How Reagan Changed American Politics

[FRSFreeState]

Ron Reagan, Barry Goldwater, Milt Friedman, Bill Buckley and a few others. Moved America from an era of Democratic Socialism with the Welfare State. Going back to the Great Society and New Deal. To an era of more Individual Freedom and Responsibility that we are still in. Which is a big part of Reagan's legacy.

[Dramactica]

Regan didn't change history. He was late when the soveits are losing. what an idiot.

[gray499kcw]

Tory sleeper agent

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

The only people who can criticize Reagan are people totally ignorant of economic history and the devastating policies of the Carter administration... these are the fools that elected Barack Obama.

[bashia]

If we'd followed Carter's policies we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today. One of his main goals was energy independence and development of renewable energy. Carter was a victim of the oil cartel, manipulation by the Fed and unemployment due to the entry of the baby boomers into the job market. Too bad Americans think the only resolution to any problem is FORCE.

[kurt33333]

That's a good point. There is also the debt that was created during the Vietnam War, and the inflation as a result during the Carter Administration.

[ThePenguin1134]

@bashia Carter? Really? Even the most liberal historians make no effort to paint the Carter presidency as a successful one. Carter was a victim, as mentioned in the video, of being a piss poor leader. And really? We ALL believe that the only reslution to any problem is force? The majority of the country disapproves of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? BTW, our second invasion of Iraq was induced by 10+ years of failed DIPLOMACY. Please see the Christopher Hitchens video on the anti-war mvmt.

[Dramactica]

@GaiusIuliusTaberna

wrong. you are poorly wrong.

[BUDDY6414724297]

ReaGAN CAN GOTO HELL!

[toosinbeymen]

These are all the standard R talking points about their "legend" Reagan.

They conveniently forget trading arms for hostages with IRAN, illegally supplying arms and supplies to the horribly cruel Contras, tax cuts for the rich, reversing all the energy savings initiatives of previous presidents, and quietly destroying our tariff system to start our drive to ship American jobs overseas.

[bashia]

and most important the dumping the fairness doctrine and starting the consolidation of media so today corporations are capable of keeping Americans brainwashed

[adzug]

@toosinbeymen thank you truth is much better than angry rant. couple 100k died in el salvador and guatemala thanks to him

[hookshot1986]

Green energy is the Robin Hood of politics. It will be expensive at first for sure. However, the benefits that will incur will be long lasting and we as an American people will forever be grateful. For it's endurance as a source of energy and it's minimal cost. It will create so many jobs that FDR can finally rest in peace. Even if you think global warming is bullshit. The sole idea is so valuable that it cannot be left alone.

[JONK1NG]

Agreed. The proprosition of global warming itself can not be left alone to the consequences. Whether or not the pace is fast, slow, or at all, we musn't take that grave of a chance. Plus, it is the future generations that concern me, not the present state necessarily.

Slight quam, but not completely with the "Robin Hood" label:

I just see it creating loads of work, and not jobs that create opportunities for development. Yet, work will support those that otherwise relied on taxpayers.

[side1981]

Reagan is America's most beloved monster. Even worse than Andrew Jackson.

[eliseannville]

We've sure proven how persuedable us sheep will be. Fear of "communism" or "terrorism" easily does the job. Then go ahead and gut our dwindling economic protections. We'll all be hiding under the desk.

[matchbox555]

reaganism is evil

[garvess]

The president is a hood ornament for a car load of mobsters. Anyone schmuck could have replaced Reagan.

[funkalunatic]

If the speaker is correct, it has disturbing implications for democracy.

[exist209]

Yes Reagon fucked up EVERYTHING with trickle down economics and deregulation

[Bobbiethejean]

This should be renamed: How Reagan fucked over the American economy with his bullshit trickledown policies.

[idicula1979]

I think he was the first sound bite president, and it took the incompotence of Bush 43 to exaust the movement Ragenism.

[eirefrance]

I've heard people say that Reagan was necessary for his time. I'm too young to remember, but I know he's left my country a fucked up wreck; rotten infrastucture, massive govt and personal debt, absurd defense spending is the only role govt has, divisiveness, 'state's rights' as a justification for bigotry.

