Obama To Rebuild U.S. Fastener Industry

I'm guessing you're not old enough to remember the Reagan Presidency.

Am I right?

 

I'm guessing you're not quick enough to pick up on that post.

 

Specifics. Couched in the specifics of the plan itself.

Not ideological objections.

 

Look, all I'm saying is that some people say that Republicans have a serious problem with optics, what with racist signs at tea party rallies, Jonah Goldberg being overweight, and Reagan's inability to properly convey government bloat. If Republicans want people to agree with what they're selling, they need to seriously work on their optics, elsewise they're going to be in trouble in 2012. Some people say that Reagan's inability to give that speech without a teleprompter is an issue. I'm just saying the facts, people.

 

He was dubbed "The Great Communicator".

Before FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, or the internet, Reagan had an ability to go over the heads of the media and communicate directly with the American people.

Dems hated him for it. Belittled him as an actor. He was called the teflon President because criticism didn't stick to him.

The incident you're portraying was a highlight of his Presidency.

Reagan had a Democratic Congress his entire Presidency, yet he was able to accomplish much of his agenda specifically because he "took it to the American people", as President Obama would say.

 

Some people say that Reagan's "taking it to the American people" was ineffective because he used those binder clips instead of just letting the stack of papers properly show government bloat, and that the Great Communicator was anything but. According to some numbers, Reagan's inability to properly show this government bloat because he- accidentally, one would hope- used the binder clip is a big issue for Republicans. It makes sense; how many Republicans rail on government spending but still gobble subsidy after pork spending after subsidy? If only Reagan would've properly shown government bloat without the use of a binder clip, Republicans could've succeeded. I'm just stating the facts, people.

 

Should I criticize each specific spending proposal & tax increase? What's the point? I'm sure there are worthy projects included in the bill, but they don't deserve Federal dollars.

I don't think we should be raising any taxes.* Do I need to list each one?

*(Eliminating "loopholes" is fine, if it's part of an overall reform of the tax code, but not to pay for more stuff we can't afford.)

 

You tried to make a actual point and failed. You're now trying to portray it all as sarcasm and parody.

It's not working. It's not funny.

 

So what you're saying is that after spending a week bleating about how you wanted to know what was in the plan, where's the plan, where's the plan, where's the plan?!?!!??!?!, you've decided to ignore what's in the plan and just go ahead and oppose it on ideological grounds.

You know, I think, I THINK, we all saw that coming.

 

It would appear as if some people are getting a little testy. Inability to take a joke would lead one to believe that the idea of getting rid of government bloat wouldn't pass the Applebee's salad bar test, that is, to win down Appalachian and mid-American voters, clarity of message is key. I'm just saying that some people say that the more-government-for-me-less-for-thee Republicans who currently control the party wouldn't be as such if Reagan was more properly able to convey how crippling government bloat is. Instead, he organized his stack of papers using binder clips, a critical error. I'm sorry your feelings are hurt by this, but some people say that taking a joke in stride is necessary.

 

And fasteners!