It’s Reagan’s birthday!

06 Feb


Someone wished him happy birthday.

It’s also worth checking out the interview with a guy talking about quantum computers. Silly me. I thought time was natures way of making sure everything didn’t happen at once.


Posted by on February 6, 2014 in Uncategorized


21 responses to “It’s Reagan’s birthday!

  1. casper

    February 7, 2014 at 6:26 am

    Reagan wouldn’t be elected by today’s Republican party.

    • Cluster

      February 7, 2014 at 7:53 am

      See this is a good example of the disconnect amongst so many “progressives”. Reagan would win in another landslide amongst conservatives, in fact I would run to the polls to vote for him again. Progressives want to believe that the GOP is a old, white, curmudgeon, Hee Haw crowd, but it’s just not the case. 62 million people voted for Romney – 100 million would vote for Reagan.

      • mitchethekid

        February 7, 2014 at 2:11 pm

        Not so fast Qeeks Draw. Obama won 51.1% Romney 47.2%. Sure, almost 63 million voted for Romney. So what? Obama won the popular vote. In 2 Presidential elections. And where to get this 100 million figure from? But most importantly, how to you explain this. I’m very curious. And don’t attack the source. Check it out for yourself.

      • mitchethekid

        February 7, 2014 at 3:53 pm

        Know what Tired? Please re-submit what you said about Reagan and the Republican Party of today. I’ll publish it. In honor of Reagan of course.

      • Cluster

        February 7, 2014 at 6:10 pm

        Good questions amigo, and a good opportunity to bridge the disconnect. I will address the more salient points and allow the others to marinate in the opinionated, manipulated bullshit it deserves; i.e. the umbrella non sense.

        1. Separation of church and state – Reagan’s quote was simply the law of the land and what 99% of all conservatives agree with. What conservatives don’t, and what Reagan would not, agree with is mandating religious institutions to provide abortion coverage, specifically abortifacients. And actually the SC is also in agreement considering their recent injunction in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor.

        2. Amnesty – first of all, Reagan’s amnesty was the result of a compromise with the Democratically controlled Congress at the time and was to be in exchange for border security. The border security never happened, the amnesty did, which is why conservatives are reluctant to cut another deal. In terms of finding a way to legalizing the immigrants here, specifically those who were brought here as children – I think Newt Gingrich spoke to that issue very well in one of the 2012 debates, which is a common sense conservative position I agree with.

        3. Health Care – Reagan’s objection to socialized medicine is well documented. What he was speaking to in the quote was again simply the law of the land and you won’t find much objection amongst conservatives. I think the indigent should be treated, and the last time I read up on this issue, those costs amounted to approx. 2% of the health care industry, so not exactly a huge problem. I also need to remind you of an inconvenient truth – even after full implementation, the ACA still leaves 25 million people uninsured. So we really haven’t resolved much.

        4. The Iran Contra was a scandal AND SO IS the IRS. People testified, were held accountable and went to jail over Iran Contra. I would like to see the same happen with the IRS and Benghazi.

        The rest is just sensationalized opinionated crap.

        Hasta Luego

      • mitchethekid

        February 7, 2014 at 8:36 pm

        Abortifacients? It’s a newly minted word. To new for even spell check. And spell check is a stickler for accuracy. Pretty cool website, huh?!

      • rustybrown2012

        February 7, 2014 at 8:45 pm

        Yeah, Iran Contra was just like the IRS “scandal” – you know, except for the illegal trading of weapons to our sworn enemies, the illegal support of torture, rape, murder, mutilation and other war crimes, etc. – pretty similar though otherwise, eh Cluster?

      • mitchethekid

        February 8, 2014 at 8:01 am

        There must be a word that describes the thought process of the Japanese soldiers who didn’t know the war was over. Or people who consciously refuse to accept reality. Or people whose allegiance to an idea and the worship of a hero causes some kind of mental breakdown when confronted with the failures and flaws of the object.
        Iran Contra was more than a scandal. Senator David Vitter R Louisianna being caught wearing diapers in whorehouse is a scandal. Iran Contra was criminal. CRIMINAL Sure an argument can be made that they share some similarities. Horses are similar to Ocelots. It’s the severity of the wrongdoing that sets the difference, but it’s also who was involved and why. Iran Contra: Oval Office. IRS scandal: clearly not.
        But if you’re like Darrell Issa, a man with a mission, if you don’t get the results you want, the investigator is obviously in cahoots with the perpetrators and must be investigated!
        Get over it conservatives. It was 28yrs ago and Reagan was involved. Period. ”
        While President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the Contra cause,[7] the evidence is disputed as to whether he authorized the diversion of the money raised by the Iranian arms sales to the Contras.[3][4][8] Handwritten notes taken by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger on December 7, 1985, indicate that Reagan was aware of potential hostage transfers with Iran, as well as the sale of Hawk and TOW missiles to “moderate elements” within that country.[9] Weinberger wrote that Reagan said “he could answer to charges of illegality but couldn’t answer to the charge that ‘big strong President Reagan passed up a chance to free the hostages'”.[9] After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the United States did not trade arms for hostages.[10] The investigation was impeded when large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[11] On March 4, 1987, Reagan returned to the airwaves in a nationally televised address, taking full responsibility for any actions that he was unaware of, and admitting that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages".[12]"