[WhoRonPaul]

the comment is absolutely on target

[mikezephyr]

don't forget covert CIA wars funding fascist contras- funded by Iran, corporate dominance, moral hypocrisy and imperialistic belligerence the world over.

in a sense, reagan is a product of his conditions, but it's inexcusable.

[eirefrance]

If he was a product of his times, than our current mess is a product of him and his times.

[mikezephyr]

so horribly and miserably true.

[Plutonwolf]

In so many ways, it would take 50,000,000 characters to outline the ways his philosophies damaged our country. I sometimes wonder if he wanted things to fail so as to enable a junta takeover. Then I wonder if he just wanted to collect all of the wealth into the hands of an elite there-by recreating royalty in our land. Many hard right types lust for this. They all look at serfdom as an idea whose day has returned.

[MidnightNeverCome]

This is absurd. The "hard right" is the home of such types as F.A. Hayek, an economist who denounced serfdom in all its forms (e.g. socialism, national socialism, etc.). Only statist economies lead to plutocracy, by giving a "vanguard elite" complete (i.e. legal) control over the flow of wealth. On the other hand, capitalism allows the individual to save money, reinvest, climb career ladders, etc. Only in capitalist countries can you start with nothing and end a Rockefeller - because of freedom.

[Plutonwolf]

And for every iconic tale of "he was an immagrant with nothing more than his hopes and dreams, yet now he is soooo rich" story you can pull, there is thousands of "the only reason that jack ass is not in the gutter is because his daddy/uncle owns the company" stories.

And it is the far right who see capitalism as a religious faith who also see working folk as a "resource", not as human beings.

Capitalism is good as long as it is well regulated and watched.

[seamoremonster]

And of course luck and absolute ruthless bastardry had nothing to do with their success. I remember my mother commenting on some asshole who had achieved a modicum of wealth, saying that he he must be smart to do so...I answered by saying Mom he could just as well have been a rotten, lying, cheating son of a bitch too.

[Plutonwolf]

And that is the way it has been for most of history. The only thing different these days is the grazers have let themselves become convinced that somehow, being wealthy is all you need to see before you start admiring someone. Donald Trump a cultural icon? I mean REALLY!!!!??? All I have to say to that is "give me a fucking break.".

[MidnightNeverCome]

What are you going on about? At least Donald Trump isn't a genocidal maniac, rapist, or murderer, which is more than I can say for any government official in a communist society...

[Plutonwolf]

Like Dick Cheney?

BTW, Donald was born with a platinum spoon in his gob.

[MidnightNeverCome]

Before I leave (I don't live on the Internet), I really have to express some massive LOLz at your attempt at a logical argument. "Human Resources" is a capitalist attempt to dehumanize laborers?

...

...

...

WTFLOLROFLMFAOXDDDDDDD

kthxbye

[eirefrance]

Any govt official in a communist society is a genocidal maniac rapist? Whats your source?

[MidnightNeverCome]

In a society in which government has a monopoly on industry, do you really think it would be magically better? Somehow, all the angelic people would get jobs and all the "cheating S.O.B.'s" would be unemployed? Please. The U.S.S.R. was the most corrupt AND most socialized nation this world has ever seen. Capitalism (i.e. a reality-based market) rewards rational behavior and punishes irresponsible behavior, which is more than I can say for non-free markets.

[seamoremonster]

And Russia is less corrupt now? I'm not certain who'd be worse the former Communist's Secret Police or the well established and armed Russian Mafia.

[justicecallicles]

Your manic categorizing of everything into either your brand of laissez faire capitalism or evil totalitarian communism leaves us with only one question: do we say you're tilting at windmills or knocking over strawmen?

[justicecallicles]

I say both.

I get the impression that if he were to ever hear a man complain about a sharp edge--on a piece of metal in a car, perhaps--Midnight would accuse him of wanting to ban all cars and remind him of how horrible things were when we had only horses.

It might take days, if it's at all possible, to convince Midnight that the man only wanted the sharp edge blunted or covered. That's exactly the situation with his economics.

