21 Reasons Why Ronald Reagan Was a Terrible President

Updated on April 9, 2019
jeff61b profile image

Jeff is a computer professional who takes a great interest in politics and tries to always distinguish fact from opinion.

Official portrait of President Reagan, 1981
Official portrait of President Reagan, 1981

1. Reagan Supplied Weapons to America's Enemies

He armed Saddam Hussein's Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war despite the fact that it was widely known Iraq was using chemical weapons against civilian populations in violation of international law.

2. Reagan Ignored the Atrocities Committed by Saddam Hussein

Even after the whole world condemned Saddam Hussein for using chemical weapons to kill over 5,000 Kurdish civilians in Iraq, the Reagan administration continued to provide weapons and tactical information to Iraq. Iraq used this information to target its enemies with chemical weapons. Reagan even vetoed a UN resolution condemning Iraq.

3. Reagan Illegally Supplied Arms to Both Sides of the Iran-Iraq War

While he was supplying Iraq with weapons, Reagan also armed Iran during the Iran-Iraq War in direct violation of a U.S. law that he had signed.

4. Reagan Caved in to the Demands of Terrorists

After several Americans were taken hostage by terrorists in Lebanon, Reagan provided weapons to Iran in exchange for their release. Despite this concession, ultimately more hostages were taken.

Memorial to 241 Marines, soldiers, and sailors killed in the October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon.
Memorial to 241 Marines, soldiers, and sailors killed in the October 23, 1983 in Beirut, Lebanon.

5. Reagan Caved in to the Demands of Terrorists Again

After Reagan sent Marines to Beirut for a peacekeeping mission, a terrorist’s truck bomb killed 241 U.S. Marines. Reagan responded by immediately doing exactly what the terrorists wanted, pulling all the troops out of Beirut.

6. Reagan Was Weak in the War on Terrorism

After the bombing of the US Marine Corps barracks in Beirut, Reagan promised to track down and punish the terrorists who committed that horrible act. He never followed up on that promise.

7. Reagan Didn't Obey His Own Laws

He illegally supplied weapons to Nicaraguan rebels in violation of a law that he himself had signed.

8. Reagan Supported the Violent Overthrow of a Democratically Elected Government

He illegally supported the Nicaraguan Contras, whom he called “Freedom Fighters,” despite the fact that they killed civilians and wanted to overthrow the democratically elected government to restore the dictatorship that previously existed in Nicaragua.

9. Reagan Started an Unnecessary War to Divert Attention From His Failure in Beirut

Just days after the bombing that killed 241 Marines in Beirut, Reagan launched an attack on the island of Grenada to remove Cuban soldiers there. This successfully took attention away from the devastating loss of those Marines in Beirut.

10. Reagan Failed to Defend US From Saddam Hussein

USS Stark after 37 crew members were killed by an Iraqi missile on May 17, 1987.
USS Stark after 37 crew members were killed by an Iraqi missile on May 17, 1987.

When an Iraqi fighter jet fired a missile into a U.S. Navy ship in 1987, killing 37 men, Reagan did nothing in response to the attack. Iraq is still the only non-allied country to attack a U.S. warship without retaliation.

11. Reagan Helped Create Al Qaeda

The Reagan administration armed and supported the Mujahideen rebels in Afghanistan. Many members of the Mujahideen, like Osama bin Laden, used their experience in Afghanistan to help them form the terrorist organization Al Qaeda.

12. Reagan Supported the Racist Apartheid Government in South Africa

When the white minority in South Africa (just 10% of the population) brutally repressed the black majority, even denying them the right to vote, the U.S. Congress overwhelmingly passed the Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 to apply pressure to South Africa to end Apartheid. But President Reagan opposed any sanctions on South Africa and vetoed that bill. Congress was forced to override his veto.

13. Reagan Supported the Most Brutal Dictators in the World as Long as He Didn't Consider Them “Communists”

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.
  • He supported Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega. Later, when Noriega became too close with Fidel Castro, we suddenly considered him an enemy and removed him from power.
  • He supported Saddam Hussein when he committed the most brutal atrocities on Earth, killing thousands of his own people. Years later, when Saddam threatened our oil supply, we used these same atrocities as reasons to go to war with him.
  • He supported Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos even after Marcos killed his political rival and rigged his own reelection.
  • He supported the brutal regime in El Salvador when it was widely known that they were killing civilians, including Americans. After four American nuns were murdered by Salvadorian soldiers, Reagan’s Secretary of State defended the Salvadorians, suggesting that the nuns might have been shot while trying to run a military roadblock—but this wouldn't explain why they were also raped before they were killed.

14. Reagan’s Administration Had More Documented Corruption Than Any President in U.S. History

At least 138 Reagan administration officials, including several cabinet members, were investigated for, indicted for, or convicted of crimes. This is the largest number of any U.S. President. Many of them were pardoned by Reagan or President Bush before they could even stand trial.

  • Secretary of the Interior James Watt —Indicted on 21 felonies
  • Attorney General Edwin Meese —Resigned after investigations of corruption
  • Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger—Charged with Iran-Contra crimes and pardoned before going to trial
  • Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams—Plea bargained for Iran-Contra crimes and pardoned by President Bush
  • Two National Security Advisors Robert MacFarlane and John Poindexter—Pleaded guilty to Iran-Contra crimes and were pardoned
  • Three high ranking CIA officials, Alan Fiers, Clair George, and Joseph Fernandez —Convicted and pardoned for Iran-Contra crimes
  • At least nine Reagan appointees were convicted of perjury, lying to Congress, obstruction of Congress, or contempt of Congress

15. Reagan Frequently Repeated Bald-Faced Lies Even After They Were Publicly Revealed to Be Untrue

  • He told stories about having been a U.S. Army photographer assigned to film Nazi death camps. Reagan never visited or filmed any such camps.
  • He often told a story about a “Chicago Welfare Queen” who had 80 aliases and gotten $150,000 in welfare. She never existed but investigators did find one woman who had two aliases and received $8,000. Still, Reagan continued to tell the false version of the story.
  • He claimed that trees create more pollution than automobiles, an absurdly untrue statement that he literally pulled out of thin air.

16. Reagan Set Records for Budget Deficits

After criticizing President Carter for having a $50 billion deficit, Reagan’s own deficits exceeded $200 billion. He tripled the national debt in only eight years. Although Republicans blamed Congress for the deficits, all eight of the budgets Congress passed had less spending and smaller deficits than the budgets proposed by Reagan.

17. Reagan's Economic Policies Put Millions of Americans out of Work

When he took office in 1981, unemployment was at 7.5% and dropping. A few months after his economic policies took effect, unemployment began to rise again. Millions of people continued to lose their jobs for the next two years until unemployment exceeded 10%. It stayed above 10% for nearly a year, peaking at 10.8%. Three years after he was elected, unemployment was still higher than when he was sworn in.

Ronald Reagan wearing cowboy hat at Rancho del Cielo, 1976.
Ronald Reagan wearing cowboy hat at Rancho del Cielo, 1976.

18. Reagan’s Policies Allowed Hundreds of Thousands of Family Farms to Go out of Business or Declare Bankruptcy

By some accounts, nearly one third of all farms were at risk of being foreclosed during the 1980s. Reagan vetoed a farm credit bill that would have given farmers some relief. His popularity among farmers dropped so low that at one point when discussing the exportation of grain to other countries, Reagan joked that he would like to “keep the grain and export the farmers."

19. Reagan’s Financial Policies Caused the Savings and Loan Industry to Collapse

The financial deregulation and changes to the tax code that President Reagan enacted ultimately caused nearly 750 different financial institutions to fail. This cost taxpayers about $150 billion.

20. Reagan Robbed the Social Security Trust Fund to Pay for His Budget Shortfalls

After Reagan cut taxes for the rich, the tax revenue to fund the government was so small that the budget deficit grew to four times what it had been under Jimmy Carter. So Reagan “borrowed” hundreds of billions of dollars from the Social Security trust fund to pay the country’s bills. That money has never been paid back.

21. Reagan Largely Ignored the AIDS Epidemic while Tens of Thousands of People Were Dying of the Disease

Many conservatives in the 1980s believed that AIDS was God’s punishment for being gay. Ronald Reagan did not publicly talk about AIDS until the 6th year of his presidency. In 1986, when AIDS fatalities were doubling every year, Reagan proposed cuts in funding for AIDS research.

Questions & Answers

  • How does Donald Trump's scandal record compare to Ronald Reagan's?

