[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24332512]I love how you think the only reason someone can think reaganomics is fucked is because of that movie. It's not like Econ classes haven't practically proved it to be the largest contributer to current problems, no sir. It must just be that movie!
Also, Carters "fuck ups" were more like the fact that he had complete stagnation in his presidency. Reagan stepped in, and people like you think that he saved the hostages, and that he fixed the energy crisis. Reagan did all of... Well, he only fucked up the country for everyone that wasn't rich.[/QUOTE]
I'm just throwing out Michael Moore because in my mind he is the Glenn Beck of democrats.
Are you seriously defending Carter?
You lose all credibility there.
Carter ruined the economy, Reagan saved it.
The United States had a prosperous economy during the Reagan administration and through the Bush Sr. administration and to a lesser extent the Clinton administration due to the internet and technology boom of the 90s.
Reaganomics works.
Think back to the 1990's when Clinton was in office and the banks were literally FORCED due to regulation to not deny home loans for those with low income. Now that our economy has tanked and these low income home owners can't pay the mortgages the very same people who supported Clinton's administration want to know why the loans were made when it was them who forced the regulation in the first place.
It's ludicrous to blame the President who was in office almost 30 years ago.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24328549]You're right. He's one of the worst.[/QUOTE]
No he's one of the best.
[QUOTE=RinVII;24370972]No he's one of the best.[/QUOTE]
If you're a rich white straight Christian then sure
Carter was on the list for the two women too. Clinton went on that one though.
The guy that is imprisoned was a nutty bible thumper. According to one of his associates in their mission South Korea, he was going to North Korea to try and get Kim Jong-Il to repent or some nonsense like that.
[QUOTE=JDK721;24371020]If you're a rich white straight Christian then sure[/QUOTE]
If you are a freedom loving American who believes in smaller government.
[quote]WASHINGTON — Former President Jimmy Carter was preparing to leave for North Korea on Tuesday to try to gain the freedom of an American imprisoned for illegally entering the communist nation, U.S. officials said Monday night.
[b]North Korea agreed to release Aijalon Mahli Gomes if Carter were to come[/b] to bring him home, a senior U.S. official told The Associated Press. Gomes, of Boston, who was arrested on Jan. 25 after entering North Korea, was sentenced in April to eight years in prison and fined $700,000.
Carter was expected to spend a single night in North Korea and return with Gomes on Thursday, a second U.S. official said. Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.
As was the case when former President Bill Clinton went to North Korea last summer to win the release of two detained American reporters, no U.S. officials will travel with Carter, the senior official said.
Carter spokeswoman Deanna Congileo and several other officials with the Atlanta-based Carter Center did not immediately return calls for comment. The magazine Foreign Policy first reported the Carter trip on Monday.
The senior U.S. official stressed that Carter was not representing the U.S. government. A State Department official, who would speak only without attribution, said the U.S. remains focused on securing Gomes' release.
"If and when such a mission takes place, it will be private and for a humanitarian purpose," the State Department official said.
Attempted suicide
State Department officials secretly visited North Korea in early August in what turned out to be a failed attempt to gain Gomes' release. U.S. officials have pressed for his freedom on humanitarian grounds, citing his health and reports that Gomes has attempted suicide while in custody.
Why Gomes entered the North is unclear. He had been teaching English in South Korea before he was arrested in the North.
Gomes' release has been complicated by tensions following the sinking in March of a South Korean warship, the Cheonan, in which 46 sailors died. The South and the U.S. have blamed the North for the incident, although the North has denied responsibility.
1.
Click here for related content
1. North Korea reportedly joins Facebook
2. American journalists glad to be 'home and free'
3. N. Korea: 8 years of hard labor for U.S. man
4. N. Korea to try American for illegal entry
5. Daily life in North Korea
In August 2009, Clinton traveled to Pyongyang to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and seek the release of two Current TV reporters, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, who were arrested after crossing into North Korea from China. They too faced trial and a long prison sentence but instead received a pardon from Kim and returned to the U.S. with Clinton.
Carter, whose historic visit to North Korea in 1994 led to a landmark disarmament agreement, said last March that sanctions against the nuclear-armed regime were unproductive. The North was unlikely to back down from a standoff over its nuclear weapons program, he added, unless the U.S. and South Korea would prove to the North's satisfaction that they harbored no hostile intentions toward it.
While the disarmament accord Carter negotiated eased tensions, it fell apart in 2002 after President George W. Bush called North Korea part of an "axis of evil."[/quote]
[img]http://friendsoftheprogram.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/its-a-trap.jpg[/img]
But really, this sounds like some sort of attempt to fuck shit up. Their only demand is that Carter come to get em'?
If something happens I hope they realize we are going to bring this shit to the ground.
[QUOTE=Cassettic;24371588]If you are a freedom loving American who believes in smaller government.[/QUOTE]
Smaller government meaning bigger intrusion into your homes? You're not small government, you're social conservative. The DEAD OPPOSITE of small government.
