"Ray Fischer" <rfischer_at_bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:c3e52g$plb$1_at_bolt.sonic.net...
> William Graham <weg9_at_comcast.net> wrote:
> >"Paolo Pizzi" <paolopizziNOSPAM_at_sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> >> Bill Tuthill wrote:
>
> >> > What's a liberal? The term has been so overused that it has
> >> > no meaning any more.
> >>
> >> The funny thing is that most conservatives believe that liberalism
> >> and communism are synonymous and therefore all liberals are
> >> just a bunch of "commies."
> >>
> >>
> >Well, most of the liberals I know think it would be a good thing for the
> >government to take everyone's money and then give some of it back to each
> >person according to his need.
>
> Whereas the Rpeublicans take everybody's money and then keep it for
> themselves.
>
> > They are already taking about 50% of
> >everyone's money, and doling it back to the, "poor",
>
> Nope. To the rich.
>
> Simple exercise: Look at the amount of money you are paying in
> federal income taxes. Divide by six. That's how much you're paying
> every year on Reagan's borrowing. That pays just the interest.
>
> And I bet you didn't get nearly as much in benefits as you've been
> paying over the years.
How much is the removal of Nuclear destruction via Soviet threats worth?
I'd say it's worth substantially MORE than it cost.
People quickly forget how real that threat remained in light of the
increasingly desparate USSR.
Reagan's military spending was literally the nail in the USSR's coffin.
They were spending 30-40% of their GDP on military, while we spent about 4%.
They couldn't keep up, but drove themselves into oblivion trying.
Thank you, Mr. Reagan.
