Again, it just didn't happen as you believe, or as some media reports now suggest. There is empirical data to show what exactly happened, as well as the testimony of Col. North.
As far as the Reagan Taxes, we went through this not even a month ago, where I presented evidence to show that such allegations are total nonsense, not based on fact; not even logical, an nothing less than far left extremist spin and revisionist history. If you want to believe in idiotic theory, no sweat off of my back......It just is demonstrative of what we are dealing with in this Nation, and proof positive of the , "Dumbing Down Of America". On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:58 AM, plainolamerican <[email protected]>wrote: > None of this of course, is even remotely true > --- > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_contra > fourteen administration officials were indicted, including then- > Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Eleven convictions resulted, > some of which were vacated on appeal. The rest of those indicted or > convicted were all pardoned in the final days of the presidency of > George H. W. Bush, who had been vice-president at the time of the > affair. > > On Apr 29, 9:35 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > *"As one might expect, most gloss over or completely avoid mentioning the > > many embarrassing and outright alarming aspects of his presidency: from > > consulting astrologers to his fixation with biblical doom to the tortured > > rationalizations that enabled him to believe that he never traded arms > for > > hostages."* > > > > None of this of course, is even remotely true, nor is Green's assertion > > regarding Reagan raising taxes four times, or most of Green's > allegations > > that besmirch the Reagan legacy. But what is one to expect from a > > fiction writer from "The Onion", who was only 7 years of age when > > President Reagan was elected.: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:41 PM, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > > * > > > "When conservatives mythologize the Reagan presidency as the golden > era of > > > conservatism, it's not Reagan that they're mythologizing, but > conservatism." > > > > > **Reagan's Liberal Legacy > > > *Joshua Green, Washington Monthly, 35/1, Jan/Feb 2003 > > > > > OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, Nancy Reagan has quietly been alerting > > > friends and family that the health of her husband Ronald Reagan, the > > > nation's 40th president, is failing rapidly due to Alzheimer's. Reagan > will > > > turn 92 on Feb. 6, and the signs seem to suggest that he won't be with > us > > > for very much longer. > > > > > It is not uncommon, when such circumstances involve a national figure, > for > > > the media to prepare tributes and obituaries in anticipation of the > event. > > > But in the case of Ronald Reagan, the magnitude of this ritual seems > > > certain to eclipse anything that has preceded it. As long as five years > > > ago, the three main newsweeklies had locked up eminent presidential > > > historians to write his valedictories. The conservative Heritage > Foundation > > > has underwritten a multimedia Reagan legacy project, cued up and > awaiting > > > word of his death. The major networks and the History Channel have > prepared > > > exhaustive documentaries (the latter didn't even wait for Reagan's > > > departure, airing "Ronald Reagan: A Legacy Remembered" over > Thanksgiving). > > > And media jockeying to pay tribute has already begun: This month's > Esquire > > > dubs Reagan the "greatest living American." > > > > > But the clearest indicator can be found at the bookstore. The last few > > > months have brought an avalanche of Reagan biographies, from John > Harmer's > > > Reagan: Man of Principle to Peter Schweizer's Reagan's War to Peter > > > Wallison's Ronald Reagan: The Power of Conviction and the Success of > His > > > Presidency. They join such recent fare as William E Buckley Jr.'s > Ronald > > > Reagan: An American Hero, Peggy Noonan's When Character Was King, and > > > Dinesh D'Souza's Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary Man Became an > Extraordinary > > > Leader, themselves just a fraction of the 427 listings on Amazon.com, > many > > > of them gauzy tributes, each striving to bestow an encomium more noble > and > > > gallant than the last. Indeed, what is so striking about these > > > books--besides their sheer number--is their collective determination to > > > exalt Reagan as the heroic embodiment of American conservatism. > > > > > This is no accident. In fact, there is an active campaign to nail into > > > place a canonical version of Reagan's life and career. Energetic > > > conservatives have organized a drive to glorify the former president by > > > trying to do everything from affixing his name to public buildings in > each > > > of the nation's 3,066 counties to substituting his face for Alexander > > > Hamilton's on the $10 bill. A similar dynamic applies here. Many of > these > > > hagiographies are written by noted conservative authors (Buckley, > Noonan, > > > D'Souza) or former Reagan staffers (Wallison, Martin Anderson, Michael > > > Deaver), under the auspices of conservative think tanks such as the > > > American Enterprise Institute (Wallison), the Hoover Institution > (Anderson > > > and Schweizer), and the Heritage Foundation (Stephen E Hayward's The > Age of > > > Reagan, the first of two volumes). > > > > > One would have to go back to FDR to find a comparable example of a > > > president portrayed in such consistently glowing terms--and the > > > swashbuckling triumphs depicted in these books mythologize Reagan to a > > > degree which exceeds even that. As one might expect, most gloss over or > > > completely avoid mentioning the many embarrassing and outright alarming > > > aspects of his presidency: from consulting astrologers to his fixation > with > > > biblical doom to the tortured