# Pitting all you Reagan bashers **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 6, 2004, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970 "2004-06-06T16:55:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/41 "2004-06-06T21:14:35Z")
**Grienspace** , I posted my reply to your Reagan worship in the SallyStar thread, but I’ll repeat one point: You’re not an American, it’s not your country, and you do not have to live here with the consequences that stem from the Reagan era. For example, we really don’t need to hear from someone who has national health insurance lauding a leader who helped ensure that we’d never get that here. ---
**Author:** ![cheddarsnax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cheddarsnax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cheddarsnax)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/42 "2004-06-06T21:20:58Z")
Think carefully before you use Reagan’s poll/election numbers to support a claim that he was a good president. Clinton left office with a higher job approval rating than Reagan, Eisenhower, Bush, Ford, Johnson, or Carter. Clinton’s average approval rating was also higher than Reagan’s. Clinton is the most admired man of more Americans than Reagan. Clinton also defeats Mandela and Blair. But I don’t think you’d consider him a very good President. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/43 "2004-06-06T21:21:26Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I am quite sure that friend **Sam** , who is as sincere in his admiration as he is adamant, would happily join me in calling for the immediate release of those papers, that it might cast light on the motives and actions of those men. I, too, want that, and for precisely the same reason. And one of us is in for a disappointment. If the release of those papers supports **Sam’s** supportive view of Reagan’s presidency, why would you be disappointed **elucidator**? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/44 "2004-06-06T21:24:39Z")
Just a reminder to the Reagan deifiers that popular vote in a presidential race has nothing to do with whether a man is a great president or not. The aforementioned Nixon’s 60.67% of the popular vote in 1972 did not match Lyndon Johnson’s 61.05% in 1964. I do not believe either of those men will ever be mentioned as a potential greatest president of the 20th century. Using the popular vote as a buttress to your argument is specious. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/45 "2004-06-06T21:26:51Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > **Mr Svinlesha** -I believe **Sam** has actually stated that trees DO cause more pollution than cars. (The Smoky Mountains or something)…or was that **december**? It was **Sam**. He argued the point at great length, as I recall. ---
**Author:** ![Amok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f17d59/32.png) [@Amok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amok)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/46 "2004-06-06T21:27:54Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > [Cecil on Reagan’s “landslide”.](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_135.html) That article by Cecil discusses the 1980 election, not the 1984 one. Indeed, it was written prior to the latter election. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/47 "2004-06-06T21:28:43Z")
> [@cheddarsnax](#): > > But I don’t think you’d consider him a very good President. I would. He did what he set out to do, and promoted his party’s agenda admirably. I think he is a waste of space as a human being, and I disagree with most of his party’s agenda, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think he was a good President. But he, like Reagan, are credited with things that happened on their watch that they as Presidents had little or no control over. That in no way lessens my admiration for one of them, nor decreases my contempt for the other. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/48 "2004-06-06T21:32:51Z")
> [@Amok](#): > > That article by Cecil discusses the 1980 election, not the 1984 one. Indeed, it was written prior to the latter election. Then I appologize. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/49 "2004-06-06T21:34:50Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > [Cecil on Reagan’s “landslide”.](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_135.html) > > **Mr Svinlesha** -I believe **Sam** has actually stated that trees DO cause more pollution than cars. (The Smoky Mountains or something)…or was that **december**? That link talks about his '80 election. **grienspace** was referring to Rayguns reelection bid in '84 where he won 58.8 of the popular vote. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/50 "2004-06-06T21:40:33Z")
Jesus, what a pile of nitpicks from Mr. S. Here goes… > [@Mr. Svinlesha](#): > > **Sam** :It is entirely possible that Reagan’s hard-line policies vis-a-vis the Soviet Union hastened its collapse, but I believe the historical record clearly reveals that the Soviet Union was in decline long before Reagan took office. There is a big difference between being ‘in decline’ and collapsing. For instance, the Soviet empire was in NOWHERE NEAR as bad a shape as North Korea, and it’s been surviving in that miserable condition for decades. You underestimate the tenacity of dictatorships. It is true that many of us thought the Soviet system was grossly inferior, and we were right. But that was NOT a universal belief. See the Galbraith quote above. Go read what Arthur Schlesinger had to say about the Soviet Union. I heard it all through the 70’s and 80’s - “Sure, the Soviets aren’t as good as us at building material things, but materialism is bad! Go look at their art, their culture, their architecture, their universal education, jobs for everyone, no class warfare… Their system is superior in all the ways that count.” This was a common mantra on the left. I heard it every freaking day, and it made me just as sick then as it does now. And even among those who thought the system was inferior and could not perform like the American system could, NO ONE thought the regime was on the verge of collapse. No one thought it was even