Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many liberals are too young to remember that speech. Ancient history. Maybe conservatives are stuck in the cold war?
Humans will always seek to enslave other humans.
It is this innate tendency of one man to oppress another that our founding documents seek to control by limiting government's power over the individual.
Cold War or no, that brand of conservatism is always relevant.
[quote=urbanlife78;32262773]I don't think you know what the word "deflect" means. I asked you a specific question from your OP, let me know when you wish to stop deflecting and answer that question.[/quote
It is this innate tendency of one man to oppress another that our founding documents seek to control by limiting government's power over the individual.
Cold War or no, that brand of conservatism is always relevant.
I don't think you know what the word "deflect" means. I asked you a specific question from your OP, let me know when you wish to stop deflecting and answer that question.[/quote
What question was that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
What liberals are mad about with a speech from Reagan? And then are you ever going to answer the question about what wall you are talking about that liberals want to be built in the country?
I am still waiting for you to answer those two questions.
Reagan had nothing -- NOTHING -- to do with that wall coming down. Communism would still be alive and well today throughout the Eastern Bloc had it not been for Mikhail Gorbachev tearing down the Brezhnev Doctrine, and empowering his successor Boris Yeltsin by establishing a new legislature partially elected through the popular vote. He systematically -- and unintentionally, his intention was to reform communism, not disband it -- weakened the USSR's influence over itself and its satellite states.
The Soviet Union had the absolute ability to crush each and every revolution of 1989. It chose not to, as Gorbachev believed there could be a more open, modern Communism. His failure to act enabled these revolutions, not anything Reagan did or said.
Reagan had nothing -- NOTHING -- to do with that wall coming down. Communism would still be alive and well today throughout the Eastern Bloc had it not been for Mikhail Gorbachev tearing down the Brezhnev Doctrine, and empowering his successor Boris Yeltsin by establishing a new legislature partially elected through the popular vote. He systematically -- and unintentionally, his intention was to reform communism, not disband it -- weakened the USSR's influence over itself and its satellite states.
The Soviet Union had the absolute ability to crush each and every revolution of 1989. It chose not to, as Gorbachev believed there could be a more open, modern Communism. His failure to act enabled these revolutions, not anything Reagan did or said.
lol.
Here's an example of a leftist who loved the Soviets and hated Reagan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
