Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
RIP Rush Limbaugh
Comments
-
When the budget is looked at as a share of the economy, Reagan’s legacy looks a bit better from a small government perspective. Federal revenues as a share of gross domestic product fell from 19.6 percent in 1981 to 18.3 percent by 1989. Spending fell from 22.2 percent to 21.2 percent. Thus, Ronald Reagan shrank the federal government by about 5 percent — a less radical change than supporters or detractors often claim.
https://www.cato.org/commentary/reagans-budget-legacy
Dazzler lies, and he loves being lied to. -
SFGbob said:
If spending alone could bring about an economic Recovery you man crush Obama would have had a booming economy. As a percentage of GDP spending actually shrank under Reagan.HHusky said:
Reagan was a big government spender. In good times (California) and bad (when he took the Presidency).RaceBannon said:
SureHHusky said:
RR never shrank a government in his life. It wasn't remotely a touchstone of his governing philosophy.RaceBannon said:
I do know better and I'm not a pathological liar like youHHusky said:
Yes. Twice.RaceBannon said:
And you voted for him twice. AllegedlyHHusky said:
As if Ronald Reagan ever did anything to shrink government at any level.RaceBannon said:Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. - HHutzky
Other than the guy H claims to have voted for twice in the 80's
He was an adept politician. He paid lip service to lots of things. Unfortunately, in a Western democracy, it is crucial to capture some reasonable share of the gullible vote.
Gullible is your middle name. RUSSIA
He wasn't remotely like what you gals now imagine, though you were there and should know better. Alas, not everyone can age well.
I never voted for Reagan
RR was all about shrinking government and doing what government is supposed to do. Defend the country
What he wasn't was beloved or treated fairly by the slime ball media which is what I have been telling the GALS for over a year now as they got the vapors over Trump
You GALS are always worried about a GOP dictator then whine like GIRLS when they aren't and go along with Congress and stuff
Reagan stood for less government. You didn't and you don't
You're a fraud and a loser. And a sucker
That's not a criticism on my part. It's a big part of the reason the early 80s economic recovery was so rapid.
Sort of. The ratio shrank under Reagan to where it had been at the beginning of his presidency from the highs it had grown to during his presidency. Almost exactly the same as the Obama experience, btw. -
He cut spending and pushed for a line item veto that would have given him the authority to cut even more spending. He submitted budgets that cut spending and he called for the complete elimination of some Federal Departments. Obama never did any of this. You measure people by how you are Dazzler. You know that you're a dishonest and duplicitous hack and therefore you assume everyone else is like you.HHusky said:SFGbob said:
If spending alone could bring about an economic Recovery you man crush Obama would have had a booming economy. As a percentage of GDP spending actually shrank under Reagan.HHusky said:
Reagan was a big government spender. In good times (California) and bad (when he took the Presidency).RaceBannon said:
SureHHusky said:
RR never shrank a government in his life. It wasn't remotely a touchstone of his governing philosophy.RaceBannon said:
I do know better and I'm not a pathological liar like youHHusky said:
Yes. Twice.RaceBannon said:
And you voted for him twice. AllegedlyHHusky said:
As if Ronald Reagan ever did anything to shrink government at any level.RaceBannon said:Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. - HHutzky
Other than the guy H claims to have voted for twice in the 80's
He was an adept politician. He paid lip service to lots of things. Unfortunately, in a Western democracy, it is crucial to capture some reasonable share of the gullible vote.
Gullible is your middle name. RUSSIA
He wasn't remotely like what you gals now imagine, though you were there and should know better. Alas, not everyone can age well.
I never voted for Reagan
RR was all about shrinking government and doing what government is supposed to do. Defend the country
What he wasn't was beloved or treated fairly by the slime ball media which is what I have been telling the GALS for over a year now as they got the vapors over Trump
You GALS are always worried about a GOP dictator then whine like GIRLS when they aren't and go along with Congress and stuff
Reagan stood for less government. You didn't and you don't
You're a fraud and a loser. And a sucker
That's not a criticism on my part. It's a big part of the reason the early 80s economic recovery was so rapid.
