Total Posts:51|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

A Tribute to Ronald Reagan

charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 9:55:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Tomorrow night the History Channel is actually going to interrupt its regular non-history-oriented programming (reality show dreck about pawn shop operators and lumberjacks) to air a eulogistic special about, a veritable tribute to the 40th CEO of the American corporatocracy, Ronald Wilson Reagan. No doubt many of the registered Republicans, confirmed conservatives, and right-of center libertarians at this site will tune in to see their presidential paladin lauded and lionized. Be forewarned, I post the following not to praise but to pan his memory.

Yes, it should come as no surprise that I'm most definitely not among those who think that Reagan is a suitable candidate for induction into the pantheon of America's civil religion, that he's not a peer of larger-than-life figures such as Lincoln and FDR (not that they were exactly the dandy exponents of enlightenment they're cracked up to be either). But how so, what exactly is it that puts some tarnish on the right's golden boy? What's so unbeautiful about ole telegenic Ronnie?

Well, where to start!? Let's go directly to the unbeautiful mentality of the historical man behind the humbug conservative myth. Alas, despite his misleadingly affable persona and all the anecdotes about what a pleasant-to-be-around chap he was that we keep hearing from his personal friends, the genial Gipper had a somewhat unlovely mentality indeed.

Let me instantiate the invidiousness of the man's mind-set and worldview. Firstly, a lesser-known factoid that illustrates the sometimes chilling cut of his mental jib. When he was still Governor Reagan, and a member of the commission that was tasked with investigating the CIA's unspeakably unethical brainwashing experiments (experiments that destroyed the mental health and lives of more than one innocent victim), the "Great Communicator" communicated a disturbingly positive perspective on said experiments. He was the "dissenting voice" on a panel of otherwise appalled commissioners.

Before moving on, let me drive home that some of these experiments were truly sinister and after reading detailed descriptions of them most decent people are quite disgusted and outraged. Mr. Reagan, on the other hand, heard such detailed descriptions and instead felt inspired, inspired to propose the founding of a center in the state of California to carry on the work of the CIA's doctor dementos!

I quote from the book Journey into Madness, "Among those who were considered to work at the Center was Leonard Rubenstein. Two South American doctors who had worked at the institute under Dr. Cameron had also been targeted, one to run the center's shock room—which would operate on a twenty-four-hour basis, seven days a week—and the other to assist in the center's psychosurgical operating suite, where the very latest techniques in lobotomy would be used. The doctors were currently employed in detention centers in Paraguay and Chile."

Apparently the answer to the question "What kind of a twisted mind would get jazzed about promoting scientific research that involved subjecting human beings to lobotomies and to the sociopathic ilk of doctors who had lent their services to the secret police of Paraguay & Chile?" is mister not-so-nice-hearted-after-all Ronald Reagan.

Fortunately the state legislature of California refused to fund Reagan's proposed project to perfect the CIA's mind control techniques and it never got off the drawing board. But what a deformed brainchild, and what it tells us about the brain it was born in! Now for some better known facts that attach a bit of ugly to the mentality of the Teflon President.

I'll just cite them in random order. Well, there was his famous comment to the effect that he would rather see all the small children of the "free world" die in a nuclear holocaust than see them grow up under Soviet-style communism! This is the ole "Better dead than red" mentality stated with gruesome abandon. While I certainly would not have fancied living under a Soviet-style political system, I would not have preferred death as the best option for millions of kiddies. And if you were to survey people who actually lived in Russia back when it was the Soviet Union and queried them if life was so wretched that they would not have objected to a premature end to their existence, well, although they might not have fond memories of those days neither would they have welcomed an early death I suspect.

That is, life was still worth living for them, but apparently despite his "pro-life" stance Reagan saw being cut down in childhood by atomic Armageddon as a far happier fate for America's youngest citizens than growing up Marxist. In Reagan's perversely paradoxical book abortion was acceptable under no circumstances, but death for millions of already-born children was regrettably acceptable if it appeared that they were going to fall into the clutches of the heathen commies. Better that America go down like one big radioactive Masada than its children live to fight another day, hmm, Ronnie?

