Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The "Screw Ronnie Raygun" Thread
Author Message
joebordenrebel Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #1
 
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Ronald Reagan was a disgrace to the office and to this country. [EDITED]

Before you click the "add reply" button, consider this:

His "freedom" mission in Nicaragua wound up killing more innocent people than bin Laden allegedly has. He was a consummate union-buster. He worked to undermine all of the Great Society (and oversaw the widening of the gap between rich and poor).

This grade-B actor was as un-American as they come.

But, worst of all, he helped bring about the beginning of student loan hell. And for that,[EDITED]

Ronnie Raygun--you will not be missed.

----------------------

Other reasons[EDITED]

10. Ed Meese as attorney general. The "War" on pornography.

9. Reagan visited the SS graveyard in Bitburg, West Germany

8. The appointment of James G. Watt as Energy Secretary

7. The War on Drugs and "Just Say NO" Everytime you pee in a cup for a job, you can thank Ronnie

6. SDI- A waste of money and a violation of the ABM treaty

5. The appointment of Rehnquist as Chief Justice and the appointment of Scalia.

4. The support of the Contras in Nicaragua.

3. The firing of the air traffic controllers

2. Unprecedented deficits-High military spending and a failed economic policy

1. The Iran Contra affair. Reagan should have been impeached for this.
06-07-2004 11:14 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


rickheel Offline
The Old Bastard
*

Posts: 8,468
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Heels
Location:

Donators
Post: #2
 
As usual, your hatred consumes you and it is that type of attitude which will have you where you wish he will end up. :rolleyes:
06-07-2004 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #3
 
JBR: That post was a flagrant violation of AUP. Clean it up.
06-07-2004 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wryword Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 974
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #4
 
joebordenrebel Wrote:Good riddance to bad rubbish. Ronald Reagan was a disgrace to the office and to this country. [EDITED]

Before you click the "add reply" button, consider this:

His "freedom" mission in Nicaragua wound up killing more innocent people than bin Laden allegedly has. He was a consummate union-buster. He worked to undermine all of the Great Society (and oversaw the widening of the gap between rich and poor).

This grade-B actor was as un-American as they come.

But, worst of all, he helped bring about the beginning of student loan hell. And for that,[EDITED]

Ronnie Raygun--you will not be missed.

----------------------

Other reasons[EDITED]

10. Ed Meese as attorney general. The "War" on pornography.

9. Reagan visited the SS graveyard in Bitburg, West Germany

8. The appointment of James G. Watt as Energy Secretary

7. The War on Drugs and "Just Say NO" Everytime you pee in a cup for a job, you can thank Ronnie

6. SDI- A waste of money and a violation of the ABM treaty

5. The appointment of Rehnquist as Chief Justice and the appointment of Scalia.

4. The support of the Contras in Nicaragua.

3. The firing of the air traffic controllers

2. Unprecedented deficits-High military spending and a failed economic policy

1. The Iran Contra affair. Reagan should have been impeached for this.
So here you are, JBR, no doubt a beneficiary of the student loan program but not yet gainfully employed, and yet you think that the student loan program is "hell". I wonder if it could possibly, maybe, just perhaps be that you aren't seeking serious employment to pay back your very generous student loan debt. Or maybe you think that you should just be subsidized by taxpayers 'cause you are you.

This intense hatred you have for Reagan is interesting. You just keep talking, boy. Those of us who were WORKING and trying to make a living under the Demo regime in the late '70's and early '80's think Reagan was a godsend. You would not know anything about that since you were being subsidized then too.

The appointments of Rehnquist (as chief justice) and Scalia were critical ones, and they have done much to ameliorate the war against the constitution by the Supreme Court. You would not understand this, I know, but trust me.

Iran and the Contras? Look at the results, child. Were they not quite good?

SDI? An excellent idea, and one we are or should be pursuing now. Festung Amerika is a great idea!

Increased military spending? That, child, was the cause of the end of the Cold War. You wouldn't know anything about that, what that was like. It also provided an economic stimulus for the country, so it could afford grifters on permanent student loans.

Your hatred of Reagan just says a lot about you. You'd be well advised to can it, bud.

The rest of your points are neither here nor there.
06-07-2004 07:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Guest
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #5
 
Wryword Wrote:Those of us who were WORKING and trying to make a living under the Demo regime in the late '70's and early '80's think Reagan was a godsend. You would not know anything about that since you were being subsidized then too.
No we weren't. Unless you were selling junk bonds, he didn't do much for you, either.

Quote:The appointments of Rehnquist (as chief justice) and Scalia were critical ones, and they have done much to ameliorate the war against the constitution by the Supreme Court.  You would not understand this, I know, but trust me.


Those two are disgraceful. Are you one of their duck hunting buddies? :D

Quote:Iran and the Contras?  Look at the results, child.  Were they not quite good?


I didn't realize that treason was mitigated by the results.

Quote:Your hatred of Reagan just says a lot about you.  You'd be well advised to can it, bud.


