Ronald Reagans most important adviser...

[Truth Detector]

Dear raving lunatic, I did the research. It wouldn't hurt you to do the same before opening your big fat pie hole.

Maybe I'll ignore you again, maybe not. But if it happens it'll be my choice, not yours.

"Quigley was not the first astrologer the Reagans had consulted. Ronald and Nancy Reagan had a long history of involvement with astrologers and psychics. During the 1950's and 1960's, Ron and Nancy enlisted the services of Hollywood astrologer Carroll Righter, and later Jeane Dixon. In his 1965 autobiography, Where's the Rest of Me?, Reagan said that he and Righter were "good friends" and that "every morning Nancy and I turn to see what he has to say about people of our respective birth signs." (It was on Righter's advice that Reagan arranged his swearing-in as governor at the odd time of 9 minutes past midnight.)"

http://thereaganyears.tripod.com/divineguidance.htm
​

Dear retarded dunce; your cut and paste doesn't support the dimwitted repugnantly stupid claim that Ronalds most important advisor to his Presidency was an astrologer.

But you're a reougnantly dense dimwitted partisan asshat who shows little concern for the truth, reality or the facts and instead, spend a great deal of time on this forum removing any doubt what an uninformed hyper partisan dunce you are.

Now if you want to prove the idiot partisan talking point claim of this dullard threads premise, you're going to have to do better than that.

But alas, you're a dunce of limited intelligence and could care less about the truth, reality or the facts.

Why? Because you really are THAT stupid.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You guys didn't even remember this study huh?

that is because you REFUSE completely undeniavble facts all fucking day long to retain your historically failed ideas

tell us Desh... what exactly is this study proving? Did someone say that the stimulus was bad? Or are you just going off on one of your moronic tangents?

 

[Jarod]

Yet he stated that Obama was better than Reagan, which is why I asked him to explain his justification for such a comment.



Saying the country is better now in social aspects is irrelevant unless you can show how it is Obama caused the change. We are NOT in a better place in the war on drugs, at least not due to anything the Obama admin has done. They ramped up drug busts and the war on drugs.



True.



what has he accomplished in Syria? What did he do in Libya that was successful?



Lol... yet you didn't say so to the person who made the original claim. Perhaps you should let him know.

I disagree with much of what you say. I don't have the interest in a pissing match about who is the better president so I am just going to let you have the last word.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I'll give you wiretapping and data collection but you're going to have to explain how the rest was either illegal or unconstitutional.

1) it is illegal to use the IRS as an attack dog
2) it is illegal for the President to pick and choose parts of a bill to implement and it is illegal for him to decide to give special breaks to certain groups from said law... that is the duty of CONGRESS
3) it is highly unethical and illegal for him to have protected certain STOCK holders at the expense of bondholders and other stockholders. Bondholders especially given they have higher priority than ANY stock holder in terms of protection under bankruptcy.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I disagree with much of what you say. I don't have the interest in a pissing match about who is the better president so I am just going to let you have the last word.

LMAO... so you are an idiot... thanks for sharing, but we already knew that. you made claims and then are unable to back them up. Not surprising there either.

 

[Truth Detector]

93% of economists say the stim worked.

who are you fucks ?

some internets tube crawlers who have never predicted correctly the outcome of policy.


hmmmmm

experts or crazy clowns on the internets?

its a tuff one

Spare us your dullard claims and provide a shred of credible evidence that 93% of economists believe the stimulus worked.

The irony of moronic claims like these is that the same dimwits who claim it worked whine about long term unemployment benefits expiring and growing wealth inwpequality.

Of course the irony is well beyond the simple minded liberals who have been trained not to think and to merely parrot DNC talking points like monkeys.

 

[christiefan915]

Dear retarded dunce; your cut and paste doesn't support the dimwitted repugnantly stupid claim that Ronalds most important advisor to his Presidency was an astrologer.

But you're a reougnantly dense dimwitted partisan asshat who shows little concern for the truth, reality or the facts and instead, spend a great deal of time on this forum removing any doubt what an uninformed hyper partisan dunce you are.

Now if you want to prove the idiot partisan talking point claim of this dullard threads premise, you're going to have to do better than that.