    Trump has only been in office for two years, and he has more scandals than most presidents do in eight. If Trump is allowed to serve a second term, he could set a new record for the most scandals, most members of his administration going to prison, and most harm done to the country. Reagan was a terrible president, but Trump could be catastrophic.

  • Do you think Walter F. Mondale (who ran against Reagan in 1984) would have been a good president?

    Since I've listed a multitude of reasons why Reagan was a terrible president, it stands to reason that I do believe that Mondale would have been considerably better. I doubt a Mondale presidency would have had the countless scandals, graft, and corruption that we experienced from the Reagan presidency.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment
    • profile image

      e yes 

      5 weeks ago

      beans.

    • profile image

      Richard Darby 

      7 weeks ago

      One thing RR did right when gov of CA, he blocked a terrible make work project by the Corp of Engineers, to build an unnecessary dam and flood Round Valley. Round Valley is the heart and soul of the Mendocino County Pomo Indian reservation, and the home of most of the reservation residents. RR traveled to the reservation and sat down for lunch with my wonderful friend, Ida Soares, in the church yard next to her house after she wrote him a letter asking for his help...

    • profile image

      Jack 

      6 months ago

      Well Patty, you just demonstrated who the bully and abuser is, take a look in your mirror.

      I point out the truth and you make false accusations about me? You are the abuser!

    • Patty Inglish, MS profile image

      Patty Inglish MS 

      6 months ago from USA and Asgardia, the First Space Nation

      I will not be bullied and diminished by you, an abuser.

    • profile image

      Jack 

      6 months ago

      So the age was never raised to age 75 and to say Reagan was responsible for it being raised to 75 because there exist drafts of bills that have never been passed is disingenuous in the least.

      This is a typical demonization of Reagan, falsely blaming him for things that haven’t even occurred, you should be ashamed of yourself. He can’t enact a bill that hasn’t been passed by congress. He wasn’t a dictator, any law you wish to blame him for you can first blame the democrat congress of his time for first.

    • Patty Inglish, MS profile image

      Patty Inglish MS 

      6 months ago from USA and Asgardia, the First Space Nation

      The first two steps already fulfilled - to ages 66 and 67 - are in H.R. 1900: Social Security Amendments 1983, under the bold heading "Title II."

      Drafts of bills to institute further age increases to age 75 were prepared and kept for future use, according to my sources, and this preparation was not made public, but was officially communicated to government and nonprofit agencies for whom I worked, including Private Industry Council, OSU Colleges of Medicine and Public Health, and Welfare-to-Work (I saw the communication at all three).

      Current sources in my state's U.S. Senate offices and APA division on Adult Development and Aging suggest that these draft bills are still awaiting a green light. The good news, in my opinion, is that the increase to age 75 did not occur by 2020 as was predicted in the mid-1980s and 1990s.

    • profile image

      Jack 

      6 months ago

      And where does it say under the reagan administration the age for full retirement benefits to receive Social Security was raised to 75?

      I think your source is mistaken because

      I don’t see that anywhere on the social security website. There is this: If you start receiving retirement benefits at: age 62, you will get 75 percent of the monthly benefit because you will be getting benefits for an additional 48 months.

      But there is no rule raising the age to 75.

    • Patty Inglish, MS profile image

      Patty Inglish MS 

      6 months ago from USA and Asgardia, the First Space Nation

      Meeting minutes of the Ohio Industrial Commission and American Psychological Association meetings I attended in the mid-1980s, meeting of the Greater Columbus Area Chamber of Commerce I attended in 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986; and minutes of a Columbus City Council Meeting I attended in 1986; all based on reports from the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate; and, meetings of the OSU College of Medicine in 1993, 1994 and class presentation by OSU officials in my Epidemiology Class, Spring 1993.

    • profile image

      Jack 

      6 months ago

      “During the Reagan years, the age for full retirement benefits to receive Social Security was raised to 75, to be instituted across several years “

      Patty, What your source for that statement?

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      6 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Patty, I am sorry to hear about you personal experiences and the treatment by the federal agencies but this is not a reflection on the Reagan administration. The problem with social security is on going. The age of the retirement population is growing and people are living much longer...which is a good thing and a testament to our medical treatment and improvements such that people are living longer and healthier lives. Social security would have been insolvent if Reagan did not try to fix it but increasing FICA deductions and extending the retirement age...

      It probably needs to be adjusted in a few short years seeing how it is being depleted.

    • profile image

      NOYFOB 

      6 months ago

      SS and Medicare were bad systems created by democrat presidents. They have been kept alive by both parties.

      They should have been replaced with benefits like those given to Federal Workers. Instead of being servants, they enjoy the best and most expensive benefits of any workers.

      The real problem is the inequity between government workers and private workers.

      SS and Medicare are money drains, and so are those government benefits.

      It really didn't matter how bad was president Reagan, the fact is that neither party even tried to undue the 1986 Tax Reform Act where we the people lost our only real tax deductions. They could have been given back to us by any of the congresses that were in power since Reagan.

      And because of Obamacare, in 2013 congress per Obamacare raised the Medical Threshold Deduction from 7.5% to 10%. That is going the wrong way for the people. If Obamacare was affordable, it should gone down to 2% where we still have a few deductions.

      You can blame Reagan, but what about all the rest that came after him?

    • Patty Inglish, MS profile image

      Patty Inglish MS 

      6 months ago from USA and Asgardia, the First Space Nation

      During the Reagan years, the age for full retirement benefits to receive Social Security was raised to 75, to be instituted across several years - my cohort must wait until 67 right now. Additionally, every single one of my 100%-disabled patients receiving SSI or SSDI along with Medicare health insurance was removed from the programs. Only a portion of them were permitted to reapply. One older woman and recently former patient receiving SSDI and without family was in hospital long-term, unconscious, and in a back brace with all four limbs in traction - she was cut off SSDI and Medicare, and evicted from her apartment while unconscious. When she regained consciousness, the hospital began paperwork to discharge her for lack of insurance - with back brace and non-functioning limbs - to a homeless shelter, but she died.

      This maltreatment of people proven to be 100% disabled by even government evaluating physicians - who are hard to convince of total disability and rightfully so - after years of hard work and tax paying followed by mutilating injuries or Stage 4 cancer is damning and unconscionable.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      6 months ago

      Jack Lee -

      You are certainly entitled to your opinion, just as I am, but these facts are undeniable. Reagan did a lot of harm as president. Very little good resulted from Reagan's presidency.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      6 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Jeff, you remind me of the guy who was rescued by the fireman from his burning house and complained to the guy, what about my hamster?

      Reagan was a hero to many for his many great accomplishments. For you to cherry pick some items and claim he was the worst president just show how out of touch you are with reality.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      6 months ago

      You may not like what is written here about Reagan, but I don't see you denying any of the facts presented in this article.

    • profile image

      long live president Reagan 

      6 months ago

      Reagan was a great president.

      And what you are doing is disrespecting the president of the united states of America and that is NOT OK.

      I would like to see you do better at running the country.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      6 months ago from Yorktown NY

      This discussion on the electoral college is interesting. I seem to remember not too long ago when a Republican was going to loose the Electoral votes but had a small majority of the popular vote, the Democrats at the time defended the electoral college system. How time has changed. The shoe on the other foot...

      The electoral college system is a good one because it allows smaller states to be represented equally in election time. Otherwise, a large state like California can determine the out come of any election and all the candidates will focus all their campaign in just a few states and ignore iowa and New Hamshire and RI...

    • profile image

      barlos 

      6 months ago

      yall love commenting on something that means almost nothing, it happened and that cannot be changed. the facts are the facts and you guys can have your opinions but it wont change the fact that all this happened, accept it and move on.

    • Ewent profile image

      Eleanore Ferranti Whitaker 

      8 months ago from Old Bridge, New Jersey

      There is no doubt that politicians have abused the purpose of the Electoral College.

      Since the election of 2000, Republicans have relied entirely on 261 electors, all chosen by state legislators of the majority party to win elections.

      In 2016, according to the US government's report on the total number who voted in that year's election, it was a "record breaking" 135.7 million voters. So, how is it that 261 electoral votes matter more than that 135.7 million?

      I'll tell you how according to the hearings I've listened to on CSpan by the Supreme Court. (You can only :"listen" since there are no cameras allowed during hearings.).

