Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (37499)	3/9/1999 9:37:00 PM
From: nuke44	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I served under every President from LBJ to Clinton. I can say with some authority that President Reagan ranks head and shoulders above all other Presidents during that period in one important aspect. He had a clear vision of U.S. foreign policy and was unwavering in implementing that vision. Under him and later under Bush, continuing his policies, the U.S. was universally respected as the preemminent world power. It was feared by some and hated by others, but it was respected by all. Almost single handedly, through his policies he brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union by forcing it to try to match strength with strength, ruble for dollar. He stated early on in his first term that his goal was to end Soviet hegemony and he did it with a single mindedness that can't be matched by anything done by any other President since Truman turned Hiroshima and Nagasaki into still life sculptures. Some people will say that the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact was not a good thing, but they weren't there at the Brandenberg gate that night in 1989 to see the fruits of Reagan's efforts like I was. Now, as the rest of the world snickers at the impotence of U.S. foreign policy under Clinton, while our enemies strengthen their positions to challenge us, a hagiography for Reagan doesn't seem so inappropriate.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (37499)	3/9/1999 10:05:00 PM
From: George Coyne	Respond to of 67261

Danny boy, why are you so obsessed with trying to trash Reagan? Do you somehow think it will make your boy look better? Pitiful. G. W.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (37499)	3/10/1999 8:15:00 AM
From: Ish	Respond to of 67261

<<And on what basis do you say this, Ish? People who were there have a different opinion, as I've amply documented. As far as the President himself is concerned, Mr. Regan tends to reinforce views already familiar from press stories and others' memoirs. It's a view of President Reagan as a genial, optimistic man unconcerned with details of policy - a President who never once told his Secretary of the Treasury ''what he believed or what he wanted to accomplish in the field of economics.'' Donald Regan, Treasury Secretary during Reagan's entire first term. You know better than him? OK.>> Thanks for straightening me out. All these years I thought Reaganomics were Reagan's idea. So trickle down economics was Regan's idea and not Reagan's policy? Never knew that.