Politics Domestic President Reagan - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:President:Reagan:
Results 151 - 227 of 227   < 1 2 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2017/11/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/22   

2013/10/24-11/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:54743 Activity:nil
10/02   RIP Tom Clancy:
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/l5ejpy3 [nyt]
2011/10/14-30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Reference/Tax] UID:54197 Activity:nil
10/14   "SimCain?  Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan resembles the tax code in SimCity"
        http://www.csua.org/u/uh9
        \_ "The Tax Reform Act of 1986: Should We Do It Again?"
           http://www.csua.org/u/uiu
           "Reagan built on their efforts and put forward a very detailed plan
           for tax reform in May 1985, based on several years of work by the
           Treasury Department, that identified a long list of tax provisions
           needing pruning from the tax code, along with supporting analysis
           and documentation.
           Today, Republicans like Mr. Cain put most of their efforts into
           devising catchy slogans and almost none into providing details of
           their tax proposals."
           \_ Maybe we can dig up Reagan's corpse and have him run for
              President as the Zombie candidate.
2010/11/2-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:54001 Activity:nil
11/2    California Uber Alles is such a great song
        \_ Yes, and it was written about Jerry Brown. I was thinking this
           as I cast my vote for Meg Whitman. I am independent, but I
           typically vote Democrat (e.g., I voted for Boxer). However, I
           can't believe we elected this retread.
           \_ You voted for the billionaire that ran HP into the ground
              and then tried to buy the job of CA governor? Really?
              I almost voted Green or Libertarian, but never once thought
              of voting for Whitman.
              \_ wrong billionaire.
                 \_ Sorry, couldn't tell the difference.
                    \_ Makes a big difference. I hated Fiorina when she was
                       CEO at HP. I hate her even more now that I know her
                       backwards politics. However, Whitman is a RINO. She
                       endorsed Gore. She opposed Bush on global warming.
                       She supported Boxer's 2004 campaign. I am not
                       saying I love the woman, but *JERRY BROWN*? Been
                       there, did that, was not that great. As for her
                       money, I actually prefer people spend their own
                       fortunes instead of owing a thousand political favors
                       in exchange for donations. Face it, most candidates
                       are trying to buy the election on some level and
                       the ones that aren't don't get very far. You are so
                       informed you couldn't even separate Whitman from
                       Fiorina so I hope you didn't vote.
        \_ Your point about having a politician who is beholden to no one
           because she didnt need to accept any donations is interesting. I
           never thought of that one before.  I really don't think she was
           qualified in anyway though.  she flipflopped her way around
           WHILE running for governor and hadn't even voted for decades.
           On the plus side, she proved she will kick your ass, physically,
           if you mess with her.
                       \_ After experiencing eight years of Bush I know
                          enough to never vote for a Republican.
                          \_ Sounds pretty closed-minded. I agree that Bush was
                             an idiot, but I am not going to shut out 50%
                             of candidates based solely on party affiliation.
                             You'll realize how silly you sound if/when
                             you grow up.
                             \_ I am old enough to learn from my mistakes.
                                When will you learn?
                                \_ Voting for a candidate based solely on
                                   a D or R next their name means you
                                   have a long way to go.
                                   \_ No, the GOP has been universally venal
                                      and/or incompetent for a long time. I
                                      thought about it some more and decided
                                      that if the GOP somehow actually elects
                                      a decent leader (in spite of my vote
                                      against them) who ends up doing a good
                                      job tackling real problems, I would
                                      be willing to reconsider my stance. But
                                      after watching bad and then worse
                                      leadership from them, I have no confidence
                                      in their collective decision making.
                                      Give me a Republican president at least
                                      as good as Reagan or Clinton or a
                                      CA governor that is halfway decent and I
                                      give them another look. But it is hard
                                      to see this happening anytime soon.
                                      Btw, it is quite a bit of difference to
                                      "vote for a candidate based solely on
                                      [party affiliation]" and refusing to
                                      vote for a candidate based on party
                                      affiliation. Hopefully you can see the
                                      difference. I expect to vote for quite
                                      a few Green and Libertarian candidates
                                      in the future.
                                      \_ Wasn't Reagan a Republican President
                                         as good as Reagan? And GH Bush
                                         wasn't bad. GWB is the only bad
                                         example in the last 40 years.
                                         \_ Bush, Cheney, DeLay, Rove, the
                                            whole crowd has been terrible for
                                            at least a decade. And the ones I
                                            see them bringing up as future
                                            leaders (Palin, really?) seem
                                            even worse. Lincoln was a good
                                            Republican President too but he
                                            doesn't say much about the GOP
                                            today. Same with Reagan, he was
                                            elected what, almost 30 years ago?
                                            Today's Republican Party would run
                                            a common sense pragmatist like
                                            Reagan out of the party.
                                            \_ What about, I dunno, Meg
                                               Whitman?!
                                \_ http://preview.tinyurl.com/2gyqr8d (LA Times)
                                   "Strikingly, almost one in five California
                                    voters said they would never cast a ballot
                                    for a Republican." Not that nutty an idea,
                                    it turns out.
        \_ The republican party got us into a (seemed a good idea at the time)
           war in Afghanistan and with my laser like hindsight a completely
           unecessary conflict in Iraq.  And they accept no responsibility.
           And shitheads in SF riot over a baseball game, but not an election.
           \_ Dems in Congress were in favor of the wore on terra as well
              \_ Some Dems. A majority voted against it. Well against the
                 Iraq invasion, at least. I think they all voted for the
                 "Patriot" Act.
2010/1/20-29 [Science, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:53645 Activity:nil
1/20    Food for thought: kids today are more responsible and less selfish
        than kids from 80s... the REAGAN era.
        http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-10434969-238.html
        \_ As a parent of a kindergartener, I don't think so.
2009/10/8-21 [Reference/BayArea, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:53437 Activity:nil
10/7    danh@soda is heavily featured in this book:
        http://www.amazon.com/dp/0143113801
        \_ This guys articles are probably more relevant:
           http://larrylivermore.com/?p=185&cpage=1 - danh
           \_ Is this book worth owning? -ausman
        \_ are you implying i know the guy referenced in this url:
        http://www.sfweekly.com/2009-10-07/music/new-bay-area-punk-oral-history-unearths-dead-babies-stinky-roadies-and-strong-community-networks
2009/9/25-10/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:53402 Activity:nil
9/25    Reagan's Legacy on the UC:
        http://www.newfoundations.com/Clabaugh/CuttingEdge/Reagan.html
2017/11/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/22   

2009/9/15-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:53369 Activity:nil
9/15    WORST PRESIDENT EVER: Ronald Reagan. The president
        of GREED.  http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/060309.html
        \_ You and Michael Moore are in agreement.
2009/7/18-24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:53161 Activity:nil
7/18    "Exclusive: Conservative group offers support for $2M"
        http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25072.html
        "The letter shows one reason why activists get so much junk mail, both
        on paper and electronically: Some groups that send it charge
        handsomely for the service."
2009/4/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Finance/Investment] UID:52845 Activity:nil
4/11    Look at the great things that happen when we stop overpaying
        finance workers:
        http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/weekinreview/12lohr.html
2009/2/25-3/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:52635 Activity:nil
2/25    Thank you Obama for pledging to reverse much of Reagan's economic
        mess. Thank you!
        http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/24/analysis.obama.reagan
        http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-219640
        \_ About time. The last 25 years have been a disaster for the middle
           class.
2009/2/16-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:52583 Activity:nil
2/16    Bush not the worst President ever
        http://tinyurl.com/bu2o36 (Yahoo News)
        \_ According to CSPAN, so, of course, no one will watch.
        \_ Agreed, Buchanan and Pierce were THE WORST. Don't you
           guys remember how bad they were?
2008/11/21-28 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:52063 Activity:nil
11/21   Remaining GOP activists want to turn the Party further to The Right:
        http://tinyurl.com/6m4xsv (TPM)
        Note I predicted this a year ago, luckily (?) with the way information
        moves, it shouldn't take them 12 years to discover that extremism is
        a losing strategy, the way it did with the Dems.
        \_ You do know that McCain was about as left as you can go and still be
           in the GOP, right?
           \_ You don't know what left means do you?
           \_ I think that Guliani and Schwartzenner are both more liberal,
              actually. Other than immigration policy and campaign finance
              reform, McCain was pretty solidly conservative, right?
              reform, McCain is pretty solidly conservative, right?
        \_ I don't think McCain held many non very conservative views.  That
           was not his appeal.
2008/11/12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51946 Activity:nil
11/12   http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/12/republicans_for_a_reason
        lulz.
2008/11/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:51906 Activity:low
11/11   Ronald Reagan is my hero.
        \_ Did you know about his support of California's lovely Proposition
           14? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_14
           \_ My hero!   -landowner and landlord, love prop 13 and 14
        \_ Yup.  He won in two landslide elections.
              \_ You are aware of the blatant racism involved in the prop. 14
                 campaign, and that the supremes overturned it in '67 anyway?
                 \_ if I'm a landlord, I could care less. Go Pete Wilson!
                    \_ What does Pete Wilson have to do with the '60s?  Oh
                       I see, you are just a dumb troll.
                       \_ Maybe you're too young to remember this but Pete
                          Wilson was a racist and people loved him for
                          Prop 187. YES ON PROP 187 Pete.
                          http://members.tripod.com/~cochiseguardian/NEWS/WilsonDefImmStance020503.html
                 \_ ofc not, he's a troll.
        \_ Yup.  He won in two landslide elections, better than how Clinton
           did in his two.
           \_ But Obama just won a larger percentage of the vote than Reagan
              in '80.
        \_ "Gov't should protect people from each other but not from
           themselves."  Also you gotta love how he ordered the nat'l guard
           to open fire on the UCB protesters.
              \_ "So you wanna be treated like a communist, huh hippie?"
        \_ You're an idiot, but you're not alone. That doesn't mean you're
           not an idiot.
2008/11/6-13 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51864 Activity:nil
11/6    How a photographer can change opinion, subtlely via lighting,
        composition, contrast, color:
        http://strobist.blogspot.com/2008/11/vote-and-consider-uplighting.html
        \_ A couple years ago someone posted a link on motd which was a
           headshot of Dubya taken with a wide-angle lens at close-up distance.
           He looked stupid in that picture.  The photog did it on purpose
           according to the poster.
2008/11/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51829 Activity:nil
11/4    Jim Moran (VA representative)
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJyS1WJNisM
        "We've been guided by a Republican administration who believes in the
        simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it."
        \_ Shut up, go away, election almost over, we're sick of you, etc.
           \_ I just can't believe how idiotic this guy's statement is. -op
        \_ So, rich people ought not to be more responsible for the societal
           machinery which defends and protects that wealth?
           \_ False dichotomy.
              \_ Well, Obama is just putting the tax code to back what it was
                 under Reagan, not 100% confiscation, and if the tax level was
                 good enough for Reagan, why isn't it good enough for the GOP
                 today?
                 \_ Liar. That's the spin, but not reality.  Here's Neil Cavuto
                    calling yer crap:
                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzUxjF1X_28
                    \_ Ah yes, Neil Cavuto, unbiased that he is.
                       \_ Oh, yah you're right.  I'll ignore his facts because
                          I disagree with his opinions. <facepalm>
2008/10/21-11/6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51608 Activity:high
10/21   SOCIALISM
        \_ WELFARE STATE
        \_ ...FOR THE RICH
        \_ JEWISH-BACKED ISLAMISTS
        \_ why are Republican strategists on tv always old white guys?