It's funny because Cassettic is right.
[QUOTE=Steak;24374400]It's funny because Cassettic is right.[/QUOTE]
It's funny cause you can't back that up.
He backed his statements up.
Everyone who was arguing against him did not.
[QUOTE=Steak;24374501]He backed his statements up.
Everyone who was arguing against him did not.[/QUOTE]
Except no.. He just said things. Things that don't even match up with the current history.
Reagan introduced Reaganomics/trickle down economics. Are you seriously going to think that it worked?
Carter didn't have a good presidency. He didn't have a bad one either. He literally did nothing good, and nothing bad. He's a completely irrelevant president.
Plus, you're arguing that a [b]social conservative government is a small government.[/b] That alone is ludicrous and wrong.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24373917]Smaller government meaning bigger intrusion into your homes? You're not small government, you're social conservative. The DEAD OPPOSITE of small government.[/QUOTE]
Don't claim to know my political standpoint.
I'd classify myself as a libertarian if I had to.
[QUOTE=Cassettic;24377267]Don't claim to know my political standpoint.
I'd classify myself as a libertarian if I had to.[/QUOTE]
Then why the fuck do you like Reagan? He wasn't about small government.
[QUOTE=Cassettic;24377267]Don't claim to know my political standpoint.
I'd classify myself as a libertarian if I had to.[/QUOTE]
"I like Reagan. He was small government."
So, do you like to contradict yourself or do you just live in denial?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24374635]Except no.. He just said things. Things that don't even match up with the current history.
Reagan introduced Reaganomics/trickle down economics. Are you seriously going to think that it worked?
Carter didn't have a good presidency. He didn't have a bad one either. He literally did nothing good, and nothing bad. He's a completely irrelevant president.
[/QUOTE]
For one prove that the things I've pointed out don't match up with current history?
Reaganomics [B]DID[/B] work I'm waiting for you to prove to me that it didn't.
The 80's were prosperous interest rates plummeted as unemployment rates fell while our tax revenues exploded.
Can't wait till I have to argue with you about regulation.
Carter had a terrible presidency and he is known by many as one of our worst presidents.
Carter today is a great person and I adore him for that but his go in the oval office wasn't great.
As I've said it isn't what Carter did do it's what he didn't do but if you insist:
1. Neglected our military as the commander in chief.
2. Raised the inflation rate from 5.22 % to as much as 14.78 % during his time in office, it is currently 1.24 %
[URL]http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx?dsInflation_currentPage=2[/URL]
Notice how things started changing in 1981 when Reagan entered the office?
3. Iran hostage crisis
4. Gave away the panama canal
I can continue if you'd like
[editline]03:09AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=JDK721;24377388]Then why the fuck do you like Reagan? He wasn't about small government.[/QUOTE]
[media] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=x59wNGHe6iI[/URL][/media]
Are we done here?
Or should I continue to prove you and HumanAbyss know nothing about the history of the political system of the United States?
[editline]03:13AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24377494]"I like Reagan. He was small government." [/QUOTE]
Nice terrible paraphrasing.
This is disappointing, no rebuttal?
[QUOTE=Cassettic;24339890]I'm just throwing out Michael Moore because in my mind he is the Glenn Beck of democrats.[/quote]
not really.
[quote]Are you seriously defending Carter?
You lose all credibility there.[/quote]
he was a p. good president.
[quote]Carter ruined the economy, Reagan saved it.[/quote]
uh, no?
[quote]The United States had a prosperous economy during the Reagan administration and through the Bush Sr. administration and to a lesser extent the Clinton administration due to the internet and technology boom of the 90s.[/quote]
High poverty line, massive inflation, tax cuts to the rich, increased taxes to the poor, unemployment and social fascism... Yeah, I'd say that's booming.
[quote]Reaganomics works.[/quote]
In which reality?
[quote]Think back to the 1990's when Clinton was in office and the banks were literally FORCED due to regulation to not deny home loans for those with low income.[/quote]
Source.
[quote]Now that our economy has tanked and these low income home owners can't pay the mortgages the very same people who supported Clinton's administration want to know why the loans were made when it was them who forced the regulation in the first place.[/quote]
I doubt that caused the economy issues.
[quote]It's ludicrous to blame the President who was in office almost 30 years ago.[/QUOTE]
Not really, we still have social security issues and successes, all can be pointed back to FDR. Influence doesn't stop with time.
[editline]10:26PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cassettic;24377638]
Reaganomics [B]DID[/B] work I'm waiting for you to prove to me that it didn't.[/QUOTE]
Worked for Rich people, doesn't mean it's right.
[QUOTE=RinVII;24392459]This is disappointing, no rebuttal?[/QUOTE]
Not my fault I can't be on the computer arguing all the time.
[editline]03:40PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cassettic;24377638]For one prove that the things I've pointed out don't match up with current history?
Reaganomics [B]DID[/B] work I'm waiting for you to prove to me that it didn't.
The 80's were prosperous interest rates plummeted as unemployment rates fell while our tax revenues exploded.