      In several Republican states like NC, SC, TX, MI, WI and OH, Republican legislators got caught redrawing voting districts maps. When they did this, it had the effect of shoving more voters into Republican districts which then results in more electors in the Electoral College.

      There is no longer a real reason for the Electoral College other than to ensure a Republican president is elected even when the popular voters are trillion times what the 261 electoral voters are.

      There is another REAL reason to get rid of the Electoral College: it is technology obsolete.

      When Indonesia and Singapore feared meddliing in their elections by terrorist groups, they were forced to make a very serious change to their election process in order to ensure election integrity: The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and block chain filing systems.

      Here is how it works. The US Electoral College is based on the data from the US Census Bureau. Using AI and block chain, that data would start the election integrity ball rolling since the Census determines population numbers.

      When this is coupled with state population data and voter registries, It produces a clear and undefiled number of voters registered in each state. This data is entered into state voting computers where it can not only verify a voter's eligibility but retain an individual voting record of each voter's choices of candidates from election to election.

      All of this is done using block chain. An AI computer at the Census Bureau is linked to state AI computers in a seamless chain of records stored in "blocks" that cannot be rigged by politicians with ideas of grandeur.

      it removes the Electoral College since a national voting system using AI and block chain tabulate ONLY votes in each state and provide a fail safe tally for each candidate.

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino I 

      8 months ago

      Make no mistake, I am not name calling anyone. I referred to as a dimwit as an objective observation based on your ignorance of history and rejection of empirical data. That was NOT an ad hominem attack, it was based on the fact you don't seem to know much. Willful ignorance is not a protected class and should be condemned by EVERYONE, regardless of political affiliation. For your education, the Electoral College is antiquated, which is why NO OTHER democracy in the world uses it to choose their representatives and leaders. As a general rule of thumb, if a state needs more federal dollars than it collectively pays into the system in order to thrive, then maybe it shouldn't be a state. Just about every state in the Deep South needs federal welfare, coming from progressive blue states like CA, MA and NJ, in order to maintain their economies. When these states can stand on their own two feet without help from blue states, then and only then should they he allowed to have a say in our country's future. Mississippi provides ZERO value to the rest of the country. Why should we pay to keep them afloat?

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      8 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      Well, it has failed. What the electoral college does is give small states an advantage, allowing a minority of certain types of people to rule over the majority of us who live and pay taxes here, who strongly disagree with with everything they believe in!

      Time for the electoral college to go. No time to wait. It is causing America to crumble.

      It’s only logical.....it’s like forcing a square peg into a round hole. And this wil never work.

      We are NOT a country of white evangelicals, no matter what this ding dong president tells you.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      8 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Michael,

      Calling names won’t change anything. The fact is, the electoral system was put in for a soecific reason...to make sure all States, large and small gets equal treatment at election time.

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino 

      8 months ago

      Jack Lee,

      With all due respect, you are a dimwit. I am basing my assessment on your uninformed opinion of reality, history and facts. I support my assertions with verifiable statistics, like the fact that Republicans controlled the purse strings to government for 18 of the past 25 years. If you weren't into alternative facts, you would already know that. You rebut my arguments with diarrhea that spews out of your brain.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      8 months ago from Yorktown NY

      What? The Electoral College is not out dated. Those that think so have no understanding why it was done this way instead of just count the popular vote...

    • CELEBSFAN78 profile image

      Ara Vahanian 

      8 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      I think what gets lost in all this debate is that Americans should be grateful that they have a choice (to a certain degree) to elect their president. Those who utter these old talking points that Democrats destroyed the economy with taxation and overspending which they did not, those who try to debate these re-hashed talking points are missing that they should be grateful for having the chance to elect their politicians. Reagan wasn't the greatest President but he certainly was not the worst either, as critical as I have been of him in the past. Wake up and be grateful that you people have the chance to elect your leaders even if the Electoral College is old and outdated.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      8 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Michael, you are all wet.

      It is the Democrat that destroyed the economy with over taxation and deficit spending and America elects a Republican like Reagan and Trump to fix it...

    • profile image

      Michael Padrino 

      8 months ago

      Bradmaster,

      Do you remember who preceded Jimmy Carter? It was the guy who pardoned the criminal Nixon, or the first sitting president to impose wage and price controls on our free market economy. Nixon created the shitshow that Carter inherited, just like GW Bush created the shitshow that Obama inherited. America has been following this pattern for the past 45 years: a Republican president trashes the economy, only to have a Democrat come in and rescue it, then the American people get complacent and vote in another Republican who trashes it again, followed by a Democrat that has to save it, followed by another Republican that trashes it, etc, etc, etc. 90% of our national debt was accrued while Republicans controlled the White House and US Senate. Republicans have controlled the pursestrings to Congress for for 18 of the past 25 years. We have added over $2 trillion in new debt during Trump's first 2 years in office, when Republicans controlled ALL branches of government. You need to bone up on your history.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      8 months ago

      Brad -

      Yes, this article does contain my opinions. The title "21 Reasons Why Ronald Reagan Was a Terrible President" should have given you a clue that this article expresses an opinion.

      I state facts and I base my opinions on those facts. If you lived through the 1980s then you should remember, like I do, all the things I discussed in the article. Many of the facts I stated are so commonly known, it does not seem necessary to provide sources for all of them. If I said "The Moon orbits the Earth" I don't think I need to provide a source that proves the Moon orbits the Earth.

      However, (it seems redundant to have to explain this to you yet again), you can clearly see throughout the article that there are links you can click on to take you to other sources of information which confirm the facts I provided.

    • profile image

      bradmaster 

      8 months ago

      Michael

      When Reagan became president the prime rate was in the low twenty percent. Does that sound like a good number for Carter.

    • profile image

      bradmaster 

      8 months ago

      Jeff1b

      Delete yourself

      "his is getting ridiculous.

      Within your long, rambling comment with a multitude of talking points, you ask me to provide examples to “prove” that you write long, rambling comments with a multitude of talking points. Thank you for proving my point."

      What facts have you given, this who article is just your opinion. It is your article, you need to provide the facts..

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino 

      8 months ago

      The mess we are in today as a country began under Nixon, but the demise of the once great American middle class was put on steroids under Ronald Reagan. What Reagan taught to Americans was that spending beyond your means is okay, just put whatever you want to buy on a credit card that you have no intention of ever paying back. It is the same model that GW Bush used and that Trump is using today. Prior to Reagan, America was a fiscally conservative nation. It took 200 years to accrue our first $1trillon in debt, and it paid for a lot of good stuff, like the GI Bill, Tennessee Valley Authority, NASA & putting a man on the moon & Social Security, just to name a few. Reagan tripled that debt in just 8 years and got nothing to show for it, other than bringing Osama bin Laden to power and creating Al Qaeda with his foreign policy, along with getting 241 US Marines killed while they slept in their barracks in Beirut. Wait, there is more. Reagan also sold arms to a sworn enemy, Iran, and allowed the CIA to introduce crack cocaine into poor black neighborhoods in Los Angeles to fund his war against Nicaragua, because Congress refused to do so. He also presided over the savings & loan crisis that caused thousands of seniors to lose their life savings, opened the gate to illegal immigration from Mexico in order to allow cheap labor to flood in and bust our unions and did nothing to combat the AIDs crisis. There is so much more, but I am running out of space.

      90% of our national debt is BECAUSE of conservative economic & fiscal policies. Both Bill Clinton and Obama were fiscally prudent. The debt incurred on Obama's watch was mostly accrued from decisions implemented his predecessor, GW Bush and a fully controlled GOP Congress from 2001 until 2007. One year later Bush led America into the Great Recession of 2008. Obama had to spend the next 8 years digging us out of that mess, and he did a damn good job of it, leaving Trump with a flourishing economy and stock market. You can be assured when Trump leaves office, it will he similar to the same way GW Bush left office, only 10 times worse. We won't know the full extent of the damage Trump is doing to our country until 3 or 4 years down the road. When you have so many people still fooled by a charlatan, grifter and criminal, you know in your heart this is not going to end well.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      8 months ago

      tsadjatko -

      The rules are pretty simple.

      If you want to respond in a meaningful way to anyone's comment (even mine), you are welcome to do so. But if you continue to make personal attacks and to repost the same comment that you have already posted over and over again, I will delete it.