[MidnightNeverCome]

I apologize for not being able to explain in 500 words my entire philosophy and political ideology. This is entirely my fault. After all, I own YouTube, and can set the word limit; I have more time than I can manage, so, if I really wanted to, I COULD spend all my days typing out dissertations on politics and economics for the anonymous masses on YouTube; and I'm omnipotent, so obviously there's no possibility I would be wasting my time in writing all this, cuz I know "fo-sho" I'll convince you.

[MidnightNeverCome]

(Besides that, if you really want to question my positions, and have a discussion, feel free to PM me. At least in that situation, I have more room to argue and my message won't get lost in a deluge of every-two-seconds posts. This goes to everyone, btw.)

[MidnightNeverCome]

Ah, so your main point is that capitalism sucks because it allows people to support their loved ones with their hard-earned wealth. Huh?

I love the Marxist argument that capitalism is "dehumanizing." Capitalism is the only humane economic system because it recognizes that humans aren't "things" the state can buy and sell (and kill), but sovereign individuals who control their own lives. There is nothing wrong with selling your talents, labor, etc. in exchange for compensation.

[Plutonwolf]

First off, in response to your trite bit of debate trickery, ie, labeling me as a commie marxist socialist, I must most politely tell you to go fuck yourself, with all due respect.

As to your weak assertion that capitalism doesn't turn people into things, why is it called "Human Resources"?

Finally, why is every business organization using every resource at their disposal to thwart by any means a return to a fair Unionism climate and law set? You know it's the only way for workers to get a fair

[eirefrance]

My main point is that you must be an ideologue. You constantly shift the target and label everything you dislike as 'total govt control' and 'marxism'. Never mind what an actual socialist, Marxist or anarcho-collectivist might think. Justicecallicles hit it on the head when he you're knocking over strawmen. Meanwhile, your country is falling apart at the seams.

[MidnightNeverCome]

(This is the last post I'm making on this video. Anyone who wants to talk to me about this should feel free to PM me, 'cause I honestly neither have the time nor the obsessive passion for this.)

I'm not knocking down straw-men. I can't magically predict what any random person's economic philosophy is going to be. All I can get is a gist of what they're saying. And when I promote the free market, and someone responds negatively, isn't that a sign they're anti-free market? I think so.

[AtSwimTwoBricks]

Ironically, you're falling into the trap Hayek complained about in "Why I Am Not a Conservative"--you're not adapting to change and fighting long settled battles. Capitalism won. It's over. Capitalism is taken for granted in every major political party and country. Hell, even China is now more capitalist than it is communist.

[MidnightNeverCome]

"Capitalism won"? Is that what you call the U.S. stimulus package? Laissez-faire capitalism?

[AtSwimTwoBricks]

Way to move the goalpost.

[MidnightNeverCome]

Didn't really "move" it; you just failed to recognize where it was in the first place. "Capitalism" is used as a sub for laissez-faire, free-market economics all the time. I just don't feel like writing "laissez-faire, free-market economics" every time I post for your convenience.

[AtSwimTwoBricks]

No, you failed to recognize that there are a variety of approaches and a variety of implementations of the capitalistic idea, some pure and some compromised.

The debates that a relevant today are debates between those approaches. We all accept private ownership, market forces the many beneficial effects of self-interest as the default or base of our economic system. Do we then interfere in particular cases, such as natural monopolies or externalities? Those are the subjects of debate today.

[eirefrance]

You read that in a book written by a philosopher economist. Meanwhile, I look around me at the actual, real world and see my country way behind many 'statist, socialist' countries in health care and education, but all that matters to anyone is the rhetoric. SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM, SOCIALISM!!!!!!! THAT is the legacy of Reagan. Soundbite fearmongering that keeps us from looking for practical solutions to our problems.

[thpt]

BRILLIANT. The president is not given some magic wand which fixes everything. It is a symbol and a speaking point.

