UPDATE: Dana Milbank in today's Washington Post: "Aspiring RNC Chairmen Wonder: What Would Reagan Do?:
Luckily, all six RNC candidates agreed on a solution to the party's woes: They would say Ronald Reagan's name over and over, as if it were a tantric incantation.
Anuzis quoted Reagan in his opening statement. Former Ohio secretary of state Ken Blackwell lamented that too many Republicans "campaign like Ronald Reagan and then govern like Jimmy Carter." Saltsman talked about his high school days: "Ronald Reagan was president, and he got me excited."
Katon Dawson, chairman of the South Carolina GOP, tried to top that. "I was inspired as a college graduate by a fellow who walked in the room by the name of Ronald Reagan."
The five GOP chairman candidates (maybe we should call them the Washington Generals, since they're all losers) just voted for their favorite Republican president, and it was a rout.
Reagan 5.
Lincoln...who's that?
I guess the rule here is that, by definition, the best Republican president can't be anyone that a Democrat might pick. That's a shame, because as the song (not by Cher, unfortunately) says, "he freed a lot of people." Maybe that's the problem. Also, shouldn't Ike get an honorable mention.
Tear down this myth.
Blogger's note: Changed the headline from the original because....I can. It's my blog.
Posted by Will Bunch @ 8:21 PM
Permalink |
65 comments
For those Attytoodians who don't already know...The Sloth believes, and I mean truly believes that HIS OPINION trumps fact, as evidenced in this quote pulled directly from one of his previous posts. **Please note, that in his last post he made the adjustment to nix the operative word (IMO-in my opinion) to try and hide his obvious FRAUD.** *"But the single, biggest factor is, in IMO, the fact that for all the competing companies insurance costs are a non-factor."* Exposed once again as the fraud, lackey, liberal coward he is.
Here's the point you refuse to visit Talking Pillow Sniffer: The Big 3 were in trouble, by THEIR OWN ADMISSION, since 2002. That fact completely debunks and kills your arugument that the current financial crisis is now a mjor part of their problems. It's contributing now of course, but the Big 3 along with everyone who has a pulse knows they've been introuble LONG before the current credit crunch set it so it's a moot point. Toyota's problems ARE a direct reflection of the credit crunch. But they will be able to survive, because unlike the Chrysler shut down, they won't have to pay wages to people sitting on their couch like the labor mafia here demands. You on the other hand have tried and tried again to sell the idea that nationalized healthcare would have let the Big 3 avoid their self-manufactured disaster, and thus they would be flush with capital and cars would be flying off the lots in bundles of a thousand. You are completely wrong, you do nothing but add spin to your statements, accuse me of doing so when I quote you, and then try and label me as a lackey, obsessive, etc. You have a simplistic knowledge of all things, but your enormously eronious ego will not let you accept the fact the you are wrong, that you are a complete fraud and that you'll never succumb to error. But I, and many others can see your spots...and your leotard. You are a fraud and a coward. People might actually give you a tad of respect if you would ever just stop with projecting your own complexes on others, but you'll never, ever let that happen because in your own eyes, you are god. Well, maybe you hold yourself behing your Obamessiah and of course your boy-toy Will Bunch. But please continue on making a fool of yourself, you're doing a great job of exposing that to the world. BBBBBWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCKKKKKKKK!!!!! You nitwit.
Did you look up "confidence interval" yet, bp? Are are you, in your far superior intellect, going to continue to claim that the range of an estimate is necessarily a measure of its validity? Lol!
---}}} GM's admission that their business model is a failed one is only further proof that your entire argument is BOGUS. {{{--- Still having that trouble with distortion, eh, bp? I said all along that the business model of the American companies was a contributing factor - but that the single biggest factor in their profitability relative to the foreign competitors was the $1200-$1500 per car they pay in healthcare costs. The reason I commented about Toyota was that you diminished the extent to which the financial crisis is a factor in the economic health of the Big 3. BTW, did you happen to notice which companies have suffered from the most significant sales loses recently? The worst was Chrysler. Any idea which companies had the next largest drops in sales? Take a wild guess, bp. Any comments? I'd imagine you would, since you talked over and over how drops in sales was due to the fact that "no one" wanted to buy American cars (and in doing so, calling huge numbers of Americans "no one."). LOL!
