Defending the Truth

Originally Posted by sgtdmski

For all you who don't know or who are old enough and have forgotten, after Ford and Carter, political scientists were wondering whether the Presidency was too big for just one man. Then along came the actor, Ronald Reagan. Thought to be dumb, he transformed the Country.

During the late 1970's this country had lost its momentum, its swagger, we were wondering if we were really great, we lost faith in ourselves. Ronald Reagan came along and said, no, our brighter days are still ahead of us, you ain't seem nothing yet. You know what, he was right. For those of you who wish to argue that he only played a role, and was handled by his advisors, my suggestion to you is to look at what he wrote in the 60's as the host of GE theatre, and for his radio show following his governorship and failed run for president in 1976. Many of the same ideas he had in the 60's and late 70's became the policy for this country in the 1980's.

78 consecutive months of peacetime economic growth. Lower taxes, more people moving up the socio-economic ladder. Yes the rich got richer, but so then did more of the poor, especially those who were actually working and trying to improve themselves.

He faced down the Soviet Union, and made them say I quit. He destroyed the Breshnev Doctrine and saw the wall come tumbling down. He say Germany reunited, and Poland free.

dmk

Originally Posted by aMFliberal

How can FDR be blamed for programs that existed longer than they were designed to? One of those programs, as you might well know, is Social Security, a problem we are in the midst of tackling, as you also might well know. But perhaps you do not know that your wonderful Reagan deserves much blame for the state of Social Security right now, as he called it a discretionary fund and used money from SS to pay for things like weapons.
Also, what sgt said, about the rich getting richer, and the poor too. That's not true. The rich got richer and the poor stayed reletively the same.

Originally Posted by aMFliberal

I just think that Social Security is a flawed idea at it's core...in that it was created so that old people, who couldn't get jobs because they were too old, recieved money from the government. The only problem is that everyone pays the taxes that support Social Security right from their paycheck for their whole lives, so when they retire, they want to see their Social Security money even if they don't need it. Millions of people recieve Social Security that don't need it to sustain themselves. We're not Saints here, no one would support a program like that. (opponents of welfare chime in now ) Like I said before, the program should have died like it was supposed to.

Originally Posted by aMFliberal

I'm not saying that at all. The system is flawed if you look at it simplistically. Why can't there just be a government pension fund for those who actually need it? Most people would not need it.