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      8 months ago

      The worst thing that Reagan did was the 1986 Tax Reform Act. That act eliminated the few deductions that could be used by the middle class.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      8 months ago

      T -

      Here is what Linda is talking about. This is from the Social Security web site.

      https://www.ssa.gov/history/studentbenefit.html

      When student benefits were repealed as part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, the Senate Budget Committee offered this explanation:

      "Although the committee believes that a child beneficiary's benefits should continue long enough to permit him a reasonable opportunity to complete high school, benefits for post-secondary students 18 and older should be gradually eliminated over the next several years. "

    • tsadjatko profile image

      8 months ago from now on

      Linda, can you give a source for that allegation? Cause I searched the internet and found nothing.

    • profile image

      Linda Hemenway 

      8 months ago

      Most Americans who are alive today are unaware that one of Reagan's worst mistakes was cutting off SS survival benefits to young people between the ages of 18 to 21 as long as they stayed in school.

      This extended benefit made a college education possible for tens of thousands of American students.

      Why would he deny this aid to students who would become future taxpayers?

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      9 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Eric, under our Constitution, Congress has the power of the purse string. They can choose to spend or not...and on which items...

    • profile image

      Eric 

      9 months ago

      Jack Lee -

      If you are going to provide facts make sure to get them right.

      It wasn't the Democrats in Congress who ran up the huge budget deficit. All eight budgets that were passed by Congress had less spending and smaller deficits than the budgets proposed by President Reagan.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      9 months ago from Yorktown NY

      Michael,

      Reagan lowered taxes and generated more revenue. It was the Democratic controlled Congress that over spent even more than they took in. The deficits was also to bankrupt the Soviet Union leading to the downfall and the tearing downof the Iron curtain.

      The debt was doubled from 9 trillion to 18 trillion under President Obama.

      The number is 50% of Americans live pay check to pay check not 80%.

      If you are going to provide facts, make sure you get them right.

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino I 

      9 months ago

      Ronald Reagan was the first American president to use the federal credit card to spend America out of a recession. Let that sink in the next time some uneducated conservative tries to tell you that you can't spend your way into prosperity. They really only say that when a Democrat is in the White House. Between 2017 and today, Republicans have already added over $2,000,000,000,000 to our national debt.

      What Reagan did when he tripled our national debt, spending more money than all of the 39 presidents that came before him COMBINED, was set a precedent for ALL future presidents to spend like drunken sailors in a whorehouse with a stolen credit card. Prior to Reagan, America was a VERY fiscally responsible country. Most adults didn't even own ONE bank credit card. You either paid with cash or check, and if you didn't have the money to purchase something you really wanted, several retail stores like Sears and Penny's, would allow you to put a piece or merchandise on "layaway". Reagan all but eliminated that term from the American lexicon and replaced it with "charge it!" Reagan ended the concept of delayed gratification. That is when America became a debtor nation, and we have never looked back. Today we are $22 trillion in debt, and it all began with a conservative ideology introduced by Jack Kemp, Grover Norquist and their chump, Reagan. They called the plan, "Starving the Beast". You youngins can Google the term if you's like to learn more about the GOP plan to reverse the New Deal and destroy the once great American middle class. Thanks to Reaganomics, 80% of Americans today live paycheck to paycheck, and oit dollar is worth about 25% of what it was worth in 1981.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      T -

      Sorry to disappoint you but it does not bother me where these surveys place Reagan.

      We're all entitled to our opinions. I listed 21 facts about Ronald Reagan that form the basis for my opinions. Nobody has successfully disputed any of the facts I listed. It is still crystal clear to me that Reagan had one of the most corrupt, scandal prone and harmful administrations in history.

      I Googled historian's rankings of US presidents and couldn't find this survey you posted. I found a lot of opinions about where Reagan should rank. I did find ONE where Reagan was number 9. Curiously, Barack Obama was number 8 in that survey.

      Since you value these surveys of historians so much, I'm sure you must fully agree that Obama was one of the best presidents.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      9 months ago from now on

      HISTORIANS SURVEY RESULTS

      TOTAL SCORES RANKINGS

      President's Name Final Scores

      Ratings——2017 2009 2000

      Abraham Lincoln 907 1 1 1

      GeorgeWashington 868 2 2 3

      Franklin Roosevelt 855 3 3 2

      TheodoreRoosevelt 807 4 4 4

      Dwight Eisenhower 745 5 8 9

      Harry S. Truman 737 6 5 5

      Thomas Jefferson 727 7 7 7

      John F. Kennedy 722 8 6 8

      Ronald Reagan 691 9 10 11

      Last 8 years or more Reagan in top ten so Jeff thinks that’s terrible? I can’t imagine what he thinks of the other 35 presidents who Historians (right, Jeff knows more than about 1000 historians?) rate worse than Reagan!

      Or maybe, just maybe Jeff doesn’t know what he is talking about? Naw, that can’t be true.

      Why?

      Because he’s so full of himself!

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Bradmaster –

      This is getting ridiculous.

      Within your long, rambling comment with a multitude of talking points, you ask me to provide examples to “prove” that you write long, rambling comments with a multitude of talking points. Thank you for proving my point.

      I state facts, which you copy and paste into your reply, then you say “where are your facts?” You already have them. They were right there in your post.

      You copied and pasted multiple facts I stated about Ronald Reagan and my expressed opinion that he was an awful president and a worse human being. You asked “Where are the facts?” You already have the answer. They were right there, in the clip you just pasted.

      You can disagree with my opinion about Reagan, but you cannot deny the facts that I stated to support that opinion.

      If you question my facts, you can look at my article about Reagan. Although everything I stated was common knowledge, I included links to sources that verify my facts so you don’t have to take my word for anything.

      You then asked about Trump and his campaign’s ties to Russia. The answer is right here.

      https://soapboxie.com/us-politics/21-Links-Between...

      Again, you don’t have to take my word for anything. Within that article are links to sources that verify the facts and go into more detail.

      You, however, frequently repeat debunked right wing talking points without offering any sources and offer them as facts. You also express opinions as if they were facts. You still don't understand the difference between fact and opinion.

      I have never attacked you, but I have grown tired of responding to your constant attacks on me. It is not worth the time or the effort to respond, point-by-point to every attack you make on me.

      I’m not insulting you when I call you a troll. Here are definitions of the word “troll”.

      One who posts deliberately provocative and argumentative messages with the intention of causing unnecessary disruption and argument.

      Someone whose only purpose is to antagonize other people in an online forum rather than engage in a discussion.

      A person who intentionally antagonizes others online by posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic comments or other disruptive content.

      Take your pick. Any one of these easily apply to you. If you want examples, just scroll down. All of your comments are textbook examples of trolling. I’ve wasted too much time responding to you already.

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff0b

      "Bradmaster –

      I've rarely ever heard you state any facts. You repeat long debunked talking points but you clearly don't fact check any of the talking points you copy and paste.

      B: I told you that I agree with those and they augmented my comments. When have you provided any facts, or argued against my comments with facts. You certainly are not doing it here by giving the left wing divert, attack, red herring, character assassination and distortion. What is your excuse for not arguing your points against mine?

      --------------------

      You’re doing what a lot of trolls do.

      B: This is a perfect example of attack, and name calling. This doesn't address my points, it tries to ignore them.

      -------------------

      You type out a long rambling comment with a multitude of talking points

      B: What examples do you have to prove that statement, which is another example of not arguing your point, but attacking the person. That is off topic when you attack a person instead of the points that they make?

      --------------------

      – many of which are off-topic

      B: Examples, and in what way?

      --------------------

      or I have already responded to

      B: This is an example of how you respond, attack the person not their points.

      -------------------

      – and then you whine if I don’t respond to each and every one of them yet again.

      B: Respond yes, but as in this example you don't give any arguments to support your points, and that should be the goal of a response.

      -------------------

      In addition to being completely off-topic, your comments fall into the “But what about Hillary?” bucket which is a waste of time.

      B: I mention Hillary when it is appropriate. For example, you didn't really argue any opposition about Hillary and the Uranium One, you just dismissed it, no facts.

      -------------------

      So go ahead and whine.

      B: What I see here is that you are the one that is whining. Once again, no arguments on my points just attacks and red herrings.

      ------------------

      I don’t have the time or the desire to continue debunking the same, sad right-wing talking points over and over again."

      B: First of all I am not right, left or any wing. I got that Crowder link because it came up in a search. I don't watch any cable news. My writing is my thinking alone. I don't get influence by other people much less those that can't tell the difference between a response and an answer. Your last comment continues with you avoidance of discussion of the actual issues.

      Look back at your responses and where do you see yourself discussing an issue as opposed to your comment here which is representative of your responses.

