This guy ran up more debt compared to GDP than W or any other president. He was OPENLY AND PROUDLY partisan, attacking democrats relentlessly, lied, introduced the failed policy known as "trickle down economics" (horse & sparrow theory), and basically got a big loan to jumpstart the economy (which just delayed the recession).
Well I live in Canada and we've got a way better healthcare system than the states. The lineups are long but at least you can get in the lineup. Hell, when Sarah Palin's family has a problem they go to Canada.
We pay more for health care than any other country in the world, despite being 37th in the world health organization's list of healthy countries (in a tie with Turkey).
Ronald Reagan is intentionally spreading paranoia; Obama isn't championing a single-payer system (even though he should); Health care will kill our economy if we don't do something; People DIE from this.
There is a simple reason for why we pay more than any other country in the world. The fact is that we have a population of 300 million people that is far more diverse than any other country in the world. All this diversity creates many different healthcare issues than ony other country has to deal with. Most countries have a less diversified population which allows thier healthcare to focus on the particular malities common amongst thier people. The cost issue is a red herrriing here.
Could you show any figures showing the diversity of issues in comparison to other countries? I'll look but it'd be convenient. I don't see how it would create that much of a difference.
I just found a site comparing causes of death in countries all over the world, and they seem completely comparable to those in the USA overall, with small differences occurring in individual countries with certain diseases on occasion (like Hungary has an extraordinarily high liver disease problem). This leads me to conclude that your argument is baseless.
I really liked him too. I was surprised that Huckabee was considered a better choice amongst primary voters. I never vote in the primaries, except this last time for Ron Paul. Thompson would make a very good president no doubt.
i didnt listen to the speech only because i had already heard it when i wrote a paper on GOP objections to social security, medicare, medicaid, and the civil rights movement. reagan was the right's puppet. but one thing this speech is good for is demonstrating how consistently retarded republicans have been on health care. HES TALKING ABOUT OPPOSING MEDICARE! ASK YOUR GRANDPARENTS IF THEY AGREE THEIR SON "WILL WAIT FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TELL HIM WHERE HE WILL GO TO WORK" IF MEDICARE PASSES
OK Did you just say that you wrote a paper on how the GOP had objections to the civil rights movement? Sorry pal but you just exposed yourself as an intellectual lightweight. You see, despite the revisionist history being taught at university today, the GOP was the champion of the civil rights movement. It was republicans who got sufferage passed and MLK was a registered Republican because of this. It was Robert Byrd (D) WV who said that was the worst thing The GOP ever did.
"You start out in 1954 by saying, Nigger, nigger, nigger. By 1968 you can't say nigger—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites." - Lee Atwater, Reagan's top campaign strategist
LBJ was a power hungry asshole who is as responsible as anybody for escalating the war in Vietnam. Doesn't change the fact that he fought for Civil Rights, Education, Medicare, Medicaid, Rural Infrastructure etc... He was also a former school teacher who was said to have taken genuine interest in seeing his (mostly poor and Latino) students succeed. Reagan launched his candidacy for president in Philadelphia, MI saying he believes in "states rights." Tell me, in a place that is famous for
four slain Civil Rights workers--whom, btw, were murdered by the local police--in Mississippi, what does it mean when you tell them you believe in "states rights?" Could it possibly be an outreach to racist white voters as a continuation of Nixon's "southern strategy?" What if you clarify by saying that the Civli Rights Movement "was humiliating for the south?" What does it mean then?
You can not put words in Reagan's mouth. I would say that, as was intended by the founders, There are certain things that are to be left to the states. It is not a call to southern white racists. It is in the Constitution under the 10th Ammendement. For you to accuse Reagan of being racist at the same time defending LBJ is ludicras.
Some people you just can't reach. When that happens I remember Otto Van Bismark who said "a man who is not socialist at 20 has no heart, a man who is socialist at 30 has no brain."
I don't know about you, but reprogramming these robots is wearing on my last nerve. They go to putz college and soak up all that revisionist history and then think they know the world. Seeing this is making me prematurely grey.