           \_ You're forgetting psychotic but hot MILFs (c.f. Michele
              Bachmann)
              \_ you're right, but i'm talking about guys who describe their
                 jobs as 'republican strategist'.  at least Bachmann has
                 a day job.
        \_ I grew up in the 80s. Capitalism has done nothing good. The
           lack of central command to direct basic things such as housing,
           transportation, utility, etc makes everything suck. In addition
           there is too much greed resulting in fraud everywhere. Fuck
           Reaganomics, it is not working. I never prospered from Reaganomics
           and neither did my family. Fuck capitalism. I welcome
           New World Socialism any time.
           \_ Yes, command economies like former USSR are so superior.
              \_ I suppose you don't support the bail out at all.
              \_ {$HUMOR}
              \_ Let's talk about how much money an average American owes
                 vs. how much money an average Russian saved. Actually,
                 let's just talk about the National Deficit.
              \_ No, but command economies like the US military in the 80s
                 was superior. I love me them base PX prices.
                 \_ ha i grew up on the PX too.
           \_ Yeah, let's nationalize all the dot-coms.  Better, let's do that
              retroactively, and make all those (ex-)employees who benefited
              from stock options turn in their profit to the goverment.
           \_ Seems like the problem is corruption in general, and I don't
              think socialism will resolve that.  A more vigilent populace
              may.
        \_ Yes? What about it? Young people today with nothing to lose
           but everything to gain from Socialism, embrace it. We're
           tired of having sucky infrastructures and unfairness.
           Let us all embrace socialism.
           \_ Why do you think they have nothing to lose?
              \_ Read Prop 13 history and ramifications
        \_ I presume you are free-market type.  Please do tell me you
           oppose the 700 billion bail out package.  Please tell me you
           do support the abolishment of
           - SEC
           - FDIC
           - FDA
           - minimum wage
           - child labor law
           - ban on human trafficking

           and let the invisible hand does everything.
           \_ Excellent straw man sir!
        \_ You know, I'd say 8 of the top 10 nicest countries to
           live in in the world are socialist.
        \_ The three TIE fighters move in on Luke.  As Vader's center fighter
           unleashes a volley of laserfire, one of the TIE ships at his side
           is hit and explodes into flame.  The two remaining ships continue
           to move in.
           \_ Which are the other two? Switzerland and Singapore?
        \_ Wow, I think this is the most efficent troll I have ever
           seen.  Bravo!
           \_ Seconded. It takes the Art of Troll to the next level. Kudos!
        \_ Key word: socialism
           \_ BUD DAY doesn't like your tone.  Obviously you've never
              served.
2008/10/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51481 Activity:nil
10/12   How the GOP used "Star Wars" to rip off the taxpayer:
        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/washington/12missile.htm
2008/10/3-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51360 Activity:nil
10/3    Palin blatantly misappropriates Reagan quote:
        http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/raising-the-white-flag-of-surrender-to-medicare
2008/9/20-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51243 Activity:nil
9/20    "There isn't one grain of anything in the world that is sold in a free
        market. Not one! The only place you see a free market is in the
        speeches of politicians. People who are not in the Midwest do not
        understand that this is a socialist country."
           --Dwayne Orville Andreas, CEO of Archer Daniels Midland
           http://www.motherjones.com/news/special_reports/1995/07/carney.html
2008/9/16-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:51196 Activity:kinda low
9/16    I'm confused on this one.  Obama's campaign denies that he pressed
        Iraqi's to delay security agreement by confirming it.  Huh?
        http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hi9TDNHvuBZpFsO8ZbiFYsnbIl3A
        \_ Isn't this what Nixon did?
           \_ I'm not sure of the history on that one. -op
           \_ Ah, I've heard this charge before.  As far as I know it's just
              speculation, and there is no proof.  Besides, is Nixon really
              the role model you want for the next president?
              \_ http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/080900-01.htm
                 Reagan did the same thing with Iran when they were holding
                 American hostages. At least Obama is negotiating with aj
                 nominal ally.
                 \_ Errr...  kinda?  This should sink Obama's hopes for
                    presidency, as it would have for Nixon.  I would
                    hope no one here would think this is OK.
2008/9/14-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51165 Activity:nil
9/14    LEH bailout fails; to file for bankruptcy tonight.
        MER bought by BAC (firewall).
        Central bank liquidity fund coming online.
        Guys:  Multi-year global credit deleveraging.  Nasty shit.
        It's your money though, so do with it what you will.
        \_ "But great as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public
            spending. For decades we have piled deficit upon deficit,
            mortgaging our future and our children's future for the temporary
            convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to
            guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic
            upheavals." -Ronald Reagan
            \_ "Deficits don't matter. Reagan proved that." -Dick Cheney
2008/9/9-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51115 Activity:nil
9/9     Liberals keep talking about how Palin is loud, annoying, obnoxious.
        Liberals hate candidates with big egos & obnoxious personality.
        You know what? That's exactly what conservatives vote for. Palin is
        playing the Ronald Reagan card... fuck all issues and just look
        nice on TV and be bright and be seen. The Ronald Reagan card is
        wins 48% of the votes, and is exactly what will get candidates
        into office. Sorry liberals, you just don't get it.
        \_ What sort of troll are you?
        \_ Right. If the Dems "got it," they'd remind people that:
           --McCain divorced his first wife, a former swim-wear model, after
             she was horribly disfigured in a car accident.
             \_ Dude are you serious? URL?
                \_ actually this is true.  while McCain was in POW camp,
                   his wife was in a terrible car accident that required
                   25+ surgeries that left her 4 inches shorter.  she didn't
                   tell him this while he was in POW camp, figuring he was
                   suffering enough.  when he got back to the states,
                   he divorced her, and soon married the rich Arizona heiress.
                   \_ Who was young enough to be his daughter.
                \_ The Daily Mail is a horrible rag, and yet I think they
                   managed to capture the outrage pretty accurately on this:
                   http://preview.tinyurl.com/6gbzhw (Daily Mail)
                   \_ According to the article, he got back to the US in 1973,
                      and divorced her in 1980.  So it's a pretty big stretch
                      to say he divorced her because of the accident.  -tom
                      \_ Good point. It's more accurate to say that he was
                         running around on her, chasing other women, and that
                         he divorced her to marry a rich and pretty younger
                         trophy wife.
           --McCain called his second wife a cunt.
           How dare they take the high road!
           \_ The cunt story is dumb.  If you've ever been in a relationship
              you'll know that there are sometimes ugly fights.  The divorce
              stuff does, however, say something about McCain.
              \_ Frankly, what the guy says in privacy (or at least in hushed
                 tones) doesn't particularly matter to me. Saying it in public
                 just makes me wince. It _is_ dumb; he ought to know better.
2008/9/4-12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51064 Activity:nil
9/4     Michael Reagan compares Palin to his Dad with, IMHO unintentional,
        hilarious effect.  http://csua.org/u/m9f
2008/8/30-9/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:51009 Activity:nil
8/30    The Myth of the Tragedy of the Commons
        http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/angus250808.html
        \_ http://www.monthlyreview.org/builditnow.htm
           Socialism NOW! Fuck GWB and Reagan type of capitalism.
2008/8/21-29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:50937 Activity:nil
8/22    I'm not sure how much of his failure to recollect is McCain joking or
        not.  My dad is 72, and while I love him, there is no way I'd want
        someone that age running the white house.   I recognize that as being
        "ageist" or whatever, but president is a pretty fucking demanding job.\
        Remember how hands-off shit got with Reagan the second term?
        \_ Saddleback debate.
        \_ Lets get rid of anyone over 30.  Cf. Logan's Run!
           \_ While that might help with the population problem, I don't
              think it would help enough, and you're not ridding the Earth
              of the people who contribute more to the population problem.
              (People under 30 have most of the kids.)
2008/7/25-30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50688 Activity:nil
7/25    Are these the kind of Conservatives that liberals should be paying
        attention to? I think I am going to buy the book. -liberal
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/64v8oy
        \_ I dunno, it looks pretty wishy washy to me.
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:50620 Activity:nil 54%like:50612
7/17    More hypocrisy from Al Gore
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESxvY1tQHTo
        [Promo/hit piece from Americans for Prosperity]
        \_ It's pretty tough being Al Gore. On one hand, he wants to get
           his message across. On the other hand, it is extremely difficult
           to get his message across without violating his messages. On
           one hand, I'd wish he would bike to conferences using a single
           speed bicycle and wearing spandex. On the other hand, no one
           really listens to hippies dressed in tie dye shirts shouting
           "Global warming is here! Conserve!" Tough position man. What
           would you do in his position?
        \_ "This video is no longer available"
            \_ works fine for me
        \_ http://AmericansForProsperity.com has a picture of RONALD REAGAN
           Oh yeah this is a GREAT message and a GREAT site RONNIE is
           our GREAT HERO YES VOTE CONSERVATIVES NOW! Patriots unite!!!
           \_ Translation: I feel really stupid for supporting this hypocrite,
              ad hominem time!
        \_ You're a conservative, why do you care what other people do
           with their lives? As long as you are eco-conscious or can
           help others become more eco-conscious, what do you care?
           \_ Mainly just because it's annoying to have some hypocrite
              harranging you. -!op
           \_ Al Gore is trying to get policies enacted to force me to act in
              a way that he himself doesn't.  It's clear that he doesn't
              actually believe in his global warming hoax since he doesn't even
              do a thing to live like he tries to tell the rest of us to live.
        \_ WWAGD. Bwahaha http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=33#comments
        \_ Al Gore is 10 times the leader that Dubya is. Too bad the Supreme
           Court selected Bush.
2008/7/16-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:50588 Activity:moderate
7/15    Provisions to tighten regulation over Fannie and Freddy. Whatever
        happened to GWB and Reagan's FREE MARKET economy and the
        new OWNERSHIP SOCIETY???
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25686589/page/2
        \_ The macs are gov't partnerships with business--what has that to do
           with free market?
           \_ Plenty!  Previous sarcastic poster, the free market/ownership
              society doesn't work very well if we are in a global
              depression.  I think everyone recognizes this.
              \_ "Everyone?" Really, even the motd.libertarians? If so,
                 this would be a mighty sea change. Is this true, libertarians?
                 \_ official libertarian nutjob position: the free market would
                    work perfectly in a global depression, if only the
                    government would stop meddling.  -tom
                    \_ No, I think a global depression is a natural
                       phenomenon and a healthy thing. Why would you want to
                       stop it?
                       \_ You obviously haven't studied the 1930s where
                          people were starving on the streets while the
                          capitalists lived off of nice steaks everyday.
                          I wish you'd get laid off by JPL one day. Your
                          f***ing IT job is worthless at JPL, FYI.
                          fucking IT job is worthless at JPL, FYI.
                          \_ And how the government's random lumbering economic
                             policies made that very depression longer?
                          \_ I think monetary policy is a good thing for social
                             reasons but can result in a suboptimal economic
                             result. BTW, you have no idea what I do at JPL.
                             Hint: I don't work under the CIO.
                             I'm glad I've upset you, though. I always
                             wanted my own following bitch. --dim
                          \_ And you haven't studied the Soviet Union. This
                             kind of comparison is pointless and stupid.
                       \_ and of course it's healthy because it proves the
                          strength of the free market!  -tom
                          \_ One nice thing about the free market is that
                             it will course correct itself. Certainly it
                             is preferred to a planned economy. The free
                             market would have never given us Iraq. It
                             took an inept government you trust completely
                             to do that kind of economic damage.
                             \_ "that's not starvation and famine, it's the
                                free market course correcting itself!"  -tom
                                \_ Imagine if every dollar spent in Iraq
                                   had been spent by the free market
                                   rather than Big Government.
