okay, that’s a joke. He’s not crying or whining.”
Wilber believes that whether facing life-or-death surgery after an assassination attempt, dressing appropriately in the Oval Office, or making policy decisions, Reagan never lost sight of the fact that he had a moral responsibility as president of the United States to act in a way that did credit to the office.
“In everything he did, he never wanted to diminish the office,” said Wilber.
History, Wilber believes, will make a positive judgment on Reagan.
“I think Reagan will be viewed by historians as one of the probably more successful U.S. presidents over time in terms of getting his agenda through and his goals accomplished--whether they were accomplished after he left or not,” said Wilber.
“You know, he left office with the highest approval rating of any president,” said Wilber. “Now, he is looked at as having accomplished winning the Cold War, reducing the threat of nuclear war, altering the face of basically the entire Europe, changing the debate about taxes in this country--for it will never be the same again. He even helped save Social Security.”
Wilber knows that some people may find his assessment of Reagan surprising coming from a Washington Post reporter.
“People see me and say you’re a Washington Post guy, Del, and you’re writing about Ronald Reagan?” said Wilber. “And I say: Listen, journalists, I think, get an unfair needle stuck in us for being biased. I’m not biased. I approached this with wide open eyes; I knew nothing about it. I came to admire Ronald Reagan as a guy and as a leader. Do I agree with all of his policy positions? No, but who does with anybody? But I can judge him on his success, right. He was a huge success.”
Free Republic is not a credible or factual news source. Its a internet forum full of mostly white supremacists. Why do you continue to put their garbage on these sites for instead of posting article from credible news sources
-
According to the documentary "Inside Job", all US presidents, from Reagan to Obama, have had a significant hand in wrecking the US and global economy.
-
Tuesday 05 July 2011
Telegraph.co.uk
Telegraph View
Remembering Ronald Reagan
________________________ ________________________ ________
Telegraph View: By the end of his second term in office, he had transformed the economy and helped bring the Soviet Union to its knees.
Former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Foreign Secretary William Hague at the unveiling of a statue to former US President Ronald Reagan in London today to mark 100 years since his birth Photo: PA By Telegraph View
Ronald Reagan, the centenary of whose birth fell earlier this year, yesterday became the third great American to be honoured by a statue in Grosvenor Square. Attending the ceremony, Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state, spoke of “a memorial and a commemoration of a glorious past but more importantly a call to an even more glorious future”. The reminder is apposite. In yesterday’s paper, Toby Harnden, our US editor, wrote that unprecedented uncertainty and self-doubt were clouding the Independence Day celebrations. The mood is not dissimilar to that when Reagan was sworn in as the 40th president in 1981. On the campaign trail, his answer to the failures of the Carter presidency was a pledge to restore “the great, confident roar of American progress and growth and optimism”. By the end of his second term in office, he had transformed the economy and, from a position of strength, helped bring the Soviet Union to its knees.
In that heady period, as in the darker days of the Second World War, close personal relations between the American president and the British prime minister played a crucial role. Just as Churchill and Roosevelt faced down one great tyranny of the 20th century, Reagan and Margaret Thatcher did the same to another; he identifying the USSR as an “evil empire”, she undermining it by her support for the Polish trade union movement Solidarity.
Ironically, the American embassy is planning to leave Mayfair, where Washington has had an official presence since the late 18th century, for Battersea. But the bronze triumvirate which it will leave behind – Roosevelt, Reagan and Eisenhower (who oversaw the D-Day landings from the square) – will be a permanent reminder in the heart of London of our shared history and the depth of our friendship.
-
05 July 2011 3:08 PM
The Missing US Ambassador at the feast for Ronald Reagan
http://politics.standard.co.uk/2011/07/the-missing-us-ambassador-at-the-feast-for-ronald-reagan.html
________________________ ________________________ _
Last night's Guildhall dinner in honour of Ronald Reagan's centenary was a truly glittering and warm occasion.
The British roasted lamb and the sunny Californian chardonnay evoked the close Anglo-US relationship of Reagan and Thatcher as much as the fine speeches by Condi Rice and William Hague.
But guests were left asking, where on earth was the American ambassador to London, Louis B Susman?
"Our ambassador should be here," said Lynn de Rothschild, the American entrepreneur who is married to Sir Evelyn de Rothschild and was one of Hillary Clinton's key fundraisers in 2008 as well as a supporter of several Republican presidential candidates. "This was an historic dinner to mark Reagan's centenary and to celebrate him as the man who ended the Cold War. What could not be more important?
"Why is our ambassador not here on Independence Day? No excuse. How is it that America is not represented in this room by our ambassador? It is appalling that no representative of our government is in this room. This has the feel of petty partisanship."
Ambassador Susman is, of course, a long-standing Democrat fundraiser, nicknamed the vaccuum cleaner for his skill at sucking donations out of the wealthy. And his efforts to fill Obama's campaign pockets was said by many to be his main qualification to come to London.
According to the US embassy spokesman: "Ambassador Susman was pleased to be invited to the dinner but was unable to attend."
He had however been at the unveiling of a statue of Reagan in Grosvenor Square earlier in the day, and hosted a generous breakfast for the entire VIP visiting party and the military band. So he cannot be accused of snubbing the Reagan centenary.
But he missed some cracking speeches and anecdotes. For more details see the Standard story here.
And where was he? The embassy won't say.
-
came into office with ~ 700 billion in debt and left with 3 trillion
raised taxes 11 times
raised taxes on social security and then borrowed the surplus
cut and ran from Lebanon after bombing of Marine based
had the most indictments/convictions in his administration of any POTUS prior to him
Iran/Contra
I'm sure I've missed a few things
-
came into office with ~ 700 billion in debt and left with 3 trillion
raised taxes 11 times
raised taxes on social security and then borrowed the surplus
cut and ran from Lebanon after bombing of Marine based
had the most indictments/convictions in his administration of any POTUS prior to him
Iran/Contra
I'm sure I've missed a few things
Yes you did -
Record job growth
Doubled $ $ $ to the treasury
Defeated communism
Beat inflation from Jimmuh carter
Are you arguing that RR should have started a land war in Lebanon? isnt that what you clowns attacked Bush for?
-
Yes you did -
Record job growth
Doubled $ $ $ to the treasury
Defeated communism
Beat inflation from Jimmuh carter
Are you arguing that RR should have started a land war in Lebanon? isnt that what you clowns attacked Bush for?
LoL - you swallowed the myth hook, like and sinker
Commies defeated themselves
he didn't beat inflation
as for growth in $$$ to theTreasury
-
The Real Reagan Economic Record: Responsible and Successful Fiscal Policy
Published on March 1, 2001 by Peter Sperry Backgrounder
See also: The Truth About Tax Rates and The Politics of Class Warfare
by Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.
After President George W. Bush sent Congress an outline of his tax reform plan on February 8, some critics immediately began to attack it as a return to what they portray as the fiscally irresponsible policies of the Reagan Administration. According to these commentators, Congress should scale back--if not outright reject--President Bush's tax reform proposals because they are based on a period when the wealthy received excessive tax cuts and revenue was wasted on defense even though most Americans struggled in poverty. This is a revisionist view of recent history that ignores reality and denies the fact that President Reagan's sound policies and determination deserve much of the credit for the current economic picture. Congress should embrace President Bush's tax reform plan as a responsible return to the most successful economic policy of the 20th century.
President Ronald Reagan's record includes sweeping economic reforms and deep across-the-board tax cuts, market deregulation, and sound monetary policies to contain inflation. His policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history and nearly 35 million more jobs. As the Joint Economic Committee reported in April 2000:2
In 1981, newly elected President Ronald Reagan refocused fiscal policy on the long run. He proposed, and Congress passed, sharp cuts in marginal tax rates. The cuts increased incentives to work and stimulated growth. These were funda-mental policy changes that provided the foundation for the Great Expansion that began in December 1982.
As Exhibit 1 shows, the economic record of the last 17 years is remarkable, particularly when viewed against the backdrop of the 1970s. The United States has experienced two of the longest and strongest expansions in our history back to back. They have been interrupted only by a shallow eight-month downturn in 1990-91.
Even with the growing surplus, however, a small but vocal faction in Congress opposes any policies that would allow taxpayers to keep more of their own money through real tax cuts and that generally would shift power from the government to the people. This attempt to rewrite history should not be surprising. Proponents of additional government spending try to make the Reagan boom appear to be a bust because they fear that Reagan's success will help President Bush build popular support for lower taxes, further deregulation, and reduced government spending. But their rhetoric is easily countered by the evidence.
Under President Reagan, federal revenues increased even with tax cuts, federal spending did not decrease, the country experienced the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime in its history, and the rich paid more taxes proportionately than they had before the tax cuts were implemented.
HOW DID THE REAGAN TAX CUTS AFFECT THE U.S. TREASURY?
