Category: Ronald Reagan

Categories
Politics Ronald Reagan United States

Bachmann Lies – Blames Carter And Clinton For 2008 Recession

Republican Michele Bachmann thinks Jimmy Carter is responsible for the 2008 financial recession and the state of today’s economy. In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, the 2012 presidential hopeful was asked to explain the 2008 financial meltdown, to which she said;

“There were a lot of bad actors involved, but it started with the Community Reinvestment Act under Jimmy Carter and then the enhanced amendments that Bill Clinton made to force, in effect, banks to make loans to people who lacked creditworthiness. If you want to come down to a bottom line of ‘How did we get in the mess?’ I think it was a reduction in standards.”

Just for reference, Jimmy Carter was the 39th President of the United States, and served from 1977 to 1981 when he was succeeded by Ronald Reagan. Bill Clinton was the 42nd President – who, when he left office had created over 22 million jobs during his eight years and left a budget surplus of $127 billion, – served from 1993 to 2001 when George Bush took over. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were Democratic presidents, and Ronald Reagan and George Bush were Republicans.

So not surprisingly, Mrs. Bachmann’s blame will be placed on last the two Democratic presidents over the last 35 years. She didn’t include Barack Obama, because he was sworn in in 2009. But are there any truths to this claim? According to an article written on Bloomberg’s Business Week back in 2008, the answer is “no”. Bachmann’s claim of putting the blame of the 2008 economic mess on Carter and Clinton and the Community Reinvestment Act is totally inaccurate. In fact, Bloomberg’s article called Bachmann’s claim, “silly.”

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: “In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.”

No surprise here. Bachmann is still pushing false statements that were debunked over 3 years ago. And the fact that she didn’t include Ronald Reagan and George Bush in her blame game shows the true meaning of her claim – politics as usual.

Not only is Ronald Reagan’s trickle down economics one direct reason for what this economy is going through today, but consider the video below,  George Bush’s interpretation of the Community Reinvestment Act, where he asked, in fact demanded, that home ownership be increased by millions “by the end of this decade.” George Bush even went as far as to say that everyone, regardless of their income, should be able to own a home no matter the price, saying “the first time home buyers, the low income home buyer can have just as nice a house as anybody else.”

Bachmann is trying to get your vote. She is interested in running for President of the United States in 2012. Shouldn’t Americans stand up and demand that these candidates tell the truth, no matter what the politics of the moment dictates?

Categories
Politics Ronald Reagan Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin Gets Dissed By Margaret Thatcher

Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the former Prime Minister of The United Kingdom, were considered close allies. So Sarah Palin, in an effort to show her conservative Republican followers that she is the ultimate ‘ Reagan’ candidate, expressed her desire to meet with Mrs. Thatcher.

Palin told Christina Lamb in the Sunday Times about an upcoming trip she’s planning;

I am going to Sudan in July and hope to stop in England on the way. I am just hoping Mrs. Thatcher is well enough to see me as I so admire her.

But it seems this admiration is a one-way-street. Mrs Thatcher has other plans and according to the report, she is really not very fond of Sarah Palin.

It would appear that the reasons go deeper than Thatcher’s frail health. Her allies believe that Palin is a frivolous figure who is unworthy of an audience with the Iron Lady. This is what one ally tells me:

“Lady Thatcher will not be seeing Sarah Palin. That would be belittling for Margaret. Sarah Palin is nuts.”

Thatcher will show the level she punches at when she attends the unveiling of a statue of Ronald Reagan outside the US embassy in Grosvenor Square on Independence day on 4 July. This is what her ally told me:

“Margaret is focusing on Ronald Reagan and will attend the unveiling of the statue. That is her level.”

Categories
Barack Obama Ed Schultz MSNBC Politics Right-wing politics Ronald Reagan Slut

Ed Shultz Suspended For Calling Laura Ingraham A “Slut”

Ed Shultz sometimes gets carried away. He’s very emotional about the issues of the times. But did he cross the line when he called a right winged host a “right winged slut?” Many may agree with Mr. Shultz on this, especially when talking about Laura Ingraham.

What did Ed say?