                                   \_ Iraq was and is a major clusterfuck,
                                      but that's irrelevant to the question
                                      of whether global depression is
                                      "healthy."  Stop trying to change the
                                      subject.  -tom
                                      \_ Actually, it's not irrelevant.
                                         Do you trust the free market to
                                         allocate resources or do you
                                         trust Big Government to do so?
                                         In the former case you sometimes
                                         have market corrections. In the
                                         latter case you have Iraq. Which
                                         one results in a healthier economy
                                         long-term? Which one is morally
                                         superior?
                                         \_ I believe in a mixed economy, as
                                            do all non-whackjobs. Some things
                                            are better allocated centrally
                                            and some by a market system.
                                            Morality is a pretty personal
                                            thing, but I believe in a mixed
                                            economy morally as well, since
                                            both extremes cause huge amounts
                                            of human sufferring, when tried.
                                         \_ Your dichotomy is false.  War is
                                            not a function of "Big Government";
                                            it's largely a function of
                                            resources.  Let's say that
                                            current trends continue, and oil
                                            and food prices continue to go
                                            through the roof.  Poorer countries
                                            like those in Latin America will
                                            be more heavily impacted than
                                            the U.S.  The real free market
                                            solution to the problem would
                                            be for the Latinos to move to
                                            the wealthy U.S.  The libertarian
                                            nutjob solution is to build a
                                            bigger wall, because "a primary
                                            function of government is to
                                            protect property rights."
                                            Obviously the situation is
                                            untenable; the "free" market
                                            will cause a war due to resource
                                            scarcity.  Rwanda, Somalia are
                                            not the result of Big Government.
                                             -tom
                                            \_ Actually, I would say their
                                               governments are most to blame.
                                               \_ of course you would.  -tom
                                                  \_ So you blame the
                                                     citizenry? Way to go!
                                                     \_ you really enjoy
                                                        putting words in
                                                        other people's mouths,
                                                        but you're not very
                                                        good at it.  -tom
                                                        \_ Look, Tom. What
                                                           other option is
                                                           there? Either
                                                           it's the fault
                                                           of the gov't or
                                                           the citizenry.
                                                           Care to name
                                                           your mysterious
                                                           3rd party?  Zuul?
                                                        \_ Maybe you should put
                                                           more words into your
                                                           own mouth instead
                                                           of being so evasive.
                                                           If not the gov't or
                                                           the citizens then
                                                           who? Zuul?
                                I think it is primarily _/
                                the afteraffects of
                                colonialism, which for
                                this discussion was
                                perpetrated by both
                                government and market
                                actors. -!tom
                                \_ I would have to say colonialism is almost
                                   exclusively perpetuated by governments.
                                   Even the East India Company was basically a
                                   front for government interests. However,
                                         \- this is mostly not a meaningful
                                            statement but is mostly wrong
                                            before the East India Act.
                                            \_ Well it is 100% correct
                                               after the Act and "mostly
                                               wrong" means "partly
                                               right". I think it's
                                               debatable. Certainly EIC
                                               wasn't your basic corporation.
                                               \- "ObLandWarAsia"
                                            I think what you want to look
                                            into is "mercantilism".
                                            somewhat interesting note in re:
                                            your somewhat humorous first
                                            sentence: at one point coca cola
                                            was more or less going to buy
                                            the country formerly known as
                                            British Honduras [slight exag-
                                            geration ... it was pretty much
                                            going to be privatized].
                                            In re: below ... you may want to
                                            read about how belgian colonialism
                                            int the congo changed when it went
                                            from being a personal possession
                                            of the king to a state colony.
                                   I think there's more blame to direct at the
                                   current corrupt and petty governments.
                                   I think Africa, as a whole, would
                                   benefit more from being run by corporate
                                   interests than corrupt governments. In
                                   fact, corporate investment in Africa is
                                   probably the the easiest path to salvation
                                   probably the easiest path to salvation
                                   just like it is in Afghanistan, Iraq,
                                   and other troubled regions. To really
                                   mess things up you need to get
                                   governments involved.
                                   governments involved. Governments are
                                   irrational.
                                   \_ I love this line of argument:
                                      1) Assert that free markets produce
                                         optimal results.
                                      2) Conclude that anywhere sub-optimal
                                         conditions exist, it is the fault
                                         of the government, by point 1.  QED.
                                      Soon followed by:
                                      3) To explain the existence of the
                                         sub-optimal condition, reverse-
                                         engineer an untestable hypothesis,
                                         usually based on government's
                                         response to the sub-optimal
                                         condition (i.e., "we wouldn't have
                                         gun crime if it weren't for gun
                                         control" or "the banking crisis is
                                         caused by FDIC insurance encouraging
                                         banks to take more risks.")
                                           -tom
                                         \_ I notice you still haven't
                                            defined your position. Why am I
                                            not surprised.
                                            \_ What position?  I certainly
                                               feel that someone who uses
                                               a machete to kill a person
                                               whose family he knows, must
                                               be significantly culpable for
                                               that act.  -tom
                                 \_ Governments are irrational? Only somone who
                                    has never worked in the private sector could
                                    say such a thing. Do you think businesses
                                    are rational?
                                    has never worked in the private sector
                                    could say such a thing. Do you think
                                    businesses are rational?
                                    \_ Ones that manage to compete are, yes.
                                       \_ Do you think that the military
                                          is irrational and poorly run?
                                          \_ It's one of the best examples
                                             of an irrational and poorly run
                                             government entity.
2008/7/15-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:50579 Activity:nil
7/15    How the government cooks economic statistics (great article by
        Kevin Phillips)
        http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/05/0082023
        \- YMWTGF(cambridge forum kevin philips)
2008/7/8-11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:50498 Activity:nil
7/8     Economic data fudging by the government:
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/5ol574 [madconomist.com]
        \_ I liked this: Soviet Collapse Lessons
           http://preview.tinyurl.com/6gw4ax
           \_ I liked this one as well.
        \_ Where does this site come from?
2008/7/8-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:50496 Activity:nil
7/7     The Failures of Neoliberalism:
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/6xwgsg
        \_ That link goes to the Reiser-body article.
           \_ http://dailystaregypt.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=14905
              Someone must have "edited" it.
2008/7/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Finance/Investment] UID:50492 Activity:nil
7/7     The Failures of Neoliberalism:
        http://dailystaregypt.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=14905 (Stiglitz)
2008/6/17-20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:50284 Activity:high
6/17    Obama the Marxist
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/3qxoqt [wsj.com]
        "Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of
        workers," he said, and a strong government hand is needed to assure
        that wealth is distributed more equitably.
        \_ Highly unequal wealth is generally considered bad.  In the past
           the government of the united states WAS concerned when regular wages
           stayed stagnant or dropped while the upper 1% gained a higher
           percentage of the pie.  That's not Marxism, no matter what your
           Libritarian echo chamber says.
           \_ Grive me Librity or grive me Dreath!
        \_ Thank god, I can't wait to see tax rates go to pre-Reagan
           era. Fuck globalization and trickle down to China economy,
           it was a dumb idea in the beginning, and a complete
           disaster in practice.
           \_ Sorry but you're either incredibly stupid or ignorant if you
              want to go back to the Carter era economy.  Compared to then,
              this is a golden time for the economy for rich, middle class,
              and poor.  Or wait, there's a third option I forgot: you're
              a troll which is why you keep mentioning Reagan; you're looking
              to draw someone out on how great Reagan was or something.
              \_ Real average hourly wages peaked in the early 70s.
              \_ Real average hourly wages peaked in the late 70s.
                 \_ You gonna support the shit you just made up from
                    your ass, liberal?
                    \_ What shit?  That in the Carter era we had double digit
                       inflation, we voted in prop 13 to save people from
                       outrageous property taxes and that the country was
                       headed downhill in a huge way as stated by Carter
                       himself in a major speech?  If you don't know those
                       things then as I said you're either ignorant, a troll,
                       or just plain dumb.  I'm pretty sure you're a troll.
                    \_ Facts are such bitter things when you are a Conservative:
                    \_ Facts are such bitter things when you are a
                       Conservative:
                       link:preview.tinyurl.com/3w79k5
                       From article at:
                       http://www.demos.org/inequality/numbers.cfm
                       \_ "Public programs that enrich..." Looks like a
                          socialist advocacy group. Try the Cato Institute
                          web site if you want to convince me.    -pp
                          \_ Yes, the BLS is such a biased org. So you only
                             accept facts authorized by the Authorized
                             accept facts approved by the Authorized
                             Conservative Statistical Institute? How Stalinist
                             of you. An overwhelming body of evidence points to
                             three decades of stagnate wages for the middle
                             three decades of stagnant wages for the middle
                             class. Amazing that you have somehow missed it.
                          \_ Cato Institute > Heritage Foundation, but not by
                             much.
           \_ So, what, you are against technology and automation?
              Let's all go back to stone age tech. Let's redistribute all
              resources equally to everyone! Actually no, fuck that.
              Poor people should have fewer kids.
              \_ You're entitled to your extreme thought processes and
                 belief as do I.                        -fuck Reagan
                 \_ You're entitled to your extremely bad grammar.
                    \_ I'm entitled to have 100 kids because I'm winning
                       the genetic pool race. PS my kids have US
                       citizenship, nah nah nah nah nah         -fuck Reagan
              \_ Believe it or not the world isn't binary.  Marxism is one
                 extreme, yes.  However that doesn't mean, say, Pell
                 grants are Marxist.  But Pell grants do have a good track
                 record of increasing social mobility and in doing so
                 decreasing the inqequality of wealth.  A large, desperately
                 poor, increasingly hopeless segment of the population is
                 something any government wants to avoid if it wants to
                 prosper.
                 \_ I don't want the government to prosper.  I want the
                    people and the country as a whole to prosper.  Providing
                    some education assistance (or a more reasonably priced
                    educational price at each institution would really be
                    more helpful) is helpful.  Raising taxes on everyone
                    and flushing more money down the drain is not helpful
                    to anyone unless you're one of those government employees
                    sucking the life out of the rest of us who earn our living
                    the traditional way: working.
                    \_ duhhh what? hmmm your dumb
                       \_ thank you for adding zero content.
                    \_ Raising taxes on everyone is not good. Raising taxes
                       on the wealthiest as the income gap continues to
                       grow makes a lot of sense. Hint: no one earns $1bn
                       strictly through "working."
                       \_ No.  The folks making tens and hundreds of millions
                          are mostly hedge fund manger and other NYC financial
                          types who are taxed at the cap gains rate instead of
                          the income rate where they belong.  That is the only
                          place you need to change the tax code if you want a
                          fairer tax on the truly rich.  But slamming people
                          who make $100k in this area with a higher tax rate
                          because they are 'rich' is just stupid and harmful
                          to the economy.  Raising taxes across the board is
                          not going to cause economic prosperity.
                          \_ Agreed. Making income>$1m level pay their fair
                             share, though, might. $100k is not filthy rich
                             anymore. --pp
                          \_ Obama wants to raise taxes on people who make
                             over $250k, not $100k. If he means family
                             income, I am screwed, but if he means personal
                             income, I am still under that.
                             \_ Screwed?  Just how exactly are you "screwed"
                                if you pay more tax on your $250k?
                                \_ The dead hand of The State will force me to
                                   quit being productive, drink cheap wine and
                                   die of alcoholism.
                     \_ I agree, my grandfather worked hard so his descendants
                        could have the best of everything. Why should I let the
                        mean old government, at the point of a gun, take away
                        everything he sacrificed for, just so some truck
                        driver's son can get some education he will just throw
                        away anyway.