      ------------------------------------------

      1. As always, you're welcome to post your opinions and even a link to an article if you want, but don't copy and paste entire editorials from other sources.

      It is not necessary to filibuster here to express your opinion.

      ------------------------------------------

      2. “What about the Uranium One deal that Obama and Hillary gave to Russia. “

      Here is the Uranium One “deal”.

      A Russian company bought 51% of a Canadian mining company. Canada approved the sale. Nine US federal agencies approved the sale. No Republican objected to it at the time.

      Hillary Clinton had very little to do with it.

      No uranium went to Russia. Not one ounce. All the uranium remained in the United States.

      The End.

      ---------------------------------------------------------

      3. Jack Lee –

      “Since when Iran gave up their nuclear ambitions? The Obama Kerry deal was a joke. We gave then billons in cash and get little to show for it but a delay of their program.”

      You are dead wrong.

      Iran gave up their enriched uranium. We know this because international inspectors removed it.

      Iran gave up their centrifuges and other equipment for developing nuclear weapons. We know this because international inspectors removed it.

      Iran complied with the conditions of the treaty because international nuclear inspectors were able to enter the country on a 24/7 basis to inspect any site they like anywhere in the country and they confirmed that Iran was in compliance.

      Also, we did not “give” Iran billions of dollars. We unfroze some of Iran’s assets that were frozen by the Obama Administration for the purpose of forcing Iran to the negotiating table.

      Perhaps you were in a cave somewhere for the past 5 years since you didn’t know any of this.

      -----------------------------------

      4. Bradmaster -

      You say

      "You seem to be fixated on Iran and Iraq and president Reagan."

      Perhaps you didn't notice, but this is an article specifically about President Reagan. I have written about other presidents and issues in other articles.

      "So what presidents since Regan what did they do better with Iran and Iraq?"

      Well, Obama successfully got Iran to give up their nuclear weapons program, give up their enriched uranium, give up most of their centrifuges and agree to 24/7 inspections by international nuclear inspectors to prove they are in compliance. It was declared to be the most comprehensive and thorough nuclear treaty in history by nuclear experts.

      ------------------------------------

      5. Bradmaster -

      No other president had as many scandals as Reagan. Not Clinton, not G. W. Bush, Not even Nixon. Nixon had more overall members of his administration go to prison but that's mostly because Reagan pardoned a lot of the people in his administration. Reagan had more Cabinet level people resign in disgrace or indicted for crimes than any other president.

      There is very little good that ever came from the Reagan presidency.

      B: This is probably the closest to the issue

      -------------------------------------------

      6. eff61b

      7 weeks ago

      If someone disagrees with the content of this article they are welcome to post their views. But if you just want to hurl insults and spew obscenities, then I will delete your comments.

      --------------------------------------------

      7.Trapsixtey23 -

      If you're going to make claims about falsehoods in this article, then you should back them up. Since you cannot do that, then you are tacitly admitting that everything in this article is 100% true and accurate.

      B: Something you have not done yourself. When people argue their points.

      -------------------------------------------

      8. TSAD -

      Thank you for confirming everything I said. Once again you just stated your opinion and passed it off as "facts".

      You clearly don't understand the difference between an objective fact and a subjective opinion.

      This is a trait I find common in conservatives.

      Here is an objective fact: deregulation of our financial system has repeatedly been followed by financial collapse and the loss of trillions of dollars by the American public while a small number of rich, powerful people rake in billions of dollars in profits.

      So here is an opinion based on that fact: We need a lot of financial regulations to protect the American people from the greed of the wealthy, powerful few who would otherwise enrich themselves by victimizing millions of everyday middle class Americans.

      B: We only have your word that it is not just opinion, but one based on fact. What makes that sense any more factual than your opinion?

      -----------------------------------------

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      40 yrs is long enough.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Bradmaster –

      I've rarely ever heard you state any facts. You repeat long debunked talking points but you clearly don't fact check any of the talking points you copy and paste.

      You’re doing what a lot of trolls do. You type out a long rambling comment with a multitude of talking points – many of which are off-topic or I have already responded to – and then you whine if I don’t respond to each and every one of them yet again.

      In addition to being completely off-topic, your comments fall into the “But what about Hillary?” bucket which is a waste of time.  So go ahead and whine. I don’t have the time or the desire to continue debunking the same, sad right-wing talking points over and over again.

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff

      What is the difference? A link or the actual words. It is obvious that I agree with it, and that is the same as my opinion. But what you fail to do is argue my points, but instead now you want to critic my commenting. It be more responsive if you could challenge the points made instead of playing hall monitor.

      Because of the way that you run this article, I don't feel it is worth commenting when you don't want to respond to my comments. It is obvious that you would rather have people make ridiculous baseless accusations and comments then one grounded in facts.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Bradmaster -

      As always, you're welcome to post your opinions and even a link to an article if you want, but don't copy and paste entire editorials from other sources.

      It is not necessary to filibuster here to express your opinion.

    • CELEBSFAN78 profile image

      Ara Vahanian 

      9 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      Actually Reagan didn't create Al Qaeda. They were building up strength in 1979 when they went to war against the Soviet Union. Reagan was not yet President in 1979, it was Jimmy Carter.

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      9 months ago

      Leslie McCowen

      "They are too caught up in active measures.....this crap has been going on a very long time. The vast right wing is no lie.....they started on the Clintons back in Arkansas."

      B: And there was cause to investigate, more than on Trump today.

      ------------------------------------------------

      "Where do you think the Obama Birtherism came from? Bircher/Birther/Tea Party/ Trump."

      B: Being an American Citizen is one of the few requirements of the president, unlike tax returns which are not.

      ------------------------------------------------

      "When a president of the United States can say democrats are executing babies after they’re born, and people are ok with it.....it’s over. There is no coming back from that. They are too deep in the hatred of liberals, which is a major theme of this group."

      B: Aren't the democrats for pro choice, which allows abortions into the 3rd trimester. Those babies didn't come back either.

      ------------------------------------------------

      “Liberals have destroyed America” I/e our white nation

      B: What white nation? Liberals, Democrats, Progressives, and anti Trumpers are destroying America.

      “Liberals hate America” I/e our Christian nation

      B: Liberals, democrats, progressives, and anti Trumper's are the anti American. Resisting the president, grid locking the congressional process to impeach or use any means to get Trump out of office before 2020. They are doing the same work as those people that want to take down the US.

      ---------------------------------------------------

      “Sometimes you have to water the teee of Liberty” I/e use guns on liberals, which 2 members here said they would do if need be,

      B: Who said that, when and what was the context.

      ------------------------------------------------

      And which their president alluded to as well, “second amendment solutions if Hillary wins”

      B: WILMINGTON, N.C. — Donald Trump said Tuesday that if Hillary Clinton gets to pick Supreme Court justices, there’s “nothing you can do, folks … although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is.”

      Trump’s ambiguous comments alarmed some political observers as to whether he was threatening her life or calling for increased political activity.

      Robby Mook, Clinton’s campaign manager, issued a one-sentence statement in response to Trump.

      “This is simple — what Trump is saying is dangerous. A person seeking to the be president of the United States should not suggest violence in any way,” he said.

      But Jason Miller, Trump’s senior communications adviser, said Trump was merely talking about Second Amendment supporters large influence as a group.

      “It’s called the power of unification — 2nd Amendment people have amazing spirit and are tremendously unified, which gives them great political power. And this year, they will be voting in record numbers, and it won’t be for Hillary Clinton, it will be for Donald Trump,” he said.

      The GOP nominee sought to rally voters Tuesday highlighting the next president’s role in selecting Supreme Court justices and his commitment to the Second Amendment.

      “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks,” Trump said before pausing and adding: “Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. ”

      Trump has repeatedly suggested that Clinton will “abolish” the Second Amendment.

      The former secretary of state has never called for the abolition of gun rights, but has called for additional gun regulations and safety checks to reduce the number of deadly gun shootings in the US.

      Trump has vowed not to further restrict gun purchases in the US and earned the endorsement of the National Rifle Association, the pro-gun lobby.

      ----------------------------------------------------

      "They think that because the white Europeans came here and took it by force, those of us here buy into it. I don’t. In my mind, the real heritage is Indigenous. White Christianity is an add on. An overlay. But underneath is the real heritage of this land. And we all can draw from it."

      B: What is your point?

      --------------------------------

      Because the land is older than us all. The earth is ancient. And, as Robbie Robertson says, “nothing is forgotten, only left behind”.