[fleecejackets]

He was a pitiful actor, if he deserves to be called that, and ruined American politics. I still cannot figure out why most of America still thinks that being a Liberal is radical or unAmerican. We aren't the sheep of Conservatism, we don't just do what they say. I hope that with idiots like Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich still blasting their unintelligent mouths, maybe Americans will realize it is Conservatism that is scary and harmful to American beliefs, not Liberalism

[LeGioNoFZioN]

you may be right, but conservatives do more for society tangibly (see Arthur C Brooks book Who Really Cares) and procreate more. the only way Liberalism wins over conservatism is through indoctrination, or in the marketplace of ideas. Demographic shift is in the conservatives favour.

[exist209]

making such a sweeping gneralization about conservatives doing more for society is an severely delusional viewpoint.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

not a generalization, but based on stats and figures from the book I quoted you.  It by no means is proof positive for all time, but for the last decade its quite accurate. Brooks is no right winger as well I might add. Very interesting book, full of vast amounts of data on Americans, I highly recommend it if you'd like to learn more.

The fact remains that in the USA people who self identify as conservatives give more blood, time, volunteer more and give more money to charity. that is fact

[wmg111]

Giving money to charity does not get to the root causes of the need for them. An enlightened society would have no need for charities because a proper government doing its job would make them redundant. If everyone received a living wage for their efforts and had access to health care there would be no need for conscience salving charity tax write-offs

[LeGioNoFZioN]

no it doesn't but neither does the government, no government is "proper" as you describe.you speak of a fantasy man has yet to enact,even in communist countries.We have a living wage here and universal health care in Canada but poverty still exists.

Fact is Americans who call themselves conservative give more of themselves to their fellow man than self identified liberals or progressives.You have the power to change this yourself. Give more of yourself. Stop waiting for gov to do it for you

[LeGioNoFZioN]

Toronto spends over 2 million a year on homelessness alone. Yet we have only been able to document less than 100 homeless in Toronto any year. The money could be better spent buying a few common homes for the homeless to use, the government intervention creates an industry where noene would previously exist. Administering to the homeless. Charity does this because of human sensibilities, different cultures and religions endorse charity. Seems society's natural mechanism for coping.

[goldgrif]

Legion of zion worshipps on his knees in front of limbaugh and hannity

[LeGioNoFZioN]

I'm a canuck. those dudes are yankees. Better luck next time feeb.

[exist209]

I'm an Atheist

I donated many new pairs of drum sticks to a local school's music dept.

It was not documented

your theory fails, seeing as you can't keep track of all deeds

YOU FAIL

[mnostredame]

"I'm an Atheist"

There's your problem! In the charity surveys I've seen, collection plates and religious tithes count as charity even if they go to nothing but maintaining the building and keeping the priest employed. They also have the advantage of being much more easy to document than many kinds of secular help.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

read his book, he took a lot into accoutn beyond money. he reveiwed blood donations records, volunteer times at soup kitchens, youth hostels. Its the most comprehensive study of its kind.

[exist209]

1. I've given free time

2. I've given plasma for cancer patient

3. "conservatives" do these things, for a reward of heaven....and therefore cannot be altruistic....it's not sincere

Einstein said something of the sort that....if we only do things for a reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed

also, you're only talking about one man who wrote one book...and I"m supposed to just accept it as fact....no thanx

your demeanor is the problem, and your willingness to make such a sweeping claim

[LeGioNoFZioN]

I'm not arguing for altruism, but rather than charities serve a social function inherent in humanity regardless of culture or religion. Not all self identified conservatives are religious, so not all thought they were getting a reward.

you seem to counter my generalizations with generalizations of your own.

the difference is mine aren't generalizations but based upon research this man did. Perhaps I do put too much weight in it, but it seems to me some of you put too little.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

far from it, you can help to shift the paradigm, and make that report no longer true, but based on the first 6 or so years of this millenium and a few from the 90's his #'s don't lie and he has no politicial axe to grind. When Brooks started he thought he would prove conservatives were hypocrits that didn't do half of what they propose. The facts stated a different case and to his honour he published his findings without prejudice. science without poltical influence.