                        away anyway. -truck driver's son
        \_ Hey, Obama wants to eliminate capital gains taxes on start-ups!
           Now that's a Marxism I can get behind.
           \_ What is his definition of "start-ups"?
2008/5/16-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49979 Activity:nil
5/1     Huckabee's lame Obama joke
        http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/huckabee-jokes.html
        \_ He might have been referring to this:
           http://www.banhandgunsnow.org/everyhandgun/index.html
           http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5582268
           http://preview.tinyurl.com/4fvb83 [democratic underground]
2008/5/13-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49936 Activity:nil
5/13    Ronald Reagan is GOD.                           -Conservative
        \_ Blasphemy. Ronald Reagan was a Prophet.
2008/5/1-5 [Finance/Banking, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49863 Activity:nil
4/30    Youtube video on $600 stimulus check costing you -$900/year for a
        $200K mortgage (assuming you're getting a stimulus check)
        http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=42476
        \_ Don't worry, oil will be tax-free for a while!!! Americans
           rejoice!
        \_ This video is over 30 seconds, or 100x times over the threshold
           of an average American's attention span, and therefore, is a
           very ineffective message. Secondly, he's using 4th grade
           math, which is beyond the comprehension of 90% of the Americans,
           and therefore, this is a very ineffective message. Thirdly,
           he's trying to persuade people using logic instead of good
           looks and charm (Ronald Reagan), and therefore, this is a very
                            \_ JFK
           ineffective message.
           \- i watched about 2min of that video. it is stupid. he spends
              all his time on arithmetic rather than economics. the question
              is "what will be the macroeconomic effects of the 'stimulus'
              plan". why dont you look for something about this by brad delong,
              paul krugman, even that semi-evil, smug greg mankiw, CBO etc.
              paul krugman, even that semi-evil, smug greg mankiw etc
              [i am assuming in the latter 2min of the video he doesnt talk
              about velocity of money, balance of payments etc]. of more
              relevance to mortgages is the part of the bill relating to
              conforming loans ... but again, the actual effect of changing
              the conforming loan cap is complicated].if we take "well known
              borderline communist" lawrence lindsay's estimate for cost of the
              iraq war in 2008 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lindsey]
              it will add more to the deficit than the stimulus, if you use
              the CBO's estimate. And of course the 2009 cost of the one time
              stimulus drops dramatically ... you think the 2009 cost of the
              iraq war will be <$20bn? the interest on the debt is already
              more than twice the cost of the stimulus etc.
              about velocity of money, balance of payments etc.]
2008/4/22-30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49798 Activity:nil
4/21    President Bush now has highest disapproval rating in the history of
        Gallup poll.  Previous record holder was Harry Truman in the depths
        of the Korean War.  Numbers are 28% approval, 69% disapproval.
        http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-04-21-bushrating_N.htm
        \_ Still 66% approval rating amongst Republicans baby!
           If Democrats and Independents had the same loyalty as Republicans,
           they'd rule by now.
        \_ BDS
           \_ eh?
        \_ Mission Accomplished!
        \_ Why are we still talking about Bush? He is irrelevant now.
           He can't lower taxes further. He can't start another war.
                                        \_ actually i think he could!
           He can't save the housing market. He can't lower fuel prices.
           His credibility is low and no one's really listening to him.
           He can still veto but wrt new actions/initiatives, he's pretty
           useless.
           \_ The crapitude of W Bush is still relevant because he is the
              winner of the last two elections and now we have another
              election. It's worth thinking about how and why he got
              elected. Twice. He also happens to still be the president.
              \_ He is a great stick to beat the GOP with, especially since
                 a majority of Republicans still think he is doing a great job.
                 \_ Causality. Is he still getting 66% approval from R
                    because he's doing a great job? Or is he getting 66%
                    approval from R because the R party is great and loyal?
                    It's more of the latter. As Ronald Reagan the
                    God of the R said one, thou shall never speak ill of
                    thy friend, family, and affiliates.
           \_ He can also start a war with Iran, which he seems hellbent on
              doing.
2008/3/25-28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49565 Activity:nil
3/25    Nancy Reagan endorses McCain!
        \_ I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you.
           \_ More and more I wonder which McCain we're going to get.
2008/3/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49548 Activity:nil
3/24    An honest dialogue about race
        http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=9955
        \_ I see very little honesty there.
2008/3/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49486 Activity:high
3/18    Full text of Obama's "pastor" speech.  Whatever else you might think,
        this is moving stuff.  I guess you can either choose to believe it
        or not.
        http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/full_text_of_obamas_big_race_s.php#more
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU
        \_ Not only do I not think it's moving, I think it's a cynical
           side-step.
           \_ That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.  However, I think
              the bulk of people who would consider voting for Obama at all
              will consider it brave, principled, and devout.  He may be doomed
              by the Idiocracy that only thinks in 5 second sound bites,
              but he probably would never win with these folks anyway.  Whether
              they may make up 50% + 1 of the electorate remains to be seen.
           \_ My original response to you was nuked.  On the assumption that
              it wasn't you that nuked it, let me ask, in what way did you find
              it cynical, exactly?
        \_ He will make a great President. My father still talks about JFK
           and how much me moved a generation, we are going to finally see
           and how much he moved a generation, we are going to finally see
           something similar: a man of great charima, passion and intergrity
           something similar: a man of great charima, passion and integrity
           who is going to move America in a new and better direction.
           \_ But... but... he's black!  You know that those people are
              all lazy shifty criminals who hate the white people and want
              payback!  My god, HE HATES AMERICA!  AND SO DO YOU!
           \_ I just got back from a two-week vacation in Australia. Every
              conversation longer than five minutes that I had with Aussies
              turned to the US Dem Primaries. There's a lot of hope/interest
              in Obama, even abroad. --erikred
              \_ Fortunately the rest of the world does not vote for our
                 leaders.
                 \_ Your statement is difficult to unpack. Are you suggesting
                    that it is fortunate that the rest of the world does not
                    vote for our leaders, that it is fortunate that the rest
                    of the world has no say in the choosing of our leaders, or
                    that despite his popularity abroad, Americans are unlikely
                    to elect Obama?
                    \_  All three.  I don't see a difference between A&B which
                        is what I meant when I posted, but C is also true, but
                        not because he is or is not popular with the rest of
                        the world.  Americans as a whole don't vote on that
                        basis.  The reason it is fortunate that non-citizens
                        do not vote is they would obviously vote for someone
                        best for their own country, not ours.  I think it goes
                        without saying (although I'm saying it :)) that an
                        elected official in any office should represent the
                        interests of the voters/citizens, not random people
                        from some other country who have their own government
                        and election system.
                        \_ *shrug* I don't see how my initial statement that
                           there's a lot of hope/interest in Obama, even
                           abroad, led to your statement. Perhaps I'm just
                           still jetlagged. --erikred
                           \_ We'll try again later.
                        \_ After six years of Freedom Fries and calling our
                           allies names, our reputation abroad could use
                           some improvement.
                           \_ You're confused.
                              \_ What do you imagine that I might be confused
                                 about? Do you think that our reputation abroad
                                 has gone up under The Decider? Do you think
                                 that our declining reputation is a good
                                 thing?
           \_ Historically JFK seems to have been a pretty poor president.
              See "A Legacy of Ashes."
              \_ I agree. Ronald Reagan is our hero.
              \_ Not sure I agree entirely, since he only had 3 years in which
                 to work before he was shot.  He did inspire a generation to
                 service and to get to the Moon.  He did well in the Cuban
                 Missile Crisis, the closest we ever came to full on nuclear
                 war with Russia (imagine if LBJ had been prez for that).
                 Then again, he did get us further into Vietnam.  Hard to
                 say.
s
                 \_ And he made it ok to go outside without a hat.  That alone
                    is worth being a hero.
                    \_ It would be nice if people wore more hats. It's
                       also good for us guys with thinning hair.
                 \_ So you think that last year would've been pivotal?  Or are
                    you saying it takes 2 full terms to matter?
                    \_ I'm just not sure. I don't think there is a hard and
                       fast rule.  As an enduring postive symbol of America, I
                       think there's no question that he's had impact, just as
                       Reagan did and continues to do so - though Reagan's
                       second term wasn't exactly littered with great
                       accomplishments.  I think to put him in the same
                       category as say, Garfield or Harding, is a mistake.
                       I don't think we can say for sure what he would have
                       gone on to accomplish, but I think it's fair to say
                       that the '60s would have been quite different without
                       the trauma of his assassination.  Talk to boomers about
                       it - for a lot of them, it defined their lives.
                       \_ re: boomers.  Absolutely.  I 100% agree.  OTOH, I
                          don't care that all those people remember where they
                          were and what color their socks were when they heard
                          he got shot.  As a realist I only care what he (or
                          anyone else) did or did not accomplish.  I'm not sure
                          I agree the 60s would have been any different though
                          if he had lived.  The US would still have been hip
                          deep in Vietnam.  The hippies would have hipped.
                          Free love would have been just as not-quite free.
                          Am I missing something?
                          \_ The Civil Rights Act.
                             \_ Uhm no.  That was grass roots.  Without the
                                marches, the water cannons, dogs, shootings,
                                lynchings and millions of Americans saying
                                "No!" the CRA would never have happened.
                                \_ Uhm no. You can perhaps argue that it would
                                   have been signed sooner or later, but the
                                   Montgomery bus boycott started 10 years
                                   earlier. It took great political courage to
                                   push through the CRA.
                                   \_ People dying on the streets made it
                                      happen, not some paper pushers in DC.
                                      It took no courage to pass something
                                      most of the country was in favor of
                                      given what was going on in the south.
                                      Politicians are by their very nature
                                      not courageous creatures.
                                      \_ What makes you think that a majority
                                         of the country was in favor of it?
                                         As LBJ said, it gave the South to
                                         the GOP for at least a generation.
        \_ Replace all references to Reverend Wright in that speech with
           David Duke and you might get a feel for why I'm not that impressed.
           \_ So you think the two are the same?  Really?  Are you insane?
              \_ One's a white guy who hates black people, and the other is
                 a black guy who hates white people.  What's the difference?
                 Enlighten me.
                 \_ The United Church of Christ doesn't burn crosses on
                    people's lawns.
                 \_ Uh, please show me where he hates white people.  Seriously.
                    I've seen the videos.  I don't see him shouting how
                    WHITEY MUST DIE.
                    \_ Which videos? I have yet to see a url that points me
                       to these videos.
                       \_ In other words, you're comparing David Duke, former
                          Grand Dragon of the KKK, an organization publically
                          and vocally dedicated to racism, to Rev. Wright, a
                          man whose views you only know through reports in
                          Right Wing Media? Dude, more research, please, before
                          opening mouth.
                          \_ Different person, moron.
                             \_ Wow, if only you'd signed your post, AC.
                                \_ It's pretty obviously a different person.
                                   Sheesh.  I signed as well as you did.
                                   \_ 1) This obvious you speak of is not so
                                         obvious.
                                      2) I'm not the one who complained about
                                         being mistaken for someone else. If
                                         you really want to be differentiated,
                                         sign your posts.
                                      \_ I suppose it's only obvious if you
                                         have an IQ over 12.  I'll spell it
                                         out for you.  If you're discussing an
                                         article/video, and post comes along
                                         from someone who doesn't even know
                                         there IS a video, it's probably not
                                         from the same guy.
                   \_ And David Duke claims to not be racist, but that he is
                      "a racial realist defending human rights."  So what?
                      I admit, I don't have a 'smoking gun' statement, I'm
                      just infering from his attitude and general distain for
                      'Amerikkka' and 'middleclassness.' (acting like whitey)
                      At the very least we know he is a conspiracy nut.