As for Reagan's unshakable resolve to win the Cold War, did it really come from a place of loving freedom and life? Well, get your Ouija board out and ask the who-knows-how-many men, women, and children who were tortured and killed by the U.S.'s client regimes in Latin America and elsewhere during the Reagan years. Despite being a devout Christian and admirer of Pope John Paul II, even the brutal rape and murder of Catholic nuns by Salvadoran military personnel didn't put a dent in Reagan's staunch support for the militaristic, homicidally repressive regime of El Salvador. Apparently only repressive and lethal governments that professed a Marxist-Leninist philosophy were recognizably evil to his rightist way of thinking. So, was he really opposed, on ethical and enlightened grounds, to repression and political evil per se, or was he just a staunch anti-communist?

Come on, let's talk motivational turkey here, Mr. Reagan was a Falwellian Christian who abhorred and abominated communism for its atheism, a nationalist who wanted to crush any perceived enemy of his country, and an ardent booster of capitalism and the capitalist elite who viewed communism as a troubling threat to the system that he was a "true believer" in and to the interests of its anointed (by their god Mammon, that is) ruling class. This all is what really motivated his resolute opposition to the "evil empire", not any humanitarian aversion to evil.

Likewise, Reagan's domestic economic policies also hardly indicated a very compassionate mentality. He was instrumental in helping to head the nation down the path of deregulation, of freeing up big business to uninhibitedly follow its greed, to the harm and hurt of millions of working-class and poor citizens (we can thank him today for helping to set us up for the current global recession). And of course he was a big ideological proponent of abolishing social welfare programs designed to help the needy victims of his beloved capitalist system (he deserves no small share of the credit for the number of homeless on our streets nowadays). Billions for defense and not a penny for tribute to those struggling below the poverty line was his conservative motto.

And I won't even go off on a tangent about his mentality's lack of empathy for poor people of color, once again his public policy record speaks for itself. All in all, I'm afraid that Ronald Reagan wasn't all that much of a sweetheart in the mentality department. Perhaps in a hundred years, if our civilization isn't under water thanks to the anti-environmental ethos he helped promote, people might be able to look back with more critical hindsight and behold the man in a more objectively truthful light, not as an icon of wholesome American values, but as the epitome of the uncompassionate, unprogressive, and unenlightened mind-set of the right.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 9:56:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"I come to bury Reagan, not to praise him."
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:09:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 10:01:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 9:55:10 PM, charleslb wrote:

endless rant about Reagan.

But I suppose you'll enjoy the History Channel's tedious tribute to him tomorrow night? I guess you're not interested in a little historically accurate negativity about the man to balance out the baselessly positive picture of him that we've been indoctrinated with?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2011 10:12:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 10:09:35 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:01:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 9:55:10 PM, charleslb wrote:

endless rant about Reagan.

But I suppose you'll enjoy the History Channel's tedious tribute to him tomorrow night? I guess you're not interested in a little historically accurate negativity about the man to balance out the baselessly positive picture of him that we've been indoctrinated with?

I don't even like Reagan so why would I watch a documentary about him?
TombLikeBomb
Posts: 639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 3:09:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/8/2011 10:12:06 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:09:35 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:01:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 9:55:10 PM, charleslb wrote:

endless rant about Reagan.

But I suppose you'll enjoy the History Channel's tedious tribute to him tomorrow night? I guess you're not interested in a little historically accurate negativity about the man to balance out the baselessly positive picture of him that we've been indoctrinated with?

I don't even like Reagan so why would I watch a documentary about him?

Surely you can come up with a better reason not to watch than that you're part of the great Libertarian choir that hears only Libertarian preachers.
From the time of the progressive era with the rise of public schooling through the post-WWII period, capital invaded the time workers had liberated from waged work and shaped it for purposes of social control. Perhaps the most obvious moment of this colonization was the re-incarceration in schools of the young (who were expelled from the factories by child labor laws) such that what might have been free time was structured to convert their life energies into labor power.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 3:52:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/9/2011 3:09:53 PM, TombLikeBomb wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:12:06 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:09:35 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:01:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 9:55:10 PM, charleslb wrote:

endless rant about Reagan.

But I suppose you'll enjoy the History Channel's tedious tribute to him tomorrow night? I guess you're not interested in a little historically accurate negativity about the man to balance out the baselessly positive picture of him that we've been indoctrinated with?

I don't even like Reagan so why would I watch a documentary about him?

