…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Reaganite Republican, with a post wondering if Drudge and Breitbart are getting paid for good Trump coverage.
THE AUTHOR
PAGES
Recent Comments
- Elwood P Dowd on If All You See…: “Mr Dana approves of violence against America and the police, at least as long as the assaulter is an aggrieved…” Dec 18, 22:10
- Dana on If All You See…: “The incredulous Mr Dowd wrote: Evans pleaded guilty to a felony count of obstructing or impeding officers during a civil…” Dec 18, 20:03
- drowningpuppies on If All You See…: “It’s a shit bill that Mikey shouldn’t be trying to ram through at the last minute. And Rimjob you know…” Dec 18, 18:52
- Elwood P Dowd on If All You See…: “Trump and Elon (aka Trumpelon) are both now advocating that Congressional GOPhers shut down government until Trumpelon is sworn in.…” Dec 18, 18:42
- drowningpuppies on Tennessee Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Ship Illegals/Migrants To Sanctuary Cities: “Why are you so upset, Rimjob? Is the truth that painful.” Dec 18, 18:06
Do Reganite Republicans support an assault weapons ban like Ronnie did?
Regan increased the Federal employment by 25% it has NEVER been as high as it was under him
Isn’t it just good politics (not to mention capitalism) to pay “journalist” operations like Breitbart and Drudge for their support?
Certainly you’re not advocating government control over what well-respected “journalist” institutions like Breitbart and Drudge “report”? Certainly you don’t want to use the government to force estimable “journalist” organizations like Breitbart and Drudge to disclose the sources of their income, do you?
How do we know that the Cruz campaign didn’t pay the Reaganite Republican to make the whole thing up??
Let’s see… so those that support Trump are paid to do so, but those that support Cruz do so out of rational thought.
As I’ve suggested here before, I think all conservabloggers receive some form of wingnut welfare as a reward for the over the top tongue baths (Reaganite Repub term, not mine) they give conservative elites.
As usual, john lies.
Apparently Jeffery has forgotten the JournoList scandal where journalists got together to put out supporting pieces on Obama and the progressive agenda.
And now Trump has secured the vital Palin endorsement. It just keeps getting better
Anyone who disagrees with GC can be called a liar
http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2013/feb/05/barack-obama/did-reagan-support-assault-weapons-ban/
Please note GC I said assault weapons, not “modern hunting rifles”
Please note john that I was specifically addressing your claim on Federal employees. See how I quoted the specific statement I was refuting with government facts and figures?
If you are going to try and discuss something, learn to read.
Did john lie about Raygun’s federal employees?
Another commenter supplied a link showing that during only 7 non-census years since 1962 were there more than 3 million federal employees – ’68, ’69, ’85, ’87, ’88, ’89, ’92. The median number of federal employees during Raygun’s reign was 3 million – the highest in history. The total number during the Raygun years was the highest in history. The highest year was 1989 – 0nly 10,000 higher than 1988, and arguably Raygun’s responsibility.
Reagan start to finish (8 yrs): 2.8 to 3.1 million (increase)
Bush I start to finish (4) : 3.1 to 2.9 million (decrease)
Clinton start to finish (8) : 2.9 to 2.7 million (decrease)
Bush II start to finish (8) : 2.6 to 2.8 million (increase)
Obama start to finish (8) : 2.8 to 2.7 million (decrease)
Reagan increased the size of the federal government, nearly tripled the national debt and started the decimation of the American middle class.
I wish. But, sorry, Jeff, I pay for this site all on my own.
I see a girl who is NOT going to fit under that car.
Jeffery,
Thanks for looking into the claim and agreeing that john lied.
After all, what he claimed was:
Even your citing of the data shows this to be a lie.
Have a nice day.
Mr. Dichotomous Thinker hoist by his own petard.
Are you denying that Ronnie Raygun was President in 1989?? The highest number of Fed employees, by a few, was in 1989. Raygun was President in 1989, wasn’t he?
Raygun ruined America. Maybe President Trump will make America Great Again.
Gitar exemplifies on/off, black/white, under/over, dichotomous thinking. This time it bites him in the butt.
Raygun was prez in 1989
Trump/Palin 2016!
Raygun was not President in 1989. I even looked at all the presidents and can’t find anyone named “Raygun.” Perhaps you are looking at science fiction as most of you posts are fiction?
Total Federal employees (in thousands):
1989: 5,292
1962: 5,354
1966: 5,888
1967: 6,416
1968: 6,639
1969: 6,575
1970: 6,085
1971: 5,675
Game, set, match.
George HW Bush was president in 1989, Jeff.
And, Jeff, the numbers you are whining about have to do primarily with an increase in military personnel. The actual civilian federal workforce has been rather consistent since 1962.
Yeah, little one, the same year he invaded Panama!
History is not your strong suit, is it?
Sorry lads. But Ronnie Raygun WAS president in 1989.
No, William, I did not use military figures. GC supplied the data broken down, including and excluding military employment. GC moved the goalpost and included military personnel to reach the opposite conclusion, not I.
Excluding the years where we hired thousands and thousands of Census takers, 1989 was the year the US had the most civilian Federal Employees, at least according to GC’s data. The prez on Jan 1 of 1989 was one Ronald Reagan (aka Ronnie Raygun).
No prez added as many civilian employees to the Federal Government as Ron did. None. Not even close. No president since WWII added a greater percentage of national debt as did St. Ron. None. Not even close. The data don’t lie, although GC and suckingpuppies do.
I win, y’all lose. Again. You are so dishonest…
Jeff,
As I lived during the time and strongly suspect you were only born about 20 years ago, I can assure you that Reagan did not have full control of the government like Obama has had. The Dems in Congress went out of their way to thwart all of his efforts and instead of decreasing the size of the government, as he desired, they greatly increased spending, mostly on their pet projects. Now, despite that, the decrease in taxes that we saw made the economy boom with only periodic slight reversals until Clinton killed the goose. Since Clinton, we have been in trouble and Obama has wrecked the world economy, not only ours. If you would just take a few courses, you would understand much of this, maybe.
Good luck with your leftist confabulations, little one.
Yeah, Reagan was President in 1989 for about 20 days.
dave,
I lived during the Reagan reign, and as a young man figured that America would recognize the damage that right-wing policies would do to the nation and never elect a Republican again. I was wrong.
I appreciate the hagiography around St. Reagan on the right, but the data tells a different story.
Well, what story is that, little one?
Excuse me Jeffery, but the statement was that under Reagan ” it has NEVER been as high as it was under him”
If you go back and look at the data, it is the Federal government that calls military part of the Federal government. (Or perhaps you think that the states pay military men and women or that the the Pentagon is a private company.)
No one moved the goalposts other than you. John lied and now you are doing the same thing.
You lost.
Be a man and admit it.
That’ll be the day.
No US president added as many civilian employees to the government dole as Ronnie Raygun. None. Nada. Zip.
St. Ronnie also nearly tripled the national debt.
The greatest number of civilian employees was recorded in 1989, when Ronnie was prez.
It’s all there in black and white. Now you move the goalposts to include the military.
Why do you hate the military? If not for them conservatives would have no one to cheer and no military service to avoid.
No president in history added more bureaucrats, desk-sitters, regulators and pencil pushers than St. Reagan.
And your point is…?
No president in history added more bureaucrats, desk-sitters, regulators and pencil pushers than St. Reagan.