                      \_ Please document.  Seriously.  Because I have a
                         feeling your ass is getting very empty right now.
                         \_ You said you saw the videos.  Perhaps they weren't
                            the same videos?  You could also read the
                            church website, but it's been purged recently.
                            link:csua.org/u/l2c (church pdf) Or you could
                            read Obama's first book, "Dreams From My Father."
                            Perhaps you should not be insulting other's
                            research.  I've obviously done more than you.
                            \_ Yup, it's totally empty.
                            \_ Keep deleting this if you want, but it
                               is still obvious your ass well is running dry.
                               \_ Are you kidding? I love it when people ask
                                  for evidence, and when you give it to them,
                                  they say "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU! LALALA!"
                                  I admit, you win, I laughed first.
                                  \_ There is no way any of the things you
                                     are talking about come anyway close to
                                     David Duke.  In any way shape or form.
                                     I'm sorry but this whole thing should
                                     be a total non-story.
                                     \_ I've heard some of his sermons on the
                                        radio.  There is no way that a) any
                                        reasonable person can consider what he
                                        said anything but racist and hateful
                                        or b) that someone who knew the guy
                                        for 20 years, called him mentor,
                                        attended his church for 20 years and
                                        had him as a campaign advisor has no
                                        clue what the guy has been saying and
                                        doesn't agree with at least some of
                                        it.  --someone else
                                        \_ So I am supposed to take the word
                                           of some anonymous motd hozer, in
                                           the abscence of any evidence what-
                                           soever? I am curious, are you one
                                           of the guys who thought invading
                                           Iraq was a good idea, too? If these
                                           sermons are so racist, find the
                                           text of one on the Net and share
                                           it and let me decide for myself.
                                           Your judgement is suspect to me.
                                           \_ It took me 10 seconds to find
                                              a pile of links.  It took 10
                                              more to find links from a
                                              sufficiently left wing source
                                              that you might accept them:
                        http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788&page=1
                        http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4443230
                                              I can't play the video but it
                                              should be the live speech.  If
                                              not, you can easily find the
                                              video or audio elsewhere.  Have
                                              a good evening.
                                              \_ I looked at both of those
                                                 and watched the video. Which
                                                 quote exactly is the problem?
                                                 You had no idea what you were
                                                 talking about before and now
                                                 you can't find shit.
                                                 \_ Ok, now you're just
                                                    trolling.  No reasonaable
                                                    human being can call that
                                                    anything but hateful.
                                                    \_ Were P Robertson and J
                                                       Falwell's musings on
                                                       "God removing his
                                                       protection on 9/11"
                                                       more or less "hateful"
                                                       in your beady little
                                                       mind?
                                                    \_ Which?
                                                    \_ It is about as "hateful"
                                                       as your average Rush
                                                       Limbaugh show or rant
                                                       from Ann Coulter, which
                                                       is to say, yes. Not
                                                       racist though, at least
                                                       it doesn't seem so to me.
                                                       is to say, yes somewhat.
                                                       Not racist though, at
                                                       least it doesn't seem
                                                       seem to me, a white guy.
                                                       so to me, a white guy.
                                                       \_ If Ann and Rush were
                                                          Obama's advisors and
                                                          friends of 20 years
                                                          they wouldn't get a
                                                          pass like Wright.
                                                          \_ Which is why
                                                             Ann can talk at
                                                             the RNC and call
                                                             Edwards a fagot
                                                             and the media
                                                             barely pays any
                                                             attention to
                                                             the story?  Why
                                                             McCain can suck
                                                             up to a preacher
                                                             who calls the
                                                             Catholic church
                                                             Satanists and he
                                                             gets a pass?  Why
                                                             Pat Roberston can
                                                             blame 9/11 on gays
                                                             and feminists and
                                                             still be sucked up
                                                             to by the
                                                             republican
                                                             machine?  This is
                                                             whole thing is
                                                             bullshit.  Obama
                                                             didn't say these
                                                             things but he
                                                             takes the hit.
                                                             Meanwhile major
                                                             rep. powers spew
                                                             tons more hate
                                                             regularly and
                                                             noone blinks.
        How is being the subject of intense media      _/
        scrutiny and being the number one story in
        newspapers all over the country qualify
        as "getting a pass"?
2008/2/27-3/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49276 Activity:low
2/26    Goodbye, Bill Buckley, you magnificent bastard.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080227/ap_on_re_us/obit_buckley
        \_ Some of Buckley's vaginal orgasms:
           Buckley vs. Gore Vidal
           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYymnxoQnf8
           Buckley vs. Chomsky
           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt-GUAxmxdk
           \- good riddance.
              \_ some low life here always wishes ill upon the dead.  he's
                 gone.  get over him.  move on.
                 \- i am not sure what your point is, but let me elaborate
                    on mine:
                    Wm Buckley "mastered" the art of defending a self-serving
                    set of ideas in a forum he controlled. He looks smart
                    and shiney next to talk show hacks, and perhaps is
                    somebody you look up to when you mature from a
                    High School Randroid into a freshly card carrying
                    college republican. But a deep and original thinker
                    like say Robert Nozick? Hardly. Although Cheney makes
                    him look good. [and yes i know Conservatism != Randoidism]
                    \_ He's dead.  Attacking dead people doesn't hurt them.
                       I'm concerned for your emotional and mental well being,
                       not WFB's reputation or feelings.  It's unhealthy.
                 \_ You're joking, right? It's WFB. Some of his best friends
                    are still going to spit on his grave.
                    \_ Like who?  URL?
           \_ wow.  i really want a "...Mr. Anderson" on that 2nd video
        \_ http://www.csua.org/u/kxl (NY Times)
           David Brooks on Buckley.
2008/2/22-26 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49217 Activity:nil
2/22    So when will we know who'll be on the ballot for sure?
        \_ After both conventions are over.
           \_ Where the front runners don't have enough delegates in either
              party and they appoint Reagan vs. Gore.
              \_ Stocked up on crack again I see?
                 \_ Just because both men are dead is no reason they can't be
                    their party's candidate.  Dead people vote.  Why can't
                    they run for office?
2008/2/22-25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49213 Activity:high
2/21    Isn't it weird that assassinated or attempted assassinated
        presidents are usually portrayed as good presidents in
        media, books, etc? Do we EVER say bad things to people in their
        obituaries? I mean, if president Nixon was assassinated, would
        we say nicer things today?
        \_ Well thank god no one tried anything funny on George W Bush,
           otherwise he'd be known as a great President.        -Democrat
        \_ Counterexample: Gerald Ford.  -tom
           \_ listen up tom holub, the key word is usually
           \_ I'm not sure Ford is a good example, his obits seem
              positive:
              http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/863634.stm
              http://preview.tinyurl.com/2e9n3k (washingtonpost.com)
              http://preview.tinyurl.com/y5yxvu (telegraph.co.uk)
              And the only real "bad thing" I've ever heard
              about Ford that I've heard (from non-kooks) is that
              he was klutzy.
              And the only really "bad thing" I've ever heard re
              Ford (from non-kooks) is that he was klutzy.
              \_ Ford was ineffectual.  Obits are never negative; even
                 Nixon got transformed into a respected elder statesman.  -tom
                 \- Notes on the Passing of an American Monster:
              http://home.lbl.gov:8080/~psb/Articles/Politics/NixonObit-HST.txt
                    There were plenty of negative comments upon the death
                    of the Indonesian Crook Suharto.
                    There were plenty of negative comments about
                    Benazir Bhutto. By Shashi Tharoor, William Darymple etc.
                    Not a pol but see: http://www.slate.com/id/2111506
                    YMWTFG(samuel johnson lapidary)
                    YMWTGF(samuel johnson lapidary)
                    You guys dont know what you are talking about.
                 \_ Nixon just looks better relative to the current disaster
                    in chief.  They are both crooks but I don't remember Nixon
                    accused of being incompetent and/or intellectually stunted.
                    \- i have kind of a soft spot for nixon [and musharaf]
                       but it is kinda hard to compare W and RMN because
                       the time have changed. for example W would never make
                       the times have changed. for example W would never make
                       the kinds comments to Condi about being black as Nixon
                       did to SuperK about being jewish. but of course SAGENEW
                       never shot an old man in the face and then got him to
                       apologize to the country.
        \_ I hear "A Legacy of Ashes" isn't kind to JFK, but I haven't read
           it yet.
           \_ key word: usually
              \_ This may be the best motd meme since "obviously you've
                 never served."
        \_ "Richard Nixon, hero of his age, began the long painful draw down
           of troops which later led to the end of the Vietnam conflict, also
           responsible for opening China to the West, ending the long cold war
           with our former foe, he shall always be remembered as the greatest
           American President of his era before he was assassinated by unknown
           Democrats".
           agents".
        \_ Pinochet had some pretty mixed obituaries, but no I have never
           seen a bad one for an assassinated US President. You might be
           able to find one written by a foreign newspaper.
           \_ I was in Santiago the day Pinochet died:
              http://flickr.com/photos/tholub/365629145  -tom
        \_ Reagan was attempted assassination, and supposedly he was a bad
           president.
           \_ He defeated an EVIL communist regime and his STAR WARS
              legacy helped us advance our space programs. He is an
              all American HERO and a nice looking actor.
                \_ Thanks to Star Wars we got to shoot down a sattelite.
                   And the fact that the weather cooperated.
                   \_ ... and the fact that the satellite is in a lower
                      altitude than normal orbiting ones.
                      \_ But not lower than an ICBM.
2008/2/14-18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49148 Activity:kinda low
2/14    Seriously, does a black man really have a chance against a more
        experienced (though controversial) white Caucasian candidate?
        Is America really ready for a black President?
        \_ What is this "experience" that she and everyone keep talking
           about?
        \_ Is America ready for a 72 year old President?
           \_ Reagan was 70-78 years old during his presidency.
        \_ What is this "experience" that she keeps talking about?
           \_ Someone had to mind the store while Bill was busy with
              the staff.
        \_ Given how people are talking when interviewed, this really
           appears to have become a non-issue.
        \_ Americans vote for charming winners that appeal to their hearts
           while right wing people vote for smarties (or at least those
           who seem annoyingly smug about their superier intelligence)
                                                \_ Please tell me this
                                                   was edited after the fact.
                        http://csua.com/2008/02/04/#49061_
                        (stop deleting this asshat)
           It's not about the policies, damnit.
           \_ Oh look, it's Mr. MAINSTREAM AMERICA posting again.
           \_ Really? I thought right wing was anti-smarty. It's the
              liberals that always say they're the smart people.
              Big city elites and all that.
              \_ Rush always says that Democrats are a bunch of crack
                 smoking welfare moms. Does he mean welfare moms with
                 PhDs? Don't forget the illegals and lazy Union thugs.
                 Are these all supposed to be intellectuals?
        \_ Think Presidents David and Wayne Palmer. But one hopes that
           Michelle Obama is nothing like Sherry Palmer.
        \_ I love conservatives.  When it comes to policy, 'racism doesn't
           exist anymore.'  When it comes to candidates, 'OH NOES BLACK GUY
           RUN FOR THE HILLS!'
                 \_ Why do you listen to Rush?
        \_ After seeing Presidents David and Wayne Palmer in action,
           America is totally ready for a black president. A black
           first lady, however, is a different story. Hopefully Mrs.
           Obama is nothing like Sherry Palmer.