      • Cluster

        February 8, 2014 at 8:27 am

        Well Watson usually chides me for dipping back into history to provide examples of wrong behavior to compare to current wrong behavior, so I am sure you will hear from him soon. People were jailed over Iran Contra so there was some criminality and it was fully investigated. So what? I will remind you that there are four on going investigations into the IRS issue, and the lead person. Lois Lerner, has pled the Fifth, so I wouldn’t consider it “over”.

  2. rustybrown2012

    February 7, 2014 at 8:56 pm

    Hey Cluster,

    Still no source for your claim that most state administered health care is more effective (whatever that means) than federally administered health care? Smells like horseshit to me.

    • Cluster

      February 8, 2014 at 12:13 am

      That would be your own scent Rusty

      • rustybrown2012

        February 8, 2014 at 12:26 am

        No it isn’t. You know what? I’m going to start a tally. The “Pulled From Cluster’s Ass” tally. I’m not counting the many, MANY times you’ve done this in the past but I’m starting now so this one goes in the books. The rules:

        1. It must be a statement claiming knowledge of fact. Opinions will not be counted.
        2. It must be a statement that I or others have thoroughly disproved OR a statement for which you did not provide evidence when asked.
        3. If you admit your error, I will remove it from the list. We all make mistakes.

        I’m excited about this! Good fun for everyone, except perhaps you.

        As of 2/7/14, the Pulled From Cluster’s Ass Tally stands at: 1

        BTW, feel free to start a similar tally with me. The number will remain at zero, because I don’t make things up to argue my points.

      • Cluster

        February 8, 2014 at 5:57 am

        Well first of all Rusty, your game is adorable. I think it’s important that children create ways to keep their minds active and this is a good exercise for you. Secondly, it’s really no secret that most states, and I think all, have some level of government administered healthcare. Here in AZ it is called ACCESS – not sure what they call programs in other states, except of course Massachusetts and Romneycare. Now just from a legal standpoint that all states have to balance their budgets, all of those state based programs need to be reconciled and balanced, therefore forcing states to be efficient and cost effective with their programs. Obviously the federal government is not constrained by a balance budget amendment and that is why we have out of control spending on all fronts including healthcare. I read this article the other day which reinforced my “opinion” (there’s that word again), on why and how states can deliver healthcare more effectively. It’s a good read, but if there are too many big words for you, let me know.

        Finally I just want to point out that you have a penchant for posting links and “opinions” from such notable and honorable sources such as Media Matters, and maybe unbeknownst to you – those are most often opinions and not facts either. Just saying. Have a super fun Saturday and please keep me posted on the progress of the game.

      • rustybrown2012

        February 8, 2014 at 9:58 am


        First of all, as far as Media Matters is concerned, that’s a fine media analysis site, a bit finicky at times but trustworthy; if you have a problem with the veracity of their material you should address it specifically. Funny how conservatives like you love to slander MM wholesale while never giving specific examples of their malfeasance.

        Second, I never said there was anything wrong with opinions. I love opinions. Here’s one now: you’re a blockhead. The problem is when you dishonestly transform opinion into fact as you routinely do and did after you read the article you linked to and concluded:

        Does every state have some level of government administered health care? Yes. Are those programs usually more effective than the federally administered programs? YES.

        There was nothing in that article that would lead an honest person to that conclusion. See, you could have said “some states administer their health care very effectively” or some such pablum and there would be no problem. But you are lying when you EMPHATICALLY declare that state administered health care IS MOST OFTEN more effective than national programs. That is an unambiguous statement of fact and you unceremoniously pulled it straight from your ass. Thus, sadly:

        Rusty’s Tally Of Facts Pulled From Cluster’s Ass : 1

        I feel for you. I understand you have to fabulate to support your idiotic opinions, but that’s not my problem.