Sort of. The ratio shrank under Reagan to where it had been at the beginning of his presidency from the highs it had grown to during his presidency. Almost exactly the same as Obama, btw.
-
This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
-
So you'd prefer to change the subject.SFGbob said:
He cut spending and pushed for a line item veto that would have given him the authority to cut even more spending. He submitted budgets that cut spending and he called for the complete elimination of some Federal Departments. Obama never did any of this. You measure people by how you are Dazzler. You know that you're a dishonest and duplicitous hack and therefore you assume everyone else is like you.HHusky said:SFGbob said:
If spending alone could bring about an economic Recovery you man crush Obama would have had a booming economy. As a percentage of GDP spending actually shrank under Reagan.HHusky said:
Reagan was a big government spender. In good times (California) and bad (when he took the Presidency).RaceBannon said:
SureHHusky said:
RR never shrank a government in his life. It wasn't remotely a touchstone of his governing philosophy.RaceBannon said:
I do know better and I'm not a pathological liar like youHHusky said:
Yes. Twice.RaceBannon said:
And you voted for him twice. AllegedlyHHusky said:
As if Ronald Reagan ever did anything to shrink government at any level.RaceBannon said:Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. - HHutzky
Other than the guy H claims to have voted for twice in the 80's
He was an adept politician. He paid lip service to lots of things. Unfortunately, in a Western democracy, it is crucial to capture some reasonable share of the gullible vote.
Gullible is your middle name. RUSSIA
He wasn't remotely like what you gals now imagine, though you were there and should know better. Alas, not everyone can age well.
I never voted for Reagan
RR was all about shrinking government and doing what government is supposed to do. Defend the country
What he wasn't was beloved or treated fairly by the slime ball media which is what I have been telling the GALS for over a year now as they got the vapors over Trump
You GALS are always worried about a GOP dictator then whine like GIRLS when they aren't and go along with Congress and stuff
Reagan stood for less government. You didn't and you don't
You're a fraud and a loser. And a sucker
That's not a criticism on my part. It's a big part of the reason the early 80s economic recovery was so rapid.
Sort of. The ratio shrank under Reagan to where it had been at the beginning of his presidency from the highs it had grown to during his presidency. Almost exactly the same as Obama, btw.
Wise. -
Disagree. Lots of poasts about me. I like it!DerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
-
Used to listen to Rush on the morning drive, during the Clinton years, whom I voted for twice, btw.
Back then nobody needed Trigger Warnings because nobody shit their pants when they heard opposing opinions like the fragile generations since. I listened, I learned, and I frequently disagreed.
And somehow, miraculously, I lived through it.
Even fragile flowers like @HHusky somehow survived.
Could it be that people on the political Right AREN'T actually trying to kill Lefties, all day every day? -
When I asked why Rush was a fascist, that was the end of any meaning full conversation. It's just something all leftards feel and therefore they are.DerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
-
Wait, wait, wait....Fascism PRECEDED Trump? GTFO!!WestlinnDuck said:
When I asked why Rush was a fascist, that was the end of any meaning full conversation. It's just something all leftards feel and therefore they are.DerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
-
-
-
MNF will never be the same
-
I'm just here to seek out 4 fuck off posts by the Dazzler so I can lay down the 5th bury post hammer.DerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
-
Why don't you just say . . .PurpleThrobber said:
I'm just here to seek out 4 fuck off posts by the Dazzler so I can lay down the 5th bury post hammer.DerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
?
Flattering. -
New board mottoDerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
-
This JIF should be used more imoalumni94 said: -
You and I might disagree on the details, but I agree with you in principle.greenblood said:
I think "small government" should be replaced with "limited government". Government will never be small, but it should be limited when it can be.HHusky said:
Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. It's not an intellectually honest pursuit and neither political party has ever pursued it, regardless of what they said during a campaign. It's a fantasy. And all most of you ever mean by it is you want the government to do stuff you like, but not stuff you don't like.RoadTrip said:
Do you consider social media writ? How was Rush's spoken opinions on subjects like small government different than intellectual prose on the same subject in 1980?HHusky said:Political conservatism was actually moored to conservatism writ broadly, and was intellectually and philosophically coherent in in 1980.