        \_ This country is not ready for a black president. This contry
           isn't ready for a female president either. However, it is ready
           for a moron president (http://www.presidentmoron.com
2008/2/4-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:49061 Activity:moderate
2/4     Romney is very good looking. My inlaws are voting for him because
        he reminds them of Ronald Reagan. They've always voted for winners
        in the past and have been 100% accurate.
           \_ Yeah?  What do you think of them now, with Romney out of the
              race?  "Even a broken clock is right twice a day".  Also,
              if you have 1000 mutual funds playing the market, some of them
              are going to have extraordinary winning streaks that are more
              owed to randomness than to wisdom on the part of those running
              the mutual fund.
        \_ So now that Romney's out of it what's their accuracy rating? 50%?
        \_ Good looking?  They like how he looks?  Or they like his policies?
           \_ They like the way he carries himself. Ya know, charm,
              confidence, modesty. Things that Americans care about.
        \_ Sounds like your inlaws are going to be <100% accurate come Nov.
        \_ Damn, so does this mean that a few years from now alcohol, coffee,
           cigarettes, and diet coke will be outlawed, and everyone will
           be allowed to have more than one wife?
           \_ I'm not a Mormon but I'm against alcohol, cigarettes, and
              gambling since they've had crippling effects on my family.
              I don't care about diet coke or caffeine as they haven't
              affected me personally. The multiple wife thing is a serious
              issue since it'll create more desperate single restless
              young men w/o a wife to whip them (e.g. hateful, restless
              Middle East young men effect). I don't care about gay
              marriage, religion, etc. In all I don't have anything
              against Romney, and I may just end up voting for him.
                                        -Undecided Independent
              \_ I have no problem with people eschewing alcohol, cigarettes,
                 gambling, etc. on their own; I have a huge problem with them
                 telling me I shouldn't indulge those vices.
           \_ No, but I hear he is planning on declaring a "War on Trolls."
              Watch out!
        \_ Wow, two time Bush voters? Your inlaws are smart folk!
           \_ They're NOT smart, that's the whole thing. Americans vote
              for charming winners that appeal to their hearts while
              left wing people vote for smarties (or at least those
              who seem annoyingly smug about their superier intelligence)
              It's not about the policies, damnit.
              \_ Oh I see, you're just trolling.  Left-wing people are not
                 American?
                 \_ San Franciscan style left wing is not MAINSTREAM America
2008/2/1-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:49049 Activity:kinda low
2/1     Who should McCain add as VP?
        \_ Ann Coulter, for full comedic value
        \_ The mummified corpse of Ronald Reagan.
        \_ Dick Cheney
        \_ Lieberman
        \_ Joe "Can I suck your Republican dick" Lieberman
           \_ This is actually a good idea.
        \_ Obama
2008/1/23-31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48991 Activity:low
1/22    Sweet, Bush's stimulus package is nearly *twice as large* as the
        one Clinton proposed in 1993, but couldn't get passed.  Go
        Bushonomics!
        \_ So who are you blasting? Is it a good idea that was unfairly spiked
           in 1993, so....Bush is bad?
           \_ Dunno about op, but I find it to be more evidence of how BushCo
              is lacking in principles, even ones I don't support. Morally
              bankrupt doesn't do it justice.
              \_ Wait, wasn't congress a majority D in 1993?  What does this
                 have to do with BushCo?  Okay, now checking:
                 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/103rd_United_States_Congress
                 The D's had a majority in both houses and the presidency. How
                 does what they failed to pass mean anything wrt Bush?
                 \_ Clinton proposed a stimulus package that would have raised
                    the Deficit; har, har, snicker conservatives, typical Dem.
                    Bush proposes _twice as large_ stim package, yet pretends
                    to be fiscally conservative Rep in the tradition of Reagan.
                    The irony is enough to cure world-wide anemia.
                    \_ Reagan was never fiscally conservative.
                       Reagan == trickle down economics. High deficit spending
                       is not being fiscally conservative. Ron Paul is the
                       only current candidate promoting fiscal conservativism.
                    \_ Bush hasn't pretended to be fiscally conservative for a
                       long time.  It's why he's lost a lot of his base. See
                       the thread from 1/18 on that very topic. -emarkp
                       \_ Now you're memorizing threads+date? Dang you're
                          a major motd-snob.
                          \_ more like a major motd-geek than a motd-snob.
                          \_ No, I'm not memorizing it, I just remember
                             mentioning it a few days ago. Checking the history
                             was easy. -emarkp
                       \_ Yes, you know that, I know that, lots of people
                          know that. He still keeps pretending.
        \_ So the real story is that Clinton proposed an R idea, and a D
           congress shot it down?
           \_ The real story is that there are no conspiracies. It's all out
              in the open.
        \_ These economic stimulus packages are bogus and don't address the
           fact that the economy is being hollowed out and the financial
           system is out of control due to lack of any kind of regulation.
           Out of control lending and speculation, twin deficits over a
           trillion a year is setting up the system for collapse, all this
           shit Bush and the Fed are doing is just delaying the inevitable.
           \_ The important thing is delaying shit hitting the fan until
              someone else takes over, then it's their problem.
                \_ Yup -- the shit will hit the fan around 2010/2012 when
                   peak oil arrives so whatever party wins the election
                   will get one term and then get dumped (see Carter)
                   \_ You're totally nuts if you think Carter got kicked out
                      because of oil prices or economic events his
                      administration wasn't mostly responsible for.  Maybe
                      you also heard of this little thing called The Iran
                      Hostage Crisis?  Are you old enough to remember the
                      daily count-up on the news reminding us yet another
                      day had gone by while our people were held by a
                      foreign power while Carter stood around with two thumbs
                      up his ass telling us how America should get used to
                      being a third rate power?  Sheesh.  I could go on but
                      there's no point.
                        \_ I had forgotthen how Reagan solved the Iran hostage
                           crisis in the first 5 minutes of his Presidency ...
                           \_ I'm sure you forgot because it has nothing at all
                              to do with anything I said about Carter.  Nice
                              try.
                   \_ PEEK OIL!!!!11!!
           \_ Yeah, we got to this point for a reason. Cutting the rate
              more and spending more is just digging the hole deeper. Maybe
              it will prop up housing again for a while with more cheap credit.
        \_ Isn't the economy more than twice as large today?
           \_ Not even close. It's like ~9:13. 1:1.7 in real dollars.
              (According to US budget tables.)
              \_ Is Bush's budget stimulus twice as large in real dollars
                 or nominal dollars? In nominal dollars the economy is
                 almost exactly twice as big:
                 http://www.forecasts.org/data/data/GDP.htm
                 \_ For some reason I was comparing against 2000. You're
                    right about nominal dollars vs. 1993. But in real dollars
                    it's still only like 33% bigger. Hooray for inflation.
                    And that also assumes the government CPI shit is accurate.
                    (I'll let the op figure out whatever he was referring to.)
2007/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:48584 Activity:kinda low
11/8    Character counts. Kerry has no character. Neither do any of the Ds.
        \_ Ah, astoundingly useless statement.  Hey, how bout "All R's are
           corrupt!"  You sound like the twat you are.
           \_ again this is why liberals don't win. they think intelligence
              and reasoning win votes. Nooooooo. It's all in the CHARACTER.
              Case in point, Ronald Reagan. It didn't matter what policy
              he had. The smile, the tone, the confidence... CHARACTER COUNTS.
           \_ Seesh, you fell for that lame-o strawman troll?  Idiot. -!op
              \_ It's a slow night.
2007/9/5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:47901 Activity:nil
9/5     'A moment I've been dreading. George brought his ne're-do-well son
        around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the
        political one who lives in Florida. The one who hangs around here
        all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost
        40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I'll call Kinsley over at The
        New Republic and see if they'll hire him as a contributing editor or
        something. That looks like easy work.' The REAGAN DIARIES -May 17, 1986
2007/8/28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:47770 Activity:high
8/27    Surprising facts: ppl with children are no happier than those who
        don't, retirees no happier than workers, pet owners no happier than
        those without pets, etc etc. Also, R happier than D, the young are
        less happy than the middle-aged and old, suburbanites are happier
        than city folks.
        http://pewresearch.org/pubs/301/are-we-happy-yet
        \_ Why is any of this surprising?  Every choice has plusses and
           minuses.
        \_ You do end up happier if you're married, though, on average.
           How about that, BDG?
2007/8/2-22 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:47519 Activity:nil
8/2     U.S. highway system badly in need of repair. No funding!
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20095291/from/RS.4
        \_ Ronald Reagan is proud of his tax cuts.
           \_ Reagan is dead.  He is not proud of anything.  2007.
        \_ Obviously, the hgihway system is one of the many government fat
           that needs to be cut and privatized. There is no need to raise
           tax. Free market will solve the problem.             -Conservative
        \_ Don't worry, President Guiliani will protect us from the
           Terra-rists....
        \_ Now that the majority of the budget is just wealth transfer, how do
           you expect to pay for roads?
           \_ You aint seen nothin yet!  Wait til you start getting charged a
              carbon use tax on everything you buy.
2007/7/8-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:47223 Activity:nil
7/8     Its all Mr. Roger's Fault:
        http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118358476840657463.html
        \_ Mr. Roger is like Ronald Reagan. Nice guy & well mannered.
           However, as good as their intentions were, the long term
           positive impact of their actions are in question.
2007/7/6-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:47205 Activity:low
7/6     Forget about the first female future president or the first minority
        future president.  Here's the first white male future president in
        110 years.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070627/ap_on_re_us/mr_pta
        \_ 'Susan Bailey of Wellesley Centers for Women at Wellesley College
            said the election of a man to the PTA's top post is "exactly the
            kind of thing we would hope would happen more often."'
           Wouldn't it be great if the average American voter could say the
           same thing about a female or minority POTUS?
        \_ Forget the 'First' anything.  The first minority was already elected
           when Kennedy got in, btw.  I don't give a fig about 'First XYZ'
           based on color or gender.  I want honest, competent people in
           office who give a shit, not power mad selfish people who just might
           also happen to be a 'First' or not and I don't care what their
           'party' is.  Currently not seeing anyone running who fits the
           description though, sadly.  That would be my 'First': honest,
           competent, not there for their ego or the personal power, looking
           out for Americans first, not the rest of the world before the
           people who elected them.
           \_ But ask the average joe whether he thinks Kennedy is a minority.
              Look at the Irish community in SF.  Their need as a minority
              group has been largely ignored.
              \_ Ask anyone at the time if Kennedy was a minority.  It was a
                 *huge* big deal at the time and everyone said there was no
                 way a Catholic could get elected and the country just wasn't
                 ready for a Catholic POTUS.  I'm not sure what your point is
                 about SF Irish.
                 \_ Like you said, "at the time".  The average joe nowadays
                    knows more about Paris Hilton's sex life than about US
                    history.
                    \_ It doesn't matter if it was 'at the time' and no longer
                       true.  The fact that Kennedy was the 'First' Catholic
                       puts to rest all further claims of 'a Catholic can
                       never be elected POTUS' because obviously that is not
                       true *after* Kennedy was elected.  This isn't a history
                       quiz and has nothing to do with what the average joe
                       knows about Kennedy.  I don't understand why you bring
                       that up.  I still want an honest, competent person in
                       office of any race/gender/whatever/bullshit and I'm not
                       getting it.  Being a female, a minority, a Catholic, a
                       white, a black, a purple, or anything else does not
                       make for a better -or- worse POTUS.  The content of
                       their character is what matters, not the color of their
                       skin.
          \_ Romney.  Extremely competent, detail oriented, and honest.
             http://economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9441455
2007/7/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:47158 Activity:nil
7/3     http://www.conservapedia.com/Ronald_Wilson_Reagan
        "Ronald Wilson Reagan (February 6, 1911- June 5, 2004), considered
        by many (us conservatives) to be one of the greatest American
        Presidents."