        Finally, you know that whole ‘states have constricted budgets’ thing you mentioned? That’s not a good thing when administering health care with peoples lives on the line:

      • Cluster

        February 8, 2014 at 10:43 am

        Thanks again for keeping me posted on your game, it’s fun to watch children progress. And you are progressing (no pun intended – well okay maybe a little bit), in acknowledging the existence of state based programs. That’s a small step in the right direction. Now let’s address efficiencies and as you put it – “when peoples lives are on the line”. Let’s start with a state based issue. Just yesterday, residents of Connecticut learned that many doctors are opting out of the ACA, and I think we can all assume that that will have an impact on peoples lives:

        This is obviously a result of the ACA’s low reimbursement rates, and what’s not known is why the doctors didn’t opt out of Husky Healthcare – the state administered program prior to the ACA, but I have my suspicions. And since you are so concerned with “peoples lives”, and trust me, I am moved by that sentiment, you should know that access to “quality” care under the ACA is being more and more restricted:

        These two recent developments might suggest that federally administered health care certainly has some challenges that may not be a “good thing when administering health care with peoples lives on the line”.. Just some inconvenient truths for you mull over the weekend.

      • rustybrown2012

        February 8, 2014 at 11:13 am

        When comparing health care programs it’s only fair to compare programs that are equally established, not an established program to one which has not even been fully implemented and is going through understandable growing pains, as you deceptively try to do. Typical boring Cluster tactics: deflect, compare apples to oranges and post two negative articles on the ACA. Yawn.

        Want some examples of ESTABLISHED federal programs, Sparky? Medicare. Single Payer health care systems around the world. And nobody ever suggested that any large health care system, federal or otherwise, would be free of “challenges”, idiot.

        Rusty’s Tally Of Facts Pulled From Cluster’s Ass

        1. Does every state have some level of government administered health care? Yes. Are those programs usually more effective than the federally administered programs? YES. 2/7/14

  3. watsonthethird

    February 8, 2014 at 12:04 pm

    4. The Iran Contra was a scandal AND SO IS the IRS. People testified, were held accountable and went to jail over Iran Contra. I would like to see the same happen with the IRS and Benghazi.

    This is just a bizarre statement and indicative of a highly partisan mind. I’d expect something like this from tiredoflibbs. In the case of the so-called IRS scandal, you’re right that people testified and were held accountable. But nobody went to jail. Why? There is no proof that anyone broke the law. Only a minor difference there, Cluster.

    • Cluster

      February 8, 2014 at 12:40 pm

      Um ……… there FOUR ON GOING INVESTIGATIONS. And the person responsible for the oversight, Lois Lerner left her position, has pled the Fifth, and has lawyered up, so in a sense, only one person has been “held accountable” – Commissioner Steve Miller, who was let go in May 2013 and whose term ended three weeks later anyway in June – so not exactly a bold move.

      Now a curious person would wonder why you are so sure there is “no proof” anyone broke the law, when four investigations are still pending and Lerner won’t speak. But that must be due to that liberal crystal ball you guys pull out when needed.

      • Marner

        February 8, 2014 at 2:34 pm

        There are really only two active investigations: The DOJ and the Senate Finance Committee. The two House committees are Republican witch hunts. Interestly enough, none of the three Congressional Committees have come up with anything damning. Issa has been reduced to leaking doctored testimony that blows up in his face when the entire transcript is released.
        I don’t blame Lerner at all for refusing to testify in front of Issa. Why would you willingly talk to someone who has already publicly judged you guilty?

      • watsonthethird

        February 8, 2014 at 2:38 pm

        Well, Cluster, there’s this little thing we call “innocent until proven guilty.” You subscribe to that, don’t you? You do believe in constitutional protections as proscribed by the Bill Of Rights, don’t you?

        So if anyone is convicted of a crime related to the so-called IRS scandal, then at least you might draw some equivalence in that regard.

        You know, a “curious person” might seek to understand the motivations of Darrel Issa. A curious person would not unfailingly accept the Republican talking points hook, line and sinker. A curious person might acknowledge the evidence released by Democratic members of the investigating committee, and might wonder why Chairman Issa was so selective in his public releases of information. There are a lot of things a “curious person” might do, but you don’t do any of them.

      • Marner

        February 8, 2014 at 2:53 pm

        Uh oh…Looks like the IRS IG has some answers of his own to provide. I remember saying when this story broke that something was fishy about the IG and Issa. It seems the two of them are pretty cozy and like to spend quiet time together.

%d bloggers like this: