Liberal Forum

RichClem » 08 Jan 2015 8:48 pm » wrote:
Here's your petunia, psycho.

I have almost all history books, mostly written by liberals, liberal Time, liberal Newsweek, every old MSM network, IBD, Forbes, WSJ, National Review, Weekly Standard, American Spectator, ad infinitum.

You have your psychotic opinion and a few fringe leftists.

The then-liberal Flagship New Republic also devoted an entire issue to admitting they'd been wrong; that Reagan's policies were a huge success that turned the US into the manufacturing giant of the world.

You sound like a highly educated fellow, clemmie. I find it odd that you've been literally UNABLE to absorb the fact that Carter created 25%more jobs per years than reagan - and that clinton outshone reagan by even more than that. Pointing that out to you, time after time, with the proof and a link to the nonpartisan source of that proof, and then watching you brag up Reagan's third place record out of four administrations (besting only his own VP, who had the excuse of following Reagan) and marvel that we don't cheer for the old crook with the boot-black in his hair.

Remarkable. All that reading material, and you cannot respond appropriately to evidence which confronts your prejudices. That's pathetic.

Tell ya what, clem. Prove me wrong. Here is an argument against Reagan's reputation as one who shrinks the bureaucracy. Will you join me in declaring the reputation unearned? Or will you salvage that reputation by shooting holes in my argument, reinterpreting my evidence or debunking it authoritatively?

OR WILL YOU CALL ME A MOONBAT AND REHEARSE YOUR OVER-HYPED BONA FIDES FOR A 20TH TIME?

Smart money's on option 3. Here we go:

TOTAL NUMBER OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, BY ADMINISTRATION

http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversigh ... ince-1962/

Year........Exec Civilians..........Military..........Judicial and legislative..........Total Federal Employees

1977........2,840,000..........2,112,000......53,000...............................5,005,000.....................Ford's last Budget
1981........2,806,000 ..........2,122,000......54,000...............................4,982,000 .....................Carter's last Budget
1989........3,064,000..........2,168,000......60,000...............................5,292,000.....................Reagan's last Budget

Carter's civilian bureaucracy shrank and his military grew

As a % of population, Reagan's military SHRANK. Civilian employees - federal bureaucrats- grew by leaps and bounds.

Let's look at population. https://www.google.com/fusiontables/Dat ... #rows:id=1 Ford's last year was 220,239,425 people in '77. Carter's last year was 229,465,714 - a population growth of 4.189% during his presidency. Reagan ended 1989 with 246,819,230 people - a population growth of 7.57%. Reagan's military forces (see above) grew by an anemic 2.2% (Carter's only grew by half a point, but Carter was CUTTING civilians, not padding the government employment roster with bureaucrats).

While Reagan was growing the population by 7.57% and the debt by 300% and the military by 2.2%, he was growing the CIVILIAN side of government - the part that focuses on we the people - by a whopping 9.2%. The man who promised to shrink government - who told Americans that government was the problem and that he was going to get government out of their way - grew that government faster than the population it served grew. The debt grew, the economy grew, the federal government's control of education grew, the federal labor force grew. The only thing that grew slower than the population was the military.

There it is, Clem. There is a meme that Reagan shrank government. MY PURPOSE is to destroy Reagan's rep. If you're here to save it, there are numbers, there are sources, there are arguments. Can you respond appropriately to each, and either make a cogent argument against my claims, or grant that they seem correct, as a MAN would do?

I will fall over if you manage ANY of those masculine outcomes. My read of you is that you are entirely effeminate and without masculine judgment - a thread fapper like your compadres. Prove me wrong, son.