Reagan was immoral and evil

Ok, maybe "Evil" is too far. But Ronald Reagan has always been the symbol for the GOP, and really both sides of the political spectrum think Reagan represented America. Why?

Ronald Reagan is not the moral and worldly guy everyone thought he was. There was a yellow streak down this purple pansy. Example, remember Jane Wyman? This was Ronalds first wife. They were divorced, because during their marriage he was to busy meeting up with a girl named Nancy. Adultry is pretty evil, and it is immoral.

How about lying: http://www.youtube.com...

Yeah...Ronald Wilson Reagan (6 letters in each name--666)....(ok that was just a joke).....but really...

Don't worry, I understand when you can't make it to a response in time.

I'll just add a couple of more things then allow my opponet to respnd.

"For 18 months now, we have had under way a secret diplomatic initiative to Iran. That initative was undertaken for the simplest and best reasons: to renew a relationship with the nation of Iran; to bring a honorable end to the bloddy six-year war between Iran and Iraq;to eliminate state-spondored terrorism and subversion, and to effect the safe return of all hostages...
Durning the course of our secret discussions, I authorized the transfer of small amounts of defensive weapons and spare parts for defensive systems to Iran....These modest deliveries, taken together could easily fit into a single cargo plane....We did not--repeat--did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we."
Reagan Nov 14, 1986
Speech to Nation

(But he did sell those weapons....LIE)

Wouldn't slurs bew considered immoral? Well during a sound check for his weekly radio address, President Reagan refers to the Polish
government as a "Bunch of no-good lousy bums" Reagan 10/9/1982
(Note: Jobless Rate in the US is up to 10.1% at the time. Worst in 42 years)

Yeah, I am also willing to state that Reagan is an idiot as well. But that is another argument.

I hope my opponet is willing to respond to me, and I hope he gets to it.

My opponet did not respond with an argument, but rather through a comment down below. It reads: "I guess you will have no problem admitting that the pinacle of the Democrats, Bill Clinton, is just as evil and immoral as Reagan, right? I mean, they are both adulterers. One was in the Oval Office when he did it, and he admitted to it. Or will you come up with an excuse to apply selective morals like the rest of the democratic party?"

Ok, well first of all you are assuming that I think Bill Clinton represents the democrats or as you say he is the "pinacle" of the party. I actually do not like Bill Clinton at all, not because of the Lewinsky thing, but because of his favors to the republicans like NAFTA, making radio ads on "Christian" radio stations saying how against gay-marraige he is, proposing bills that increased the use of the death penalty, ect. Things like that is why I hate Bill Clinton, and you have to admit things like this do not make him the "pinacle" of Democrats.

Besides, Reagan in our American culture, is looked at like the "Grandfather of America". My argument is not about party. Right-wing or Left-wing. I'm here to say that Reagan was immoral. Him being evil is just a joke, but the pont is by accepting this argument my opponet has agreed to defend Ronald Reagan. He has failed to do so. All he has done was provide an argument that accepeted the idea that Reagan cheated on his wife and compared it to Bill.

This is my closing statement, and all I would like to say is, for those who vote against me are voting for my opponet. You are voting for him saying that he was a better debater, but he admited I was right about Reagan and his immorality, which means a vote for my opponet is a vote for my cause.

This debate is not whether Ronald Reagan was a "good or bad" president. Was he moral or not. You make the call. Look at the facts. Don't get distracted by othher politicans, be it republican or democrat. Was Reagan moral? As my opponet already agreed, he was not.