Recent economic data shows that between the stimulus and the bailout, about 1 million jobs have been preserved. Despite its bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition, the bailout was a firmly Keynesian idea. In order to preserve markets, the government must sometimes interfere
It's going to take awhile. Maybe if Obama didn't inherit record budget deficits and national debt approaching the same size as annual GDP, his administration could have manifactured a more appropriately sized stimulus given the harsh economic climate. On the one hand, focusing on the budget will hurt the economy, which will negate any fiscal conservatism. On the other, complete disregard for such massive deficits (which are mostly Bush's fault) would be reckless and irresponsible.
This is why youtube sucks, and I'm getting tired of this ridiculously poorly designed format. Maybe another time, I'm going to go enjoy my Tuesday night. It's been good.
"Recent economic data shows". Lat time I checked we lost 245,000 jobs in July. But if we are going to take credit for jobs that are still there why not take credit for everyone who is still working not losing their job. Saying that 1,000,000 jobs have been saved sounds a little fishey.
Because not everyone still working would have necessarily lost their job without the bailout (which was Bush, not Obama, though Obama supported it) and the stimulus. An estimated 1 million would have, with a rather sizeable margin of error.
Before we go any further, Let's get over the blame game as far as Bush or Clinton or Obama is concerned. Let's stick to the economic aspects of the recovery. I would like to dwell into the best way to recover. I think we can both agree that thereis plenty of blame to go around. Both parties created this mess.
Wasn't it the Keynesian "easy money" aspect that created the most recent problem in the first place. I am sorry you are too young to remember the Keynesian disaster that was the 70's and Jimmy Carter.
Two one word responses: Vietnam and OPEC. It was Jimmy Carter's pick for Fed Chairman, Paul Volcker, who ended the inflationary trends that tore through the 70s by raising interest rates to levels that caused great unemployment, but that was to be expected, and it worked. Guess who was given credit though! I'll give you a clue, he was president after Carter.
Sorry, inflation at the end of Carter's presidency was still in the high teens and unemplyoment was double digits. Volcker's fed policies were not responsible for anything good.
Volcker was appointed in 79. His fed policies got inflation under control, then he lowered the interest rates incrementally which allowed for the good economy that followed
And no, Keynes had nothing to do with the most recent problem. That can be primarily blamed upon financial deregulation that allowed these "non-bank banks" to give out loans which they didnt care about because they repackaged them anyway. For that, the last four presidents can be heavily blamed (yes, including Clinton), as well as congressional douche bags like Phil Gramm.
One of Keynes key principles is Easy Money. Deregulation led to easy money and for a while things were great. Then midnight struck and the bill has come due. So if the problem is a double edged sword what is the solution?
I didn't "put words in Reagan's mouth," I was quoting him, gigantic difference. What about subjugating an entire people, should that be left to the states? What other "states rights" was he referring to in the town where the movie Mississippi Burning took place? I never said Reagan was necessarily a racist, just more than willing to cater to racist voters, key distinction. LBJ was an asshole, but no president since Lincoln can claim to have done more for African Americans.
Lincoln was a Republican. Wilson was a Democrat. Back before some undefined time in the mid 20th century, some (not most, but some) Republicans were supporters of Civil Rights. Hence Jackie Robinson being a Republican. But most Republicans, like most northern Democrats, were neither segregationists nor integrationists, but tended to take very cautious approaches to such matters. However, starting with Truman desegregating the military, southern Democrats began leaving the party, and most of them
I know about this. What I want to know is why you carry this into today. I think Obama's election shows most of us are done with this racist crap. My dad is a southern redneck who married a mexican woman. I have two half black children. And I am a conservative(with heavy libertarian leanings). I just think throwing out the "racist" card is played out in this day and age. Sure racism exists, but not to the extent the media wants us to believe.