Surely you can come up with a better reason not to watch than that you're part of the great Libertarian choir that hears only Libertarian preachers.

It has nothing to do with my ideology. I just don't want to waste my time watching something I'm not even interested in.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 4:06:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Let me just tack on a few more lousy legacies of those halcyon years of conservatism known as the Regan era, a few more cruel gag gifts from the Gipper.

1) The ramped-up immigration from Central America that was kicked off by Reagan's wars in El Salvador and Nicaragua. You know, the immigration that ironically conservatives now decry and dishonestly pin on "liberals". The immigration of people who had been exposed to the violence of war, and then the socio-economic pathologies of America's inner cities (you know, those distressed districts of our society that are ideologically disdained by Regan Republicans), leading to the genesis of the terroristic street gang MS-13, etc.

2) Speaking of terrorism, another karmic legacy of the Reagan commitment to making communism cry uncle like a bit*h to the West is the little ole unintended consequence that supporting the fundamentalists who fought the Soviets in Afghanistan turned that country into the alma mater in terrorism and asymmetrical warfare of the likes of Osama bin Laden. Then there was Reagan's staunch support for the state of Israel (which in part had to do with his Falwellian Christian agenda of helping to fulfill Biblical prophecy), which has contributed significantly to anti-U.S. sentiment in the Middle East and to making the U.S. a legitimate target of terrorism in the eyes of extremists.

Yes, we have to give a generous share of the credit for the rise of faith-based terrorism in the Muslim world to that preeminent Cold War warrior, Ronald Reagan. He defeated communism and set the world stage for the globalization of capitalism that's breeding the aggrieved Third World's righteous anti-American anger, which will more and more be acted out by destitute and disaffected people who have absolutely nothing to lose by throwing in with "terrorist" movements. He also provided an opportunity, in Afghanistan, for terrorist organizers such as bin Laden, to discover their calling and learn their craft. And he continues to rub salt in the wounded ethnic pride of Arabs by helping to entrench this country's policy of supporting Israel in its ongoing visitation of injustice on the Palestinian people.

3) And while I'm on the Middle East, Ronald Reagan, who apparently had great difficulty recognizing evil unless it espoused the philosophy of Marxism or took over an American embassy, was a supporter of another Middle Eastern state, Saddam's Iraq of course. The crimes-against-humanity-perpetrating Iraqi dictator and his murderous military became Reagan's point men against Iran. The Reagan administration funneled plenty of aid to its vile ally and became accessories-before-the-fact to the two Gulf Wars.

And of course the terrorism that Reagan's support of fundamentalist "freedom fighters" (as they were called when they were killing Russians rather than Americans) helped foment provided the phony pretext for the Bush administration to carry out its plans (which of course really had zip to do with cracking down on terrorism) to invade and occupy Iraq. Ronnie, as it turns out, set more than one domino leading to the current situation in Iraq in motion.

4) And, last for now but certainly not least, there's the legacy of the triumphant conservative movement and the two Bush administrations it's given this country, and the slow-burn catastrophe this has been and continues to be. From the mortgage and financial crisis we're still very much in, to the government's "withdrawal of support" for the social safety net, to the erosion of civil rights at the hands of conservative judges, etc., there's much that can be laid at the ideological doorstep of the conservative movement that Reagan and the "Reagan Revolution" energized and legitimized.

The conservative movement has deregulated American capitalism to the extreme extent that capitalism, which has always been raptorial, and democracy, which has always been more show than substance, have both given way to what the economist James K. Galbraith aptly terms the "predator state". If you think "predator state" is a hyperbolic characterization of our politico-economic system today, well, I suggest that you chat with some of the folks who've lost their homes and jobs in the last couple of years. They're not too hard to find! And, once again, it's Ronald Reagan who helped put the conservative movement in the catbird seat, and laid the groundwork for the crony-capitalist's paradise and workingperson's purgatory we live in today.

It's still one's prerogative to hero-worship the man if one chooses to, but rationally and morally justifying doing so is another story.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
TombLikeBomb
Posts: 639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 6:14:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/9/2011 3:52:39 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/9/2011 3:09:53 PM, TombLikeBomb wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:12:06 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:09:35 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/8/2011 10:01:31 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/8/2011 9:55:10 PM, charleslb wrote:

endless rant about Reagan.