remotely likely to happen. Except for Reagan. > [@](#): > > In addition, your argument here contradicts your own political philosophy, does it not? Or do you actually believe that a communistic system could eventually beat out a capitalistic one, all other things being equal?Come on, **Sam**. What a load of crap. The Soviet Union was not “on the rise” during the 70s – it was collapsing. No one thought the USSR had a chance of “winning” against the West.? It was certainly ‘on the rise’ militarily and in terms of global influence. My own university was full of Soviet cheerleaders. They had just invaded Afghanistan. Vietnam and Cambodia had just become communist. They were keeping up in the space race (even had their own shuttle - Buran, which turned out to be a flop but didn’t look like it at the time). Sorry, but I remember the era very well. You’re not going to get away with revisionism with me. I remember what people thought and expected. The left wanted detente and coexistance. It preached understanding. “The Russians Love Their Children Too!” And again, there’s a big difference between thinking a system is inferior, and thinking it was about to collapse in on itself. Saddam survived ten years of sanctions and showed no signs of going anywhere. The Chinese aren’t collapsing, are they? Their system is inferior, but that doesn’t mean it’s a house of cards that just needs a stiff breeze to knock it over. The North Korean economy is a disaster, but is anyone predicting its imminent collapse? It could still be around 30 years from now, for all we know. > [@](#): > > WTF? > > Do you mean the Russians aren’t around anymore? What did Reagan do with them? Oh for God’s sake. You know I meant to say Soviets. > [@](#): > > Oh, yeah, that was really unique. As if “the Soviet Union is evil” hadn’t been a mantra of the Right since the days of McCarthy. But it wasn’t a mantra of the left, was it? The Soviets were actually admired by large swaths of the left, who were in total denial about its horrors. And it doesn’t change the fact that when a PRESIDENT comes out and says it in a major speech, its impact is a lot greater than when a bunch of conservative back-benchers mutter it among themselves. > [@](#): > > SDI. Strategic **DEFENSE** Initiative. A network of satellites that would serve to protect the US from nuclear attack. How, exactly, did this threaten the “Soviet Union,” may I ask?I can hardly believe I’m reading this. Are you being obtuse on purpose? I meant “Threaten” in a strategic sense. It threatened the efficacy of their ICBM network. It threatened their scientific community. It theatened the strategic balance. Stop being so intentionally literal in a lame attempt to score points. > [@](#): > > The 9/11 hijackers were Mujahadeen, **Sam**. You praise Reagan for his financial and military support of a group that eventually morphed into the Taliban and al-Qaida. Damned straight I do. It was the correct decision. You, on the other hand, are trying to blame him for not seeing that the Mujahadeen would morph into a threat against the U.S. twenty damned years later. > [@](#): > > You neglected to mention that he also claimed trees cause more pollution than automobile do.Oh, bullshit. Oh, now I get to play the liar game. LIAR! He never said that, and I’ve explained that to you on several occasions. He said “Oxides of Nitrogen”, and he was RIGHT. Do you want to drag open those threads again and go through them? This pisses me off to no end. When we first discussed that issue, I cited it extensively. Then later, you ridiculed me for it. So I opened a new thread, and explained it again. Now you’re still doing it. Get over it already. > [@](#): > > It’s this sort of willful misunderstanding of the left by members of the right that leads to the discursive collapse you so abhor, **Sam**. _You_ **show no respect whatsoever for those who disagree with your political views.** Sure I do. Where do you get disrespect from? Because you chose to parse my words with a microscope to show how misleading I was being? When I wasn’t? > [@](#): > > No wonder you get bashed so much when you post your (oft-times noxious) opinions in GD. Or maybe the truth hurts, pal. > [@](#): > > I suppose if I’m German, and Reagan wants to plant a cruise missile in my backyard, I shouldn’t be allowed to have any opinion about it. He got plenty of opposition at home. He got protests and marches from Canadians when the U.S. simply wanted to use a test corridor to test an unarmed missile. This was just a visceral reaction from the peace-at-any-cost crowd. > [@](#): > > Maybe I don’t like having missiles in my garden? Does that make me a commie, **Sam**? No, it makes you someone unwilling to pay the price for freedom. > [@](#): > > What a spectacular pile of crapola. Provide evidence that fear of SDI led the Soviets to grant “huge concessions” to the US. Go read up on the summits between Reagan and Gorbachev. SDI was Reagan’s trump card. > [@](#): > > Yes indeed, because the Soviet system was so infinitely superior to Western capitalism that, had Reagan not appeared on the scene, we would all surely be eating borscht by now. No, if Reagan had not come onto the scene, the world would have had four more years of Carter’s ineffectual policies. Remember his response to the invasion of Afghanistan? Ooh, let’s boycott the Olympics. That’ll show them. I believe the Soviet Union would have collapsed eventually. But the collapse might have happened after perhaps an invasion of Pakistan, or a major crisis in Eastern Europe, or any number of bad things. Perhaps had the Soviets felt more emboldened they would have responded to the uprisings in Poland with a brutal crackdown like they did in Hungary in 1956 or Czechoslovakia in 1968. The death throes could have taken decades. > [@](#): > > Can you not see that this argument contradicts your own political philosophy, **Sam**? No it doesn’t, and that was a particularly lame argument on your behalf. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/51 "2004-06-06T21:41:26Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > **Grienspace** , I posted my reply to your Reagan worship in the SallyStar thread, but I’ll repeat one point: > > You’re not an American, it’s not your country, and you do not have to live here with the consequences that stem from the Reagan era. For example, we really don’t need to hear from someone who has national health insurance lauding a leader who helped ensure that we’d never get that here. I paid to have the privilege to post here so I’ll say what I damn well please! Just because I don’t have the right to vote for the leader of the free world doesn’t mean that your governments don’t affect us Canadians . In fact your government has more impact on my life than Ottawa. Regarding health insurance, its long been my opinion that none of you guys liberal or conservative really want it. That has always been a source of amazement to me. And what do you mean that Reagan ensured that you’ll never get national health insurance? Was there a constitutional amendment that I missed? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Svinlesha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/22d042/32.png) [@Mr.Svinlesha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Svinlesha)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/52 "2004-06-06T21:46:37Z")
**Guin** and **Gorsnak** : **Sam** attempted to mount a defense of Reagan’s statements in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=171491). I should know. I posted the OP. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/53 "2004-06-06T21:46:54Z")
> [@cheddarsnax](#): > > Think carefully before you use Reagan’s poll/election numbers to support a claim that he was a good president. Clinton left office with a higher job approval rating than Reagan, Eisenhower, Bush, Ford, Johnson, or Carter. Clinton’s average approval rating was also higher than Reagan’s. Clinton is the most admired man of more Americans than Reagan. Clinton also defeats Mandela and Blair. > > But I don’t think you’d consider him a very good President. Actually I do! Right behind Reagan. Do not mistake my admiration for Reagan to label me a hard core conservative. Didn’t you read your "Reagan’s Liberal Legacy " link? ---
**Author:** ![WernhamHogg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a587f6/32.png) [@WernhamHogg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WernhamHogg)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/54 "2004-06-06T21:48:32Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Regarding health insurance, its long been my opinion that none of you guys liberal or conservative really want it. That has always been a source of amazement to me. It’s long been by opinion that none of you guys really like hockey or Rush. Unfortunately it’s really fucking hard to defend an opinion about what I think other people think, especially when it’s the complete opposite of what they say they think. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/55 "2004-06-06T21:49:26Z")
> [@gobear](#): > > **Grienspace** , I posted my reply to your Reagan worship in the SallyStar thread, but I’ll repeat one point: > > You’re not an American, it’s not your country, and you do not have to live here with the consequences that stem from the Reagan era. For example, we really don’t need to hear from someone who has national health insurance lauding a leader who helped ensure that we’d never get that here. **gobear** , sorry, but this should not have been said, especially on this message board. I feel free to comment on Canadian issues, on any countries issues, and **grienspace** is certainly free to comment on any issues he desires, however misguided his point of view may be. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/56 "2004-06-06T22:00:47Z")
**Reeder** - if you apply Cecil’s math to the 1984 election, Reagan got only 31.2% of the voting-age population to vote for him - voter turnout in that election was only 53.11% of the VAP. Only slightly better than Bush, who got ~25% of the VAP. ---
**Author:** ![ZebraShaSha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/eada6e/32.png) [@ZebraShaSha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZebraShaSha)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/57 "2004-06-06T22:01:35Z")
(This may or may not help but do not attack me for it… I am just adding a refrence to pop-culture of the 80s towards the sentiments of RR… As quoted from **Camper Van Beethoven’s Sweethearts** : 'Cause in the mind of Ronald Reagan Wheels they turn and gears they grind Buildings collapse in slow motion And trains collide, everything is fine ) ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/58 "2004-06-06T22:02:58Z")
By the way, if anyone would like to read that old thread about Reagan’s claim that trees generate oxides of nitrogen, [here it is](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=171491). I’ll let you decide if Mr. S’s characterization of that debate is correct, even though he’s used it twice that I know of since as claim that I am stupid or ignorant. ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/59 "2004-06-06T22:06:18Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > **gobear** , sorry, but this should not have been said, especially on this message board. I feel free to comment on Canadian issues, on any countries issues, and **grienspace** is certainly free to comment on any issues he desires, however misguided his point of view may be. Nonsense. He is free to comment, and I am free to tell him to stuff it. He can say wha the hell he pleases, but he isn’t free to say it without dissent. He doesn’t live here, and his admiration of Reagan’s policies is annoying because he doesn’t have to deal with their consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2004, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970/60 "2004-06-06T22:08:16Z")
I didn’t see **Mr. S’s** link to the same thread. Interesting that we both seem to think we won that debate. Regardless of who you think ‘won’, I defended my position well enough that for you to keep bringing it up as an example of my ignorance and/or partisan blinding is disingenous at best. But perhaps you have a different memory of that debate. Did you read it before you linked it here? I did. I’m happy to stand by my defense. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-all-you-reagan-bashers/248970.md?page=4)