Subjegating an entire race of people is not a states rights issue. And it definately was not the issue when Reagan used the term. You, by insinuating that is what reagan meant, did put words in his mouth. The 13th 14th and 15th Ammendments took the issue out of the realm of the 10th ammendment and therefore no longer a states rights issue. The problem is with the Jim Crow Laws which were created by Democrats in the south who were still pissed about the civil war.
Who is my professor, gworks? I wrote that paper in high school. I believe in judging issues on their own merits, not on whether they are old ideas or not.
Last point I wanna make. If I "did put words in his mouth," if courting racist voters was just my insinuation, then please tell me what Reagan meant. I'd love to hear your opinion as to what he was referring by "states rights" in a speech that called the Civil Rights movement "humiliating for the south." If he was referring to the institution of Jim Crow, why didn't he say that was humiliating? Why did he say the Civil Rights movement (opposed by most local gvts in the south) was humiliating?
All social issues are included in states rights, it is intended to allow the population of each state to create its own identitiy, including medical marijuana in California. Southerners have different values than in the north which is pretty obvious from polls and voting records and not just issues that have an impact on race.
So the federal government should have allowed southern states to continue treating blacks as--at best--second class citizens? If that's not what you're saying, then please by all means inform me as to what you think Reagan was referring to in Philadelphia, Mississippi when he said "I believe in states rights," keeping in mind that he said the Civil Rights Movement was "humiliating for the south" in within a few minutes of that.
Yeah Reagan did recognize that the Civil rights act was humiliating for the south. Do you think that the people who lived in the south at the time Reagan was running for president were proud of the legacy that the Democrats left them.
The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war, is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country. Ronald Reagan
"the GOP was the champion of the civil rights movement." Incorrect. Both parties tended to take a passive stance towards civil rights until JFK, a Democrat. The two most important pieces of legislation for ending Jim Crow were the Civil Rights Bill and the Voting Rights Act, both pushed through Congress by LBJ, a Democrat. The GOP lost its title of "the Party of Lincoln" a long, long time ago. MLK was not a registered Republican, that is an outright lie. Robert Byrd is a rare case of a Dixiecrat
staying in the Democratic Party. Ever since Strom Thurmond decided to run as a third party candidate in 1948 to give voice to those southerners who were disturbed by Truman's decision to desegregate the military, there has been a process of racists leaving the Democratic Party. In the case of Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and a long list of others, they joined the Republican Party.
Hey man there is no need for ad-hominems. if you want to go down that road fine, I can definatly oblige you on that . The fact is that the Democrats brought us Jim Crow laws and the Republicans are the ones who championed civil rights. Just because JFK and LBJ held the office of president does not mean that the Dems had a monopoly on justice. LBJ was a racist and the only reason he signed these reforms into law was because he new he could when coupled with his "Great Society" could...
oh wait, medicare did pass. im pretty sure it did not lead to "socialism," just medical coverage for those over 65. america is still a market based economy and youre an idiot if you think obama is gonna change that.
also, when he mentions that trumans health care plan failed, he neglected to mention why. during trumans presidency, hospitals in the south were still segregated. its main opposition came from southerners who were afraid that universal health care would mean desegregated hospitals
get educated. try taking an econ history class at your local community college or something, maybe then you wont buy into bullshit propaganda quite so easily.
Gotta remember:
This guy ran up more debt compared to GDP than W or any other president. He was OPENLY AND PROUDLY partisan, attacking democrats relentlessly, lied, introduced the failed policy known as "trickle down economics" (horse & sparrow theory), and basically got a big loan to jumpstart the economy (which just delayed the recession).
redreaper2020 2 months ago
Well I live in Canada and we've got a way better healthcare system than the states. The lineups are long but at least you can get in the lineup. Hell, when Sarah Palin's family has a problem they go to Canada.
georgekostaras 8 months ago
Comment removed
ukyopak 1 year ago
We pay more for health care than any other country in the world, despite being 37th in the world health organization's list of healthy countries (in a tie with Turkey).