[seamoremonster]

Well put. It was the Reagan era that begin to manipulate and own the rhetoric. It was the Reagan era that began the anti-intellectual campaigns and began the worship of ignorance and greed as God. Outside the US, other countries could only shake their heads in disbelief at the Reagan in the US and Thatcher in Britain. Truly a partnership made in Hell. To this day somnambulistic brain dead Conservative Zombies think all they have to do is call a liberal stupid to win a debate.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

you've got to watch the whole video on Fora, your asssertion is counter to the points and evidence provided by the speaker

[seamoremonster]

My assertions are based on an article by a Berkley professor some years ago who wrote an article on how the liberals let the conservatives own the rhetoric. It was aptly illustrated with the RNC when they exploited the tragedy of 9-11 to instill fear. The rhetoric of Nationalism and Fear is the rhetoric of fascism. We see it used daily with bombastic right wing tools like Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly. Anti-liberal, anti-intellectual, anti-thinking.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

I agree that nationalism is a value held in regard amongst the "right". Fear on the other hand is used by all, left and right to promote their agenda. What is "An Inconvenient Truth" but a propoganda movie to scare people into following their lead ? The repubs in the US used fear as a tool post 911 also. Fear is a universal tool because all in power know how to exploit it.

[exist209]

How are secular people documented as doing good deeds? You CANNOT know...PERIOD

You don't understand that atheists like to fly under the radar al lot, therefore you CANNOT account for what they do...PERIOD

I don't want to be accounted for what I do. I do it, and that's that.

You really are having a hard time thinking outside of so0called statistics.....doesn't say much for your intelligence.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

so you don't like the findings so you reject the science ? that's a pretty ideological thing to say for an athiest. wouldn't you submit to reason and read the book to determine if it is accurate or not instead of arguing over the impression given to people who have read the book ?

I'm just saying be consistent, I know I am.

[exist209]

why would I read a book claiming to "know" what can't be known?

that's like believing in the bible

nobody can know what everyone does

you're missing the point

it's impossible to know the true statisitcs..IMPOSSIBLE

so, sweeping statements are null and void

are you claiming it possible to know what everyone does at all times?

[LeGioNoFZioN]

you claim it can't be know, I know that while exact 100% accuracy maybe out of reach, but a respectable 95% is available, for those inclined to investigate.

some prefer their own prejudices, others prefer to know the truth. A 95 % understanding of any given issue is preferable to 0% understanding.

[exist209]

YOU CANNOT KNOW THAT 95% is AVAILABLE

[exist209]

Are you a fucking Zionist?

Please say you have more intelligence than that

[LeGioNoFZioN]

I'm not but I am West Indian so the level of my intellect is debatable.

That said I have no hatred for zionists or other ultra nationalists.  Their lot is their own to choose.

[exist209]

yes, you're level of intellect is debatable

[exist209]

And anyone making such a sweeping statement, by such claim cannot be oh high intelligence

[exist209]

GO ahead and try to refute what I"ve stated.

I'd love to hear you claim that you watch over everyone, like a God, and know everything everyone does at all times.

That's the only way you could refute what I said.

Are you really going to make such an assinine claim?

[LeGioNoFZioN]

no I can't claim that I am not God, nor am I the researcher who delved into this.

"Who Really Cares" takes into account only those who self indentify. So the largest indentity group is conservatives, which includes religious and athiest alike. It's only true for the timeframe in which his examinations took into account, which is basically the last 10 years or so. It may not be true in 5 years but it was when he looked at the data.

For an athiest you seem very emoitional.

[exist209]

"For an athiest you seem very emoitional."

Are you NOT human?

And yes, your claim has been proven wrong

[LeGioNoFZioN]

I am human.

My claim is not my claim, I presented facts from a source, you may refute the source but without facts comparable and contrary I don't see how you could win the debate. I've used facts and info, and you haven't used either.

[exist209]

You did NOT present facts

You presented one person's studies

Nobody can know the real stats.

You're making a religious argument now.

You can't prove the stats, yet claim them to be fact.....only on the basis that I can't prove to the contrary.

The burden of proof is on the one making such a sweeping claim.

you've just been owned, with rationale and logic

Are you gonna get all emotional now, and make more rediculous claims?

