Obama the new Reagan? The numbers tell you all you need to know.

Here is all you need to know as you compare Obama's self-serving declarations of greatest versus a comparison of the two men's re-elections. 

In 1984,  Ronald Reagan won re-election with  58% of the vote and 49 of the 50 states.  He picked up 11 million votes compared to his first election.  He cared about all the people,  and worked well with both sides of the political aisle. 

Obama ran for re-election in 2012.  He won,  of course,  but lost 3.5 million votes compared to his 2008 total,  indicating a startling loss of loss of popularity.  He won only 26 states with a 51% margin of victory.  

No matter how you look at the totals,  Obama fails miserably in a comparison to the Great One.  

This would not be a reason to post,  except for the fact that Obama, in his childish desire to self-promote,  wants history to remember him as greater than Reagan.    I am glad to help in making such comparisons. 

Obama used to pretend a deep and abiding respect for Ronald Reagan, before his presidency went full bloom. Here is what Reagan believes is our choice in the coming election. Only the "enemy within" will disagree.

“You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well, I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There’s only an up or down — up to man’s age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism.

“Now it doesn’t require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people . Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.”  ~ Ronald Reagan.

James Brady's death this week declared a homicide. Does this mean John Hinkley can be retired for murder?

48 share rating

40 is our goal

<<<  Reagan, on the ground facing the camera;  Brady lying next to him with the SS holding Hinkley against the building during the 1981 assassination attempt on the President. 

From the NY Times:  WASHINGTON — The death this week of James S. Brady, the former White House press secretary, has been ruled a homicide 33 years after he was wounded in an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, police department officials here said Friday.   Officials said the ruling was made by the medical examiner in Northern Virginia, where Mr. Brady died Monday at 73. The medical examiner’s office would not comment on the cause and manner of Mr. Brady’s death.

Editor’s notes:  This is not a “big deal” to me,  but,  of course,  Brady did not die of a gun shot to the head some 33 years ago.  That is silly.  The fact that this decision might be used to keep John Hinckley in jail,  seems to be the only reason for such a decision.  

If you do not remember,  John Hinkley attempted to kill President Reagan, in 1981,  a murder attempt he thought would impress Jodie Foster.  Brady,  Reagan's press secretary,  was shot in the head,  during this attempt.  Both Reagan and Brady survived,  Brady being the more severely injured of the two men.  In fact,  he never fully recovered from the shooting.   Hinckley claimed “insanity” and was successful in that defense.  He remains in jail and under psychiatrist care,  to this day.    As a side bar to this,  Jodie Foster,  one of my personal favorites,  is lesbian,  and has been such most if not all of her adult life.  

It is the legal opinion of everyone I know [one of my sons is a lawyer] or have read,  that Hinkley cannot be retried,  now,  for murder.  As it turns out,  his successful defense establishes "insanity" as the overwhelming legal cause for his actions, a "final judgment,"  and,  prevents his retrial for any development in this case including the eventual deaths of Reagan and Brady.  

You can read a thorough-going legal opinion on this,  here,  at the Washington Post.  

Let's get this straight: Obama is NOTHING like Ronald Reagan and should leave off that lie.

There is nothing more insulting than to listen to Obama claim the name of Ronald Reagan as he runs this country away from the traditions and societal values that Reagan both typified and pushed forward.  The fact that Barack Hussein Obama does not believe that "government is the problem" is proof enough that the two men should never be considered to be partners at any level.

When B Obama makes that comparison,  he insults to the highest order,  those of us who knew Ronald Reagan and proves himself a fool in making that comparison. I was a Democrat until Reagan.  I voted for the moron,  Jimmy Carter and still have a soft spot for JFK. I was in my mid 30's when Reagan became president and Hussein Obama is nothing,  nothing like Ron Reagan.

After 18 months, Reagan took unemployment
from a higher rate to a lower rate as each
is compared to Obama.  

Reagan would have never employed a known communist (van Jones) or a Maoist sympathizer (Anita Dunn).  He would have never raised taxes without working to reduce spending (his Democrat congress did that for him).  Reagan challenged the Russians and won.  Obama has never come close to such a strategy, coward that he is.  Reagan would have never sided with Honduran Communists or sought to appease the likes of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.  Reagan would have never sat on his butt,  watching Russia complete a $5 billion dollar military transaction with Venezuela and a gift of more than a 100 land to air missiles.  Reagan would have never, ever,  turned his back on Israel or appease a rogue Muslim regime.   Reagan would have never worked outside congressional review or challenged the Supreme Court in public displays of disrespect and contempt.    He would have never forced government order upon religious institutions or send guns into Mexico for no good reason.  He would have never treated the opposing political party with contempt,  as is the daily habit of H Obama.

Reagan would have never compromised missile defense as Obama has done.  He would have never acted unilaterally to establish and enforce his personal agenda,  as Obama has done and promises to continue to do so.

Reagan would have never sat on a stage with the Russian president,  patted the enemy on the arm,  and promised that after the election, he would be more agreeable to Russian leadership.

Reagan came into power after the worst recession since the Great Recession,  and turned things around in his first term.  Obama is still waiting to organize his first lemonade stand.

Guaranteed, 30 years from now,  Obama will not be revered by anyone in the opposing party as Reagan is,  today.

Reagan once said this: "Democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man."   Heck,  Obama does not even believe this.

Reagan argued for the continuation of a continuing effort to establish and reestablish freedom.  Obama is not capable of coming up with such profundity as is represented in this Reagan observation:  "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."

Instead,  Obama's wife offers this observation as to the Obama Agenda for this country . . . .  and it is nothing like Reagan's:

"Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."  --  Michelle Obama, May of 2008.

Point of post:  Democrats cannot offer up Obama on his own terms,  so they pretend he is someone else.  Geeeeesh.