      B: What is your point, what is your reference?

      --------------------------------------------------------------

      What was done here is atrocious...the history is atrocious.

      That’s why the overlay will never work.

      The earth is not an atrocious planet, and the indigenous peoples here know better.

      B: Based on what do you make these statements?

      ---------------------------------------------------------------

      And that’s the other thing.....white people are indigenous, too. Our ancient tribes have more in common with other indigenous groups than the Christianity that’s been put on top.

      B: What is the topic?

      -----------------------------------------------------------------

      Hatred will never win. It’s the wrong intention.

      B: Then why do you and the others HATE! Donald Trump in any form?

      ---------------------------------------------------------------

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      9 months ago

      Michael

      You said, "Reagan will best be remembered for these things that had a lasting consequence on American culture.

      1) Helped to create Al Qaeda and bringing Osama bin Laden to power."

      --------------------

      B: My response

      "September 19, 2014

      How the US Helped Create Al Qaeda and ISIS

      by Garikai Chengu

      Much like Al Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS) is made-in-the-USA, an instrument of terror designed to divide and conquer the oil-rich Middle East and to counter Iran’s growing influence in the region.

      The fact that the United States has a long and torrid history of backing terrorist groups will surprise only those who watch the news and ignore history.

      The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in rather simple terms: on one side, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, which America regarded as a Soviet tool; on the other side, Western nations and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the struggle against the Soviet Union.

      The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan, General William Odom recently remarked, “by any measure the U.S. has long used terrorism. In 1978-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against international terrorism – in every version they produced, the lawyers said the U.S. would be in violation.”

      During the 1970′s the CIA used the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as a barrier, both to thwart Soviet expansion and prevent the spread of Marxist ideology among the Arab masses. The United States also openly supported Sarekat Islam against Sukarno in Indonesia, and supported the Jamaat-e-Islami terror group against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan. Last but certainly not least, there is Al Qaeda.

      Lest we forget, the CIA gave birth to Osama Bin Laden and breastfed his organization during the 1980′s. Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, told the House of Commons that Al Qaeda was unquestionably a product of Western intelligence agencies. Mr. Cook explained that Al Qaeda, which literally means an abbreviation of “the database” in Arabic, was originally the computer database of the thousands of Islamist extremists, who were trained by the CIA and funded by the Saudis, in order to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan.

      America’s relationship with Al Qaeda has always been a love-hate affair. Depending on whether a particular Al Qaeda terrorist group in a given region furthers American interests or not, the U.S. State Department either funds or aggressively targets that terrorist group. Even as American foreign policy makers claim to oppose Muslim extremism, they knowingly foment it as a weapon of foreign policy.

      The Islamic State is its latest weapon that, much like Al Qaeda, is certainly backfiring. ISIS recently rose to international prominence after its thugs began beheading American journalists. Now the terrorist group controls an area the size of the United Kingdom.

      In order to understand why the Islamic State has grown and flourished so quickly, one has to take a look at the organization’s American-backed roots. The 2003 American invasion and occupation of Iraq created the pre-conditions for radical Sunni groups, like ISIS, to take root. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. occupation caused vast unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and closing down factories in the naive hope that the magical hand of the free market would create jobs. Under the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost hundreds of thousands of jobs. Unlike the white Afrikaners in South Africa, who were allowed to keep their wealth after regime change, upper class Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their assets and lost their political influence. Rather than promoting religious integration and unity, American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, from which Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.

      The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have a different name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group rebranded and refocused its efforts on Syria.

      There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria: one between the government and the rebels, another between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and yet another between America and Russia. It is this third, neo-Cold War battle that made U.S. foreign policy makers decide to take the risk of arming Islamist rebels in Syria, because Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, is a key Russian ally. Rather embarrassingly, many of these Syrian rebels have now turned out to be ISIS thugs, who are openly brandishing American-made M16 Assault rifles.

      America’s Middle East policy revolves around oil and Israel. The invasion of Iraq has partially satisfied Washington’s thirst for oil, but ongoing air strikes in Syria and economic sanctions on Iran have everything to do with Israel. The goal is to deprive Israel’s neighboring enemies, Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine’s Hamas, of crucial Syrian and Iranian support.

      ISIS is not merely an instrument of terror used by America to topple the Syrian government; it is also used to put pressure on Iran.

      The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the U.S. has been engaged in over 53 military invasions and expeditions. Despite what the Western media’s war cries would have you believe, Iran is clearly not the threat to regional security, Washington is. An Intelligence Report published in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies, confirms that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way around.

      America is using ISIS in three ways: to attack its enemies in the Middle East, to serve as a pretext for U.S. military intervention abroad, and at home to foment a manufactured domestic threat, used to justify the unprecedented expansion of invasive domestic surveillance.

      By rapidly increasing both government secrecy and surveillance, Mr. Obama’s government is increasing its power to watch its citizens, while diminishing its citizens’ power to watch their government. Terrorism is an excuse to justify mass surveillance, in preparation for mass revolt.

      The so-called “War on Terror” should be seen for what it really is: a pretext for maintaining a dangerously oversized U.S. military. The two most powerful groups in the U.S. foreign policy establishment are the Israel lobby, which directs U.S. Middle East policy, and the Military-Industrial-Complex, which profits from the former group’s actions. Since George W. Bush declared the “War on Terror” in October 2001, it has cost the American taxpayer approximately 6.6 trillion dollars and thousands of fallen sons and daughters; but, the wars have also raked in billions of dollars for Washington’s military elite.

      In fact, more than seventy American companies and individuals have won up to $27 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan over the last three years, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity. According to the study, nearly 75 per cent of these private companies had employees or board members, who either served in, or had close ties to, the executive branch of the Republican and Democratic administrations, members of Congress, or the highest levels of the military."

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      They are too caught up in active measures.....this crap has been going on a very long time.

      The vast right wing is no lie.....they started on the Clintons back in Arkansas.

      Where do you think the Obama Birtherism came from? Bircher/Birther/Tea Party/ Trump.

      When a president of the United States can say democrats are executing babies after they’re born, and people are ok with it.....it’s over. There is no coming back from that. They are too deep in the hatred of liberals, which is a major theme of this group.

      “Liberals have destroyed America” I/e our white nation

      “Liberals hate America” I/e our Christian nation

      “Sometimes you have to water the teee of Liberty” I/e use guns on liberals, which 2 members here said they would do if need be,

      And which their president alluded to as well, “second amendment solutions if Hillary wins”

      They think that because the white Europeans came here and took it by force, those of us here buy into it. I don’t. In my mind, the real heritage is Indigenous. White Christianity is an add on. An overlay. But underneath is the real heritage of this land. And we all can draw from it.

      Because the land is older than us all. The earth is ancient. And, as Robbie Robertson says, “nothing is forgotten, only left behind”.

      What was done here is atrocious...the history is atrocious.

      That’s why the overlay will never work.

      The earth is not an atrocious planet, and the indigenous peoples here know better.

      And that’s the other thing.....white people are indigenous, too. Our ancient tribes have more in common with other indigenous groups than the Christianity that’s been put on top.

      Hatred will never win. It’s the wrong intention.

      https://youtu.be/6GgUyZ4F7CU

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Bradmaster –

      “What about the Uranium One deal that Obama and Hillary gave to Russia. “

      Here is the Uranium One “deal”.

      A Russian company bought 51% of a Canadian mining company. Canada approved the sale. Nine US federal agencies approved the sale. No Republican objected to it at the time.

      Hillary Clinton had very little to do with it.

      No uranium went to Russia. Not one ounce. All the uranium remained in the United States.

      The End.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Jack Lee –

      “Since when Iran gave up their nuclear ambitions? The Obama Kerry deal was a joke. We gave then billons in cash and get little to show for it but a delay of their program.”

      You are dead wrong.

      Iran gave up their enriched uranium. We know this because international inspectors removed it.

      Iran gave up their centrifuges and other equipment for developing nuclear weapons. We know this because international inspectors removed it.

      Iran complied with the conditions of the treaty because international nuclear inspectors were able to enter the country on a 24/7 basis to inspect any site they like anywhere in the country and they confirmed that Iran was in compliance.

      Also, we did not “give” Iran billions of dollars. We unfroze some of Iran’s assets that were frozen by the Obama Administration for the purpose of forcing Iran to the negotiating table.

      Perhaps you were in a cave somewhere for the past 5 years since you didn’t know any of this.

