Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Interesting that you link a transcript supposed released 10 years ago on Iran-Contra. The source is a progressive website which contains no source for the transcript which is not verified as being part of any recorded transcripts.

Of course, there was never any evidence that revealed that Reagan was aware of Iran-Contra, in the first place.

What is evident is that there is no hate like the white-hot incandescent hatred of the left. Twenty-one years after Reagan's presidency and five years after the man's death, no stone will be unturned to vilify and excoriate the man.

One wonders at the damage such hatred must do to the psyche of one who must hold such hatred for so long.

In a way, it reminds me of the hatred one reads about the hatred that bigots held for those of another race.
Ron, I am an Obama supporter an I knew that Regan was knee deep in the Iran-Congra scandal. But who was the fall guy, Oliver North. Even his secretary had to appear before congress! Both of them became media darling's. That's another thing, congress is always having people appear before them and nothing ever comes out of it! Congress needs to come before a committe of Americans on their actions, such as why would they pass a stimulus bill that allows employees to get bonuses for running their company in the ground!
So, Betern, this is what you've got. You haven't posted since Obama took over, and rather than take up for the socialist regime you help put in place, you try once again to berate dead presidents.

It's gutless and old news.

Why don't you defend your guy, Obama, and his government control of private industry, and all his broken campaign promises, and his miserable cabinet choices. Start w/ Geithner, and the Dem. lead Congress' unconstitutional moves and targeting individuals, and this administration deciding which CEO's need to go.

You were rabid for the 'chosen one' and we haven't had the "pleasure" of hearing from you for months, since he's started his reign of destruction.
quote:
Originally posted by gracies old man:
So, Betern, this is what you've got. You haven't posted since Obama took over, and rather than take up for the socialist regime you help put in place, you try once again to berate dead presidents.

It's gutless and old news.

Why don't you defend your guy, Obama, and his government control of private industry, and all his broken campaign promises, and his miserable cabinet choices. Start w/ Geithner, and the Dem. lead Congress' unconstitutional moves and targeting individuals, and this administration deciding which CEO's need to go.

You were rabid for the 'chosen one' and we haven't had the "pleasure" of hearing from you for months, since he's started his reign of destruction.


You say it's "old news." Well, whatever else it is, it is HISTORY, and those who ignore the lessons of history are likely to repeat the mistakes of the past, including mistakes of major and catastrophic proportions such as the Reagan Maladministration's Iran-Contra debacle. The lesson of Iran-Contra is one that all nationally-elected public office holders need to stay familiar with.

My lessened participation in this forum does not in any way represent any kind of disenchantment with the new and (BLISSFULLY!) Democratic administration. As to your allegation of "his [Obama's] government control of private industry," all I can say is that when the Federal government devolves billions of dollars on distressed financial institutions, it certainly should NOT do so without retaining sufficient CONTROL to protect the taxpayers' interests. Would you have the treasury simply give them the money with no strings attached??!! AIG and others who accepted the bailout $$$ also accepted the Federal controls that came with that money. Presumably these lords of commerce and finance could have refused the money and plodded ahead into ruin, but they did not. The ridiculous right wing characterization of the bailout arrangements as "socialism" is a desperate effort to find something--anything--by which to criticize the efforts of the current Congress and Administration as they attempt to rescue this country from 8 years of Bushist insanity!
quote:
Originally posted by jan1356:
Ron, I am an Obama supporter an I knew that Regan was knee deep in the Iran-Congra scandal. But who was the fall guy, Oliver North. Even his secretary had to appear before congress! Both of them became media darling's. That's another thing, congress is always having people appear before them and nothing ever comes out of it! Congress needs to come before a committe of Americans on their actions, such as why would they pass a stimulus bill that allows employees to get bonuses for running their company in the ground!


Ah, yes, Ollie North, the Congressionally-certified LIAR! Ollie escaped prosecution by virtue of the fact that he had already testified before Congress and divulged information that could not then be used against him in a court of law. He and Watergate burgler Gordon Liddy, another GOP pseudopatriot (who WAS convicted and did serve time), found later work as talk show hosts, pandering to an audience of rigid and radical rightists whose ethics and morals were so flimsy as to regard liars and criminals as national heroes. Pretty pitiful, don't you think?
quote:
Originally posted by Howard Roark:
Interesting that you link a transcript supposed released 10 years ago on Iran-Contra. The source is a progressive website which contains no source for the transcript which is not verified as being part of any recorded transcripts.

Of course, there was never any evidence that revealed that Reagan was aware of Iran-Contra, in the first place.

What is evident is that there is no hate like the white-hot incandescent hatred of the left. Twenty-one years after Reagan's presidency and five years after the man's death, no stone will be unturned to vilify and excoriate the man.

One wonders at the damage such hatred must do to the psyche of one who must hold such hatred for so long.

In a way, it reminds me of the hatred one reads about the hatred that bigots held for those of another race.


Does it not also remind you of the hostility that so many right wingers have toward Jimmy Carter? Plenty of times on this and other forums, I have encountered unrestrained and harsh attacks on that former President by conservatives.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
Does it not also remind you of the hostility that so many right wingers have toward Jimmy Carter? Plenty of times on this and other forums, I have encountered unrestrained and harsh attacks on that former President by conservatives.


One major difference, which I'm sure is of little distinction to a liberal:

Jimmy Carter was a laughable failure on international and domestic fronts, whose term in office is characterized by his own word - MALAISE.

Reagan is an American hero who destroyed the Soviet Union without ever firing a missile and oversaw tremendous prosperity and a vast correction of the Jimmy Carter "Peanutonomics" that nearly destroyed the American economy.

Another distinction: Reagan was beloved by Americans and feared by our enemies. Carter was terrorized by our enemies and driven out of office in a landslide of epic proportions.

Reagan was re-elected, Carter became a synonym for "pathetic, weak-kneed pacifist fraidy-cat whose in over his head".
quote:
Originally posted by Henhouse Prowler:
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
Does it not also remind you of the hostility that so many right wingers have toward Jimmy Carter? Plenty of times on this and other forums, I have encountered unrestrained and harsh attacks on that former President by conservatives.


One major difference, which I'm sure is of little distinction to a liberal:

Jimmy Carter was a laughable failure on international and domestic fronts, whose term in office is characterized by his own word - MALAISE.

Reagan is an American hero who destroyed the Soviet Union without ever firing a missile and oversaw tremendous prosperity and a vast correction of the Jimmy Carter "Peanutonomics" that nearly destroyed the American economy.

Another distinction: Reagan was beloved by Americans and feared by our enemies. Carter was terrorized by our enemies and driven out of office in a landslide of epic proportions.

Reagan was re-elected, Carter became a synonym for "pathetic, weak-kneed pacifist fraidy-cat whose in over his head".



Yeah good ole jimmy served about, uummm, 4 years more than he should have. I think we'll all be saying that about the current White House attendant someday.
"Does it not also remind you of the hostility that so many right wingers have toward Jimmy Carter? Plenty of times on this and other forums, I have encountered unrestrained and harsh attacks on that former President by conservatives"

No! Sadness and disappointment at lost opportunities. Embarrassment at his actions and observing dismay of Germans when they spoke of his foolish actions. No hatred, you have to be a leftist for that.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by jan1356:
Ron, I am an Obama supporter an I knew that Regan was knee deep in the Iran-Congra scandal. But who was the fall guy, Oliver North. Even his secretary had to appear before congress! Both of them became media darling's. That's another thing, congress is always having people appear before them and nothing ever comes out of it! Congress needs to come before a committe of Americans on their actions, such as why would they pass a stimulus bill that allows employees to get bonuses for running their company in the ground!


Ah, yes, Ollie North, the Congressionally-certified LIAR! Ollie escaped prosecution by virtue of the fact that he had already testified before Congress and divulged information that could not then be used against him in a court of law. He and Watergate burgler Gordon Liddy, another GOP pseudopatriot (who WAS convicted and did serve time), found later work as talk show hosts, pandering to an audience of rigid and radical rightists whose ethics and morals were so flimsy as to regard liars and criminals as national heroes. Pretty pitiful, don't you think?


But you would have gleefully pleasured the master liar, bull clodton.
Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, et al are all typical, and not in a good way.

The left and the right harbor idealistic partisan fantasies about these presidents. Realistically, they were the SSDD, lather, rinse, repeat.

I realize objectivity isn't very popular, but how is it that partisan hacks can look at the legacy of one admin and totally ignore applying the same standards to the other?

Politics has evolved into a religion, the faithful believe their own story propagated by their cult.

And we wonder why we're screwed? Look no further than the mirror. Irrational belief(us trusting politicians to do the right thing when we really know better)leads to irrational behaviour, which leads to disastrous results.

The management needs to be fired and held accountable. If the country was a business, the bank would have cut us off long ago.

Money, power, control and re-election by self serving incompetent charlatans.

Why do we settle for this cr@p? How could we be so ignorant and stupid?

This bus is headed for a cliff and we're stepping on the accelerator....

Regards
quote:
Originally posted by kperk:
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by jan1356:
Ron, I am an Obama supporter an I knew that Regan was knee deep in the Iran-Congra scandal. But who was the fall guy, Oliver North. Even his secretary had to appear before congress! Both of them became media darling's. That's another thing, congress is always having people appear before them and nothing ever comes out of it! Congress needs to come before a committe of Americans on their actions, such as why would they pass a stimulus bill that allows employees to get bonuses for running their company in the ground!


Ah, yes, Ollie North, the Congressionally-certified LIAR! Ollie escaped prosecution by virtue of the fact that he had already testified before Congress and divulged information that could not then be used against him in a court of law. He and Watergate burgler Gordon Liddy, another GOP pseudopatriot (who WAS convicted and did serve time), found later work as talk show hosts, pandering to an audience of rigid and radical rightists whose ethics and morals were so flimsy as to regard liars and criminals as national heroes. Pretty pitiful, don't you think?


But you would have gleefully pleasured the master liar, bull clodton.


It was my impression that the subject matter of this thread was the Reagan-era Iran_Contra scandal. Ollie North was a part of that; thus it is legitimate to discuss his involvement. But where, in any of this, does Bill Clinton fit in? I will answer that myself. It is a common fallacy on the part of those who attempt to rationalize the misbehavour of their favorites (e.g. Reagan) to believe that such an effort is served by the diversionary measure of calling attention to the failures or foibles of some other public figure. Clearly, it is not! This failed strategem is kin to the childish practice of saying such meaningless things as "So's yer old man" or "A-r-r, yer mother wears army boots," when unable to iterate valid answers to issues in dispute. Pitiful!
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by kperk:
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by jan1356:
Ron, I am an Obama supporter an I knew that Regan was knee deep in the Iran-Congra scandal. But who was the fall guy, Oliver North. Even his secretary had to appear before congress! Both of them became media darling's. That's another thing, congress is always having people appear before them and nothing ever comes out of it! Congress needs to come before a committe of Americans on their actions, such as why would they pass a stimulus bill that allows employees to get bonuses for running their company in the ground!


Ah, yes, Ollie North, the Congressionally-certified LIAR! Ollie escaped prosecution by virtue of the fact that he had already testified before Congress and divulged information that could not then be used against him in a court of law. He and Watergate burgler Gordon Liddy, another GOP pseudopatriot (who WAS convicted and did serve time), found later work as talk show hosts, pandering to an audience of rigid and radical rightists whose ethics and morals were so flimsy as to regard liars and criminals as national heroes. Pretty pitiful, don't you think?


But you would have gleefully pleasured the master liar, bull clodton.


It was my impression that the subject matter of this thread was the Reagan-era Iran_Contra scandal. Ollie North was a part of that; thus it is legitimate to discuss his involvement. But where, in any of this, does Bill Clinton fit in? I will answer that myself. It is a common fallacy on the part of those who attempt to rationalize the misbehavour of their favorites (e.g. Reagan) to believe that such an effort is served by the diversionary measure of calling attention to the failures or foibles of some other public figure. Clearly, it is not! This failed strategem is kin to the childish practice of saying such meaningless things as "So's yer old man" or "A-r-r, yer mother wears army boots," when unable to iterate valid answers to issues in dispute. Pitiful!



The only places bull clodton EVER fit in was monica, genifer, sally, paula, kathleen, eleanor, juanita, dee dee, susan, and buddy the dog.
quote:
Originally posted by luvurnabor:
quote:
Originally posted by Henhouse Prowler:
Proving once again what's really at the heart of liberalism: hate, jealousy, class envy...

So being a conservative, I suppose, could you now say something nice about Jimmy Carter? How about "he was sure right on that dependence on foreign oil thing!"


I'll give him that. One out of a thousand is still not very good though. Of course he is one of the idiots who oppose drilling every chance they get which does what? You're right. Causes more dependence on foreign oil.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
It is a common fallacy on the part of those who attempt to rationalize the misbehavour of their favorites (e.g. Reagan) to believe that such an effort is served by the diversionary measure of calling attention to the failures or foibles of some other public figure. Clearly, it is not! This failed strategem is kin to the childish practice of saying such meaningless things as "So's yer old man" or "A-r-r, yer mother wears army boots," when unable to iterate valid answers to issues in dispute. Pitiful!


Let me spell this out for you, since you seem to be having trouble with it:

People aren't mentioning Carter or Clinton to divert the subject away from the intended victim of your attack, the late President Ronald Reagan. We are pointing out the ridiculous hypocrisy of liberals like you supporting former Presidents who are impeached, unfaithful, admitted liars and unsuccessful, incompetent cowards, simply because they share your political ideology. As usual there are no foundational (dare I say "fundamental") principles and morals on which to stand. No, simply blow with the wind toward which ever scumbag agrees with you on abortion, bra burning and chicks with hairy armpits.

Sorry, but if you're going to pull one of your random "I want to attack yet another dead Republican for no apparent reason other than my hatred of people who disagree with me" posts, then you don't get to make a rule that the aforementioned dead Republican can't be compared to living liberal failures who both nearly got us all killed.

.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×