But alas, you're a dunce of limited intelligence and could care less about the truth, reality or the facts.

Why? Because you really are THAT stupid.

<yawn> What a waste of bandwidth.

Btw, try to learn the difference between "could care less" and "couldn't care less."

You limited-intelligence dunce.

 

[Phantasmal]

Actually that is debatable. Obama did not have to deal with the stagflation Reagan inherited from Carter. Both situations were bad, for very different reasons.



He changed nothing about the failed system except for HOW we pay. The problems we face within the health care system were the non stop cost increases. Those problems still exist and have very likely been increased due to the fiasco that is Obama care.



Obama did no such thing. The Iraq withdrawal plan was established by Bush and the Iraqi government. It went exactly as they planned it.

Obama has INCREASED our presence in Afghanistan.



The statement made was that Obama was better than Reagan. I asked how. You pretending anyone said the above is moronic.

For the record you have not shown any evidence that Obama is better.

Actually, there are many things in the affordable care act that change the medical system. Hospitalization and follow up care, if a patient returns within thirty days to the hospital there are fines.

There are many other things too numerous to mention here, but I can retrieve the list if you wish.

 

[Truth Detector]

TO argue, based on what we know today, that Obama is better would be silly. Its impossible without the lens of a historical perspective. Obama has moved our nation to a place that my personal politics would say is better in many ways. We are unquestionably in a better place with regard to how we treat homosexuals for example, and in a better place with regards to the War on Drugs, but other issues are yet to be answered.

Reagan was very effective in using our military in a way that accomplished small goals without creating lasting engagements. Obama has been successful with that in Libya and accomplished a lot in Syria with the simple threat of using the military.

To say an entire presidency is better or worse than one of 30 years ago is silly.

I cannot imagine a more brain washed tome of the Obama Administration.

This is the worst recovery from recession in modern history. Benghazi was a diplomatic failure resulting in American lives lost. Syria was a fiasco and embarrassment. Trillion dollar deficits. IRS scandals. Mexican cartel gun running scandals. Obamacare rollout fiasco. Retreat and abandonment from Iraq. Retreat and abandonment from Afghanistan. High unemployment. The loss of 2.5 million jobs and lowest labor participation rates in our history. The most divisive partisan Presidency in our history.

Yeah Jarodud; he is an astounding success. Go drink some more Obama-aid.

 

[Truth Detector]

http://www.classwarfareexists.com/93-of-economists-agree-obama-stimulus-helped-economy/


My bad its 93%



93% of the economists surveyed by the University of Chicago Booth School of Business believed that the Obama stimulus i.e. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 helped reduce unemployment. But when factoring in the potential costs of either raising taxes to address the deficit spending – only 14% of the economists surveyed felt the economy would be better off without having passed the Obama stimulus package. - See more at: http://www.classwarfareexists.com/9...stimulus-helped-economy/#sthash.WSmVyO0k.dpuf

The inconvenient truth has been bolded for you. The claims of this study are farcical at best.

 

[Ishmael Pequod]

Actually, there are many things in the affordable care act that change the medical system. Hospitalization and follow up care, if a patient returns within thirty days to the hospital there are fines.

There are many other things too numerous to mention here, but I can retrieve the list if you wish.

The majority of the people don't like it. Obama deliberately lied for over 3 years.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Actually, there are many things in the affordable care act that change the medical system. Hospitalization and follow up care, if a patient returns within thirty days to the hospital there are fines.

There are many other things too numerous to mention here, but I can retrieve the list if you wish.

lol... I understand there are changes, I was referring to changes that will help resolve the problem of ever increasing costs. Shifting HOW we pay does not resolve that issue in the least. As Obama is finding out, many of those uninsured are CHOOSING to stay uninsured. because the cost benefit isn't there for them.

That said, I would like to hear more about this fine for returning within 30 days...

 

[Bonestorm]

Um:

Medical prices are rising at their slowest pace in a half century, a shift in the health-care industry that could provide relief to government and businesses' budgets while also signaling consumers are being left with a larger share of the bill.