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino I 

      9 months ago

      Reagan will best be remembered for these things that had a lasting consequence on American culture.

      1) Helped to create Al Qaeda and bringing Osama bin Laden to power.

      2) Getting 241 US Marines killed in Lebanon, and then "cutting and running" from the region.

      3) Inducing the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s.

      4) opening our borders to illegal immigrants from Mexico to cheapen to the labor pool in order to break the unions, and then granting them amnesty.

      5) Selling arms to Iran, a sworn enemy, to fund terrorists in Nicaragua to overthrow a democratically elected government.

      6) Ignoring the impending AIDs crisis in order to prevent the disease from turning into a full blown epidemic, unlike President Obama who squashed the Ebola Crisis that Republicans were shitting themselves over back in 2014. Obama said, "I've got this!", and he did. It turned out to be no big deal thanks to Obama.

      7) Improving the depravity and proliferation of pornography in the USA, by opening up the market to Russian and Czech women, who can and will do things that nobody ever conceived was possible, until Reagan exposed them to free market capitalism. Young American women wanting to break into the industry had to step up their game in order to compete with the Ruskies.

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      9 months ago

      Leslie

      Just kidding, what exactly is "your comment"?

    • profile image

      bradmasteroccal 

      9 months ago

      Leslie, I can't respond, Jeff has not published my comment.

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

    • profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Leslie

      "Jack and Brad do nothing but parrot rightwing fake news.

      It’s so old and tired by now.

      Trump thinks he’s better than Reagan, so why don’t you two agree? Reagan wasn’t that great. Trump says so."

      B: Yes, you are! You offer nothing!

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      Jack and Brad do nothing but parrot rightwing fake news.

      It’s so old and tired by now.

      Trump thinks he’s better than Reagan, so why don’t you two agree? Reagan wasn’t that great. Trump says so.

    • profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff1b

      What Jack said.

      And what about the Uranium One deal that Obama and Hillary gave to Russia. Now according to the unAmericans in the US congress and their supporters here, they want Trump to piss off Russia into another cold war, or even a real war.

      The point is that these comments do belong here even though your title

      "21 Reasons Why Ronald Reagan Was a Terrible President"

      They belong here to define "Terrible" by showing Regan wasn't terrible. If you want to concede that your points may make Regan look in a somewhat bad light without reference, then I agree. But terrible is more an accusation than a fact.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      9 months ago from Yorktown NY

      What? Since when Iran gave up their nuclear ambitions? The Obama Kerry deal was a joke. We gave then billons in cash and get little to show for it but a delay of their program.

      That is why Trump reversed it.

      You are so foolish for believing everything the Obama administration feeds you.

      Can I sell you the Brooklyn bridge?

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Bradmaster -

      You say

      "You seem to be fixated on Iran and Iraq and president Reagan."

      Perhaps you didn't notice, but this is an article specifically about President Reagan. I have written about other presidents and issues in other articles.

      "So what presidents since Regan what did they do better with Iran and Iraq?"

      Well, Obama successfully got Iran to give up their nuclear weapons program, give up their enriched uranium, give up most of their centrifuges and agree to 24/7 inspections by international nuclear inspectors to prove they are in compliance. It was declared to be the most comprehensive and thorough nuclear treaty in history by nuclear experts.

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      You.

    • profile image

      BradmastersOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Leslie McCowen

      B: What is this? Who are you talking to?

      -------------------------------------------------------

      "Well, that is true. He sent Mika's dad there....on a mission from God. (as usual)

      They were fighting Russia, and we still are.

      No big deal, we do it all the time. Once an enemy, now a friend and vice versa: Saddam Hussein.

      LBJ?......not going there. too many think he had Kennedy killed.

      Iran Contra was true...and they all got away with it. And, in fact, many people speculate that HW Bush really ran Reagan, not the other way around.

      and NO, i would not TOUCH anything about or by Trump with a 10 foot pole. I don't want cooties!"

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      Well, that is true. He sent Mika's dad there....on a mission from God. (as usual)

      They were fighting Russia, and we still are.

      No big deal, we do it all the time. Once an enemy, now a friend and vice versa: Saddam Hussein.

      LBJ?......not going there. too many think he had Kennedy killed.

      Iran Contra was true...and they all got away with it. And, in fact, many people speculate that HW Bush really ran Reagan, not the other way around.

      and NO, i would not TOUCH anything about or by Trump with a 10 foot pole. I don't want cooties!

    • profile image

      brademastersOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff61b

      You seem to be fixated on Iran and Iraq and president Reagan.

      So what presidents since Regan what did they do better with Iran and Iraq?

      Obama

      Dec 01, 2013 · Officials refuse to say who knew about the gun walking. The Mexican government say 211 people have been killed by guns from Fast and Furious, including police officers.

      https://nypost.com/2013/12/01/book-excerpt-how-ame...

    • profile image

      BradMastersOCcal 

      9 months ago

      "President Trump claims in a new book that he is "far greater than Ronald Reagan" and says conservative columnists don't get him enough credit for his accomplishments."

      *stunned silence*

      B: Did you read the book?

      ------------------------------------

      And its always a matter of opinion, but Historians do get special consideration. its like everything else, you have to weigh the good with the bad.

      I did not like Reagan, and think he did far more bad than good. But i am not a historian.

      Jeff lays it out fantastically.

      And you all are free to disagree.

      B:

      Jeff hasn't responded to any of the arguments against his opinion, and neither have you. This is not about president Trump this is about presidents that have completed their terms. So Trump is not ready for the historians, because history is not current events.

      -----------------------

      Maybe you might like to argue #11 on Jeff's list? I gave my argument in my last comment.

      Also, what are your thoughts on LBJ versus Regan?

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

      "President Trump claims in a new book that he is "far greater than Ronald Reagan" and says conservative columnists don't get him enough credit for his accomplishments."

      *stunned silence*

      And its always a matter of opinion, but Historians do get special consideration. its like everything else, you have to weigh the good with the bad.

      I did not like Reagan, and think he did far more bad than good. But i am not a historian.

      Jeff lays it out fantastically.

      And you all are free to disagree.

      And no im not getting wiser, just less cantankerous.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      9 months ago from now on

      And what does Trump have to do with Reagan? But I’m glad you agree that Reagan can’t be bad being rated in the top ten...(according to your link)... you are getting wiser Leslie

    • profile image

      BradmasterOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff, here is the correct answer for number 11.

      Al-Qaeda: Al-Qaeda, broad-based militant Islamist organization founded by Osama bin Laden in the late 1980s. It began as a logistical network to support Muslims fighting against the Soviet Union during the Afghan War and transformed into the active terrorist organization known for carrying out the September 11 attacks of 2001.

      [Search domain www.britannica.com/topic/al-Qaeda] https://www.britannica.com/topic/al-Qaeda

      BTW, it was president Bill Clinton that led Osama Bin Laden get away after the 1993 bombing of the WTC. Had Clinton got OBL maybe there wouldn't have been a 911, certainly not an OBL 911.

    • profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      9 months ago

      ARA

      "

      Who were the Presidents of the cold war?

      In chronological order: Harry s. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower , John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Regan, George Bush Senior.....

      Who was president when the Cold War ended?

      Answer . George H.W. Bush declared a formal end to the cold war. However, it effectively ended during the Reagan Administration.

      "

    • lovemychris profile image

      Leslie McCowen 

      9 months ago from Cape Cod, USA

    • tsadjatko profile image

      9 months ago from now on

      I guess all historians got this wrong

      https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2017/?page=o...

    • CELEBSFAN78 profile image

      Ara Vahanian 

      9 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      Oops I ,meant to say the word "of." Another thing is that if we just look at history, the Cold War ended in 1990 after Ronald Reagan had left office. Yes, he was the one that told Gorbachev to tear down that wall and he may have been a factor in the start of that process but the end of the Cold War and dissolution of the USSR happened in 1990 and 1991 when George H.W. Bush was President.

    • profile image

      9 months ago

      Jeff-well lets start with this for which even though i asked for a reference you ignored me....

      “No other president had as many scandals as Reagan.” ~jeff

    • CELEBSFAN78 profile image

      Ara Vahanian 

      9 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      I agree totally that Dwight David Eisenhower was the last decent Republican president. He warned against the buildup pf the military industrial complex in his farewell address in 1961 before leaving office.

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino I 

      9 months ago

      Reagan was a douchebag. Our problem as a country was not Nixon, Reagan, George Bush, GW Bush or Trump. It's the people who vote for them. These people have a few screws loose, although they will never admit they have unresolved mental health issues. All of these men were sociopaths. The last decent patriotic Republican was Dwight Eisenhower.

    • profile image

      bradmastersOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff

      There is very little good that ever came from the Obama presidency

      The Cold War was over and the wall came down during Reagan.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      T -

      I defy you to find one - just one - thing that was just "made up" in this article. Every word is true. There are links in the article that back up every word of it.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      9 months ago from now on

      Jack, a few bad things (can often be arguable) is one thing but this guy just makes things up! Not the sign of a patriot, exactly like today's fake news however.

    • jackclee lm profile image

      Jack Lee 

      9 months ago from Yorktown NY

      This hub reminded me of the Bible verse Matthew 7:5. The author focuses on a few bad things while ignoring the best of Reagan and his accomplishments. Totally biased opinion and a small minority at that. With each passing year and new Presidents added to the list, Reagan’s ranking rises while others fall. Just the opposite with Clinton and Obama... that is the true test of greatness.

    • profile image

      BradmastersOCcal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff

      As I mentioned, GH Bush was a bad influence on Reagan.

      Just because there is no scandal doesn't mean a president wasn't bad.

      GW Bush and Obama were terrible presidents and are terrible people.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      9 months ago from now on

      Jeff, where do you find that information? I searched the internet and could not find anywhere that states "No other president had as many scandals as Reagan"

      I did find this on Obama.

      https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonexamine...

      So I suppose if Carter, the Democrat's pick, had beaten Reagan the US would have been far better off?

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      9 months ago

      Bradmaster -

      No other president had as many scandals as Reagan. Not Clinton, not G. W. Bush, Not even Nixon. Nixon had more overall members of his administration go to prison but that's mostly because Reagan pardoned a lot of the people in his administration. Reagan had more Cabinet level people resign in disgrace or indicted for crimes than any other president.

      There is very little good that ever came from the Reagan presidency.

    • profile image

      bradmastersOC cal 

      9 months ago

      Jeff

      The biggest problem that I saw with president Reagan was vice president GH Bush.

      As for the other items on your list, how many other presidents had the same problem.

      Obama allowed ISIL to take geography.

      What president or what congress didn't use the SS Trust Fund as a personal piggy bank. And privatizing SS to make it like Federal Employee Retirement System with is Defined Benefits Retirement would be a good thing. Federal employees pay into SS but that is not their big retirement, and they don't contribute into it for 50 or more years. And if they retire but still earn a wage outside of the government they don't have to contribute to FERS.

      Another problem that no president or congress has even tried to fix is the unfunded billions of dollars for government worker pensions.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      11 months ago

      If someone disagrees with the content of this article they are welcome to post their views. But if you just want to hurl insults and spew obscenities, then I will delete your comments.

    • John Welford profile image

      John Welford 

      11 months ago from Barlestone, Leicestershire

      Isn't it interesting that when some people don`t like a contrary opinion they immediately descend to vulgar abuse? I always interpret this as evidence that they don`t have any cogent arguments to offer that could form the basis of a sensible debate.

    • John Welford profile image

      John Welford 

      11 months ago from Barlestone, Leicestershire

      I always thought of Reagan as a terrible President and could never understand the hero-worship he was given then and since. There might be a few parallels between him and some later Republican presidents!

    • profile image

      None of ja business 

      11 months ago

      I’m using this for a debate

    • profile image

      Michael Pedrino I 

      11 months ago

      Reagan was the first POTUS I ever voted for. I was 18 and VERY naive. Virtually everything the author said about Reagan was 100% accurate. This list could easily be expanded. The objective of Reagan & Jack Kemp was to "starve the beast", which was to choke off federal revenue(cut taxes) while driving up debt on the federal credit card (with no intention of ever paying it back), in order to bankrupt the US Treasury and kill the New Deal once and forever.

      Prior to 1981 America was a VERY frugal & conservative country. In 1981 our national debt was UNDER $1 trillion. It took 200 years to accrue that debt, and it paid for 2 world wars, Vietnam & Korean wars, the New Deal, Social Security, Tennessee Valley Authority, Hoover Dam. NASA & putting a man on the moon, Federal Highway Act of 1956, the GI Bill, the FDA, the SEC, the Veterans Administration, unemployment insurance and just about EVERY progressive policy that created the once great American middle class that made our country the envy of the world. Then Ronald Reagan came to town.

      In addition to all of the horrible and sociopathic foreign policies that Reagan enacted, he liked to spend other people's money. Reagan ran budget deficits EVERY year he was in office. He tripled our national debt on his watch, proving to all future presidents AND the country that being in debt was nothing to be ashamed of. If the country could run up massive debt with cash advances on the federal credit card, why couldn't the general public? Reagan replaced the term "layaway" with "charge it!" People no longer had to delay gratification until the had the money to buy something, they could just put it on plastic, and worry about the consequences later.

      Prior to Reagan, declaring personal bankruptcy was stigmatized as being a moral failure and character flaw. After Reagan it became the accepted norm for abandoning your responsibility to debtors. If Uncle Sam could do it, why not you? THAT will be Reagan's greatest legacy: he taught otherwise fiscally prudent Americans that it was okay to spend like drunken sailors in a whorehouse, just so long as they did it with credit, that they could later wipe clean with bankruptcy when their debt became unmanageable. This is a verifiable fact. Prior to Reagan, Americans were fiscally prudent. After Reagan, Americans became a nation of spendthrifts.

      Here are a couple of more verifiable fun facts: up until January of 2009, 90% of our national debt was accrued while Republicans controlled both the White House and US Senate. Moreover, GOP has controlled the House of Representatives for 18 of the past 24 years. For those who don't know, that's the pursestrings to government. By the time Barack Obama inherited the Great Bush Recession of 2008, America was already bankrupt as a country, both fiscally as well as morally. Our economy has been propped up by cash advances on the federal credit card for the past 10 years.

      On a cynical yet accurate note, Reagan was most responsible for introducing America to Russian porn. That was one of the benefits of the fall of the Soviet Union and introducing American capitalism to Russian women. They took it to a whole new level of depravity that we never could have imagined. That's a part of Reagan's legacy that you won't hear a lot of old-school Republicans talking about - at least not in public.

    • profile image

      Mark 

      12 months ago

      The person that wrote this was not even old enough to wipe his ass when Reagan was president. His opinion is laughable when you consider he criticizes Reagan for not being tough on "the war on terrorism" which wasn't even a thing until 9/11 in 2001...LONG after Reagan's presidency and almost after his death. The only point on his list of criticisms that is historically accurate is #13 and the countries Reagan supported non-communist dictators in (Pinochet) are now the most economically prosperous in the region so it ended up working out for the best there too.

    • profile image

      Rudy Rudziewicz 

      13 months ago

      22.

      He removed mental health assistance to the public.

      ( That was so wrong.)

    • profile image

      Megan 

      14 months ago

      Who are your sources?

    • profile image

      Al 

      14 months ago

      I’ve never read such so much bullshit in my lives. Liberals are some of the dumbest gullible people on earth. Thank god for presidents like Trump and Reagan. Clinton Obama and Carter were nightmares for this country but their brainwashed supporters champion them... unbelievable

    • profile image

      Valia Coca Serafin 

      14 months ago

      I know I will get slammed for this but there is an error on the

      "Iraq is still the only non-allied country to attack a U.S. warship without retaliation" claim. Do not forget the "The Liberty" End of my comment for obvious reasons.

    • profile image

      Aslan 

      14 months ago

      You forgot his costly and pointless war on drugs which we are still paying for financially and socially. All that just to divert away attention from his failing foreign and financial policies. He destroyed millions of young American lives and broke away families all for something as simple as puffing on a joint. If you still can't see why he wasn't a good president then you're just lost friend.

    • jeff61b profile imageAUTHOR

      jeff61b 

      15 months ago

      Trapsixtey23 -

      If you're going to make claims about falsehoods in this article, then you should back them up. Since you cannot do that, then you are tacitly admitting that everything in this article is 100% true and accurate.

    • profile image

      Trapsixtey23 

      15 months ago

      Literally half of what you said here is not truthful information.

    • tsadjatko profile image

      17 months ago from now on

      Deflect, that’s all you know how to do and it’s understandible when you can’t support your piddling statements.

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, soapboxie.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://soapboxie.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)