[entropy12]

DO not get me wrong Reagan was 100 times better than the alternative at the time, Jimmy Carter.

But any president who allows federal spending to triple during 8 years flunks my requirements of a fiscal conservative. That list you presented completely ignores that fact. Cutting federal departments was very good, increasing social welfare spending was very bad. Net result was very bad. Spending increased during Reagan more than any previous president since WWII.

It is the NET RESULT which counts. If you cut your personal spending by 50% in clothes but then spend 200% more on a fancy car resulting in your total spending to triple, is the similar to what took place during Reagan’s 8 years.

I understand he had to deal with Tip O’Neill and democrat congress. But he did not exercise veto on all those increases in spending. He should have forced the democrats to override his vetoes. Them Reagan would have been a real hero in my book.

[SoConPubbie]

I understand he had to deal with Tip O’Neill and democrat congress. But he did not exercise veto on all those increases in spending. He should have forced the democrats to override his vetoes. Them Reagan would have been a real hero in my book.

You are still not getting it.

As long as he was dealing with the enemy in control of the House of Representatives and sometimes the Senate as well, In order to get what he wanted, he had to give them something they wanted.