Interesting read

Still nothing on the ACTUAL data Mott? Are you really just going to stick with the 'I was there man, I was there' line of bullshit?
 
The author of the OP article needs to study Oswald a bit more. There was a LOT more to Oswald's bizarre nature than merely his trip to the USSR. The punk even tried to assasinate a Marine Corps Maj. Gen. who was still somewhat famous at the time. Oswald further continued to preach communism on the streets, and on the talk shows he frequently called into, even after experiencing the drab and depressing life of communism behind the Iron Curtain.

Its fairly obvious that Oswald was a punk, and a young fool, who was desperately seeking attention. He settled on assasination as the means to acheive fame, because the one thing he was good at in life was handling a rifle.
 
The second oil crisis happened in 1979, six years after the first when prices quadrupled overnight.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-carterreagan.htm

That piece is on a very aptly named website. What a friggin joke.

1) Inflation was falling as Carter took office and was back under 6%
2) GDP growth was as I mentioned above 4+% from 1976-1979
3) Unemployment was down near full employment
4) That site PRETENDS Carter let Volcker initiate his plan and keep it in place. Carter did not. He did let Volcker try it, but as soon as the inevitable recession signs started, Carter ran away and backed off, Volcker then lowered rates again because Carter was unwilling to take the political hit for the good of the country. Once Reagan took office, THEN Volcker was allowed to follow through on his plan. The recession of 81/82 hit and Reagan got the Reps hammered in the mid terms as a result.
5) The Volcker plan did not result in 7 years of growth, it resulted in a bull market from 1982-2000. A bit more than 7 years. A brief blip of a recession caused by Bush's tax hikes was the only hiccup in that run.
 
That piece is on a very aptly named website. What a friggin joke.

1) Inflation was falling as Carter took office and was back under 6%
2) GDP growth was as I mentioned above 4+% from 1976-1979
3) Unemployment was down near full employment
4) That site PRETENDS Carter let Volcker initiate his plan and keep it in place. Carter did not. He did let Volcker try it, but as soon as the inevitable recession signs started, Carter ran away and backed off, Volcker then lowered rates again because Carter was unwilling to take the political hit for the good of the country. Once Reagan took office, THEN Volcker was allowed to follow through on his plan. The recession of 81/82 hit and Reagan got the Reps hammered in the mid terms as a result.
5) The Volcker plan did not result in 7 years of growth, it resulted in a bull market from 1982-2000. A bit more than 7 years. A brief blip of a recession caused by Bush's tax hikes was the only hiccup in that run.

In 1979, inflation averaged over 11%

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx?dsInflation_currentPage=2
 
Then we also should have tried the administrations of Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, Bush and who knows where we would be today. But I know, we only look at what Reagan did because he is the big boogey man of the left. His successes far outweigh his negatives... as I stated, Reagan made the hard choice that Carter ran away from. Just as Mott runs away from addressing any of the actual FACTS of the state of the economy when Carter took office.

Selling weapons illegally, that hard choice? I bet more of that crap goes on than we realize. Reagan was the beginning a a power control surge that has spiraled us down to the point we are at today. The middle class took their eyes off the ball and blindly believed our government could do no wrong. We are paying for that mentality now. Überpatriotism and the anti Americanism of those who try to hold the government accountable. This RIGHTIE blind attitude that Reagan was a saint and that he did more right than wrong is absolute bullshit. Sorry, Superfreak, but Reagan started the slide into mediocrity!
 
The author of the OP article needs to study Oswald a bit more. There was a LOT more to Oswald's bizarre nature than merely his trip to the USSR. The punk even tried to assasinate a Marine Corps Maj. Gen. who was still somewhat famous at the time. Oswald further continued to preach communism on the streets, and on the talk shows he frequently called into, even after experiencing the drab and depressing life of communism behind the Iron Curtain.

Its fairly obvious that Oswald was a punk, and a young fool, who was desperately seeking attention. He settled on assasination as the means to acheive fame, because the one thing he was good at in life was handling a rifle.