Can't wait till I have to argue with you about regulation.
Carter had a terrible presidency and he is known by many as one of our worst presidents.
Carter today is a great person and I adore him for that but his go in the oval office wasn't great.
As I've said it isn't what Carter did do it's what he didn't do but if you insist:
1. Neglected our military as the commander in chief.
2. Raised the inflation rate from 5.22 % to as much as 14.78 % during his time in office, it is currently 1.24 %
[URL]http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx?dsInflation_currentPage=2[/URL]
Notice how things started changing in 1981 when Reagan entered the office?
3. Iran hostage crisis
4. Gave away the panama canal
I can continue if you'd like
[editline]03:09AM[/editline]
[media] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=x59wNGHe6iI[/URL][/media]
Are we done here?
Or should I continue to prove you and HumanAbyss know nothing about the history of the political system of the United States?
[editline]03:13AM[/editline]
Nice terrible paraphrasing.[/QUOTE]
As warhol was kind enough to point out, Reagan wasn't that great. Ignoring poverty line, and the further separation of the Rich and poor, and basically creating a social war with a further strengthening social conservative stand point, and the whole problem of creating todays dependency on Oil. What? You think it's ok to be dependent on oil? No it isn't.
ITT people ramble on about their political opinions which nobody gives a shit about.
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24395264]ITT people ramble on about their political opinions which nobody gives a shit about.[/QUOTE]
Yeah! That political shit that has decided how your life will play out? That doesn't mean fucking shit.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24395482]Yeah! That political shit that has decided how your life will play out? That doesn't mean fucking shit.[/QUOTE]
Haha, yeah - I mean ranting like a bitch on an internet forum to stand up for the party you support totally means you're going to change how everybody's life plays out? Right? Right...?
Grow up, seriously - go rant about it elsewhere. As I said before, nobody gives a [b]shit[/b] about your opinion, valid or not.
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24395600]Haha, yeah - I mean ranting like a bitch on an internet forum to stand up for the party you support totally means you're going to change how everybody's life plays out? Right? Right...?
Grow up, seriously - go rant about it elsewhere. As I said before, nobody gives a [b]shit[/b] about your opinion, valid or not.[/QUOTE]
And people give a shit about yours?
It's a fucking forum, we're allowed, and even supposed to have these discussions. No one is forcing your dumbass to read them.
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24395600]Haha, yeah - I mean ranting like a bitch on an internet forum to stand up for the party you support totally means you're going to change how everybody's life plays out? Right? Right...?
Grow up, seriously - go rant about it elsewhere. As I said before, nobody gives a [b]shit[/b] about your opinion, valid or not.[/QUOTE]
How dare people discuss things on a discussion board. What are they thinking?
Don't post if you don't give a shit.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24395728]And people give a shit about yours?
It's a fucking forum, we're allowed, and even supposed to have these discussions. No one is forcing your dumbass to read them.[/QUOTE]
Seems like you lost your cool a little there, heh - tough guy on the loose.
I come to ITN to see bad puns and interesting stuff - I don't want to scroll through page after page of useless, boring shit to find something good.
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24395785]Seems like you lost your cool a little there, heh - tough guy on the loose.
I come to ITN to see bad puns and interesting stuff - I don't want to scroll through page after page of useless, boring shit to find something good.[/QUOTE]
Tough guy on the loose? Not really, I'm not threatening you, nor do I care you're here. If anyone wants to seem like a ITG, it's you telling people that they can't talk about this shit.
It's not boring to us.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;24396094]Tough guy on the loose? Not really, I'm not threatening you, nor do I care you're here. If anyone wants to seem like a ITN, it's you telling people that they can't talk about this shit.
It's not boring to us.[/QUOTE]
:downs:
ITN stands for In the News.
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24396230]:downs:
ITN stands for In the News.[/QUOTE]
I meant ITG, so whatever.
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24395785]Seems like you lost your cool a little there, heh - tough guy on the loose.
I come to ITN to see bad puns and interesting stuff - I don't want to scroll through page after page of useless, boring shit to find something good.[/QUOTE]
you come to the fucking news section for puns instead of discussion about the news and politics
maybe you should just look at lolcat pictures and not stress your mind bro
[QUOTE=Chippay;24396255]you come to the fucking news section for puns instead of discussion about the news and politics
maybe you should just look at lolcat pictures and not stress your mind bro[/QUOTE]
bro, you seem angered by my comment - can I interest you in a cup of tea to calm your nerves?
Look, that guy enjoys terrible puns - he obviously likes lolcatz and is a dumbass. :downs:
[QUOTE=Ragamuffin..;24396331]bro, you seem angered by my comment - can I interest you in a cup of tea to calm your nerves?
Look, that guy enjoys terrible puns - he obviously likes lolcatz and is a dumbass. :downs:[/QUOTE]
You're the one saying no one in here should have political discussions because you'd rather just read endless puns and funny shit. How are you not a dumbass?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