Also, stop trying to present your opinion as the expert analysis and as the final fact. You're just not as smart as you believe. But continue Yoga-Fail. LOL at the smartest human in the universe.
Nice try, but explain the correlation between Toyota shutting down for a month and GM's slow demise. You brought it up not me. And again you backpeddle, spin and run around in circles trying to cover your FRAUD tracks. The Big 3, as I have noted about 467 times by now, have been in trouble since 2002, by THEIR OWN estimations, not mine. But you try and draw parallels between their failed business model and Union stranglehold, to the current credit crunch which affords no leeway to businesses that rely on financing, like Toyota as if for some unforseen reason to everyone but you, that somehow they are related. They are not related, and GM's admission that their business model is a failed one is only further proof that your entire argument is BOGUS. Just admit that you are a complete agenda-pushing, leotard wearing, fraud contortionist and this will all go away. But we all know that will never happen with your superiority complex and obsession with attacking anything that does not fit into your extremist, elitist box. Go back to Canada you fraud coward.
I've explained it to you before, bp - but I'll explain it to you again. I realize that on the "atomic scale" sometimes it takes a while for complicated ideas to seep in. There are a number of factors that have affected all the auto companies negatively recently. There are also factors that have affected some companies more than others. All along, I agreed that some of those factors were superior business plans, manufacturing and inventory processes, inventory controls, etc., among the Japanese companies as a whole when compared to the American companies. All of those factors affect sales as well as profitability. However, the single biggest factor, IMO, that makes the difference in profitability between the American big 3 and the Japanese companies are health care costs for current employees and legacy costs including healthcare. Currently, GM loses hundreds of dollars every car the sell. They also pay some $1500 in ever car they sell for healthcare costs. That turns a profit for every car into a loss for every car. There. Understand now? Did you look up confidence interval yet? If not, look it up and get back to me. K?
No forget about that...explain how your not a fraud for your GM argument. You know, the one you tried to note in a terribly weak attempt to discredit me. Please, it will be fun for me watching you squirm like a cornered rat. Another liberal stool pusher backpeddling.
Oh - and btw: On 28 January 2008, the ORB (Opinion Research Business), an independent polling agency located in London, published an update based on additional work carried out in rural areas of Iraq. Some 600 additional interviews were undertaken and as a result of this the death estimate was revised to 1,033,000 with a given range of 946,000 to 1,120,000. I know that you use the "atomic scale," so you might have some difficulty interpreting that number, bp. Their estimate ranges from slightly below to somewhat above 1 million. Yes, bp, that would make "hundreds of thousand" a fair characterization. But go back to asserting that the range of an estimate, irrespective of confidence intervals, is a valid way to compare statistical analyses. Lol!
"But the single, biggest factor is, in IMO, the fact that for all the competing companies insurance costs are a non-factor." That's not a truncated quote pal, that's EXACTLY what you tried to peddle as fact...YOUR OPINION. Complete fraud. But please explain how now Toyota, who doesn't have the high healthcare costs, as you previously noted, lends anything redeeming to YOUR argument. You won't because you can't. FRAUD. LOL. Look up the terms PHONY, FRAUD, SCALLYWAG and CARPETBAGGER and get back to me, K? LOL DOPE.
So now healthcare costs are a non-factor for GM...because, you know, all the car companies are hurting, right? I'm still waiting for you to explain how Toyota shutting down for a month has ANYTHING to do with your earlier argument, you know, the one about how healthcare costs are what's driving GM into the ground. But,...*crickets* LOL FRAUD, LOL!!!