“President Obama is going to be visiting Joplin, Mo., on Sunday but you know what they’re talking about, like this right-wing slut, what’s her name?, Laura Ingraham? Yeah, she’s a talk slut. You see, she was, back in the day, praising President Reagan when he was drinking a beer overseas. But now that Obama’s doing it, they’re working him over.”

Mrs Ingraham replied on her Facebook page, saying;

Re. the crude comments made about me by Ed Schultz on his radio program: First, I was surprised to learn that Ed Schultz actually hosted a radio show. Is it only available online? Second, I have to get back to recording the audio edition of my new book “Of Thee I Zing.” Now I’m tempted to insert one additional zing–about men who preach civility but practice misogyny.

And apparently, MSNBC executives agree that Ed went too far. Today, they have suspended Ed for a week because of the online out-cry from different blogs calling for some action to be taken.

Here’s the audio of Ed, talking about Laura Ingraham on his radio show;

 

Categories
Barack Obama Politics Republican Ronald Reagan White House

Republican Presidents Add More To The Debt Than Democratic Presidents Do

Something we already knew, but now the record proves it. Republican presidents run up debts, while Democratic presidents try to reduce it.

This is in stark contrast to the ideology constantly being drilled into our heads by the media and the Republican party, that conservatives are for fiscal discipline. If this is true, the conservatives who become president must leave their ‘discipline’ at the door of the White House.

According to the report,

Economist Mike Kimel notes that the last five Democratic Presidents (Clinton, Carter, LBJ, JFK, and Truman) all reduced public debt as a share of GDP, while the last four Republican Presidents (GW Bush, GHW Bush, Reagan, and Ford) all oversaw an increase in the country’s indebtedness.

Similarly, Republican David Stockman, director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan, as op-ed contributor to the New York Times blamed the “ideological tax-cutters” of the Reagan administration for the increase of national debt during the 1980s.

Looking back, this trend was not always the case. Yesteryear’s Republican Presidents once had focused on bringing down the national debt,  but something changed right around the time Reagan got into office. See the chart below;

So next time these conservatives talk about “deficit reduction” and “cutting the budget,” maybe they should consider whose policies increased the national debt to where it is today. They should also consider educating their next presidential candidate, and beg that candidate to maintain their so-called “conservatism” if they manage to cross the threshold of the White House.

Categories
Medicare Politics Republican Rick Scott Ronald Reagan United States

Republican Robin Hoods – Taking From The Poor To Support The Rich

Republicans have long wished for the time when the poor and suffering would move out-of-the-way, and allow the millionaires, billionaires and Corporations to prosper. In their view, poor and middle class Americans are trying to take away all the programs the government has established to benefit the rich. Republicans call these “entitlement programs,” and the sooner they’re able to push and squeeze others off these programs, the sooner the rich can benefit.

No place is this more evident than in Florida, where a new Teaparty candidate,  representing the Republican party,  held a townhall meeting to address his supporters. Mr. Allan West, the House representative for Southeast Florida told the crowd that he would love to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and federal income tax, while retaining tax cuts for billionaires. West also wants to stop the  extension of unemployment benefits to the middle class and refers to the government  providing these benefits to middle class Americans as, “rewarding bad behavior.”

In reference to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, West thinks that leaving these services in tact will deplete our GDP by 2030 or 2040. His plans would be for the eventual dismantling of these  services that again for the most part assist the poor people and middle class. Spokeswoman for DCCC Jennifer Crider said;

“Everyone agrees we need to cut spending, but Representative Allen West is making the wrong choice by forcing seniors to shoulder the burden and while not asking Big Oil companies making record profits to sacrifice even the smallest amount.”

Social Security is a program that mostly pays for itself. Over the last few years, however, the program has began to show signs that it will eventually fall short of its goals of comfortably providing for its beneficiaries, mainly because more people are entering into retirement and also because the labor force is reduced due to the economic downturn. Republicans, who have been trying to dismantle the program for decades, are now using the economy and the federal deficit as reasons to bring social security to its knees. Some Democrats, like Senate Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, are determined to fight these efforts of the Republicans. In a recent interview, Mr. Reid said;

“I have said clearly and as many times as I can, leave Social Security alone. Social Security does not add a single penny, not a dime, a nickel, a dollar to the budget problems we have. Never has and for the next 30 years it won’t do that.