But I suppose you'll enjoy the History Channel's tedious tribute to him tomorrow night? I guess you're not interested in a little historically accurate negativity about the man to balance out the baselessly positive picture of him that we've been indoctrinated with?

I don't even like Reagan so why would I watch a documentary about him?

Surely you can come up with a better reason not to watch than that you're part of the great Libertarian choir that hears only Libertarian preachers.

It has nothing to do with my ideology. I just don't want to waste my time watching something I'm not even interested in.

OK, but that's not what you said. I don't "like" those of my genes that would sacrifice my (not to mention others') interests to their fecundity (not to mention, in largely succeeding, debunk rational choice theory), but I'm interested in them if only because it's wise to know one's enemy. I don't "like" the tragic (thus fortunately wrong) Libertarian notion that the most efficient economic system conceivable is also the least egalitarian, but I've researched it more thoroughly than most Libertarians because I'm interested in economic efficiency. You were of course right the first time. Whether you're interested in the subject or not, as for whether you know the subject or not, you're in any case in what's called the instrumental stage: you've already made up your mind, and learning has been reduced to an endless collection of anecdotes and eloquences. That you don't like Reagan is meant to be relevant because those likely to've done or (in the case of a mouthpiece like Reagan or a pure theory like Libertarianism) said anything worthy to be in your collection are precisely those you like. I suppose it's possible to interpret your implication (that liking someone is the sole reason to watch a documentary about them) differently, it's just that you've offered no reason to.
From the time of the progressive era with the rise of public schooling through the post-WWII period, capital invaded the time workers had liberated from waged work and shaped it for purposes of social control. Perhaps the most obvious moment of this colonization was the re-incarceration in schools of the young (who were expelled from the factories by child labor laws) such that what might have been free time was structured to convert their life energies into labor power.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 6:20:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
"experiments that destroyed the mental health and lives of more than one innocent victim"

made me laugh.

Also, I'd like to say (not that it hasn't been said 1,000 times before). You say you are going to rant against Reagan, yet you don't even get to anything about him until half way through the 4th paragraph.

KISS, keep it simple silly.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 12:00:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Or maybe it's

1) We don't like Reagan and hence feel no need to defend to him.

2) Even if we did like Reagan, none of us care enough to wade through your unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 12:03:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Nope, not all. ;D

*points at ideology*
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 12:32:46 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Anyone who has half a mind, let alone a libertarian, would not bother to watch a documentary glorifying him.
He cut taxes, and then screwed us over anyhow with ungodly amounts of military spending.
That's not libertarian whatsoever. When did you miss the part in libertarianism that included 'We don't like government spending?'
I miss the old members.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 12:45:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 12:32:46 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Anyone who has half a mind, let alone a libertarian, would not bother to watch a documentary glorifying him.
He cut taxes, and then screwed us over anyhow with ungodly amounts of military spending.
That's not libertarian whatsoever. When did you miss the part in libertarianism that included 'We don't like government spending?'

this, not to mention the fact that history channel documentaries invariably suck.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 1:57:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 12:00:57 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Or maybe it's

1) We don't like Reagan and hence feel no need to defend to him.

2) Even if we did like Reagan, none of us care enough to wade through your unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit.

Or maybe my "unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit", which is actually necessarily not redundantly "wordy", and coherently protracted not "rambling", is too spot-on about the conservative movement's idol in question, and the conservative mentalité he epitomized. Perhaps that's why you and your ideological confreres choose to take pot shots without reading the post and my comments?
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 2:03:41 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 1:57:50 AM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/10/2011 12:00:57 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Or maybe it's

1) We don't like Reagan and hence feel no need to defend to him.

2) Even if we did like Reagan, none of us care enough to wade through your unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit.

Or maybe my "unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit", which is actually necessarily not redundantly "wordy", and coherently protracted not "rambling", is too spot-on about the conservative movement's idol in question, and the conservative mentalité he epitomized. Perhaps that's why you and your ideological confreres choose to take pot shots without reading the post and my comments?
Conservatives are rather lacking on this site.

Reagan was all about the debt and whining at the Fed for keeping its interests rates high (i.e. for not printing much money).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 2:12:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 1:57:50 AM, charleslb wrote:
Or maybe my "unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit", which is actually necessarily not redundantly "wordy", and coherently protracted not "rambling", is too spot-on about the conservative movement's idol in question, and the conservative mentalité he epitomized. Perhaps that's why you and your ideological confreres choose to take pot shots without reading the post and my comments?

Oh I read the post, I just don't want to feed the troll.
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 2:33:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 12:00:57 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 2/9/2011 11:56:43 PM, charleslb wrote:
Hmm, very interesting, seems like there aren't too many libertarians and conservatives active here right now, could it be that they're predictably watching the "documentary" on their free-marketarian hero Ronnie Reagan?

Or maybe it's

1) We don't like Reagan and hence feel no need to defend to him.

2) Even if we did like Reagan, none of us care enough to wade through your unnecessarily wordy, rambling bullspit.

This.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 2:59:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 2:03:41 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

Reagan was all about the debt and whining at the Fed for keeping its interests rates high (i.e. for not printing much money).

Hmm, perhaps a definition of a libertarian might be, "Someone in whose extreme book even Ronald Reagan was not enough of a free-marketeer". I suppose that's rather like a neo-Nazi disapprobating a Klansman for not lynching enough Jews. Yep, you know someone is a "true believer" in capitalism when he/she finds Reagan to have been insufficiently dogmatically-consistent.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:05:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't scour DDO a lot, but why the disregard for charles? Maybe he does rant a lot, but I do find it interesting and of a different sort than Godsands (i.e. coherent and backed up with at least some evidence).
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:05:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 2:59:00 AM, charleslb wrote:
At 2/10/2011 2:03:41 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

Reagan was all about the debt and whining at the Fed for keeping its interests rates high (i.e. for not printing much money).

I tihkn regan was a goodly representative of "true capitalism" derp. u dont liek him, therefor u r a nazi.

Yeah, you know somebody's a real communist when in their mind, not even Stalin and Mao represent a "pure" enough strain of Marxism. Tsk tsk.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:07:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 3:05:30 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
I don't scour DDO a lot, but why the disregard for charles? Maybe he does rant a lot, but I do find it interesting and of a different sort than Godsands (i.e. coherent and backed up with at least some evidence).

He's more like DATCMOTO then GodSands. DATCMOTO could at least spell properly and cite Bible verses, but he was still annoying and retarded.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:15:41 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 3:07:10 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
At 2/10/2011 3:05:30 AM, TheSkeptic wrote:
I don't scour DDO a lot, but why the disregard for charles? Maybe he does rant a lot, but I do find it interesting and of a different sort than Godsands (i.e. coherent and backed up with at least some evidence).

He's more like DATCMOTO then GodSands. DATCMOTO could at least spell properly and cite Bible verses, but he was still annoying and retarded.

Has it ever occurred to you that when you use the word "retarded" in an insulting fashion you're being hurtful to all the clinically "retarded", i.e. mentally challenged people out there who've never done anything to offend you? (It also sounds a little immature)
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:18:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 3:15:41 AM, charleslb wrote:

Has it ever occurred to you that when you use the word "retarded" in an insulting fashion you're being hurtful to all the clinically "retarded", i.e. mentally challenged people out there who've never done anything to offend you? (It also sounds a little immature)

I'm guessing you're obsessed with political correctness? I gave up on that awhile ago...
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:23:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 3:15:41 AM, charleslb wrote:
Has it ever occurred to you that when you use the word "retarded" in an insulting fashion you're being hurtful to all the clinically "retarded", i.e. mentally challenged people out there who've never done anything to offend you? (It also sounds a little immature)

You're right -- it's an insult to the mentally handicapped to compare them to you.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:28:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 2:59:00 AM, charleslb wrote:
"not enough of a free-marketeer".

No such thing. You either are a "freemarketer" or you are not a "free-marketer". There is no in-between.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:30:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 3:28:20 AM, Korashk wrote:
At 2/10/2011 2:59:00 AM, charleslb wrote:
"not enough of a free-marketeer".

No such thing. You either are a "freemarketer" or you are not a "free-marketer". There is no in-between.

This. There are no "degrees" of economic freedom, there are degrees of state control.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2011 3:40:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/10/2011 3:37:21 AM, juvanya wrote:
May he continue to burn in hell.

lol, way to just randomly pop up like that. :P

Anyway, I agree. Reagan sucks.