Rush helped to change that.
Missed by the right wing's rabble. No one else.
Small government is at best a rhetorical flourish required to pander to the stupidest voter a Republican can hope to convince to pull the lever for him come election time. -
Just not a voting issue for the dazzler. He proudly voted for barry because he was clearly the most fiscally responsible alternative.HHusky said:
You and I might disagree on the details, but I agree with you in principle.greenblood said:
I think "small government" should be replaced with "limited government". Government will never be small, but it should be limited when it can be.HHusky said:
Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. It's not an intellectually honest pursuit and neither political party has ever pursued it, regardless of what they said during a campaign. It's a fantasy. And all most of you ever mean by it is you want the government to do stuff you like, but not stuff you don't like.RoadTrip said:
Do you consider social media writ? How was Rush's spoken opinions on subjects like small government different than intellectual prose on the same subject in 1980?HHusky said:Political conservatism was actually moored to conservatism writ broadly, and was intellectually and philosophically coherent in in 1980.
Rush helped to change that.
Missed by the right wing's rabble. No one else.
Small government is at best a rhetorical flourish required to pander to the stupidest voter a Republican can hope to convince to pull the lever for him come election time. -
Pseudo intellectual Gasbag informs us that the guy who shrank government employment is a socialist.WestlinnDuck said:
Just not a voting issue for the dazzler. He proudly voted for barry because he was clearly the most fiscally responsible alternative.HHusky said:
You and I might disagree on the details, but I agree with you in principle.greenblood said:
I think "small government" should be replaced with "limited government". Government will never be small, but it should be limited when it can be.HHusky said:
Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. It's not an intellectually honest pursuit and neither political party has ever pursued it, regardless of what they said during a campaign. It's a fantasy. And all most of you ever mean by it is you want the government to do stuff you like, but not stuff you don't like.RoadTrip said:
Do you consider social media writ? How was Rush's spoken opinions on subjects like small government different than intellectual prose on the same subject in 1980?HHusky said:Political conservatism was actually moored to conservatism writ broadly, and was intellectually and philosophically coherent in in 1980.
Rush helped to change that.
Missed by the right wing's rabble. No one else.
Small government is at best a rhetorical flourish required to pander to the stupidest voter a Republican can hope to convince to pull the lever for him come election time.
-
I like to say people have "changed the subject" when they have continued to talk about the subject, it's what I like to do.HHusky said:
So you'd prefer to change the subject.SFGbob said:
He cut spending and pushed for a line item veto that would have given him the authority to cut even more spending. He submitted budgets that cut spending and he called for the complete elimination of some Federal Departments. Obama never did any of this. You measure people by how you are Dazzler. You know that you're a dishonest and duplicitous hack and therefore you assume everyone else is like you.HHusky said:SFGbob said:
If spending alone could bring about an economic Recovery you man crush Obama would have had a booming economy. As a percentage of GDP spending actually shrank under Reagan.HHusky said:
Reagan was a big government spender. In good times (California) and bad (when he took the Presidency).RaceBannon said:
SureHHusky said:
RR never shrank a government in his life. It wasn't remotely a touchstone of his governing philosophy.RaceBannon said:
I do know better and I'm not a pathological liar like youHHusky said:
Yes. Twice.RaceBannon said:
And you voted for him twice. AllegedlyHHusky said:
As if Ronald Reagan ever did anything to shrink government at any level.RaceBannon said:Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. - HHutzky
Other than the guy H claims to have voted for twice in the 80's
He was an adept politician. He paid lip service to lots of things. Unfortunately, in a Western democracy, it is crucial to capture some reasonable share of the gullible vote.
Gullible is your middle name. RUSSIA
He wasn't remotely like what you gals now imagine, though you were there and should know better. Alas, not everyone can age well.