Ronald Reagan is intentionally spreading paranoia; Obama isn't championing a single-payer system (even though he should); Health care will kill our economy if we don't do something; People DIE from this.
DeflocculatedDentist 2 years ago
There is a simple reason for why we pay more than any other country in the world. The fact is that we have a population of 300 million people that is far more diverse than any other country in the world. All this diversity creates many different healthcare issues than ony other country has to deal with. Most countries have a less diversified population which allows thier healthcare to focus on the particular malities common amongst thier people. The cost issue is a red herrriing here.
spanky061970 2 years ago
Could you show any figures showing the diversity of issues in comparison to other countries? I'll look but it'd be convenient. I don't see how it would create that much of a difference.
DeflocculatedDentist 2 years ago
I just found a site comparing causes of death in countries all over the world, and they seem completely comparable to those in the USA overall, with small differences occurring in individual countries with certain diseases on occasion (like Hungary has an extraordinarily high liver disease problem). This leads me to conclude that your argument is baseless.
DeflocculatedDentist 2 years ago
Comment removed
introvertical71 2 years ago
Comment removed
introvertical71 2 years ago
Where is our Reagan version 2.0? He was a hell of alot more articulate than Obama and a hell of alot better president than the last 3!
gworksnell 2 years ago
I believe his name is Fred Dalton Thompson.
spanky061970 2 years ago
I never knew you supported Thompson. Was he your pick for republican nominee during the partisan primaries?
gworksnell 2 years ago
Absolutely, Although they had run him off before the primary herer in TX.
spanky061970 2 years ago
I really liked him too. I was surprised that Huckabee was considered a better choice amongst primary voters. I never vote in the primaries, except this last time for Ron Paul. Thompson would make a very good president no doubt.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Awesome vid spank!
gworksnell 2 years ago
Thanks, This video is all over the place and it is brcoming more popular now.
spanky061970 2 years ago
this is specifically about medicare. go ask a senior citizen how much they agree with reagans assertion that medicare is a bad thing
BGold87 2 years ago
You didn't even listen to the speech did you. or did you just hear what you wanted to hear?
spanky061970 2 years ago
i didnt listen to the speech only because i had already heard it when i wrote a paper on GOP objections to social security, medicare, medicaid, and the civil rights movement. reagan was the right's puppet. but one thing this speech is good for is demonstrating how consistently retarded republicans have been on health care. HES TALKING ABOUT OPPOSING MEDICARE! ASK YOUR GRANDPARENTS IF THEY AGREE THEIR SON "WILL WAIT FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TELL HIM WHERE HE WILL GO TO WORK" IF MEDICARE PASSES
BGold87 2 years ago
OK Did you just say that you wrote a paper on how the GOP had objections to the civil rights movement? Sorry pal but you just exposed yourself as an intellectual lightweight. You see, despite the revisionist history being taught at university today, the GOP was the champion of the civil rights movement. It was republicans who got sufferage passed and MLK was a registered Republican because of this. It was Robert Byrd (D) WV who said that was the worst thing The GOP ever did.
spanky061970 2 years ago
BWAHAHA! OWN THIS COCKROACH!
gworksnell 2 years ago
"You start out in 1954 by saying, Nigger, nigger, nigger. By 1968 you can't say nigger—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites." - Lee Atwater, Reagan's top campaign strategist
BGold87 2 years ago
LOL! " I'll have those n*ggers voting democratic for the next 200 years!" Lyndon B Johnson, Democratic president.
gworksnell 2 years ago
LBJ was a power hungry asshole who is as responsible as anybody for escalating the war in Vietnam. Doesn't change the fact that he fought for Civil Rights, Education, Medicare, Medicaid, Rural Infrastructure etc... He was also a former school teacher who was said to have taken genuine interest in seeing his (mostly poor and Latino) students succeed. Reagan launched his candidacy for president in Philadelphia, MI saying he believes in "states rights." Tell me, in a place that is famous for
BGold87 2 years ago
four slain Civil Rights workers--whom, btw, were murdered by the local police--in Mississippi, what does it mean when you tell them you believe in "states rights?" Could it possibly be an outreach to racist white voters as a continuation of Nixon's "southern strategy?" What if you clarify by saying that the Civli Rights Movement "was humiliating for the south?" What does it mean then?