Many critics of reducing taxes claim that the Reagan tax cuts drained the U.S. Treasury. The reality is that federal revenues increased significantly between 1980 and 1990:
Total federal revenues doubled from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue.3
As a percentage of the gross domestic product (GDP), federal revenues declined only slightly from 18.9 percent in 1980 to 18 percent in 1990.4
Revenues from individual income taxes climbed from just over $244 billion in 1980 to nearly $467 billion in 1990.5 In inflation-adjusted dollars, this amounts to a 25 percent increase.
HOW DID REAGAN'S POLICIES AFFECT FEDERAL SPENDING?
Although critics continue to focus on President Reagan's budget "cuts," federal spending rose significantly during the 1980s:
Federal spending more than doubled, growing from almost $591 billion in 1980 to $1.25 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was an increase of 35.8 percent.6
As a percentage of GDP, federal expenditures grew slightly from 21.6 percent in 1980 to 21.8 percent in 1990.7
Contrary to popular myth, while inflation-adjusted defense spending increased by 50 percent between 1980 and 1989, it was curtailed when the Cold War ended and fell by 15 percent between 1989 and 1993. However, means-tested entitlements, which do not include Social Security or Medicare, rose by over 102 percent between 1980 and 1993, and they have continued climbing ever since.8
Total spending on all national security programs never equaled domestic spending, even when Social Security, Medicare, and net interest are excluded from domestic totals. In addition, national security spending fell during the Administration of the senior President Bush, while domestic spending increased in both mandatory and discretionary accounts.9 (See Chart 1.)
HOW DID REAGAN'S POLICIES AFFECT ECONOMIC GROWTH?
Despite the steep recession in 1982--brought on by tight money policies that were instituted to squeeze out the historic inflation level of the late 1970s--by 1983, the Reagan policies of reducing taxes, spending, regulation, and inflation were in place. The result was unprecedented economic growth:
This economic boom lasted 92 months without a recession, from November 1982 to July 1990, the longest period of sustained growth during peacetime and the second-longest period of sustained growth in U.S. history. The growth in the economy lasted more than twice as long as the average period of expansions since World War II.10
The American economy grew by about one-third in real inflation-adjusted terms. This was the equivalent of adding the entire economy of East and West Germany or two-thirds of Japan's economy to the U.S. economy.11
From 1950 to 1973, real economic growth in the U.S. economy averaged 3.6 percent per year. From 1973 to 1982, it averaged only 1.6 percent. The Reagan economic boom restored the more usual growth rate as the economy averaged 3.5 percent in real growth from the beginning of 1983 to the end of 1990.12
HOW DID REAGAN'S POLICIES AFFECT THE FEDERAL TAX BURDEN?
Perhaps the greatest myth concerning the 1980s is that Ronald Reagan slashed taxes so dramatically for the rich that they no longer have paid their fair share. The flaw in this myth is that it mixes tax rates with taxes actually paid and ignores the real trend of taxation:
In 1991, after the Reagan rate cuts were well in place, the top 1 percent of taxpayers in income paid 25 percent of all income taxes; the top 5 percent paid 43 percent; and the bottom 50 percent paid only 5 percent.13 To suggest that this distribution is unfair because it is too easy on upper-income groups is nothing less than absurd.
The proportion of total income taxes paid by the top 1 percent rose sharply under President Reagan, from 18 percent in 1981 to 28 percent in 1988.14
Average effective income tax rates were cut even more for lower-income groups than for higher-income groups. While the average effective tax rate for the top 1 percent fell by 30 percent between 1980 and 1992, and by 35 percent for the top 20 percent of income earners, it fell by 44 percent for the second-highest quintile, 46 percent for the middle quintile, 64 percent for the second-lowest quintile, and 263 percent for the bottom quintile.15
These reductions for the lowest-income groups were so large because President Reagan doubled the personal exemption, increased the standard deduction, and tripled the earned income tax credit (EITC), which provides net cash for single-parent families with children at the lowest income levels. These changes eliminated income tax liability altogether for over 4 million lower-income families.16
Critics often add in the Social Security payroll tax and argue that the total federal tax burden shifted more to lower-income groups and away from upper-income groups; but President Reagan's changes were in the income tax, not in the Social Security payroll tax. The payroll tax was imposed by proponents of big government over the past 50 years, and it is they, not Ronald Reagan, who should be held accountable for its distributional effects.