---}}} Your own sources have a range of 100K-793K...sounds like some reliable numbers. ---{{{ Lol! Look up confidence interval, bp. Get back to me. We'll talk. K? Doesn't change anything, anyway bp. As usual, you feel the need to use distortion to make your argument - just as you did when you deliberately mischaracterized my statements and truncated quotes from me to distort their meaning. Your source provided a range - and you only posted the number at the bottom of the range. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that you were the toady who lamely claimed that using a single-quote justified distorting a quote because it is an accepted convention for paraphrasing? Lol!
So if it's not the unions, and as you stated before, "the fact that for all the competing companies insurance costs are a non-factor", and Toyota doesn't have to deal with high healthcare costs, why would they be shutting down? It lends absolutely no merit or creedence to YOUR argument, by your own words, but gahead and cite that in support of your claims. I have proven that your case study of GM and why we should have nationalized healthcare is completely BOGUS multiple times, and now once again, as always you sway from your original assertion to try and further your already debunked argument. But keep it up, it makes my job of exposing you for the total fraud you are that much easier...you prove that yourself with each spin-filled post. LOL at the lackey dope who forgets the premise of his entire argument. LOL. And I'm sure you'll be replying to my posts till the wee hours opf the morning while you sit at home tugging it to Will's blog. LOL. Truly a pathetic existence. LOL.
Distorted? Your own sources have a range of 100K-793K...sounds like some reliable numbers. Why are every single one of your sources so far apart from one another? Now if they had a range of 90K-98K like mine did, they might seem a bit more reliable, but no your sources go from anywhere around 100K-800K. You probably make HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars a year too. So by your methods, you make anywhere between 90K-800K per year...that's a reasonable estimation. BTW, I never argued that the Toyotas of the world were not negatively affected by the credit crunch...I only argued that they can withstand the downturn, unlike GM who has been proven, and even voluntarily admitted that their business model was a complete failure, as well as noting that Union's make them unable to be competitive. Unlike your argument that hinged on your personal agenda of nationalized healthcare, when you stated AS FACT: "But the single, biggest factor is, in IMO, the fact that for all the competing companies insurance costs are a non-factor." Notice that little portion of the sentence "IMO" In My Opinion? So, as always, you propogate YOUR OPINION as FACT and then try and slither your way through the argument with nothing but spin. To date you have still avoided with all your might the simple fact that the UNIONS determine the acceptable benefits, not GM. So because of that simple fact, the UNION is to blame for the high cost of healthcare, not the insurers, because THEY, the UNION, determine what benefits are suitable for their employees, not the car company. We won't even get into the "Jobs Bank" that allowed the UAW to virtually steal money from the automakers, or the fact that the UAW has no interest in cutting their ridiculous wages for HS educated assembly line workers, about 65k per year, or the fact that you still think 44% marketshare split between 6 brands is somehow dominant when compared to a 24.5% marketshare between 2 brands. It was great owning you again. COWARD.
Lol! Even from your own source, bp, your post is a distortion. Iraq Body Count lists the range of deaths to be 90,253- 98,521. Further, that is only one of numerous sources of estimates: U.N. and Iraqi health researchers have estimated between 104,000 and 223,000 Iraqi civilians died from violence between the March 2003 U.S. invasion and June 2006. That's June, 2006. The Lancet study? March 19, 2003 - July 31, 2006; 426,369 - 793,663. The Brookings Iraq Index? May 2003 - August 14, 2008: 113,616. I guess you're calculating on an "atomic scale" yet again, eh bp? BTW, how's Toyota doing? Completely shut down manufacturing in Japan, eh? But you're right - it's the unions that's the problem. All those union demands in Japan are ruining their business model. Lol!
Comment removed.
"hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian deaths" Actually there has been UNDER 100k Iraqi civilian deaths (90,253). But sure, there's really no big difference between 90,253 deaths and "HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS." But leave it to the resident Spin Doctor, Table Pounding Sociopath to slightly embelish the numbers to fit his argument. I mean really, what's the big deal? 90K, or 275K...There only numbers people. Dope.