BGold87 2 years ago
You can not put words in Reagan's mouth. I would say that, as was intended by the founders, There are certain things that are to be left to the states. It is not a call to southern white racists. It is in the Constitution under the 10th Ammendement. For you to accuse Reagan of being racist at the same time defending LBJ is ludicras.
spanky061970 2 years ago
This dude won't get it, spank.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Some people you just can't reach. When that happens I remember Otto Van Bismark who said "a man who is not socialist at 20 has no heart, a man who is socialist at 30 has no brain."
spanky061970 2 years ago
Amen, spanky. He might be reachable. You never know. Maybe we should provide him with some info that he doesn't get from his professor.
gworksnell 2 years ago
I don't know about you, but reprogramming these robots is wearing on my last nerve. They go to putz college and soak up all that revisionist history and then think they know the world. Seeing this is making me prematurely grey.
spanky061970 2 years ago
spanky, don't let it get to you. I am indoctrinating other young people into the evil cult of the constitution. lol
gworksnell 2 years ago
Just to clarify, I am not a Socialist. I have never been a Socialist. I am a Keynesian.
BGold87 2 years ago
How's this Keynesian stimulus idea working out?
gworksnell 2 years ago
Recent economic data shows that between the stimulus and the bailout, about 1 million jobs have been preserved. Despite its bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition, the bailout was a firmly Keynesian idea. In order to preserve markets, the government must sometimes interfere
BGold87 2 years ago
Even if it did preserve jobs, Obama said it would create jobs and that unemployment would not go above 8%. Where is the uptick in job creation?
gworksnell 2 years ago
Oh but now they are talking about the fact that it is going to be a jobless recovery. How can that happen?
spanky061970 2 years ago
It's going to take awhile. Maybe if Obama didn't inherit record budget deficits and national debt approaching the same size as annual GDP, his administration could have manifactured a more appropriately sized stimulus given the harsh economic climate. On the one hand, focusing on the budget will hurt the economy, which will negate any fiscal conservatism. On the other, complete disregard for such massive deficits (which are mostly Bush's fault) would be reckless and irresponsible.
BGold87 2 years ago
I'm interested to hear more, BGold87. The comment section limits your ability to put forth your entire statment. Can you continue...?
gworksnell 2 years ago
This is why youtube sucks, and I'm getting tired of this ridiculously poorly designed format. Maybe another time, I'm going to go enjoy my Tuesday night. It's been good.
BGold87 2 years ago
"Recent economic data shows". Lat time I checked we lost 245,000 jobs in July. But if we are going to take credit for jobs that are still there why not take credit for everyone who is still working not losing their job. Saying that 1,000,000 jobs have been saved sounds a little fishey.
spanky061970 2 years ago
Because not everyone still working would have necessarily lost their job without the bailout (which was Bush, not Obama, though Obama supported it) and the stimulus. An estimated 1 million would have, with a rather sizeable margin of error.
BGold87 2 years ago
Before we go any further, Let's get over the blame game as far as Bush or Clinton or Obama is concerned. Let's stick to the economic aspects of the recovery. I would like to dwell into the best way to recover. I think we can both agree that thereis plenty of blame to go around. Both parties created this mess.
spanky061970 2 years ago
Wasn't it the Keynesian "easy money" aspect that created the most recent problem in the first place. I am sorry you are too young to remember the Keynesian disaster that was the 70's and Jimmy Carter.
spanky061970 2 years ago
I was born under Carter, my parents told me horror stories about the stop at the gas pump on their way to deliver me. lol
gworksnell 2 years ago
Two one word responses: Vietnam and OPEC. It was Jimmy Carter's pick for Fed Chairman, Paul Volcker, who ended the inflationary trends that tore through the 70s by raising interest rates to levels that caused great unemployment, but that was to be expected, and it worked. Guess who was given credit though! I'll give you a clue, he was president after Carter.