Yea, like Oswald's CIA connection? Or Attorney General Robert Kennedy's phone conversation on November 22 that sheds light on his thinking that afternoon. He spoke to Enrique ‘Harry' Ruiz-Williams, a Bay of Pigs veteran who was his closest associate in the Cuban exile community. Kennedy stunned his friend by telling him point-blank, ‘One of your guys did it.'”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/hornberger/hornberger167.html
 
Yea, like Oswald's CIA connection? Or Attorney General Robert Kennedy's phone conversation on November 22 that sheds light on his thinking that afternoon. He spoke to Enrique ‘Harry' Ruiz-Williams, a Bay of Pigs veteran who was his closest associate in the Cuban exile community. Kennedy stunned his friend by telling him point-blank, ‘One of your guys did it.'”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/hornberger/hornberger167.html

I want to know who was behind Oswald. He may have been the lone shooter, but how and why.
 
Selling weapons illegally, that hard choice? I bet more of that crap goes on than we realize. Reagan was the beginning a a power control surge that has spiraled us down to the point we are at today. The middle class took their eyes off the ball and blindly believed our government could do no wrong. We are paying for that mentality now. Überpatriotism and the anti Americanism of those who try to hold the government accountable. This RIGHTIE blind attitude that Reagan was a saint and that he did more right than wrong is absolute bullshit. Sorry, Superfreak, but Reagan started the slide into mediocrity!

NO.... Please tell me your reading skills have not fallen to the pathetic levels of Mott. As for your comments on the start of the power control surge... sorry, but that began under Kennedy and Johnson and was precisely what Ike warned us about.

Please tell me who found holding the government accountable was unpatriotic?

Reagan DID far more good for this country than bad. I acknowledged the fact that he had several things that were bad, Iran contra being the biggest. That said, as you stated, that shit has been going on long before Reagan. He just got caught.

Tell me, if Reagan started a slide into mediocrity, Why is it that the US dominated from 1982-2000? I know the left loves to hate Reagan, but enough with the wild falsehoods.
 
I want to know who was behind Oswald. He may have been the lone shooter, but how and why.

Its called ideology. If Oswald viewed the Maj. Gen. he tried to shoot as the "leader of the fascist movement" in the modern world (of 1963 - yeah, the general had his issues, and was cut from the same cloth as McCarthy), then what must he have thought of the American President who had attacked Cuba and had his UN Ambassador call out the USSR during the Missile Crisis.

Just ignore the rantings of certain conspiracy theorists. Robert Kennedy was a tool, and he could blame whoever he wanted, because he got along with no one.
 
NO.... Please tell me your reading skills have not fallen to the pathetic levels of Mott. As for your comments on the start of the power control surge... sorry, but that began under Kennedy and Johnson and was precisely what Ike warned us about.

Please tell me who found holding the government accountable was unpatriotic?

Reagan DID far more good for this country than bad. I acknowledged the fact that he had several things that were bad, Iran contra being the biggest. That said, as you stated, that shit has been going on long before Reagan. He just got caught.

Tell me, if Reagan started a slide into mediocrity, Why is it that the US dominated from 1982-2000? I know the left loves to hate Reagan, but enough with the wild falsehoods.

Dominated how? Economically, militarily? Is domination all that important, or maintanence? Are we still top in medicine, education, science? How about human rights, the arts, music? We have the largest military and we have strong armed pur wy into the minds and hearts of the rest of the planet, but are we excelling in the things that count and benefit humankind and the Earth. Is our dominance leading us to improve our quality of life or are we struggling? Is the average citizen better off than we were before 1982?

I don't think so and anytime someone doesn't agree with your opinions you claim they have reading comprehension problems and that isn't the case, but you go a head and insult, if it makes you feel superior, I don't need to do that, I don't need to put you down in order to understand that your opinion is different than mine. I have my own opinion as to when the change started in this country, when civilize discourse started to go by the wayside. When you were considered antiAmerican to question government.

