Ronald Reagan a libertarian?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Reagan was not a libertarian. He was pro-life

No he wasn't.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Reagan was not a libertarian. He was pro-life

No he wasn't.

Reagan was pro-choice as Governor of California, but pro-life as President.

No, he wasn't. He was consistently pro-death throughout his political career.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Reagan was not a libertarian. He was pro-life

No he wasn't.

Reagan was pro-choice as Governor of California, but pro-life as President.

No, he wasn't. He was consistently pro-death throughout his political career.

Prove it. All the quotes from Ronald Reagan throughout his Presidency indicated a strong opposition to abortion. In fact, it was Reagan who nominated such staunch anti-abortion justices like Antonin Scalia and William Rehnquist.

I don't care about his rhetoric and political showmanship. Abortion policy remained unchanged, while militarism and a total lack of respect for human life around the world became hallmarks of the Reagan regime.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I don't care about his rhetoric and political showmanship. Abortion policy remained unchanged, while militarism and a total lack of respect for human life around the world became hallmarks of the Reagan regime.

Still not in conflict with being pro-life.

Uh, yeah, allowing pro-death policies tends to conflict with any claim of being "pro-life."

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

He was the closest thing to a libertarian since Coolidge. Relative to Nixon and GWB, he is libertarian

Not really, no. Reagan may have been different from Nixon and GWB, but he wasn't any closer to libertarianism.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I don't care about his rhetoric and political showmanship. Abortion policy remained unchanged, while militarism and a total lack of respect for human life around the world became hallmarks of the Reagan regime.

Still not in conflict with being pro-life.

Uh, yeah, allowing pro-death policies tends to conflict with any claim of being "pro-life."

With your logic, evangelicals, and other fundamentalists would be considered anti choice because of their continued support of the military industrial complex, and the death penalty. Once again, these things don't actually conflict with a pro-life position, regardless of it's irony to onlookers.

Yes, they are pro-death. They conflict with a pro-life position pretty obviously.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Yes, they are pro-death. They conflict with a pro-life position pretty obviously.

Now THAT'S how you refute a claim!

Your post was so stupid that I couldn't quite a decipher much of an argument from it. The military-industrial complex doesn't conflict with a pro-life position?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Yes, they are pro-death. They conflict with a pro-life position pretty obviously.

Now THAT'S how you refute a claim!

Your post was so stupid that I couldn't quite a decipher much of an argument from it. The military-industrial complex doesn't conflict with a pro-life position?

No, not in the minds of most pro-lifers. You don't seem to understand that. While it looks contradictory to us on the outside, it's reconciled in their minds.

"Pro-life", as if I have to explain it, simply refers to a position on abortion, not the death penalty, or military. If you'd like to expand the sphere, go ahead, but then we're talking about different things.

Uh, no, that definition is all in your head. Pro-life means what it sounds like. Warmongers cannot be pro-life.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

It's hard to go off the deep end once you've already taken the dive, but somehow you've managed. Cheers. This is silly.

Coming from someone who thinks people who support the military-industrial complex and capital punishment are "pro-life"....

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

It's hard to go off the deep end once you've already taken the dive, but somehow you've managed. Cheers. This is silly.

Coming from someone who thinks people who support the military-industrial complex and capital punishment are "pro-life"....

I'm talking about anti-abortionists, or is that too complex a phrase?

No, we were both clearly talking about "pro-life" not "anti-abortionists."

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Economically? Yes. Socially? No.

How could a man who spent as recklessly as Reagan even be considered an economic libertarian?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Economically? Yes. Socially? No.

How could a man who spent as recklessly as Reagan even be considered an economic libertarian?

That and all the corporate welfare policies he backed, things like farm subsidies grew so much under him (with his tacit approval) it's pretty much impossible to call him truly laissez faire.

Of course he wasn't 100% lassiez faire, but he was in favor of moving in a lassiez faire direction, and that ought to be good enough. In farm policy, he wanted to implement a market oriented approach but was stymied by the midwest agricultural bust of the 1980s and political pressure. In other areas he was more successful. His entire Presidency corresponded with a historic shift towards free markets, which began with his predecessor and continued when he left office, but which he was the greatest popular proponent for.

Uh, no. None of Reagan's policies even approached libertarianism.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Who ever called Reagan a libertarian?

Non-libertarians.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The libertarian line on Reagan reminds me of the libertarian line on Greenspan:

The libertarian line years ago:

"Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan is arguably the most powerful libertarian in politics, and I am quite surprised when other card carrying libertarians are unaware of this.  You may disagree with some of the things he's done, you may be unaware of his political ideals, or you may equate him with every other big government bureaucrat.  Were he able to implement his "radical" ideologies before they were politically palatable, he would be quickly dealt with by the entrenched powers, either through some impeachment, or by new limitations of his office.  But the fact remains that he is a libertarian idealist, crafting policies, and suggesting changes to the degree that they can be successfully pursued."

- Libertarian Party of Maryland

The libertarian line today:

"Just because the man used to hang out with Ayn Rand and was apparently a libertarian Objectivist doesn’t mean he continues to be one. Anyone who advocates aggression is not by definition a libertarian. But what better way to destroy a movement then by redefining the words? Eric Arthur Blair would be proud. It was done at around the turn of the 20th century with ‘liberal.’ In economics ‘inflation’ has been redefined. Now a concerted effort appears to be being made to change the meaning of ‘libertarian.’ People like Glenn Beck and Neil Bortz nationally claim to be libertarians. Advocating government manipulation of the market and money bailouts, immigration control and war with people who pose no threat is NOT libertarian."

- some libertarian blog

Of course, Greenspan was never on the front lines advocating war, bailouts, or immigration control. He was, on the front lines battling Brooksley Born arguing that the market was self regulating so laws against regulation weren't needed, and that the market always priced things correctly so there was no need for the Fed to step in and burst bubbles.

Spreading BS as usual, beet. Actual libertarians never supported Greenspan or Reagan.