BGold87 2 years ago
Sorry, inflation at the end of Carter's presidency was still in the high teens and unemplyoment was double digits. Volcker's fed policies were not responsible for anything good.
spanky061970 2 years ago
Volcker was appointed in 79. His fed policies got inflation under control, then he lowered the interest rates incrementally which allowed for the good economy that followed
BGold87 2 years ago
And no, Keynes had nothing to do with the most recent problem. That can be primarily blamed upon financial deregulation that allowed these "non-bank banks" to give out loans which they didnt care about because they repackaged them anyway. For that, the last four presidents can be heavily blamed (yes, including Clinton), as well as congressional douche bags like Phil Gramm.
BGold87 2 years ago
One of Keynes key principles is Easy Money. Deregulation led to easy money and for a while things were great. Then midnight struck and the bill has come due. So if the problem is a double edged sword what is the solution?
spanky061970 2 years ago
Did someone use the "S" word and I missed it?
spanky061970 2 years ago
I didn't "put words in Reagan's mouth," I was quoting him, gigantic difference. What about subjugating an entire people, should that be left to the states? What other "states rights" was he referring to in the town where the movie Mississippi Burning took place? I never said Reagan was necessarily a racist, just more than willing to cater to racist voters, key distinction. LBJ was an asshole, but no president since Lincoln can claim to have done more for African Americans.
BGold87 2 years ago
And Lincoln was a republican, zach.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Lincoln was a Republican. Wilson was a Democrat. Back before some undefined time in the mid 20th century, some (not most, but some) Republicans were supporters of Civil Rights. Hence Jackie Robinson being a Republican. But most Republicans, like most northern Democrats, were neither segregationists nor integrationists, but tended to take very cautious approaches to such matters. However, starting with Truman desegregating the military, southern Democrats began leaving the party, and most of them
BGold87 2 years ago
I know about this. What I want to know is why you carry this into today. I think Obama's election shows most of us are done with this racist crap. My dad is a southern redneck who married a mexican woman. I have two half black children. And I am a conservative(with heavy libertarian leanings). I just think throwing out the "racist" card is played out in this day and age. Sure racism exists, but not to the extent the media wants us to believe.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Subjegating an entire race of people is not a states rights issue. And it definately was not the issue when Reagan used the term. You, by insinuating that is what reagan meant, did put words in his mouth. The 13th 14th and 15th Ammendments took the issue out of the realm of the 10th ammendment and therefore no longer a states rights issue. The problem is with the Jim Crow Laws which were created by Democrats in the south who were still pissed about the civil war.
spanky061970 2 years ago
Like his professor, he is living in the past. And I thought democrats prided themselves on being "progressive". lol
gworksnell 2 years ago
Who is my professor, gworks? I wrote that paper in high school. I believe in judging issues on their own merits, not on whether they are old ideas or not.
BGold87 2 years ago
Fair enough.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Last point I wanna make. If I "did put words in his mouth," if courting racist voters was just my insinuation, then please tell me what Reagan meant. I'd love to hear your opinion as to what he was referring by "states rights" in a speech that called the Civil Rights movement "humiliating for the south." If he was referring to the institution of Jim Crow, why didn't he say that was humiliating? Why did he say the Civil Rights movement (opposed by most local gvts in the south) was humiliating?
BGold87 2 years ago
All social issues are included in states rights, it is intended to allow the population of each state to create its own identitiy, including medical marijuana in California. Southerners have different values than in the north which is pretty obvious from polls and voting records and not just issues that have an impact on race.
juliemathos 2 years ago
Exactly
spanky061970 2 years ago
State's rights doesn't equal racist strategy, Zach Morris. It's constitutional.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Were did you come up with "Zach Morris"
spanky061970 2 years ago
LOL... his channel.
gworksnell 2 years ago
So the federal government should have allowed southern states to continue treating blacks as--at best--second class citizens? If that's not what you're saying, then please by all means inform me as to what you think Reagan was referring to in Philadelphia, Mississippi when he said "I believe in states rights," keeping in mind that he said the Civil Rights Movement was "humiliating for the south" in within a few minutes of that.
