Ron Paul: Obama's 'Goal' Is Economic Collapse

[redcliffsw]

The Republicans seem to be recognized as being conservative.  Not so.
From the beginnings of the Republican Party in the 1850's & 1860's, the
Republican party was not conservative and it really never has been unless
you want to include Ronald Reagan. 

It appears to me that Reagan was an old line Democrat who switched to
Republican because of the liberalism that was invading the Democrat party.
 

[Catwoman]

Catwoman, you may need to catch up with the times.  The only president in the last 35+ years to be somewhat fiscally responsible has been a democrat. 

Yes, I remember the Clinton years...I'm not as out of touch as you'd think (despite my advanced age!)...Slick Willie was quite a paper tiger.  It is interesting that, once he got out of office, whatever improvements he supposedly made on the economy evaporated into thin air once his money/number manipulators were no longer in office.  Makes you wonder how real all those gains were...Or were the numbers crunched 'just so' so that things looked a lot better than they were?  My guess is the latter.

[Anmar]

Yes, I remember the Clinton years...I'm not as out of touch as you'd think (despite my advanced age!)...Slick Willie was quite a paper tiger.  It is interesting that, once he got out of office, whatever improvements he supposedly made on the economy evaporated into thin air once his money/number manipulators were no longer in office.  Makes you wonder how real all those gains were...Or were the numbers crunched 'just so' so that things looked a lot better than they were?  My guess is the latter.

I've followed politics a long time, thats the first time i've ever heard someone say that about the clinton admin.  Usually people just say he's lucky because he benefitted from the dot com boom, which is kinda true.  Clinton also increased revenue by raising the capital gains tax.  When you talk about the difference between Clinton and Bush, you need to mention Bush's tax cuts, and the immense expense of fighting two wars.  Especially when Bush is relying so much on corporations and private contracters to do jobs that the military would normally have done under any other administration.  Bush might have had a balanced budget if he and his buddies hadn't have stole so much from the treasury.

[Teresa]

You know what really irritates me about liberals? (Besides the fact that they're spineless little girls in pretty dresses who can't play rough because it musses up their hair...)

They always think liberalism fixes the problem -- even when it was liberalism that caused the problem in the first place!

Case in point, the Financial Meltdown of 2008 (and counting).
To hear liberals tell it, it all goes back to Ronald Reagan -- who with his seductive "B-actor" charm fooled America into thinking that by slashing taxes, regulation, and government spending we could unleash free enterprise and create a new wave of prosperity.

Sure, liberals concede, that seemed to work for, oh, the better part of three decades, but now we're paying the price for all that "greed." The solution? A return to the pre-Reagan policies of Jimmy Carter, LBJ, FDR... Speaking of which, what will victory look like in the "War on Poverty"? When are they going to produce an "exit strategy" from that quagmire?

Unfortunately, the facts -- as always when you're talking about liberal theories -- tell a different story. A story in which all the major villains, it turns out, have one thing in common: government.

That's right. From the "Community Reinvestment Act" that pressured banks into affirmative-action lending, to those "government-sponsored enterprises" Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- who bought up all the resulting subprime loans and repackaged them as "investment grade" securities -- the greasy thumb-prints of government were all over this fiasco from beginning to end.

But those, as I say, are facts. And facts have no place in the fantasy world of Democratic policy-makers. Nor does history -- true history, that is, as opposed to the public-school propaganda that teaches, for instance, that FDR's New Deal got us out of the Great Depression, when in reality it only deepened and prolonged it.

But the question remains: What can those of us in the fast-dwindling, Reality-Based Community do to survive financially as the Obamacrats prepare a "New New Deal" that threatens to outspend the original by about ten thousand to one?
I don't know.....but the more I read the more I know that..... "Reaganomics will work."

I think it begins with understanding the real laws of economics...something that most of Americans really do not understand ( myself included) .. not the warmed-over Marxism that passes for "new thinking" to Obama's media groupies. We are over run with pointy-headed leftists like Obama's economic team who seem to think that all the economy needs in order to flourish are more liberals running the economy.

After Obama gets done driving down the value of the dollar...We're going to need more than a prayer to make ends meet.