---}}} actually to date Iraq 4,147 dead and Afghanistan 631 dead slightly less than tens of thousands but who cares about facts {{{--- GO PHILLIES Look up the definition of "casualties" and get back to me. We'll talk. K?
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH I see , so will is obsessed with a dead guy ? , ok whatever floats your boat I suppose . I have to admit I dont see the facination with Lincoln , didnt he wage total war on the civilian population of the south ? wouldnt that in modern times make him a war criminal ? .
PAEnglish - yes, you are missing the point. Will is obsessed with bad mouthing Reagan - maybe he thinks it will help book sale (singular)
I really dont see the point of this , isnt it obvious that you will be inspired by people who lived in your time rather than a black and white photo or am I missing the point ? .
"Bush was my favorite Republican president. Sure, he got us involved in a pointless war, resulting in tens of thousands of US casualties" (actually to date Iraq 4,147 dead and Afghanistan 631 dead slightly less than tens of thousands but who cares about facts)....maybe the Republicans ask didn't want to pick a President who got got us involved in a war with 620,000 U.S. casualties.
A post at 10:32pm on 01/05/2009 by Table Pounding Sociopath???? No, he's not obsessed, everyone else is! And everyone is angry but TPS. And lackeys. And they're angry!!!! And toadies. And angry!!!!!!!!!! TPS is NOT angry!!!!!!!!!!! And TPS is NOT obsessed!!!!!!!!!!!
Will, fake Plebby makes a good point. And if I might add, why haven't you posted that Laura Bush thinks her husband won't be one of the country's worst presidents? That's newsworthy, isn't it? And what about the stop sign they just put up at the end of my block? It's turned at a slight angle so that it's not perfectly perpendicular to the street. Why no posts on that, Will? YOUR SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES, WILL. YOU'RE AN ANTI-STOP SIGN ACTIVIST!!!
Slow news day eh bunchie? Or just another day of the same old s***? How about Burris, Franken and the recount, Richardson, Panetta. How about Rice's recent comments on Bush? Your silence speaks volumes.
The fact of the matter is that both of these two great men are far better than any past Democrat presidents.
I wish I had a nickel for every reference to Reagan made on this site.
I'd probably be able to afford to purchase a seat in the senate. OK not the senate but I'm sure I could get on city council in Chicago...
btw, isn't it obvious why Lincoln woulddn't be an RNC chair candidates favorite president? I mean, he kicked the South's arse, duh.
For the record, Panetta was chief of operations and planning of the intelligence section when he was a young officer at Fort Ord. Cue the wingnut trashing of "army intelligence", lol!
You know, b.atkinson, President Ford also appointed someone with absolutely no intelligence experience to head the CIA in 1976. It was also a time shortly after the CIA had overly politicized by the executive branch and had been involved in activities of dubious legality. History has mostly judged that choice, G.H.W. Bush, as being successful.
BTW - I think that now is an appropriate time to point out that clearly, due to their direct experience in intelligence, the Bush appointments to head the CIA and other intelligence agencies were clearly unqualified successes. I mean, it's not like they failed to run their agencies in such a way as to prevent attacks on the U.S., collect accurate info on WMD in Iraq, you know, anything important like that.
Comment removed.
oops. shepherded.
Notice, taxmemore, I didn't defend Obama's appointment to head the CIA. Look up the definition of "toady" in the dictionary, and get back to me. K?
Just curious, taxmemore - did you happen to read any of the bi-partisan reports on the federal government response to Katrina?
Bush was my favorite Republican president. Sure, he got us involved in a pointless war, resulting in tens of thousands of US casualties and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian deaths. Sure, he shepparded the U.S. economy into the worst state since the Great Depression. Sure, he's done nothing to address environmental concerns. Well, yeah, he has sacrificed American moral authority to policies based on political expediency. But he gave up golf. I mean, seriously, has any other American president ever given up golf?