That sounds like a barely veiled threat. Typical. "We don't like what you say, boy, better shut up!"
06-07-2004 08:58 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Wryword Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 974
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #6
 
Reagan's policies did a lot for me, and I wasn't selling junk bonds. Your ignorance about "junk bonds" is startling, seeing as how that business didn't start until some years after. In any event, there is nothing wrong about junk bonds. There is a lot wrong about fools who don't understand why they are called "junk bonds". You babies, you want to have all the advantages of a free market but none of the risk.

Anyway, I am going to be very interested in reading any attempt here to say that the Carter years, the old Democrat New Deal/New Society years that were terminated under his incompetency, were anything but a disaster. You rheumy eyed Democrats, you still think that European style socialism is and was the answer. Well and fine, but see how the old practiced hands, such as Germany, are faring now. Yes, they have enormous social benefits, yet look at their unemployment rate and stagnant economic growth.
06-07-2004 09:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Motown Bronco Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,758
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation: 211
I Root For: WMU
Location: Metro Detroit
Post: #7
 
Quote:(and oversaw the widening of the gap between rich and poor)

A deliberate <a href='http://www.carolinajournal.com/articles/display_story.html?id=1486' target='_blank'>mathematical distortion</a> used by politicians to play on peoples' envy, fuel another round of class warfare, while scooping up the votes of the "angry".
06-07-2004 10:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Guest
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #8
 
Wryword Wrote:Reagan's policies did a lot for me, and I wasn't selling junk bonds. Your ignorance about "junk bonds" is startling, seeing as how that business didn't start until some years after. In any event, there is nothing wrong about junk bonds. There is a lot wrong about fools who don't understand why they are called "junk bonds". You babies, you want to have all the advantages of a free market but none of the risk.

Anyway, I am going to be very interested in reading any attempt here to say that the Carter years, the old Democrat New Deal/New Society years that were terminated under his incompetency, were anything but a disaster. You rheumy eyed Democrats, you still think that European style socialism is and was the answer. Well and fine, but see how the old practiced hands, such as Germany, are faring now. Yes, they have enormous social benefits, yet look at their unemployment rate and stagnant economic growth.
Babies? Whatever you say. Condecension and obfuscation (Carter? LMFAO!) can't hide your lack of substance, but nice try.
06-08-2004 05:31 AM
Quote this message in a reply
Lethemeul Offline
Fancy Pants
*

Posts: 3,591
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For: Pirates!
Location: Boogie all the time

NCAAbbs LUGDonatorsFolding@NCAAbbs
Post: #9
 
Quote:He was a consummate union-buster.

He was the President of SAG. He believed in unions. PATCO (which is the event your referring to, I'm sure) threatened to strike if they did not get a 100% pay increase. Their request came well before economic recovery. It is/was federal law that federal employees were not allowed to strike. They did, in violation of that law. Reagan fired them. Seems like he did the right thing to me.
06-08-2004 07:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


rickheel Offline
The Old Bastard
*

Posts: 8,468
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Heels
Location:

Donators
Post: #10
 
I, for one, like the drug testing. I have avoided hiring three guys who had big time drugs in their systems and fired 2 who failed random tests. As far as the ATC's go, they paid their money, and they took their chances. Sucked to be them!

SDI has been given credit for the fall of the Soviet system. In and of itsef, that is a great result.
Failed economic policy? :laugh:
06-08-2004 08:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Schadenfreude Offline
Professional Tractor Puller
*

Posts: 9,634
Joined: Jun 2003
Reputation: 238
I Root For: Bowling Green
Location: Colorado

CrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #11
 
Lethemeul Wrote:
Quote:He was a consummate union-buster.

He was the President of SAG. He believed in unions. PATCO (which is the event your referring to, I'm sure) threatened to strike if they did not get a 100% pay increase. Their request came well before economic recovery. It is/was federal law that federal employees were not allowed to strike. They did, in violation of that law. Reagan fired them. Seems like he did the right thing to me.
I'm not a labor lawyer, but my understanding is that under normal circumstances, it is illegal for a business to fire a worker simply for going on strike.

If business is slow once the labor dispute is resolved, the business can opt not to bring back all of the striking workers right away. Also, I don't think the business is under any obligation to get rid of replacement workers to bring back strikers.

Typically, a list of striking workers is created, and the business is required to draw from that list when openings occur.

That's normal practice. And, sure, those legal requirements went out the window when PATCO called an illegal strike.

But keep in mind that the PATCO strike was hardly the first illegal strike of federal workers. My understanding is that there been a couple dozen during the 1970s involving postal workers, GPO workers and the like.

Reagan didn't have to fire those workers. He chose to do that -- and in doing so he nuked 11,000 careers. Suddenly, a whole bunch of men and women who had spent years learning their trade couldn't get jobs anywhere in America doing what they had been trained to do.

Imagine a teacher getting fired in an illegal strike -- and then being told he could no longer get a job anywhere in America as a teacher.

From the fired workers' perspective, that's what happened. They were blacklisted from a career.