I have witnessed the demonization of people in the last thirty years if their ideas were "liberal" and it started with the Reagan administration and the idea that he was the President sent by God and the GOP was the party of god to question was questioning God.

So, I guess it just boils own to hat you believe mediocrity is and my definition, nd to me, the USA is swimming in mediocrity. We have settled for less thn great and it is mirrored in our policies and our politics!
 
I want to know who was behind Oswald. He may have been the lone shooter, but how and why.

There was more than one gunman. Oswald may have been one of them, but I believe he was the patsy. Two months before the assassination, a person visited the Russian Embassy in Mexico City. He said his name was Lee Harvey Oswald...the only problem; he did not look like Lee Harvey Oswald or talk like Lee Harvey Oswald. It was an imposter. J Edgar Hoover and President Johnson KNEW this and discussed it in a phone conversation the day after the assassination.

Hoover tells Johnson that tapes of Oswald contacting the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City don't match the voice of the living Oswald. Hoover says "it appears that there is a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there."

LBJ Phone Calls - November 1963
 
Dominated how? Economically, militarily?

Yes to both. While we have faded a bit as of late, we are still the economic powerhouse... especially compared to the EU.

Is domination all that important, or maintanence? Are we still top in medicine, education, science? How about human rights, the arts, music?

Yes, we are still top in medicine and in innovation in general. Education has certainly faltered, the more the teachers union resists change and continues to teach to the lowest common denominator, the further we will fall behind. While science in schools is certainly faltering like education in general... the US still leads in medical and scientific innovations. Human rights? Depends on if you mean how we treat our own citizens, how we treat others or a combo. We are good on the first, weak on the second and average on the third. Arts and music... not really the best to judge these areas... off the cuff I would say we can hold our own in music, for art... I would guess no, but I really don't have a clue if we 'dominate'

We have the largest military and we have strong armed pur wy into the minds and hearts of the rest of the planet, but are we excelling in the things that count and benefit humankind and the Earth. Is our dominance leading us to improve our quality of life or are we struggling? Is the average citizen better off than we were before 1982?

The average citizen is far better off than we were in 1982.

I don't think so and anytime someone doesn't agree with your opinions you claim they have reading comprehension problems and that isn't the case, but you go a head and insult, if it makes you feel superior, I don't need to do that, I don't need to put you down in order to understand that your opinion is different than mine. I have my own opinion as to when the change started in this country, when civilize discourse started to go by the wayside. When you were considered antiAmerican to question government.

LMAO... no, I had problems not with people stating opposing opinions, but with those who try to restate what I said incorrectly as both Rana and Mott did in this thread. i encourage you to state your opinions... especially when you do so in your own words like this post rather than cutting and pasting.

I have witnessed the demonization of people in the last thirty years if their ideas were "liberal" and it started with the Reagan administration and the idea that he was the President sent by God and the GOP was the party of god to question was questioning God.

yes, many of the far right do demonize 'liberals', just as many on the far left demonize 'conservatives'. I love how the left always tries to blame Reagan for 'starting' everything 'bad'.

So, I guess it just boils own to hat you believe mediocrity is and my definition, nd to me, the USA is swimming in mediocrity. We have settled for less thn great and it is mirrored in our policies and our politics!

There are certainly areas where we have settled for mediocrity. Education being the easiest to see. Teaching to the lowest common denominator. Coddling children with the mentality that 'everyone gets a trophy and gets to win'. The mindset that is propagated by the left. The 'punish successful people because they have more stuff than me' mentality also leads many to complacency.

But saying the US is swimming in mediocrity is an opinion I do not share. We are still the leaders in innovation (not in every category, but overall). Overall our 'poor' are far better off than most countries 'middle class'.
 
NO.... Please tell me your reading skills have not fallen to the pathetic levels of Mott. As for your comments on the start of the power control surge... sorry, but that began under Kennedy and Johnson and was precisely what Ike warned us about.

Please tell me who found holding the government accountable was unpatriotic?