[LeGioNoFZioN]

so says the child. You can't know how many peopel are in your country at any given time, yet you rely on a census once a decade to gage population trends. the census isn't 100% yet your entire government makes policy based on one census every 10 years. Brooks figures are as accurate as anything your government can offer since its corellated from government sources. while not 100% its the best examination of the data done to date, therefore the most authoritative source to investigate

[exist209]

thought I was a waste of your time?

thought you were leaving?

lick my ass

bye bye

[exist209]

INVESTIGATE

NOT claim as fact

.i.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

it is a statistically sound basis to make judgement from. you say its not a fact, while I differ. given the stats crunched to arrive at the conclusions Brooks did, while intending the study to have the polar opposite meaning just goes to show that even to a liberal like Arthur C Brooks, when faced with evidence contrary to your own prejudice, his professionalism ranked higher than partisan semantics. He could the opposite conclusion to what he expected, and he published his findings.

[exist209]

Thers's no such thing as a "conservative", or a "liberal".....

Everyone is a bit of both, to varying degress

As Chris Rock once said, "i'm liberal on strip clubs, I"m conservative on crime. Point being that we are not ALL one way,or the othe

Classic Black and White western philosophy fails, and so do your views.

For someone calling someone with a differing view a child, you sure are acting like one.

Study up on some psychology

A typical theist, that cannot admit when he's mistaken

[exist209]

btw, if your time is so much more valuable then mine........

why do you keep coming back?

your poor little ego, it's ok little buddy

[exist209]

you just grouped atheists and conservatives together...laughable

but then claim that conservative, which atheists DO NOT identify with, do more deeds

do you see the fault here, or are you that blind?

[LeGioNoFZioN]

are you a child, of course there are athiestic conservatives. Regardless of country. there is no fault exceopt one in your own mind because fo your own prejudice. you aren't very reasonable

[exist209]

Do you live in the US?

Do you understand the cultural meaning of words in different deomographics?

Conservative athiests in the US.....show me

Conservative is a HIGHLY Christian Religious term here

Nice try at ad hominem, once again

btw, you're the child

you're ignorance proves such

[LeGioNoFZioN]

no I live in Canada. I do.  try the log cabin republicans a prominent group of conservatives within the republican party who are all gay, and some but not all are athiests. check their website it will corroborate what I have said. If you think conservative is synonamus with christians you missed the boat. you think in too general terms kid.

[exist209]

"kid"

now you're getting too emotional

can't debate wit you

[LeGioNoFZioN]

says the pickny

[exist209]

So, then you make the claim that humans should show very little emotion

like robots?

[LeGioNoFZioN]

no, just be reasonable when engaging in debate, emoition leads to the lack of substance you have spewed at me. why carry on a conversation if you can't even grasp the issues at play ?

name calling, lack of any consistent them or reason to your argument. Arguing with you is like arguing with my 3 yr old nephew. He doesn't understand enough to argue on an adult level.

Either you are young or english isn't your first language and you have a hard time engaging in rational discussion

[exist209]

You're a fuckin idiot, and it seems as they you're another psychotic Zionist.

A waste of time

Piss Off

[LeGioNoFZioN]

you have wasted more of my vauable time than whatever time you have little one. Best wishes going into the future exist209. God Bless

[exist209]

You insult me, then say God Bless....oh the irony..lol

btw, you're just another internet tough guy

try talking the way you do, to people like me, in public...and see what happens.

Nice how you dodged the demographic question, then proceed to leave abruptly.

btw, there can NEVER be a debate without emotion.

logic drives emotion and emotion drives logic...unless one has very little logic....then it all goes south....like the religious people who insult others, then say God Bless..hypocrite

[LeGioNoFZioN]

if you would like to meet in real life I can arrange it. I live in Toronto. send me an email on here and I will give you directions to my home.

you truly are a child aren't you ? it's worse than debateing with my 3 yr old nephew because at least he gets tired of talking shit and shuts up. Look kid, you feel very strongly and I get that. but you haven't broken Brooks argument, which is based on empirical data and facts.