"awkward silence from the bush derangement syndrome folks who constantly slammed Brownie of FEMA a crony pick, while Captain O appoints a Clinton crony with no experience to a far more important post"
When that pick results in a destroyed American city with thousands dead and tens of thousands suffering, you will have a valid point. Until then, your statement is the usual Republican whining.
Yes TPS, Brownie was lousy at controlling the weather. Notice the improvement in the gulf during the last hurricane with a governor thats not a complete incompetent. And yeah, the CIA is no big deal, its not like we are living in dangerous times or anything.....why not give that one to Oprah as a nice thank you present for the support
Good point, taxmemore - because appointing a crony to head FEMA really didn't have much impact.
Of course, when Grover Norquist is asking the question, the respondents are going to answer with the last Republican president to cut taxes WITHOUT tanking the entire economy. The pity for Republicans is that all of the hopefuls are still toadying to Norquist. The 'Reagan as favorite' moment of the debate was far less notable to me than the 'my guns are bigger than your guns' moments that followed later. In fact, I do believe I may have heard Saltsman challenge Blackwell to a duel! Yikes, shades of Hamilton/Burr. Kudos to Steele for being his own man and offering a less predictable and toadying vision for the Republicans.
Comment removed.
Oh, and Will, day three, and still no mention of Bill Richardson. Way to wipe that one under the rug.
awkward silence from the bush derangement syndrome folks who constantly slammed Brownie of FEMA a crony pick, while Captain O appoints a Clinton crony with no experience to a far more important post
It seems like now Will can;t go a single day without somehow promoting his book. On another note, presidential rankings are often a waste of time because the people in the survey, even senior party members, usually do not know enough about past presidents to make an informed decision. That's why more recent presidents (like Clinton and Reagan) get ranked much higher -- they are fresh in people's memory. Reagan as a #1 GOP president? Hardly. I would probably go with Lincoln myself. Then again, Lincoln basicly wiped his arse with the Constitution, performing more unconstitutional executive acts that were struck down by the Supreme Court than the next 10 presidents combined.
If Abe had let the south go then we would have been spared 8 years of Bush. So maybe they got a point, since the Rebs essentially got everything else they wanted.
"Feel free to insert a lame bunch musical reference here." . . . Sure, bats. How about that old standard, na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey, good bye.
Will: You have to endure 4 years of Carter to get to REAGAN!
"I hear white sheets and hoods will be all the rage at the inaugural ball. Feel free to insert a lame bunch musical reference here."
Wow, who peed in your breast milk today?
Wow, 16 comments on a Reagan posting and not one Lech Walesa quote? C'mon Republican trolls, you can do better than that!
Alright no one wants Will to run for office. Let's concentrate on the players at hand (living people, not figments of our imagination). Burris, Blagojevich, Franken........ you know real political personalities that pervade the landscape. Abe and Ron are dead meat. We want something that's alive that we can sink our teeth into.
Comment removed.
Projecting yet again. I don't think the yoga is helping much Sloth. Try tai chi maybe?
I guess the RNC Chair candidates remember that all the Republic candidates for presidents claimed to be reincarnations of Reagan, so they wanted to promote their own candidacies by also invoking the Great Communicator. With Obama hinting that he is following Lincoln's practices or at least his ideals, even taking a train to the inauguration in imitation of Lincoln, the RNC candidates might think they were supporting the wrong party by saying "Lincoln." Indeed, although Lincoln was the first Republican president, his policies were the antithesis of recent Republican policies (going back at least to Nixon), so it makes sense that the RNC chairman candidates would not name him as a favorite.
Wow. Hard to believe, but it seems that batboy is even angrier than usual tonight. Three posts in less than 15 minutes - each one angrier than the previous. I guess not much is going on at the other Philly.com blogs, so all his hatred is getting directed towards Will?
Comment removed.
Comment removed.
One thing's for sure. Ronny had better hair.
Comment removed.
Every time the Democrats reveal how unintelligent some of their constituents are, Will brings up Ronald Reagan as if to appease the political gods that loom over the country. Will, Ron can't obscure all of the inane decisions made by Democrats that go through life with blinders on.
