Are you insinuating Regan skyrocketed the debt in an arms race.

The last three deficits during the Reagan years were at or below $150 billion. And had the Democrat Congress passed his spending proposals would have been lower.

So how high are Obama's and he is not in an arm's race is he.

The debt started rising under Nixon and I believe that was spill over from the Vietnam war. What Regan's administration and congress did was to change laws that govern how we do commerce. That foothold escalated then and recently giving way to the surreal scenario we had on our hands when Bush left office.
But yes Regan did increase spending with the arms race. there is no denying that. Also the tax cuts we have seen didn't help and actually hurt a lot. For every tax cut there should have been an equal service or other payout that was cut. Of course now we have to raise taxes and cut more services than the tax cuts amount to to ever hope to get out of trouble.

__________________
...

And still requested less spending that the congress authorized each and every year. And his deficits were at or below $150 billion. What are Obama's without a weapons race? What are the deficits now and which direction are they headed?

False they increased revenue growth.

And tell us that you voted for Reagan and not Democrats who each and every year spend more money than he requested.

Of course? Where did you get that idea?


No we do like we did during the Reagan years and the Clinton years, the former supporting it the latter opposing it, we slow the growth in spending and cut taxes to keep money in the markets and invested in business so that tax revenues grow.

See you are more focused on tax RATE increases because you believe it soaks the rich and there will be more money for government to spend. Which or course we know historically doesn't happen, the rich end up paying less in total revenues and less of the total share of taxes.

I on the other am focused on the best way to increase tax REVENUES and know that historically lower tax RATES increase the total dollars in revenues the rich pay and shifts more of the total tax burden to them.

So why do you oppose the rich paying more in actual revenues and percent of total taxes while at the same time increasing revenues instead of less revenue, less economic growth, fewer jobs and the lower earners paying more of the tax burden?

Stop trying to frame the debate on your terms Stinger. The debt increased by 7.3% in Reagan's 1st term & 11.2% in his second - mainly because of the arms build up.

It was necessary.

I'm just asking if that's what we need to do right now? Is that the type of Conservatism we need now?

Sean Hannity likes to go on and on about Reagan Conservatism, not only because I think he believes that it is right for now, but also because I think that's just about how far a lightweight like Hannity's history book goes back...

Stop trying to make this more than what it is...

I'm not are you denying what I stated? The deficits during Reagan's last three years were at or below $150 billion and the trend was down.

Do you agree with that stipulation.

And? How much have Obama's increased without an arms build up?

Are you aware that the deficit for the month, the MONTH, of February was over $240 billion, for just ONE MONTH. I'd love to have the Reagan deficits again, I'd love to have the Bush43 deficits.

I would LOVE to have the Reagan economy right now, that is exactly the type of conservatism we need and if we could get a Gingrich congress to support him we could turn this thing around.

My statement stands alone. Herbert Hoover-conservatism would be better than what we have now. Conservatism didn't begin or end with Ronald Regan, that's all.

Well no it doesn't but oh well, the fact remains Reagan requested LESS spending than was passed each and every year and the deficits were coming down. Defense spending is NOT the reason we have deficits. If we ONLY had deficits of $150 billion instead of the TRILLIONS we are getting now.

We did it last week while all you liberals were talking about healthcare...

__________________
Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

Leftists and very small children don't seem to be able to understand that the Government isn't there to "fix" the economy, anymore than a tick is there to fix your dog.~Oftencold

Okay, lets get some things staightened around; Reagan's build-up was neccessary in order to drive nails in the coffen of the Ruskies. By putting an end to the "Cold War" not only did we lower the threat of world destruction but we incurred a war surplus shortly after the end of our protracted military standoff.

Reagan's economic bet was that we could incur debt to a point and then retire the debt through economic growth, not by raising taxes. As it turns out he was right. Through economic growth and reductions in spending we maintained control of our debt.

Another of Reagan's hedges was that he could achieve foriegn policy successes by placating the dem controlled congress, hence the expaned domestic spending. Turns out he was right, again.

We are, today doing the opposite of what Reagan would do. We are not reducing future debt, we are increasing it exponentionally.

Rush, Regan restored our credibility to the world as a world leader and power. He took a tip from TR in building up so the others would back down and they did. I guess while i'm at it I will give him credit for being timely which is a must with world changers. Had it not been for the Internet and McDonalds, the scenario with the attempted coo (spelling?) would have been a bigger set back.
He tried to lead congress to cut social spending, however the cuts it appeared proposed were to the least of our members-things like school milk programs which had greatly improved the lives of millions since the 1960s or 70s. So he didn't get a lot of cuts. But he spent the money anyway. that was irresponsible of him and congress. You could make the case he saved the free world but where is Russia now in its politics? No body really knows but it looks like things have gradually slipped back and if not for our standing in the world (even at this dark hour) they would slide even further.
As for the congress working with Regan I personally think it was because of his mandate.
I think the country's problems (economy and Terrorists) are so different right now, the comparison with Regan's time is very difficult if not impossible.
***
Yes, Stinger I did vote for Regan.

__________________
...