[seamoremonster]

I think that only the most extreme right wing and the advocates of Big Oil, Coal, and unsustainable growth would diminish "And Inconvenient Truth" as propaganda. Scary, yes. Hyperbolized...I think not. Science has always been enemy of blinkered religious zealots. Gore didn't encourage young men to go to war over non-existent WOMD to benefit the likes of Halliburton and Exxon Mobile.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

I find it ironic when people who profess to align themselves with science yet remain blissfully ignorant about the agenda they empower. Inconvenient truth is strictly a propganda piece. It may be well intentioned, but it remains propganda. Al Gore wouldn't debate anyone in public about climate change because he is far from an expert he is an early industry figurehead. He represents the Big Business of ACC, and you don't even notice it. I wish I could hustle that good.

[seamoremonster]

"An Inconvenient Truth" uses scientific data to support its claims. Al Gore did not send young men and women off to illegal invade a country that had no WOMD to secure the interests of Halliburton and Exxon Mobile with their blood. Blinkered ideologues may not be able to see the difference between the two. Propaganda rarely makes claim to any legitimate scientific data...it's simply advertising to the lowest common denominator.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

no Al Gore's movie is made to play in british classrooms with a warning of 9 factual errors in the movie. Hyperbole is the style the whole movie was shot in. Al Gore is one of the primary investors in ethanol, which is more trouble than its worth. People starved because of ethanol.

[seamoremonster]

People starved because of ethanol? Yeah. Tell that to Brazil. Ethanol is not even a serious consideration as a replacement to oil for most of us. People died because we invaded Iraq...but I suppose those with ideologue's mind set...will still claim it wasn't about oil and that the US would be embraced and lauded as liberators. Hyperbole is the style? Bullshit. We've had eight years of hyperbole, fear mongering, lies, water-boarding.  PS/ Big Oil sucks...and Climate Change is real.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

you forget the bread and rice shortage last year which was not very big here in North America but was much bigger in the West Indies and Central and South America. Africa felt it too. Ethanol was the primary factor in that mini crisis.

The US did F up in Iraq. Can't argue there. For all the lies and fear mongering that occurred under Bush, aren't you surprised it hasn't changed yet under Obama ?

Climate Chaneg is real, people being the primary factor in that is fallacy.

[seamoremonster]

No. I just remember right wing ideologues like yourself that continually try to justify using far more than your share of resources and then try to justify with limp arguments like above while exploiting third world countries, labor and natural resources. Obama han't even been in for two months. Let's just continue using oil and polluting the planet according to you global warming is just a myth propagated to stop you and your ilk form making profit. Pull your head out.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

People that advocate stopping clmiate change as opposed to adapting to it, are foolish, or ignorant. Carbon dioxide isn't even a pollutant. I come from a third world country and still have family there. Carbon cap and trade, energy surcharges, expensive staples drive up the price of living for the poor and my family. I'm not willing to sacrifice my family's well being for guilty rich north americans to free their conscience.

[seamoremonster]

Sorry. Foolish ignorant?  That adequately describes almost every big oil apology and defense you have posted. Guilty rich North Americans...So Exxon-Mobile retires Lee Raymon at 300 million dollars while still in court over Exxon-Valdez fiasco. I can understand why others in this debate have lost patience with you because I certainly have. Now those who advocating climate change reforms are the rich...Go vote for Palin, Bush, Plumber Joe...That's all I seriously had enough of you. Idiot.

[LeGioNoFZioN]

Big oil is behind ethanol, as is Al Gore, Al Gore gets more money from big oil than anyone who doesn't advocate human activity as the primary source of climate change. the system in place supports ACC, the money the funding to a myriad of scientific interests flows to the "IPCC consensus". You're intentionally naive. Every current attempt at dealing with climate change is making the rich richer period. Only the poor suffer.

[McArrowni]

Ethanol has nothing to do with fighting climate change. It's a dub put forward by greedy farmers. Anyone who bothers to inform themselves know that, including any self-respecting ecologists.

[NatureLegalized]

Yeah, Reagan certainly caused a tremendous amount more damage than any President (and probably St. Gov as well, for that matter!) before him.