Obama v. Reagan

[travelinman67]

Horsecrap!

The PLO was active LONG before Reagan.

Arafat was coordinating suicide attacks years before you first jacked off to Bobby Sherman.

Your statement that Reagan was some sort of peacenik and Obama is trying to start WWIII was still patently false, and rather stupid, even for you.

Negative, Brownshirt.

That you can't admit that Obama's demilitarization agenda has created an increased global threat for global democratic nations confirms your ignorance.

Peace through strength.

It works.

[CitadelGrad]

Reagan suppressed global war...

...Obama has worked tirelessly to start WWIII.

For personal gain.

Kalm is a blind progressive operative.

Good gosh you are delusional

Reagan started wars all over the planet. His chicken-shit response to the Lebanon Marine Massacre is what embolden the current crop of Islamic terrorist.

Yeah, now that you mention it, Islamic terrorism was unheard of before 1983.

[Chizzang]

The awesomeness of this thread is awesome...
I totally underestimated Kalm but he delivered a beauty

[kalm]

That all you got? At least Z "cherry picked" one point of the article and came up with SOMETHING.

I didn't "cherry pick" shit, asswipe. I stopped READING at that point because it was obvious whoever authored that piece has his/her head so far up their ass they can taste dinner. Whatever else they claimed in that hack piece is of no consequence.

Since you stopped reading, here's some more:

“Labor participation is affected much less by short-term job creation, and much more by long-term demographic trends. As this chart from the BLS shows, as the Baby Boomers entered the workforce and societal acceptance of women working changed, labor participation grew.

“Now that ‘Boomers’ are retiring we are seeing the percentage of those seeking employment decline. This has nothing to do with job availability, and everything to do with a highly predictable aging demographic.

“What’s now clear is that the Obama administration policies have outperformed the Reagan administration policies for job creation and unemployment reduction. Even though Reagan had the benefit of a growing Boomer class to ignite economic growth, while Obama has been forced to deal with a retiring workforce developing special needs. During the eight years preceding Obama there was a net reduction in jobs in America. We now are rapidly moving toward higher, sustainable jobs growth.”

I'm not good with this stuff, but I think it's saying that Obama's employment numbers are better than Reagan's.

Again, I'm not saying either president was good for the country.

[D1B]

Yup-- Reagan was a horrid president, yet the right worships him.

Obama, while not a great president, is doing a good job, especially with a do-nothing Congress.

Dback...

Just say no to drugs.

Tampax's boilerplate response when he's clearly outmatched.

[kalm]

Your statement that Reagan was some sort of peacenik and Obama is trying to start WWIII was still patently false, and rather stupid, even for you.

Negative, Brownshirt.

That you can't admit that Obama's demilitarization agenda has created an increased global threat for global democratic nations confirms your ignorance.

Peace through strength.

It works.

We're demilitarizing!

[AZGrizFan]

I didn't "cherry pick" shit, asswipe. I stopped READING at that point because it was obvious whoever authored that piece has his/her head so far up their ass they can taste dinner. Whatever else they claimed in that hack piece is of no consequence.

Since you stopped reading, here's some more:

“Labor participation is affected much less by short-term job creation, and much more by long-term demographic trends. As this chart from the BLS shows, as the Baby Boomers entered the workforce and societal acceptance of women working changed, labor participation grew.

“Now that ‘Boomers’ are retiring we are seeing the percentage of those seeking employment decline. This has nothing to do with job availability, and everything to do with a highly predictable aging demographic.

“What’s now clear is that the Obama administration policies have outperformed the Reagan administration policies for job creation and unemployment reduction. Even though Reagan had the benefit of a growing Boomer class to ignite economic growth, while Obama has been forced to deal with a retiring workforce developing special needs. During the eight years preceding Obama there was a net reduction in jobs in America. We now are rapidly moving toward higher, sustainable jobs growth.”

I'm not good with this stuff, but I think it's saying that Obama's employment numbers are better than Reagan's.

Again, I'm not saying either president was good for the country.

Ah, so all the baby boomers decision to stop participating in the labor market was a "demographic trend" now and had nothing to do with the absence of jobs that paid above the unemployment rate...gotcha.

Revisionist history is fucking wonderful, ain't it?

[travelinman67]

Negative, Brownshirt.

That you can't admit that Obama's demilitarization agenda has created an increased global threat for global democratic nations confirms your ignorance.

Peace through strength.

It works.

We're demilitarizing!

Yes, we are, Chuckles...

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... rity#_ftn2

[kalm]

Since you stopped reading, here's some more:







I'm not good with this stuff, but I think it's saying that Obama's employment numbers are better than Reagan's.

Again, I'm not saying either president was good for the country.

Ah, so all the baby boomers decision to stop participating in the labor market was a "demographic trend" now and had nothing to do with the absence of jobs that paid above the unemployment rate...gotcha.

Revisionist history is fucking wonderful, ain't it?

You do realize that boomers have been at retirement age for a decade or so right?

[kalm]

We're demilitarizing!

Yes, we are, Chuckles...

http://www.heritage.org/research/report ... rity#_ftn2

Not much of a fiscal conservative / limited government guy are ya?

http://reason.com/blog/2014/02/25/suppo ... ve-republi" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Gil Dobie]

Reagan years were feel good years, Bush and Obama have returned us to the Jimmy Carter malaise.