The prices paid for medical care in July rose just 1% from a year earlier, the slowest annual rate of growth since the early 1960s, according to Commerce Department data. Health-care increases now trail overall inflation, which itself has been historically slow in recent years.

The price data help explain why growth in overall health spending has slowed down in the past several years. The trend, if continued, has big implications for the government's finances because health-care costs are the biggest long-term driver of the federal deficit.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323342404579081312680485476

 

[Truth Detector]

<yawn> What a waste of bandwidth.

Btw, try to learn the difference between "could care less" and "couldn't care less."

You limited-intelligence dunce.

Thank you again for removing any doubt of what a brain dead hyper partisan asshat you truly are and how you make repugnantly stupid claims that cannot be supported by fact.

Carry on dunce.

 

[Truth Detector]

For one thing, his unconstitutional (read: treasonous) actions regarding Iran-Contra.

Fascinating; so was Reagan prosecuted and impeached for his treasonous actions?

Oh that's right, you don't need proof or evidence; you're a hyper partisan dunce of epic proportions who just makes up your unadulterated crap as you go.

Carry on dimwit; you really are THAT repugnant and stupid.

 

[christiefan915]

Thank you again for removing any doubt of what a brain dead hyper partisan asshat you truly are and how you make repugnantly stupid claims that cannot be supported by fact.

Carry on dunce.

Here you go, dumber than a box of rocks.

Which is correct: I could care less or I couldn't care less?

The expression I could not care less originally meant 'it would be impossible for me to care less than I do because I do not care at all'. It was originally a British saying and came to the US in the 1950s. It is senseless to transform it into the now-common I could care less. If you could care less, that means you care at least a little. The original is quite sarcastic and the other form is clearly nonsense. The inverted form I could care less was coined in the US and is found only here, recorded in print by 1966. The question is, something caused the negative to vanish even while the original form of the expression was still very much in vogue and available for comparison - so what was it? There are other American English expressions that have a similar sarcastic inversion of an apparent sense, such as Tell me about it!, which usually means 'Don't tell me about it, because I know all about it already'. The Yiddish I should be so lucky!, in which the real sense is often 'I have no hope of being so lucky', has a similar stress pattern with the same sarcastic inversion of meaning as does I could care less.

http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g09.html

 

[Truth Detector]

Here you go, dumber than a box of rocks.

Which is correct: I could care less or I couldn't care less?

The expression I could not care less originally meant 'it would be impossible for me to care less than I do because I do not care at all'. It was originally a British saying and came to the US in the 1950s. It is senseless to transform it into the now-common I could care less. If you could care less, that means you care at least a little. The original is quite sarcastic and the other form is clearly nonsense. The inverted form I could care less was coined in the US and is found only here, recorded in print by 1966. The question is, something caused the negative to vanish even while the original form of the expression was still very much in vogue and available for comparison - so what was it? There are other American English expressions that have a similar sarcastic inversion of an apparent sense, such as Tell me about it!, which usually means 'Don't tell me about it, because I know all about it already'. The Yiddish I should be so lucky!, in which the real sense is often 'I have no hope of being so lucky', has a similar stress pattern with the same sarcastic inversion of meaning as does I could care less.

http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g09.html

Dear dunce; your off topic prattle and attempts to obfuscate your blatant ignorance do not serve to mask the glaring stupidity you spam this forum with.

Carry on dimwit.

 

[christiefan915]

Dear dunce; your off topic prattle and attempts to obfuscate your blatant ignorance do not serve to mask the glaring stupidity you spam this forum with.

Carry on dimwit.

Your anger, hostility, hatred, endless insults and crap posts add zero to this forum.

Feel free to put me on ignore, shit-for-brains.

 

[Phantasmal]

lol... I understand there are changes, I was referring to changes that will help resolve the problem of ever increasing costs. Shifting HOW we pay does not resolve that issue in the least. As Obama is finding out, many of those uninsured are CHOOSING to stay uninsured. because the cost benefit isn't there for them.

That said, I would like to hear more about this fine for returning within 30 days...

http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2011/rwjf71451

 

[Phantasmal]

Here is a timeline of when changes were implemented

https://www.healthcare.gov/timeline-of-the-health-care-law/