Reagan DID far more good for this country than bad. I acknowledged the fact that he had several things that were bad, Iran contra being the biggest. That said, as you stated, that shit has been going on long before Reagan. He just got caught.

Tell me, if Reagan started a slide into mediocrity, Why is it that the US dominated from 1982-2000? I know the left loves to hate Reagan, but enough with the wild falsehoods.

The military industrial complex Ike warned us about in his farewell speech began before Eisenhower. It was what evolved after WWII. His mention of it stems from his presidency being sabotaged...

In 1960 when President Eisenhower launched his Crusade for Peace to bring about a lasting detente with the Soviet Union, one U-2 airplane, one pilot, and the invisible enemy shattered his dream. That U-2, flown into the USSR on May 1, 1960 by Francis Gary Powers was not on a spy mission as had been alleged. It was launched for the sole purpose of destroying whatever chance there was for peace. It was the weapon of the war lovers -- the missile of the industrial complex.

Ike learned what other world leaders have learned: it is easier to wage war than to make peace. In war the enemy is visible, and he is usually on the other side.
 
Yes to both. While we have faded a bit as of late, we are still the economic powerhouse... especially compared to the EU.



Yes, we are still top in medicine and in innovation in general. Education has certainly faltered, the more the teachers union resists change and continues to teach to the lowest common denominator, the further we will fall behind. While science in schools is certainly faltering like education in general... the US still leads in medical and scientific innovations. Human rights? Depends on if you mean how we treat our own citizens, how we treat others or a combo. We are good on the first, weak on the second and average on the third. Arts and music... not really the best to judge these areas... off the cuff I would say we can hold our own in music, for art... I would guess no, but I really don't have a clue if we 'dominate'



The average citizen is far better off than we were in 1982.



LMAO... no, I had problems not with people stating opposing opinions, but with those who try to restate what I said incorrectly as both Rana and Mott did in this thread. i encourage you to state your opinions... especially when you do so in your own words like this post rather than cutting and pasting.



yes, many of the far right do demonize 'liberals', just as many on the far left demonize 'conservatives'. I love how the left always tries to blame Reagan for 'starting' everything 'bad'.



There are certainly areas where we have settled for mediocrity. Education being the easiest to see. Teaching to the lowest common denominator. Coddling children with the mentality that 'everyone gets a trophy and gets to win'. The mindset that is propagated by the left. The 'punish successful people because they have more stuff than me' mentality also leads many to complacency.

But saying the US is swimming in mediocrity is an opinion I do not share. We are still the leaders in innovation (not in every category, but overall). Overall our 'poor' are far better off than most countries 'middle class'.


Reagan was a puppet, it was the people of his administration who have been behind the scenes influencing policy and still are, along with their big money men. Reagan was just the first of their front men. They don't just control the right, they control everything. Just follow the money.

Your demonization of teachers and unions is just as wrong as the demonization of liberals. The demonization has not been as great of the right as you will evidence by the very comments from both sides on this forum. It is the constant barrage of attacks by the money men to make left seem wrong and the right seem to be God's chosen people. It is the 1% doctrine being put into effect right here in the good old USA!
 
Last edited:
Yes, i know..... Inflation escalated dramatically under Carter.

For the years 1974-1979 the inflation rates were 11.03 9.20, 5.75, 6.50, 7.62 and 11.22 respectively. Carter managed to bring down inflation from over 11% before he came to office down to single figures except for 1979 which is when the second oil crisis kicked off. What you haven't acknowledged is the profound effect this had on inflation.

In November 1978, a strike by 37,000 workers at Iran's nationalized oil refineries initially reduced production from 6 million barrels (950,000 m[SUP]3[/SUP]) per day to about 1.5 million barrels (240,000 m[SUP]3[/SUP]).[SUP][5][/SUP] Foreign workers (including skilled oil workers) fled the country. On January 16, 1979, Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and his wife left Iran at the behest of Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar (a long time opposition leader himself), who sought to calm down the situation.[SUP][6][/SUP]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_energy_crisis
 
Last edited:
Back
Top