I never voted for Reagan
RR was all about shrinking government and doing what government is supposed to do. Defend the country
What he wasn't was beloved or treated fairly by the slime ball media which is what I have been telling the GALS for over a year now as they got the vapors over Trump
You GALS are always worried about a GOP dictator then whine like GIRLS when they aren't and go along with Congress and stuff
Reagan stood for less government. You didn't and you don't
You're a fraud and a loser. And a sucker
That's not a criticism on my part. It's a big part of the reason the early 80s economic recovery was so rapid.
Sort of. The ratio shrank under Reagan to where it had been at the beginning of his presidency from the highs it had grown to during his presidency. Almost exactly the same as Obama, btw.
Wise. -
As opposed to flatulence per all your other posts.HHusky said:
Why don't you just say . . .PurpleThrobber said:
I'm just here to seek out 4 fuck off posts by the Dazzler so I can lay down the 5th bury post hammer.DerekJohnson said:This could have been a meaningful thread but it went into the toilet.
?
Flattering.
-
No habla gibberish. I pity your imaginary clients.HHusky said:
Pseudo intellectual Gasbag informs us that the guy who shrank government employment is a socialist.WestlinnDuck said:
Just not a voting issue for the dazzler. He proudly voted for barry because he was clearly the most fiscally responsible alternative.HHusky said:
You and I might disagree on the details, but I agree with you in principle.greenblood said:
I think "small government" should be replaced with "limited government". Government will never be small, but it should be limited when it can be.HHusky said:
Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. It's not an intellectually honest pursuit and neither political party has ever pursued it, regardless of what they said during a campaign. It's a fantasy. And all most of you ever mean by it is you want the government to do stuff you like, but not stuff you don't like.RoadTrip said:
Do you consider social media writ? How was Rush's spoken opinions on subjects like small government different than intellectual prose on the same subject in 1980?HHusky said:Political conservatism was actually moored to conservatism writ broadly, and was intellectually and philosophically coherent in in 1980.
Rush helped to change that.
Missed by the right wing's rabble. No one else.
Small government is at best a rhetorical flourish required to pander to the stupidest voter a Republican can hope to convince to pull the lever for him come election time. -
This is the Dazzler classic. Obama didn't shrink Federal government employment. First of all whenever people make this claim you always need to be careful of what they are citing. Often they are counting the military or Post Office workers as Federal Employees. In 2008 Federal Employment was at 2,763,183. In 2016 it was at 2,800,000. Besides, Obama didn't want people working for the government he wanted them on Food Stamps and Welfare.HHusky said:
Pseudo intellectual Gasbag informs us that the guy who shrank government employment is a socialist.WestlinnDuck said:
Just not a voting issue for the dazzler. He proudly voted for barry because he was clearly the most fiscally responsible alternative.HHusky said:
You and I might disagree on the details, but I agree with you in principle.greenblood said:
I think "small government" should be replaced with "limited government". Government will never be small, but it should be limited when it can be.HHusky said:
Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. It's not an intellectually honest pursuit and neither political party has ever pursued it, regardless of what they said during a campaign. It's a fantasy. And all most of you ever mean by it is you want the government to do stuff you like, but not stuff you don't like.RoadTrip said:
Do you consider social media writ? How was Rush's spoken opinions on subjects like small government different than intellectual prose on the same subject in 1980?HHusky said:Political conservatism was actually moored to conservatism writ broadly, and was intellectually and philosophically coherent in in 1980.
Rush helped to change that.
Missed by the right wing's rabble. No one else.
Small government is at best a rhetorical flourish required to pander to the stupidest voter a Republican can hope to convince to pull the lever for him come election time.
-
The dazzler doesn't do numbers and sh*t. All about the feels.