        \_ Your point?
2007/5/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46713 Activity:low
5/19    I think Carter was a wimp.  I read the blackhawk down guy book and
        I think he tried to form a reasonable response to the Iran hostage
        crisis, but he just couldn't get it together.  Whether it was
        the incoming Reagan administration's fault, remains a conspiracy
        buff's dream.  That being said, the Iraq War fuckup is like
        8 million times worse.  Goddamn Bush.
        \_ I'm sorry to see what I figured for a weak troll get any responses,
           although I think you're probably half of them.
        \_ Hey, don't worry, Carter is already backpedaling
           http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18759682
           Carter said, "They were maybe careless or misinterpreted." He said
           he "certainly was not talking personally about any president.
           \_ Which of course means he's just senile.
              \_ Weird, I dont think he was harsh enough.  The Bush
                 administration should be run out off office with flaming
                 pitchforks and driven into the sea.
                 \_ just try him for treason after he get out of office.
                    \_ Before or after he's moved to his new ranch in
                       Argentina?  Oops..  Sorry, it's in Paraguay.
        \_ You mean "In The Company Of Heroes"?
2007/5/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:46703 Activity:kinda low
5/19    http://bp3.blogger.com/_8m7jYiLM_DI/RknOjt4yLuI/AAAAAAAAAFs/P7wSDXcmge0/s1600-h/personal-savings-rate.png
        Personal savings rate plummeted after 1983. What happened?
        I thourght Ronald Reagan preached conservatism. He's a conservative
        afterall, no?
        \_ Reaganomics = spend to increase the cash flow, to kick start
           economy. Behind the nice looks and strong voice is a man whos
           principles are not based on economic, historical, scientific,
           or even academic studies, but basically-- faith. For all of these
           reasons many academics today refer to Reaganomics as Voodoonomics.
           \_ No.  The term voodoo was applied at the time by other politicians
              for political reasons.  Go ahead and look at what actually
              happened in the real economy and compare to 4 years earlier.
              Reaganomics was infinitely better than double digit inflation
              and Malaise Speeches.
        \_ Conservative != preaching personal financial conservatism. Reagan
           economics was based on perception economics: if everyone claps
           their hands and puts a buck in the pot, the market will grow.
           It's not entirely wrong, but it's shaky and hard to maintain.
           Cf. economic bubbles.
        \_ Maybe the fact that during the Reagan administration, unions were
           busted and the average income for the wage earner dropped?
           \_ Typical liberal reasoning. Fact: The Unions were busted long
              before Reagan came along. Fact: The dollar grew stronger
              during the Reagan administration and corporate profits
              soared like never before. Fact: Liberals rarely look at
              the good sides.
              \_ Hrm.. I wonder which affects personal savings more...
                 Higher corporate profits?  Higher wages?  I just don't
                 know.
                 See.. As those good sides are "good" only for a small
                 portion of people, their goodness isn't all that great.
                 \_ You're right.  It is much better for employee income if
                    corporations are having a hard time economically.
                    \_ Typical right-wing wacko reasoning: ignore the
                       possibility that two things can be true, i.e., corp.
                       earnings were up, but avg. income still dropped.
        \_ If you look carefully, the big drop happened from 92 to 2000.
           It was Clinton's example of moral degeneracy that caused the drop.
           \_ Wait, you're blaming a drop in the personal savings rate on
              people paying for blowjobs?
              \_ I don't think Monica got paid.  She closed her eyes and
                 thought of the United States of America.
                 \- she didnt think of the USA. you should watch the
                    Barbara Wawa interview with her ... "so then you went to
                    washtington. were you interested in politics?" "no".
                    \_ Hey, don't bash Barb!  Everyone loves her hard hitting
                       interviews.
        \_ the plummet doesn't look like it occurs until 1987 to me.
2007/5/19-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46697 Activity:moderate
5/19    Bush "The Worst in History" according to Carter:
        http://www.csua.org/u/iq7
        \_ Not surprisingly, he's a liberal.            !emarkp
        \_ "I mean heck, he may even be worse than me now!" Carter added.
        \_ Just about everyone I know, assholes, pious people, liberals,
           conservatives, libertarians, apolitical people, political
           people, think Bush is The Worst In History.  Iraq is really
           a gigantic fuckup of difficult to fully comprehend
           proportions.
           \_ You obviously don't know emarkp and his fellows.
              \_ I'd be hesitant to call *any* president the worst in history.
                 Given Carter's ineptitude (not because he's liberal, just
                 because he's incompetent) he should be a little careful
                 throwing stones. -emarkp
                 \_ i don't think anyone can deal with oil embargo
                    like that gracefully.  Further, may I ask, do you think
                    GW Bush incompetent?
                    \_ Oil embargo?  The one in 73 when Carter wasn't in
                       office?
                 \_ *shrug* He followed Ford, whose defining moments were
                    pardoning Nixon and falling down stairs, and was followed
                    by Reagan, who proved that popularity has nothing to do
                    with being a good, let alone honest and effective, leader.
                    I'd say his glass house has fine foundations.
                    \_ Ford was actually quite athletic.  Don't watch too
                       much SNL for your history lessons.
                       \_ As noted here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/yun246
                          I didn't say he was Chevy Chase, I said it was one
                          of his defining moments. Read or perish.
           \_ Not really.  Carter's mis-handling of Iran changed the world in
              ways Bush's mis-handling of Iraq can't compare to.  Had Carter
              shown strength instead of weakness it is possible and even quite
              likely the concept of terrorism as we know it today wouldn't
              even exist.  If you're going to make historical claims you must
              look at things from a historical perspective.
                        \_ Wow!  Carter did NOT:
                           - Use torture
                           - Allow torture of POW's
                           - Imprison people without trial
                           - Render people to other countries for torture
                           - Lie to get the US into a war
                           - Erode our rights in the name of patriotism
                           - Allow rampant incompetence and corruption in his
                             Administration (except possibly HIMSELF if you
                             argue that his handling of IRAN was incompetent)
                           - Mishandle a war so badly that the US is failing
                             its objectives despite massive waste of national
                             treasure
                           - Alienate virtually the entire planet
                           - Allow a massive terrorist attack to occur on US
                             territory during his administration
                           - Allow the illegal outing of a CIA agent for
                             petty political retaliation
                           UM, WHY AREN'T WE IMPEACHING BUSH AGAIN?  HE IS THE
                           WORST PRESIDENT EVER!!!!
              \_ Who are you, Charles Krauthammer?  I don't think Iran was
                 involved in the whole Russia invades Afghanistan->We dump
                 billions of dollars and weapons on Afghanistan to ensnare
                 Russia in a War Of Pain->Russia leaves->Russia collapses->
                 \_ You really think Afghanistan was the root cause of the
                    collapse of the Soviet Union?  After saying this it makes
                    the rest of what you say hard to take seriously.
                    \_ I think it helped.  Wasnt main cause.  Sure didnt hurt!
                 We forget about Afghanistan-> IT ALL COMES BACK
                 TD BITES US IN THE ASS-> chain of events. of maybe
                 Iran helped us channel a few guns to Afghanistan. How
                 ANY of this would have been changed if we had 'shown strength
              \_ Who are you, Charles Krauthammer?  I don't think Iran was involved
                 in the whole Russia invades Afghanistan->We dump billions of
                 dollars and weapons on Afghanistan to ensnare Russia in a War Of
                 Pain->Russia leaves->Russia collapses->We forget about Afghanistan->
                 IT ALL COMES BACK AND BITES US IN THE ASS-> chain of events.
                 ok maybe Iran helped us channel a few guns to Afghanistan.
                 How ANY of this would have been changed if we had 'shown strength
                 in Iran', I do not know.  Russia would not have cared.  A bunch
                 of dudes living in caves in Afghanistan would not have cared.
                 Please explain your Carter fantasy?
                 of dudes living in caves in Afghanistan would not have cared.  Please
                 explain your Carter fantasy?
              \_ Your historical perspective is the one that needs fixing.
                 \_ Thanks for adding nothing.  Maybe next time you'll do
                    better than "you're wrong, nyah!" but I doubt it.
              \_ Look further back: if the CIA hadn't instigated the overthrow
                 of the democratically elected President of Iran and the
                 reinstatement of the Shah, extremists like Khomeni would never
                 have gained widespread support in '79. No Khomeni, no
                 hostage situation, and no Islamic Revolution running a nuclear
                 Iran today. Sure, Carter can be blamed for funding Mujahadeen
                 in Afghanistan, but then you'd have to paint your Saint Ronnie
                 with the same brush; worse, people might remember that whole
                 Iran-Contra scandal, and then the hagiography really falls
                 apart.
                 \_ The CIA didn't take action in a vacuum.  Leaving a pro-
                    Soviet/anit-US government in Iran may have been worse
                    than what we got.  It is hard to say but I'll grant that
                    yes Khomeni didn't come out of no where.  OTOH, his group
                    was just as likely to overthrow any non-Islamic government
                    so it may not have mattered.  Reagan is not my saint
                    anymore than Carter is my satan.  They are men.  They were
                    Presidents.  They did what they did.  I examine their
                    actions in a historical context.  I don't care beyond that.
                    I don't even see why you'd try to bring anyone else into
                    it.  To defend Carter?  Who cares?  Boost Reagan?  Who
                    cares?  That is completely unimportant trivial political
                    agenda crap.
                    \_ The charges of Bolshevism in Iran were frankly baseless.
                       The UK was upset about Mossadegh nationalizing the AIOC
                       and convinced Eisenhower to sic the CIA on him. We fell
                       victim to the whole enemy-of-my-enemy mindset and worked
                       to reinstate the Shah. (Cf. eerie parallels with Iraq
                       and Chalabi). While Khomeni's group was anti-non-
                       Islamic govt., it's unlikely they'd have had the support
                       they had from ordinary Iranians if it hadn't been for
                       the brutal repression inflicted by the Shah, and thus
                       it's unlikely they could have actually overthrown a
                       democratically elected Iranian govt. descended from
                       Mossadegh and co.
              \_ Terrorism existed long before Carter and will exist long
                 after we are all dead. It is naive and foolish to believe
                  after we are all dead. It is niave and foolish to believe
                 otherwise. Unless you are trying to say something else with
                 your statement "the concept of terrorism as we know it
                 today." Do you mean that Carter changed our conception
                 of terrorism?
                 \_ "As we know it today".  Meaning that I really don't care
                    if some folks in whatever country get pissed off enough
                    to take some violent but overall minor action which has
                    always been going on, as opposed to becoming the new way
                    of lesser powers to wage war by heavily funding, arming,
                    training, and supporting people who have nothing better
                    to do full time than try to do as much damage as possible.
                    The key difference being that the minor separatist group
                    is unlikely to ever do much or go anywhere while a group
                    supported by a state has options and capabilites sufficient
                    to kill thousands and make real changes.
                    \_ Um, Al Qaida, 9/11, hijackers, airplanes. WTC.
                    \_ This is not really a new phenomenea. Just off the
                       \_ Yeah, exactly.  Did you read the thread at all before
                          posting?
                    \_ This is not really a new phenomena. Just off the
                       top of my head I can think of the French supporting
                       the American Colonial seperatists and the English
                        \_ and Americans blew up a lot of british in the UK?
                       then supporting the Southern Confederates. Also,
                        \_ The SC blew up the French at home?
                       remember that WWI was started by a terrorist, when
                        \_ assassin, lone gunman, not part of a multinational
                           movement with national level support.
                       he shot Duke Ferdinand. Nations have always waged
                       proxy war by supporting seperatist groups inside
                       their rivals. You could argue that the widespread
                       availability of WMD has changed the equation of
                       assymetrical warfare, but it is pretty hard to lay
                       that at the feet of Carter.