rationalizations that enabled him to > believe > > > that he never traded arms for hostages. But they also do something > else. > > > Most of his conservative biographers espouse a Manichaean worldview in > > > which Reagan's constancy in the face of liberal evils is the key to his > > > greatness. But to sustain such an argument requires more than simply > > > touting (and often exaggerating) his achievements, considerable though > some > > > of them were. The effort to gild Reagan's legacy also seems to demand > that > > > any accomplishment that didn't explicitly advance conservative goals be > > > expunged from his record. And so they have been. > > > > > Reagan is, to be sure, one of the most conservative presidents in U.S. > > > history and will certainly be remembered as such. His record on the > > > environment, defense, and economic policy is very much in line with its > > > portrayal. But he entered office as an ideologue who promised a > > > conservative revolution, vowing to slash the size of government, > radically > > > scale back entitlements, and deploy the powers of the presidency in > pursuit > > > of socially and culturally conservative goals. That he essentially > failed > > > in this mission hasn't stopped partisan biographers from pretending > > > otherwise. (Noonan writes of his 1980 campaign pledges: "Done, done, > done, > > > done, done, done, and done. Every bit of it") > > > > > A sober review of Reagan's presidency doesn't yield the seamlessly > > > conservative record being peddled today. Federal government expanded > on his > > > watch. The conservative desire to outlaw abortion was never seriously > > > pursued. Reagan broke with the hardliners in his administration and > > > compromised with the Soviets on arms control. His assault on > entitlements > > > never materialized; instead he saved Social Security in 1983. And he > > > repeatedly ignored the fundamental conservative dogma that taxes should > > > never be raised. > > > > > All of this has been airbrushed from the new literature of Reagan. But > as > > > any balanced account must make clear, Reagan acceded to political > > > compromises as all presidents do once in office--and on many occasions > did > > > so willingly. In fact, however often unintentionally, many of his > actions > > > as president wound up facilitating liberal objectives. What this > clamor of > > > adulation is seeking to deny is that beyond his conservative legacy, > Ronald > > > Reagan has bequeathed a liberal one. > > > > > *Roosevelt Republican > > > *Reagan arrived in Washington with a full head of steam, vowing, as he > > > put it in the major economic speech of his 1980 campaign, "to move > boldly, > > > decisively, and quickly to control the runaway growth of federal > spending". > > > To conservatives, and many others, he seemed destined to fulfill > campaign > > > pledges to abolish entire government agencies, rein in the excesses of > the > > > welfare state, and end Americans' overreliance on government. Sensing > the > > > historical moment, Reagan echoed John E Kennedy in famously declaring, > "If > > > not us, who? If not now, when?" > > > > > At the outset of his first term, Reagan's revolution appeared to have > > > unstoppable momentum. His administration passed an historic tax cut > based > > > on dramatic cuts in marginal tax rates and began a massive defense > buildup. > > > To help compensate for the tax cut, his first budget called for > slashing > > > $41.4 billion from 83 federal programs, only the first round in a > planned > > > series of cuts. And Reagan himself made known his desire to eliminate > the > > > departments of Energy and Education, and to scale back what his first > > > budget director David Stockman called the "closet socialism" of Social > > > Security and Medicaid. > > > > > But after his initial victories on tax cuts and defense, the revolution > > > effectively stalled. Deficits started to balloon, the recession soon > > > deepened, his party lost ground in the 1982 midterms, and thereafter > Reagan > > > never seriously tried to enact the radical domestic agenda he'd > campaigned > > > on. Rather than abolish the departments of Energy and Education, as he > had > > > promised to do if elected president, Reagan added a new cabinet-level > > > department--one of the largest federal agencies--the Department of > Veterans > > > Affairs. > > > > > Though his budgets requested some cuts in some areas of discretionary > > > spending, Reagan rapidly retreated and never seriously pushed them. As > Lou > > > Cannon, the Washington Post reporter who covered Reagan's political > career > > > for 25 years, put it in his masterful biography, President Reagan: The > Role > > > of a Lifetime, "For all the fervor they created, the first-term Reagan > > > budgets were mild manifestos devoid of revolutionary purpose. They did > not > > > seek to 'rebuild the foundation of our society' (the task Reagan set > for > > > himself and Congress in a nationally televised speech of February 5, > 1981) > > > or even to accomplish the 'sharp reduction in the spending growth > trend' > > > called for in [his] Economic Recovery Plan? By Reagan's second term, > the > > > idea of seriously diminishing the budget was, to quote Stockman, "an > > > institutionalized fantasy." Though in speeches Reagan continued to > repeat > > > his bold pledge to "get government out of the way of the people," > > > government stayed pretty much where it was. > > > > > This hasn't stopped recent contemporary conservative biographers from > > > claiming otherwise. "He said he would cut the budget, and he did," > declares > > > Peggy Noonan in When Character Was King. In fact, the budget grew > > > significantly under Reagan. All he managed to do was moderately slow > its > > > rate of growth. What's more, the number of workers on the federal > payroll > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป > > -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