Nevertheless, even if one counts the Social Security payroll tax, the share of total federal taxes increased between 1980 and 1989 for the following groups:
For the top 1 percent of taxpayers, from 12.9 percent in 1980 to 15.4 percent in 1989;
For the top 5 percent of taxpayers, from 27.3 percent in 1980 to 30.4 percent in 1989; and
For the top 20 percent of taxpayers, from 56.1 percent in 1980 to 58.6 percent in 1989.
On the other hand, the share of total federal taxes, if one includes the Social Security payroll tax, declined for four groups:
For the second-highest 20 percent of taxpayers, from 22.2 percent in 1980 to 20.8 percent in 1989;
For the middle 20 percent of taxpayers, from 13.2 percent in 1980 to 12.5 percent in 1989;
For the second-lowest 20 percent of taxpayers, from 6.9 percent in 1980 to 6.4 percent in 1989; and
For the lowest 20 percent of taxpayers, from 1.6 percent in 1980 to 1.5 percent in 1989.17
CONCLUSION
No matter how advocates of big government try to rewrite history, Ronald Reagan's record of fiscal responsibility continues to stand as the most successful economic policy of the 20th century. His tax reforms triggered an economic expansion that continues to this day. His investments in national security ended the Cold War and made possible the subsequent defense spending reductions that are largely responsible for the current federal surpluses. His efforts to restrain the expansion of federal government helped to limit the growth of domestic spending.
If Reagan's critics had been willing to work with him to limit domestic spending even further and to control the growth of entitlements, the budget would have been balanced five to ten years sooner and without the massive tax increase imposed in 1993. Today, Members of Congress from across the political spectrum should stand on the evidence and defend the Reagan record.
Peter Sperry is the Grover M. Hermann Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/03/the-real-reagan-economic-record
-
If the Heritage Foundation thinks a responsible and successful fiscal policy includes raising taxes (which Reagan did many times) then I assume both they and you are fine with Obama doing the same thing
Same goes for more than tripling the debt and anything else Reagan did too
-
If the Heritage Foundation thinks a responsible and successful fiscal policy includes raising taxes (which Reagan did many times) then I assume both they and you are fine with Obama doing the same thing
Same goes for more than tripling the debt and anything else Reagan did too
I have just read his diaries, same bs as always. He had a dem congress who considered most of his budgets doa and they refused to go along with his defense build up unless they got their sepnding on domestic shit.
-
I have just read his diaries, same bs as always. He had a dem congress who considered most of his budgets doa and they refused to go along with his defense build up unless they got their sepnding on domestic shit.
so again, you're fine with massive government spending, multiple tax increases and more than tripling the national debt
-
-
I have just read his diaries, same bs as always. He had a dem congress who considered most of his budgets doa and they refused to go along with his defense build up unless they got their sepnding on domestic shit.
Lmao.. none of that shit is going on now. ::)
-
Lmao.. none of that shit is going on now. ::)
Obama's last budget was rejected 97-0 - guess what fool - there are not 97 Dem. Senators.
Get a clue.
-
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/18/what-ronald-reagan-said-when-korean-air
vs ofagget going to a fundraiser
-
http://reason.com/blog/2014/07/18/what-ronald-reagan-said-when-korean-air
vs ofagget going to a fundraiser
Reagan spoke 5 days after the event about the incident....Obama is speaking right now you moron ::)
-
Reagan spoke 5 days after the event about the incident....Obama is speaking right now you moron ::)
1. He's not the president. Never has been.
2. Good to see he took time out his busy schedule ......hahaha.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/schedule
-
I have just read his diaries, same bs as always. He had a dem congress who considered most of his budgets doa and they refused to go along with his defense build up unless they got their sepnding on domestic shit.
why don't current republicans COMPROMISE like Reagan did?
-
why don't current republicans COMPROMISE like Reagan did?
Because Obama is not negotiating with them. Reagan had Tip Oneill in the WH for drinks all the time etc to try to hammer out asgreements. with Obama is acts like a little commie punk calling Boehner names etc and then demands that boahner agree to whatever he says.
Does not work like that.
-
with Obama is acts like a little commie punk calling Boehner names etc and then demands that boahner agree to whatever he says.
???
Boehner Insults Obama, Says President Does Not Have The "Guts" To Cut Spending.
-
???
Boehner Insults Obama, Says President Does Not Have The "Guts" To Cut Spending.
both suck
-
both suck
But you would prefer someone who would negotiate?
-
why don't current republicans COMPROMISE like Reagan did?
Good Question.....
-
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/the-phantom-menace-106551.html#.U9ZFNWx0zIU
O-fagget only dreams in his chooms induced hazes to ever be a fraction of the president Reagan was