“So what I’ve said, if you want to look at something to take care of the out years, let’s do it at the right time. It is not in a crisis at this stage. Leave Social Security alone. We have a lot of other places we can look that are in crisis. Social Security is not. I repeat, for the next approximately 30 years people will draw 100% of their benefits.”

Mr. West’s thinking is common amongst Republican party members. Many Republican governors nationwide have begun breaking down the middle class in order to support their rich donors. Recent examples in Wisconsin, Detroit, and Florida are just some of the states where Republican governors are creating laws geared towards removing any form of assistance from the middle class worker, and transferring that assistance to the rich. Rick Scott of Florida recently proposed a bill that will cut school subsidies in his state by $1.3 billion, while at the same time, giving a tax cut of $1.6 billion to millionaires.

It is a transfer of wealth like we haven’t seen in quite a long time, and it started over 30 years ago when Ronald Regan introduced the idea of trickle down economics. The concept embraces the belief that giving to the rich will in turn allow them to provide jobs to the middle class, thus trickling down the wealth. But this idea failed in the Reagan years, causing the president to raise taxes in an effort to fight off a downward turn in the 1980 economy. And although it failed then, trickle down economics was embraced by conservatives over the past 30 years, and contributed heavily to the most recent recession that started in 2007/2008 under the Bush administration. According to reports from The Atlantic;

When Clinton left office in 2000, the Census counted almost 31.6 million Americans living in poverty. When Bush left office in 2008, the number of poor Americans had jumped to 39.8 million (the largest number in absolute terms since 1960.) Under Bush, the number of people in poverty increased by over 8.2 million, or 26.1 per cent. Over two-thirds of that increase occurred before the economic collapse of 2008.

Unfortunately, here we are in 2011, and the trickle-down trend has continued. Republicans are now taking away from schools, education, cutting back on planned parenthood and public radio, in an effort to finance the bank accounts of the rich. Will the American people wake up from their slumber before it’s too late? Will we ever realize that the last 30+ years of trickle down economics did nothing for the middle class, and everything for th über rich? If we continue to go down this path we’ve been on for the past 30 years, why should we expect a different outcome?

America can once again be what the founding fathers intended it to be. The preamble to the constitution says it best;

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Categories
Politics Ronald Reagan Tax United States

The Lesson of Not Taxing The Rich in Hard Economic Times

If history is to be our guide, then why aren’t we doing what’s already historically proven to work? The refusal by congressional Republicans to raise the taxes of the rich in these hard economic times makes as much sense as pouring water into the ocean. And this refusal goes against all that history has taught us.

According to a report written by Larry Beinhart, “History shows that when spending is cut — in the name of balancing the budget — recessions immediately follow. It makes sense, therefore, to look back at government tax and spending policies during the Depression and what the results were. ” Mr. Beinhart writes in detail some very interesting historical facts:

  • 1932 — Hoover raises the top tax rate from to 25 to 63 percent.
  • 1933 — Roosevelt comes into office. He begins spending at the same time that new tax hike comes into effect. The Depression bottoms out.
  • 1934 — Recovery begins. The GNP rises 7.7 percent, unemployment falls to 21.7 percent.
  • 1935 — New government spending on public works and rural electrification. A push to strengthen labor and raise wages. New taxes through the creation of Social Security.
  • 1936 — The top tax rate is raised again. This time to 79 percent. GNP grows a record 14.1 percent; unemployment falls even further.

Middle class Americans have carried this country on their backs for far too long. Since Ronald Regan took office in the 80’s and introduced the concept of trickle down economics, the concentration was placed on making the rich pay less in taxes while providing them with unlimited loopholes, in the hopes that when they succeed, the middle class will succeed. That concept has failed and over the last 30 years, the rich continued getting richer while the middle class fell more and more into poverty.

So here we have our lesson in history.  At a time when this country went through what is now called The Second Great Depression, all Americans, especially the rich, bore the responsibility, each paying according to his/her means. Today however, the lie of the sucess of a trickle down theory to boost a failing economy is still engraved in our minds, and the congressional Republicans are determined to keep it that way.

Read Mr. Larry Beinhart’s Report here.

Categories
democrats Dick Cheney Politics Republican Ronald Reagan United States

Reducing The Deficit Is Not In A Republican’s D.N.A

Republicans have fooled Americans into thinking they’re all for cutting the deficit. And if you listen to them long enough and fail to do the most minimal of research, you will tend to believe the lies. But here’s a little breakdown from Robert J. Elisberg that shows how concerned Republicans were when the deficit exploded… under Republican Presidents.

During the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, the national debt increased a combined 35.6%. It was the largest debt increase in U.S. history. Mr. Reagan alone tripled the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion.

Yet Republicans didn’t complain, didn’t rise up in anger, didn’t revolt. In fact, what Republicans did do was lionize Ronald Reagan as a patron saint, the near-God of conservatives.

Under George W. Bush, the national debt increased by a combined 27.1%. The U.S. budget went from a $128 billion surplus to a $482 billion deficit. The national debt doubled from $5.7 trillion to $10.7 trillion.

And there was no outcry by Republicans. Republicans didn’t complain, didn’t rise up in anger, didn’t revolt. Even when Vice President Dick Cheney was quoted, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.” Republicans didn’t complain.

In Bill Clinton’s administration, the national debt decreased. It went down by a combined 9.7%. Further — he balanced the U.S. budget.

And yet Mr. Clinton didn’t become a hero to conservatives, even the vaunted fiscal ones. The mere mention of his name still today causes body twitches.

Consider, too, that in every full administration since Nixon-Ford in 1973 up through George W. Bush in 2008 — EVERY national debt increase in America has occurred during a Republican administration. And EVERY reduction of national debt has occurred during a Democratic administration.

To this day, Republicans — that party of supposed “fiscal responsibility” — slam the Jimmy Carter presidency for incompetence. Yet the national debt went down 3.3% during the Carter administration.

Yea, there are those who refuses to do the google, and see for themselves. These are the unfortunate souls who still put their belief in the promises of the Republican party that they will “reduce the deficit.” But history is more than a subject taught in school, it also teaches us that those who fail to understand their history, tend to repeat it.

Read the rest of the article here

Categories
Barack Obama Republican Ronald Reagan Sarah Palin Sarah Palin United States

My Ignorance Detector Goes Off Everytime Palin Talks

One of the hardest things for me to do is ignore ignorance. And although some have pledge not to cover any news about Sarah Palin for the rest of this month, I’m not one of those dudes. So on Friday when Palin opened her mouth at a tribute to former President Ronald Reagan and said America is on “the road to ruin” because of President Obama and his policies- well- my ignorance detector went off full blast.

According to a report from Reuters;

Palin said Obama had revived the era of big government, and she ridiculed the infrastructure spending and investment he outlined in his recent State of the Union speech. “The only thing these investments will get us is a bullet train to bankruptcy,” the 2008 vice presidential candidate said in a speech at the Ronald Reagan Ranch Center in Santa Barbara, California, part of two days of festivities marking the late president’s 100th birthday.

Palin, as usual is stuck in one mode: attack mode. Her bullet train to bankruptcy analogy was also heard after the President outlined his plans to invest in America’s future at the State Of The Union Address. But what Palin doesn’t seem to get is that this is exactly what other countries are already doing – investing in their futures. Countries like China and India have realized the need for this and have made large gains in the areas of transportation, education and technology over the years and are now reaping the benefits.

America, once the leader of the world, is now being overtaken by countries like China, and what do ignorance-producing talking heads like Sarah Palin have to say about it? These knuckle heads put it all under the heading of “big government spending”. They attack the very  policies  that will allow America to maintain and surpass it’s competitive edge over the rest of the world.

America cannot maintain 1980 policies in a 2011 global economy. We cannot be the leaders of the world when we can’t see past our own noses. The rest of the world is adapting to a changing world and it’s time America led in this effort. Investing in our future is investing in us.

Exit mobile version