                       \_ One of my favorite historical proxy conflicts was
                          Rome and Constantinople duking it out in ancient
                          Romania and Bulgaria. Romanians and Bulgarians are
                          *still* mad at each other, nearly 1200 years later.
                       \_ It is not hard to lay the concept of modern terrorism
                          at Carter's feet.  Prior to Carter there were many
                          nationalist movements but no organised multinational
                          terrorists funded and supported by various nations
                          who had vague but large scale goals of "kill all the
                          people in the west" or some such like we see today.
                          \_ To "lay it at Carter's feet", you need to show
                             some underlying cause.  "Because it happened
                             around the same time" is not enough.  If
                             coincidence was evidence, you could say the
                             Beatles' breakup could be lain at Nixon's feet.
                             \_ "Those Liverpool cocksuckers...." -RMN
                          \_ The Jews and the Catholics are still mad at each
                             other after nearly 2000 years.
2007/5/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46612 Activity:nil 92%like:46611
5/13    A twist on the usual nonsense.  Are you really a Republican or a
        Democrat?
        http://urltea.com/jnc (realclearpolitics.com)
        \_ Given the plurality of our nation it makes very little sense to
           associate one self as a "pure" Democrat or Republican. A smart
           person is happy to give up faith and blind party loyalty to
           adaptability and logic. A smart person does not associate oneself
           to purely one party. A smart person is one who is independent.
2007/5/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46611 Activity:insanely high 92%like:46612
5/13    A twist on the usual nonsense.  Are you really a Republican or a
        Democrat?
     http://realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/revive_the_republican_way_of_w.html
        \_ Given the plurality of our nation it makes very little sense to
           associate one self as a "pure" Democrat or Republican. A smart
           person is happy to give up faith and blind party loyalty to
           adaptability and logic. A smart person does not associate oneself
           to purely one party. A smart person is one who is independent.
2007/4/12-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46278 Activity:nil
4/12    Free advice to the Bush Administration: Turn whatever machine you have
        for passing on talking points toward getting your people to stop f-ing
        up, at least for a while; there are too many fish in the shooting
        bucket already:
        http://news.google.com/?ncl=1115102767&hl=en (Wolfowitz, girlfriend)
        \- FT call on Wolfowitz to resign. Let's hope others chime in.
           \- meanwhile, back at the DoJ:
              http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1610738,00.html
              (although these guys were never the biggest fans of ALBERTO.
              although i cant imagine they are going to get somebody hugely
              more appealing now, unless it is a senator)
2007/4/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:46210 Activity:kinda low
4/5     Ye who be so offended by Pelosi's trip, did this bother you too?
        http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/04/05/gingrich_china
        \_ What about Nixon's secret negotiations with North Vietnam? Or
           Reagan's secret negotiations with Iran?
           \_ You could argue that Nixon visiting China doesn't count.
              He is the Executive Branch and is in charge of foreign
              policy.
              \_ No, I mean Nixon encouraging South Vietnam's President
                 to stay away from peace talks with North Vietnam in 68,
                 while he was still a candidate. He was afraid that a
                 peace treaty would be signed and that the Democrats
                 would win the election. Sorry about confusing North
                 and South in my earlier post, I had my history confused.
           \_ Or Franklin's secret negotiations and backdoor deals with
              France?
              \_ Wasn't that guy some kind of terrorist? Should we take
                 him off the $50?
2007/3/22-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46062 Activity:nil
3/22    Pew Research: Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007
        POLITICAL LANDSCAPE MORE FAVORABLE TO DEMOCRATS
        http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-pew23mar23,1,7389496.story?coll=la-headlines-politics&ctrack=1&cset=true
        http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/312.pdf
2007/2/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45814 Activity:low
2/24    http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Enc/Reaganomics.html
        Truth liburals can't take-- Reaganomics (cutting tax, deregulation,
        and cutting government waste) really works.
        \_ I'm going to call that a slanted opinion piece.  Yes the author
           used to be an econ prof at Berkeley, but he wrote the above
           originally for the National Review, and he is now the HEAD
           of the Cato Institute.  I don't think everyone at the Cato
           Institute is a bat shit crazy person, but anything written about
           Reagan tax policies by that guy is going to have one slant
           and only one slant only.  There was an interesting article
           a few years ago in the Atlantic Monthly about Reagan, and
           the above author (A close advisor of Reagon) and his tax
           policies that I might pull up.
           \_ So which part is slanted? -emarkp
        \_ Wow, one economist wrote something on the internet, it must be
           true!  Let's conveniently ignore all the other things equally
           respected economists have written in peer reviewed journals!  If
           it's on the internet, it must be true!  Liberals are stupid! -dans
           \_ Which articles were you refering to?
        \_ So far as I know, no one, not even your straw man "liburals"
           are in favor of government waste. -ausman
           \_ I am in favor of government waste.  --straw man "libural".
              Seriously, though, your statement is a strawman.  Of course no
              one is in favor of waste.  The issue is the definition of waste.
              One man's valuable and useful program is another's waste.
2007/2/18-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45767 Activity:nil
2/17    In the spirit of President's Day:
        http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0717-19.htm
        http://consortiumnews.com/2002/112902a.html
        \- The House and the Senate were both about 56% Dem in '72. --psb
2007/2/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45732 Activity:nil
2/13    Romney(R) has the charisma of Ronald Reagan. Romney is going to
        kick everyone's ass, including the libural devisive woman candidate
        and the negro who is one letter away from having Osama's name.
        http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/13/romney.announce/index.html
        \_ Barack Obama == Black Osama?  Anyway, I want a black president but
           I want Colen Powell.
2007/1/25-28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45584 Activity:nil
1/24    Gonzales thinks you have no RIGHT to habeas relief:
        http://tinyurl.com/39moz4 (sfgate.com)
        And why does Arlen Specter hate America?
2007/1/7-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45534 Activity:nil
1/12    http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/12/ford.presidents.ap/index.html
        "When it came to implementation, his record (Reagan) never matched
         his words. Reagan was probably the least well-informed on the details
         of running the government of any president I knew. He was just a poor
         manager, and you can't be president and do a good job unless you
         manage."
2006/12/5-8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45412 Activity:nil
12/4    Ronald Reagan is an American hero.              -conservative
        \_ Generic left-wing criticism of Reagan. And Bush. -liberal
2006/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45300 Activity:kinda low 66%like:45296 80%like:45298
11/9    Allen to concede this afternoon:
        http://tinyurl.com/y25erv (washingtonpost.com)
        \_ No recount?
           \_ What for?  7k is too big a margin to bother.  Although if it was
              120k and in Ohio then a number of people would be screaming
              fraud and recount and disenfranchisement.  At least Kerry had
              the balls to do the right thing and let it go.  So does Allen.
              \_ Allen let it go because previous recounts have in VA have not
                 yielded enough of a difference to allow for a conceivable
                 victory. Also, there's every indication that he'll run again,
                 and if he does, he won't want to be remembered as the loser of
                 a recount.
                 \_ If it was a smaller number I'm sure he would've fought it
                    but 7k is just silly in such a small state.  Even in CA
                    that would be a tough number to overcome.
2006/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45298 Activity:nil 80%like:45300
11/9    Allen to concede this afternoon:
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/y25erv (washingtonpost.com)
        \_ No recount?
2006/11/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:45077 Activity:low
11/01   Just saw this on CNN:
        Would Alex P. Keaton back Fox on stem cells?
        \_ You could just put the URL:
           http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/01/alexpkeaton/index.html
           \_ Do you remember when CNN was 'the news network that didn't
              suck'?  What happened?
              \_ CNN cable and CNN web are different animals
2006/10/26-30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:44998 Activity:nil
10/26   Ollie North, Ortega-Contra reunion tuor, 2006!
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061024/ts_nm/nicaragua_usa_dc_2
2006/10/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:44996 Activity:low
10/26   wow, check out http://drudgereport.com's headline.  that's some quality
        mudslinging, probably the GOP candidate's only hope.  the books are
        fiction, btw.
        \_ That's pretty awesome.  Reagan (and plenty of other people)
           thought Allen's book "Fields Of Fire" was the best book
           written on the Vietnam War, ever.
        \_ California Inferno?
           \_ refresh!  mebbe your proxy is messed up
        \_ OK, what the fuck is it w/ politicans and perverted fictional sex?
        \_ D'oh!  Webb's in some deep macaca.
        \_ Why do you think being fictional saves his ass?  That makes it
           even worse.  He's not reporting something he witnessed, it came
           from his own twisted brain.
           \_ did i say/imply being fictional makes it better?  yes, i agree it
              makes it worse. -op
              \_ yes.
                 \_ reading comprehension++
           \_ You obviously have not served...
2006/10/16-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:44830 Activity:nil
10/16   As you listen to Nancy Pelosi promise to clean up what she calls a
        "swamp" of congressional problems, remember the following facts from
        her record:
        1. Pelosi voted three times to make a convicted page sexual predator,
           former Congressman Gerry Studds (D-Mass.), chair of a congressional
           committee.
        2. In 1990, Pelosi voted against censuring Barney Frank for having his
           live-in boyfriend run a prostitution ring from Frank's apartment.
        3. Pelosi raised no objections when Clinton pardoned Democrat
           Congressman Mel Reynolds (Ill.) who had been convicted of felonies
           for having had sex with a 16-year-old campaign worker.
        The historic Nancy Pelosi is an authentic representative of San
        Francisco liberal values and hardly has the record to lecture anyone on
        cleaning up the Congress.
        http://www.humanevents.com/winningthefuture.php?id=17453
        \_ dont care.  mess in Iraq is enough for me to not vote
           Republican.  They really fucked up and must pay the
           consequences.
        \_ No, I don't think a one-party government is good for America.
           \_ The two-party government is decreasingly good at fixing the one-
              party problems though.  It's like the cloned Jacks from Futurama.
              \_ "decreasingly good at"?
                 \_ fine "increasingly bad at" happy?
                    \_ I think I'll still settle for a two-party government.
           \_ Yes, so stop voting for Dems and Reps and start voting for third
              party candidates who actually believe in something.  Yes, yes,
              they'll never get elected.  *Because* people get what they vote
              for instead of voting for what they want.
        \_ http://csua.org/u/h7s
           90% of the country is religious, but 100% of the Senate.  Hooray.
           And not a one who can vote his or her conscience.  Fuckers.
        \_ As you read your silly partisan websites, consider this silly
           partisan website:
           http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/gopscorecard.php
        \_ Of what crime are you claiming Studds was convicted?
           \_ You mean Reynolds?
        \_ "It's not about the sex, it's about the lying"
2006/9/28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:44587 Activity:nil 61%like:44578
9/27    Why Reagan had alzeimers and why Schwarzegger is leftist:
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/09/27/testosterone.kills.reut/index.html
        \_ Reagan occasionally played a tough guy on the screen, but in real
           life the man was a bit effeminate, like most actors.
           \_ "John Wayne was a fag."
              "The hell he was!"
2006/9/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:44578 Activity:nil 61%like:44587
9/27    Why Reagan had alzeimers and why Schwarzegger is brain-dead:
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/09/27/testosterone.kills.reut/index.html
        \_ Reagan occasionally played a tough guy on the screen, but in real
           life the man was a bit effeminate, like most actors.
2017/11/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/22   
Results 151 - 227 of 227   < 1 2 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:President:Reagan:
.