[AZGrizFan]

Ah, so all the baby boomers decision to stop participating in the labor market was a "demographic trend" now and had nothing to do with the absence of jobs that paid above the unemployment rate...gotcha.

Revisionist history is fucking wonderful, ain't it?

You do realize that boomers have been at retirement age for a decade or so right?

And they all decided to abandon the workforce because we elected a darkie?

[kalm]

You do realize that boomers have been at retirement age for a decade or so right?

And they all decided to abandon the workforce because we elected a darkie?

Huh?

[CAA Flagship]

Ah, so all the baby boomers decision to stop participating in the labor market was a "demographic trend" now and had nothing to do with the absence of jobs that paid above the unemployment rate...gotcha.

Revisionist history is fucking wonderful, ain't it?

You do realize that boomers have been at retirement age for a decade or so right?

Wrong. I'm a boomer and nowhere close to retirement age.

[Skjellyfetti]

You do realize that boomers have been at retirement age for a decade or so right?

Wrong. I'm a boomer and nowhere close to retirement age.

You do realize there is an almost 20 year gap between the oldest and youngest baby boomers, right?

[89Hen]

Wrong. I'm a boomer and nowhere close to retirement age.

You do realize there is an almost 20 year gap between the oldest and youngest baby boomers, right?

I don't think Flaggy is a boomer. 1964 was the end and I don't think he's 50.

[Gil Dobie]

Latest rumors are that Obama is dusting off the Mission Accomplished banner.

[JohnStOnge]

Economically, President Obama’s administration has outperformed President Reagan’s in all commonly watched categories.

That is a ridiculous statement to anyone who was alive and old enough to know what was going on during both periods. If somebody makes that statement it's pretty much evidence that there is no reason to pay any attention to anything else they say.

[houndawg]

Your statement that Reagan was some sort of peacenik and Obama is trying to start WWIII was still patently false, and rather stupid, even for you.

Negative, Brownshirt.

That you can't admit that Obama's demilitarization agenda has created an increased global threat for global democratic nations confirms your ignorance.

Peace through strength.

It works.

526 billion dollars worth of demilitarization.........

Stupid conk fvck.

[houndawg]

Economically, President Obama’s administration has outperformed President Reagan’s in all commonly watched categories.

That is a ridiculous statement to anyone who was alive and old enough to know what was going on during both periods. If somebody makes that statement it's pretty much evidence that there is no reason to pay any attention to anything else they say.

It isn't. It really isn't.



What were you, John, about 10 years old during the Reagan Admin.?

[kalm]

Economically, President Obama’s administration has outperformed President Reagan’s in all commonly watched categories.

That is a ridiculous statement to anyone who was alive and old enough to know what was going on during both periods. If somebody makes that statement it's pretty much evidence that there is no reason to pay any attention to anything else they say.

Thanks AZ. Way to challenge yourself.

To help you out, Obama's employment numbers and stock market numbers are better than Reagan's at this point in his presidency.

[houndawg]

Reagan years were feel good years, Bush and Obama have returned us to the Jimmy Carter malaise.

That was because he spent like a drunken sailor and left the bill for us to pick up. Fvcking piece of shit.

[BDKJMU]

Two of the worst presidents we've had, but according to these numbers, the Big O appears to be winning.





http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung ... investing/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ronald Reagan's administration added $1.86 trillion to the national debt. Barack Obama has added $5.08 trillion in just 5 years.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ter ... us-history" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(CNSNews.com) - President Barack Obama has now presided over five of the six largest annual budget deficits the U.S. government has ever run, according to data released yesterday by the U.S. Treasury.

In fiscal 2013, which ended Sept. 30, the deficit was $680.276 billion, according to the Monthly Treasury Statement released Wednesday.

In fiscal 2012, the deficit was $1.089193 trillion; in fiscal 2011, it was $1.296791 trillion; in fiscal 2010, it was $1.294204 trillion; and, in fiscal 2009, it was $1.415724 trillion.

In fiscal 2008, the last full year that George W. Bush was president, the deficit was $454.798 billion.

Even when adjusted for inflation, the $680.276 billion fiscal 2013 deficit is only exceeded by one pre-Obama deficit--the one the U.S. government ran in 1943, during the height of World War II. That year, the deficit was $54,554,000,000--or $738,367,890,000 in inflation-adjusted 2013 dollars.

But don't let facts get in the way of your rant. Carry on.

Oh it's far worse that. 7.2 trillion in about 5 years, 9 months. National debt the day Obama entered office, 1/20/09, was about 10.6 trillion. Today it's approaching 17.8 trillion.
http://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/searc ... dYear=2014" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[UNI88]

Wrong. I'm a boomer and nowhere close to retirement age.

You do realize there is an almost 20 year gap between the oldest and youngest baby boomers, right?

So Boomers range in age from 50-70 and have been of retirement age for 5 years? And approximately 3/4 of boomers haven't hit retirement age yet?

[UNI88]

That is a ridiculous statement to anyone who was alive and old enough to know what was going on during both periods. If somebody makes that statement it's pretty much evidence that there is no reason to pay any attention to anything else they say.

Thanks AZ. Way to challenge yourself.

To help you out, Obama's employment numbers and stock market numbers are better than Reagan's at this point in his presidency.

You can't have it both ways arguing here that Obama's employment numbers are good and arguing elsewhere that people are underemployed and that the middle class is in decline. I'll agree with the 2nd part but the first part is based on lies, damn lies and statistics.