It didn't have to be that way.

On a side note, I don't agree at all with the idea that Reagan believed in unions.

Yet, he was at one point president of the Screen Actors Guild -- and at the time, considered himself a Roosevelt Democrat. At some point during the 1950s, Reagan underwent a radical transformation and swung well to the right of the American mainstream. (America moved in Regan's direction during the remainder of his life, and Reagan himself played a role in that).

I'd invite other people to clarify Reagan's true feeling on unions -- but I don't think he had any patience at all for them by the time he was president. His handling of the PATCO strike reflected that, I think.
06-08-2004 08:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lethemeul Offline
Fancy Pants
*

Posts: 3,591
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For: Pirates!
Location: Boogie all the time

NCAAbbs LUGDonatorsFolding@NCAAbbs
Post: #12
 
Schadenfreude Wrote:I'd invite other people to clarify Reagan's true feeling on unions -- but I don't think he had any patience at all for them by the time he was president. His handling of the PATCO strike reflected that, I think.
I'll be the first to admit that what know of Reagan is mostly from what I've read and what I've read is slanted in favor of him (Noonan and D'Souza). However, both of them tell a story of a man who believed in and was in favor of unions. He did a number of good things while he was the President of SAG and fought for a number of actors who had been blacklisted because of McCarthy's witchhunt.

They also tell a story of a President who believed that PATCO's actions were a threat to national security, something that he was not willing to sacrifice to play nice-nice with a union. According to what I've read he dreaded what he had to do, but he did it because he believed it was the right thing.

As to the career-nuking and blacklisting of ATC's, I've not read or heard much on that subject.
06-08-2004 08:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HuskieDan Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,502
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #13
 
Motown Bronco Wrote:
Quote:(and oversaw the widening of the gap between rich and poor)

A deliberate <a href='http://www.carolinajournal.com/articles/display_story.html?id=1486' target='_blank'>mathematical distortion</a> used by politicians to play on peoples' envy, fuel another round of class warfare, while scooping up the votes of the "angry".
I don't see that this makes your point for you. It basically says that the richest do indeed get richer, faster, than anyone else, and that's always been the argument.
06-08-2004 09:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


joebordenrebel Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #14
 
I figured you would take it far enough. See ya.
06-08-2004 10:07 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GrayBeard Offline
Whiny Troll
*

Posts: 33,012
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 880
I Root For: My Kids & ECU
Location: 523 Miles From ECU

Crappies
Post: #15
 
joebordenrebel Wrote:I'd love to respond to the issues that have been raised, but the overarching issue seems to be the newly reconstituted bloody boot of fascist control.

Why are you Cons so afraid to let people speak their minds? Is that why you banned you-know-who?

Is this intimidation tactic making you feel compensated for certain other inadequacies?

Bah bah. What a herd of f'ing sheep. :roflol:
Maybe if you would post your dislike (or hatred) of others in a more tasteful and tactful way, your posts would not get edited. The reason why your threads are getting edited is because you are trying to use sensationalism to stir the pot, so to speak.

Why would you post such classless flagrant attacks so shortly after Reagan's death? Because you knew the classless posts would be edited/deleted and you could then complain about the facsist control of this board. Pity you, JBR!
06-08-2004 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
joebordenrebel Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
 
:roflol:

You have got to be shi##ing me, GB!

A public figure (and especially a DEAD public figure) is open to whatever in the HECK any DADGUM foole wants to say about him! He's DEAD! He doesn't care!

You KNOW as well as I do that the rhetoric on this board tends to be over the top. Frankly, there's a lot of people (myself included) who will be glad to urinate in the vicinity of Ronnie's final resting place as he has now passed on.

So what! That language in no way violates the AUP.

Pity you, poor sheep. Bah bah! :roflol:
06-08-2004 11:04 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lethemeul Offline
Fancy Pants
*

Posts: 3,591
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 66
I Root For: Pirates!
Location: Boogie all the time

NCAAbbs LUGDonatorsFolding@NCAAbbs
Post: #17
 
Quote:(2) Hyperbolic or overly emotive language and imagery...are generally discouraged, and will be deleted if they appear to serve no purpose other than to inflame the discussion.

You don't think some, if not many, of your comments violate this section of the AUP? It's a trait, and you're quite skilled with the English language, but wishing a man burns in hell, etc, is 'overly emotive' and meant to 'inflame discussion' in my book.
06-08-2004 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #18
 
HuskieDan Wrote:
Motown Bronco Wrote:
Quote:(and oversaw the widening of the gap between rich and poor)

A deliberate <a href='http://www.carolinajournal.com/articles/display_story.html?id=1486' target='_blank'>mathematical distortion</a> used by politicians to play on peoples' envy, fuel another round of class warfare, while scooping up the votes of the "angry".
I don't see that this makes your point for you. It basically says that the richest do indeed get richer, faster, than anyone else, and that's always been the argument.
Because they keep doing the same things that made them successful. Yep, makes sense.
06-08-2004 08:15 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.