Bush Sucks and is Way Worse than Reagan (Yes or No?)

[seventhson]

Poll question: Bush Sucks and is Way Worse than Reagan (Yes or No?)

For all the adulation and self-comparison ( and media fawning) Bushie is laying out trying to attach himself to the corpse of a dead right wing reactionary and hack actor - I thought it might be useful to check and see if people REALLY think Bush is ANYTHING like Reagan or whether Reagan was, in fact, a worse president than Bush.

I also thought it would be useful for folks to attach to their answers (here or in another thread for this purpose) all the nastier things about Reagan that we remember (Iran-Contra, Kent State killing support, social security disability cuts, welfare mother jokes, the veto of legidlation designed to free Nelson Mandela and stop apartheid, the October surprise which left our hostages in chains until Reagan took the oath in 1981, the arms to Iraq and Iran, the Salvadoran death squads, etc., etc.)

It would be good to have all the bad things about Reagan in one place to remind us that despite his kindly and tragic old grin, he is not unlike an old wrinkled Nazi who loves his grandchildren and still loved his garden orchids, while wreaking death on humanity throughout much of his life

[LynneSin]

1. If there was no Reagan there would have never been a Bush

seriously, think about it. If Reagan never became president (which made Bush Sr VP and eventually president), we would have never had Bush Jr. as President. Heck he wouldn't have been governor.

Reagan legitimatized the neo-conservative movement which makes him 1000000000% worse than Bush Jr. Jr. is simply an extension of what Reagan started in the 80's. Since there were no Reagans that they could run for office (Ron's sexuality was always question, Michael was a loop job and they would have never run a woman), they looked for Bush's that could run in the 90/00 elections. Jeb really was their first choice for running for President, but Jeb lost in 1994.

Reagan will always be worse because he spawned that idiot in the white house now!

[seventhson]

2. Interesting perspective, but I disagree

Bush I might well have been president instead and things might be far worse today.

Reagan was always a front man for the right wing, never an architect. The Bushes were the architects of the fascist right and used Reagan as a trojan horse to get into the white house.

I personally think Reagan actually BELIEVED in what he said and did regarding God and communism, etc.. But I think Bush believes ONLY in greed. I always thought Bush was worse because he KNEW he was a crook, whereas Reagan did not really

[TheFarseer]

3. I have a feeling

we'll be seeing our friend Jeb in 2008, and when I say "our friend", I mean "that asshole"

[Sugarbleus]

4. I totally agree...

Reagan ushered in (live and in the flesh) the new conservative movement. He said it himself; that the Repubican party needed a change. His policies paved the way for GW. No question about it. If GW hadn't been able to run, it would have been someone equally as vile a neocon as they all are anyway and it all started with Reagan.

[coltman]

5. They could both suck the air out of an onion sack.

Raygun set blue collar, middle class America back 50 yrs.The No Go chimp in chief is dead set on distroying it.

[Spinzonner]

6. A choice between Tweedledum and TweedleDee

is no choice at all

Granted, Bush has raised budgetary irresponsibility to new heights and increased the body counts but Reagan's stupidity was was malignant as Bush's corruption.

[NoPasaran]

7. Reagan = Bush*

The only difference is Reagan could tell a joke.

[Jack Rabbit]

8. Reagan had a few virtues Bush does not

Reagan got along with people who didn't necessarily agree with him, such as Tip O'Neill, because he genuinely liked them. Bush is just manipulative. Reagan would never have stood for some of the mean spirited things that Bush does to those who cross him. Reagan would have found a way to keep Senator Jeffords in the GOP rather than make him feel that there is no longer a place for him in the party.

Reagan was not one of our truly great leaders, but at least he won two presidential elections. Bush hasn't won one yet. Reagan made many mistakes that continue to haunt us, but it was possible to recover from many. Bush seems on a mission to do irreparable harm to the institutions of government. While Reagan supported Contra thugs, he kept US combat troops out of a quagmire that had no justification at all. Bush has done that; the Iraq invasion will go down as one of the great foreign policy blunders in history.

[DaveSZ]

9. Hmm

I personally think Reagan would have been as bad as * if he had a rubber stamp Congress in his time.

Reagan's nutjob wing of the GOP also became the mainstream GOP after his tenure in office.

[Jack Rabbit]

10. You mean he didn't have one?

For six of the eight years Reagan was in office, the Republicans controlled the Senate. Republicans and conservative Democrats gave Reagan a working majority in the House.

I will grant your argument that today's Republicans are much less critical of Bush than those of the former time were of Reagan. On the other hand, we must bear in mind that our founding fathers built up a system of checks and balances which Bush has done more to tear down than Reagan even tried. Reagan generally respected the limits of presidential power; Bush does not.

Nevertheless, your point is well made. However, that has as much to do with Congress abrogating its responsibility in the face of an irresponsible chief executive as any active role played by Reagan in his time as opposed to the more active irresponsibility of Bush.

[rasputin1952]

11. Reagan had a semblence of humanity, albeit tiny...

bush is the spawn of satan...'nuff said.