-
That also doesn’t include federal contractors like the ObamaCare Gruber guy who bragged that Americans were stupid so they’d be able to pass it. No federal payroll limits for federal contractors.SFGbob said:
This is the Dazzler classic. Obama didn't shrink Federal government employment. First of all whenever people make this claim you always need to be careful of what they are citing. Often they are counting the military or Post Office workers as Federal Employees. In 2008 Federal Employment was at 2,763,183. In 2016 it was at 2,800,000. Besides, Obama didn't want people working for the government he wanted them on Food Stamps and Welfare.HHusky said:
Pseudo intellectual Gasbag informs us that the guy who shrank government employment is a socialist.WestlinnDuck said:
Just not a voting issue for the dazzler. He proudly voted for barry because he was clearly the most fiscally responsible alternative.HHusky said:
You and I might disagree on the details, but I agree with you in principle.greenblood said:
I think "small government" should be replaced with "limited government". Government will never be small, but it should be limited when it can be.HHusky said:
Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. It's not an intellectually honest pursuit and neither political party has ever pursued it, regardless of what they said during a campaign. It's a fantasy. And all most of you ever mean by it is you want the government to do stuff you like, but not stuff you don't like.RoadTrip said:
Do you consider social media writ? How was Rush's spoken opinions on subjects like small government different than intellectual prose on the same subject in 1980?HHusky said:Political conservatism was actually moored to conservatism writ broadly, and was intellectually and philosophically coherent in in 1980.
Rush helped to change that.
Missed by the right wing's rabble. No one else.
Small government is at best a rhetorical flourish required to pander to the stupidest voter a Republican can hope to convince to pull the lever for him come election time.
H is being intentionally dishonest again.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/223578-obamacare-architect-lack-of-transparency-helped-law-pass?amp
November 10, 2014 - 05:13 PM EST
ObamaCare architect: 'Stupidity' of voters helped bill pass
-
The Left is so full of class. This is a complete lie yet is allowed on Twitter.
Liberalism is a mental illness. They’re coming for you next if you disagree with their cult.
-
Rush was a stupid Dumbfuck. Just like Trump.
And just like their trailer park leg humpers. -
Ronnie single handedly broke the Soviet Union. Worth every fucking penny!HHusky said:
Reagan was a big government spender. In good times (California) and bad (when he took the Presidency).RaceBannon said:
SureHHusky said:
RR never shrank a government in his life. It wasn't remotely a touchstone of his governing philosophy.RaceBannon said:
I do know better and I'm not a pathological liar like youHHusky said:
Yes. Twice.RaceBannon said:
And you voted for him twice. AllegedlyHHusky said:
As if Ronald Reagan ever did anything to shrink government at any level.RaceBannon said:Nobody with an ounce of intelligence has ever believed that "small government" is a realistic or a worthy objective. - HHutzky
Other than the guy H claims to have voted for twice in the 80's
He was an adept politician. He paid lip service to lots of things. Unfortunately, in a Western democracy, it is crucial to capture some reasonable share of the gullible vote.
Gullible is your middle name. RUSSIA
He wasn't remotely like what you gals now imagine, though you were there and should know better. Alas, not everyone can age well.
I never voted for Reagan
RR was all about shrinking government and doing what government is supposed to do. Defend the country
What he wasn't was beloved or treated fairly by the slime ball media which is what I have been telling the GALS for over a year now as they got the vapors over Trump
You GALS are always worried about a GOP dictator then whine like GIRLS when they aren't and go along with Congress and stuff
Reagan stood for less government. You didn't and you don't
You're a fraud and a loser. And a sucker
That's not a criticism on my part. It's a big part of the reason the early 80s economic recovery was so rapid.
Neglecting the military requires rebuilding the military. It ain't cheap. -
He SHIT right on your FACE so much you had to come post about him. ScatLakeTroll is back out of jail?MontlakeBridgeTroll said:Rush was a stupid Dumbfuck. Just like Trump.
And just like their trailer park leg humpers. -
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/rush-limbaugh-mock-aids-gays/NorthwestFresh said:The Left is so full of class. This is a complete lie yet is allowed on Twitter.
Liberalism is a mental illness. They’re coming for you next if you disagree with their cult.
Maybe it’s time you got to know the piece of human shit that was Rush Limbaugh.