Comment removed.
Comment removed.
The only thing that I have to add to this picture is a picture of Will Bunch. Abe, Ron, and a big old portrait of Will Bunch....... If the American people can elect a SNL skit artist to the senate than I say lets give this guy a chance. At least Will reports on the political scene and doesn't use the political scene for satire..
"Will, wow, you're really looking to get crushed by batty, swifty, and the rest of that group, aren't you?" I'll be interested to see if they're willing to make the argument that Reagan was better than Lincoln, and to see their reasoning. So far, no one has taken up the challenge.
EVERYTHING the GOP elite (and not so elite) do is based on spin, research, PR and consultant-driven BS. They are functionally unable to utter a single thought that isn't predigested or carefully parsed prior to its utterance.
In other (less grandiose) terms, they can't (speak) nor handle the truth!
Which is why they were so completely routed this past November!
Piltdown Man
Will, wow, you're really looking to get crushed by batty, swifty, and the rest of that group, aren't you?
65 comments | View All | Paginate Comments
About Will Bunch
Will's book: Learn about it here and purchase it here.
Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.
Will Bunch, a senior writer at the Philadelphia Daily News, blogs about his obsessions, including national and local politics and world affairs, the media, pop music, the Philadelphia Phillies, soccer and other sports, not necessarily in that order.
E-mail Will by clicking here.
PLEASE COMMENT WITH PASSION...
...but not with racial slurs, potentially libelous allegations, obscenities or other juvenile noise. Such comments will, at our discretion, be deleted in their entirety, and repeat offenders will be blocked from commenting. ALSO: Any commenter advocating killing any government official will be immediately banned.
Thanks.
- Atrios
- Kiko's House
- Suburban Guerilla
- Booman Tribune
- All-Spin Zone
- Philly (Dragonballyee)
- Afro-Netizen
- Rowhouse Logic
- MyDD
- Bad Attitudes
- Billmon
- iFlipFlop
- CorrenteWire
- upyernoz
- Tattered Coat
- Fables of the Reconstruction
- Slacktivist
- Citizen Mom
- The Next Mayor
- Philly Future
- Philadelphia Will Do
- Philebrity
- Young Philly Politics
- Phillyblog
- Welcome to Phillyville
- Phawker
- A List of Things Thrown Five Minutes Ago
- Keystone Blog
- Philadelphia - America's Hometown
- BlankBaby
- Above Average Jane
- Phillyist
- Metroblogging Philadelphia
- The Clog
- Josh Marshall
- Daily Kos
- Juan Cole
- Oliver Willis
- Andy Borowitz
- War and Piece
- Wonkette
- BuzzFlash
- Raw Story
- Cursor
- Crooks and Liars
- Swing State Project
- Kevin Drum
- Talk Left
- AmericaBlog
- Hullabaloo
- Mad Kane
- Think Progress
- Jesus' General
- The Carpetbagger Report
- Majikthise
- Echidne of the Snakes
- David Sirota
- Glenn Greenwald
- TBogg
- Fire Dog Lake
- Taylor Marsh
- Matthew Yglesias
- Jon Swift
- Drudge Report
- Beer Leaguer
- The 700 Level
- Dick Polman
- Balls, Sticks and Stuff
- Shallow Center
- Philling Station
- Phillies Nation
- A Citizen's Blog
- The Good Phight
- Romenesko
- Editor and Publisher
- Pressthink
- Buzzmachine
- The Inksniffer
- Media Bloodhound
- Eat the Press
- Mickey Kaus
- Media (Huffington Post)
- Blinq
- The Corner
- Instapundit
- Andrew Sullivan
- Free Republic
- James Taranto
- Blonde Sagacity
- ScrappleFace
- Blogorrhea
Blog Roll
Get it now
Philly.com Promotions
- News | Sports | Business | What's Happening | Restaurants & Food | Entertainment | Living | Marketplace | Jobs
Site Services:
Classifieds:
- Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Rentals | Marketplace | Celebrations
Partners:
