Reagan attacked at by anti-nuke guy on stage - April 13, 1992

[Gabu]

I find it ironic that someone who is anti-nuke woudl attack the only president since the invention of the bomb who serious talked about nuclear reductions treaties, as opposed to the nuclear limitations treaties which did nothing but limit how many more times the two superpowers could increase their ability to destroy all life on Earth.

Of course, the liberals will never give Reagan a fair shake and he will always be nothing more than a warmongering actor.

Well, there was the whole "evil empire" thing... there's more than just nuclear weapons.

The Soviet Union was an evil Empire.  But Reagan was willing to talk to a Soviet leader who was really willing to listen.

People think things were so much better after Stalin... well, when you compare it to that....

It was still an utterly totalitarian state, people might not have been getting gunned down every day, but desenters were declared "insane" and sent to metal institutions.  Homeless people still taken away by black vans and never seen again.  Unions were still forbiden.

In... I bleive it was Romania, the government wouldn't turn on the natural gas lines until the temperature fell below 40 degrees F, or there abouts... guess what, it was 40 degrees every day, no matter how cold it was.

I'm just saying, there are other reasons why liberals didn't like Reagan.  If you're going to talk about "the liberals" in ominous or spiteful tones, you at least owe it to yourself to fairly represent the varied opinions of the members of that group.  You're better than talking about a group including millions as if it were some homogeneous Borg variant.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Giving Reagan a fair shake based on his actions would entail hating him as much as Russians hate Yeltsin or Stalin.

Ummm... what?

1 Ensuring that peak oil when it happens would create a situation in the US which will make the great depression seem tame.
2 Expanding government spending/bureaucracy as much as LBJ did if not more
3 Having obscene deficits on a level not seen since the 1960s and inspiring Dubya to make his own deficits.
4 Jumpstarting the war on drugs(Yes, I know Nixon started it but RR is to blame for turning it into the monster it is today). Remember until Nancy Reagan did her "Just say no" campaign outright legalizing of marijuana was on the cards.
5 Wasting US money on a pointless military buildup when it would have been better to invest it in domestic infrastructure, promoting technology and the space program.
6 Nearly starting WWIII a few times in his term.

In order to give Ronald Reagan the fair shake he deserves for everything he's done the only reasonable response is to hate him as much as Russians hate Stalin or Yeltsin.

[12th Doctor]

I find it ironic that someone who is anti-nuke woudl attack the only president since the invention of the bomb who serious talked about nuclear reductions treaties, as opposed to the nuclear limitations treaties which did nothing but limit how many more times the two superpowers could increase their ability to destroy all life on Earth.

Of course, the liberals will never give Reagan a fair shake and he will always be nothing more than a warmongering actor.

Well, there was the whole "evil empire" thing... there's more than just nuclear weapons.

The Soviet Union was an evil Empire.  But Reagan was willing to talk to a Soviet leader who was really willing to listen.

People think things were so much better after Stalin... well, when you compare it to that....

It was still an utterly totalitarian state, people might not have been getting gunned down every day, but desenters were declared "insane" and sent to metal institutions.  Homeless people still taken away by black vans and never seen again.  Unions were still forbiden.

In... I bleive it was Romania, the government wouldn't turn on the natural gas lines until the temperature fell below 40 degrees F, or there abouts... guess what, it was 40 degrees every day, no matter how cold it was.

I'm just saying, there are other reasons why liberals didn't like Reagan.  If you're going to talk about "the liberals" in ominous or spiteful tones, you at least owe it to yourself to fairly represent the varied opinions of the members of that group.  You're better than talking about a group including millions as if it were some homogeneous Borg variant.

You're right, I am in one of my over-generalizing moods today, but that seems to happen anytime I ever see anyone unfairly attacked... so I guess my knee-jerk response to an unfair attack is usually an unfair attack... anyway, you are correct, I am simply trying to say that all the spite that tends to be thrown in Reagan's direction is unwarrented in at least one respect.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The only problem with the spite directed at Reagan is that there's not enough of it.

[12th Doctor]

1 Ensuring that peak oil when it happens would create a situation in the US which will make the great depression seem tame.

While I would say this is a failing of the Reagan Administration... and America in general, no one at that time likely would have done otherwise.  So I would say that pointing the blame at Reagan is, at the least, unfair.  I hardly agree with your assesment that domesday is inevitable, though.  Still enough oil to last a while, if we start soon, we can do somethign about it.  Fact is, the whole country has mutally agreed to certain lifestyle choices that are highly wasteful.  There does seem to be a trend towards moving back into the cities, away from the exurbs, though, and it woudl not be too difficult to bring back the trollys back.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is worth noting that Congress never, in all those 8 years, turned in a budget that was lower than what Reagan had turned in (I think there was near parity in 86, but other than that....).  It is alos worth noting that, as a percentage of the total GDP, the Reagan deficit was acctually pretty small compared to past deficits.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, ganja has never really exicted one way or the other, but I guess the fact that it is such an issue for you is pretty telling.  Eitherway, I have been to college, anyone who isn't acting like a complete idiot can easily get away with doing a little weed and not getting caught.  As for the War on Drugs, the biggest target was Crack, which was a big problem at the time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, either you hate the military... which I wouldn't discount, or you don't realize how bad off the military really was after years of budget cuts under Ford and Carter.  The Space program was, and has since the 1970's been a total joke.  As for technology, well, I guess you aren't aware how much of the technology that was developed by the military in the 80's has gone into improving our everyday lives.  And that is not even to mention all the things the military invented under Reagan, which allowed us to opperate with a smaller and less expensive force.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Example?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, I don't know, I didn't see the death squads patroling the street when Reagan was President, but you like to think you have a talent for re-writing history, so I will let you have this one.

As for Yeltsin... Hell, I think the Russians were better off under him than the quasi-fascist Putin, but saddly fascism and dependency on oligarchs has always held a strage appeal to the masses.

[Lief 🗽]

Two things:

1) So that's what Joe Biden looked like in 1992.
2) Those secret service sucked. It took them like 5 seconds to do anything. The guy could have easily mortally wounded Reagan in that timeframe.

[YRABNNRM]

So that's what Joe Biden looked like in 1992.

It's not Biden, it's Jerry Brown.

[Reaganfan]

Two things:

1) So that's what Joe Biden looked like in 1992.
2) Those secret service sucked. It took them like 5 seconds to do anything. The guy could have easily mortally wounded Reagan in that timeframe.

No doubt...he got too close. Then again, Reagan didn't even budge.