bungie_us writes;
Actually, the statement is correct.
Reagan’s first budget took effect in 1982, when the poverty rate was 13.6%. In 1989, it was 11.5%.
http://www.cache.census.gov/income/histpov/hstpov02.txt Facts are so inconvenient, aren’t they?
Isn’t it interesting how inevitable the fall of the Soviet Union is, now that it has been brought about? Toss in a little revisionist history, ignore what the Russians say, and hey presto! The Ministry of Truth triumphs again.
Also:
By “sorta”, do you mean “here is another inconvenient fact that liberals will ignore as soon as there is no one around to rub their noses in it”, or “sorta” as in “Reagan was the only President to achieve this, and every liberal in America was wrong in saying that he could never do it”?
Oh yes, Iran-Contra. Will it help to point out that two Congressional investigations, both at least as rabidly partisan as any that caused Clinton to perjure himself, and aided and abetted by a press that assumed without question that Reagan MUST have been guilty, both found that Reagan did not know about the activities of Poindexter and North?
That is to say, both found Reagan not guilty of any civil or criminal actions. How long will that particular fact stick?
To say the least, it is damning with faint praise to say that Reagan was a better President than Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush, or Clinton. Was he better than Kennedy? Obviously in his personal life. Not as pretty, clearly, but when Marines died in Lebanon, Reagan pulled out. Would that the same had been done in Viet Nam.
The rest of your points have been refuted too thoroughly elsewhere to be interesting.
I was awake during the 80s as well as the 90s. To say that the successes of America from 1981 - 1989 were not because of Reagan requires far too much dust blowing to be worthwhile.
Regards,
Shodan