BGold87 2 years ago
Give me the full context of the quote you are using. I am quite busy on here and don't have time to look up the full quote. If you don't mind.
gworksnell 2 years ago
Yeah Reagan did recognize that the Civil rights act was humiliating for the south. Do you think that the people who lived in the south at the time Reagan was running for president were proud of the legacy that the Democrats left them.
spanky061970 2 years ago
The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war, is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country. Ronald Reagan
spanky061970 2 years ago
switched to the GOP.
BGold87 2 years ago
"the GOP was the champion of the civil rights movement." Incorrect. Both parties tended to take a passive stance towards civil rights until JFK, a Democrat. The two most important pieces of legislation for ending Jim Crow were the Civil Rights Bill and the Voting Rights Act, both pushed through Congress by LBJ, a Democrat. The GOP lost its title of "the Party of Lincoln" a long, long time ago. MLK was not a registered Republican, that is an outright lie. Robert Byrd is a rare case of a Dixiecrat
BGold87 2 years ago
staying in the Democratic Party. Ever since Strom Thurmond decided to run as a third party candidate in 1948 to give voice to those southerners who were disturbed by Truman's decision to desegregate the military, there has been a process of racists leaving the Democratic Party. In the case of Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and a long list of others, they joined the Republican Party.
BGold87 2 years ago
OK let's set something straight right now. I am a Proud Republican. ARE YOU PREPARED TO CALL ME A RACIST?
spanky061970 2 years ago
I hope he tries that line on me. lol
gworksnell 2 years ago
Comment removed
ukyopak 1 year ago
I'm sorry, did somebody say intellectual lightweight? Get educated, jackass
BGold87 2 years ago
Hey man there is no need for ad-hominems. if you want to go down that road fine, I can definatly oblige you on that . The fact is that the Democrats brought us Jim Crow laws and the Republicans are the ones who championed civil rights. Just because JFK and LBJ held the office of president does not mean that the Dems had a monopoly on justice. LBJ was a racist and the only reason he signed these reforms into law was because he new he could when coupled with his "Great Society" could...
spanky061970 2 years ago
create a permanent voting block for the democrat party. Now go educate yourself with some real facts jackass.
spanky061970 2 years ago
Comment removed
ukyopak 1 year ago
Comment removed
ukyopak 1 year ago
LOL, Bgold... you are cluelessly lost in lefty land.
gworksnell 2 years ago
oh wait, medicare did pass. im pretty sure it did not lead to "socialism," just medical coverage for those over 65. america is still a market based economy and youre an idiot if you think obama is gonna change that.
also, when he mentions that trumans health care plan failed, he neglected to mention why. during trumans presidency, hospitals in the south were still segregated. its main opposition came from southerners who were afraid that universal health care would mean desegregated hospitals
BGold87 2 years ago
What is it we are talking about today. Turning medicare into a system that everyone is eligible for. Have you ever heard of incrementalism?
spanky061970 2 years ago
get educated. try taking an econ history class at your local community college or something, maybe then you wont buy into bullshit propaganda quite so easily.
BGold87 2 years ago
As far as getting educated, I am certain that I have a very firm grasp of economics and economic theory
spanky061970 2 years ago
Every American should listen to this, no matter what side of the aisle they stand on.
idfa4 2 years ago
My thoughts exactly. Reagan was able to cut through the BS to get to the meat and potatoes.
AgMachinist 2 years ago 2
Isn't oit though. He was a visionary. A modern day Nostradamus. lol
I do miss him very much.
spanky061970 2 years ago
It is as if the man has come back from the grave to get in on the healthcare debate.
joskemom 2 years ago