When your ideology dictates equal outcomes, then performance doesn't matter. In a capitalist business model the CEO and CFO (sometimes the same guy!) decide what objectives are to be reached, in what order, and what metrics will be used to measure progress. They will, on purpose, plot out waypoints to determine if the company is on course and reaching it's goals. Results matter, they really matter in a new start. With the equal outcome model, results really don't matter since given enough time it will all even out to a mediocrity somewhere slightly lower than average.

In this administration results don't matter at all. Not in jobs, not in the VA, not in ObamaCare, not in foreign policy, not in the justice department,...you name a few, I'm tired. The only place where results matter in this administration is quickly finding someone to blame for the next crisis. Ambassador Rice must have a Michelin tread pattern tattooed on her back...she's been under the bus since it left Benghazi.

Mr. Reagan, the guy who wore a jacket and tie in the oval office out of respect, allowed people to work their own problems, but he measured and checked for progress, clarified directions, measured again. He did this because he knew 1. people need to find their own solutions, that gives them ownership of their work. and 2. Measuring and adjusting is how you bring in a winner.

Reagan would have never signed the affordable care act into law, but on any project do you think he would leave Sibeleus on her own until the program kicked off? Not a chance, IMHO.

What should also be noted is that while Reagan was the President from 1980-1988, he worked with a Democratic House all eight years and a Democratic Senate the last two. And he never whined about Congress getting in the way of what he wanted to do. He was a real leader - not a petulant, self-absorbed pansy or sex-crazed liar.

RonC, don't get caught by the "need" trap. We can't let them make the argument about what we "need"; it has to be an argument about inalienable rights, period.

hey, Maph; we didn't say that he was perfect --
just better than any others in the past 113 years
or so. -- j

There are a lot of nice folks here in the gulch. We have differing opinions on many things, pretty unanimous regarding producers v moochers. There's lots of room for everyone's opinion. I figured out when I was in the barber business, if everyone liked the same thing, there would just be one thing. That's just not how I want to approach life.

I saw an interesting piece on Reagan last night. The reporter said Reagan had figured out the 80% rule. Today, the President wants it his way or the highway; after all, he did win 2 elections. Reagan was different. He realized when he approached 75-80% of what he wanted it was time to strike the deal. 80% is great progress, and excepting less than total surrender gives the other guy something to take home. It also make a less contentious negotiation next time around. It's like beating someone, but giving them room to save face. Maybe his years in the actor's guild taught him about that.

Agreed completely, blarman. On a scale of 0 to 10, he was an 8.5, with no other president since 1960 getting more than a 5, with 5 being average.

Hello Ron C.
Holy smoke! I could have posted an almost exact copy of your post, but you beat me to it. Feels good to know people such as those who contribute to the Gulch are out there.
Thanks.

The ONLY great modern-day president, and a good man as well...

And despite that, he was still one of the most effective Presidents - on all fronts - in promoting America and its interests. He saw the value in a strong economy and strong military and saw the dangers of communism/fascism and statism.

and, "if it's not moving, tax it until it does!" Joe biden

And your point is? No one ever claimed Reagan was perfect, but I'd take him over any other President in the past 60 years. Other than "Silent Cal", Reagan was one of the few Presidents in history (and especially the last 100 years) who actually tried to help the economy by getting government out of the picture.

"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." --Ronald Reagan

The other one I really like is:

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."

Well said.

I support the 2nd amendment. Having said that, I don't think we need RPGs and SAMs on the street. I have an AR-15. For the uniformed it is not an assault rifle. The AR indicates the first designer, Armalite Rifle. The term assault rifle was coined by the media. Ronald Reagan's good friend Jim Brady took a bullet in the head the day his own assassination was attempted. He did usher in the Brady bill and was in favor of the assault weapons ban. We should take note, the assassination was attempted with a 22lr caliber handgun by a nut job. The attempts on Gerald Ford were with a small hand gun and a nut job. It would be politically incorrect to separate the nut jobs from society and lock them away (treat them). So, progressive minded government officials sometimes thing taking the guns away will do just as well. I think there is an obvious break in logic there.

I have several semi automatic handguns as well, because I like to do shoot. The layperson will probably not see the fun in that, but it is fun to master the skills required to throw a playing card in the air and shoot it, or spit a card edgewise on a target stand. It's a personal challenge just like running a marathon or running the table in billiards. Am I going to war, no. Too old to fight, too fat to run.

As a libertarian I don't long to tell other folks what to do. I just like to ease into my truck and drive up to the conservation club and practice really hard shots with a pistol in a safe environment using the NRA rules for firearm safety. I've noticed people from the two major political parties seem to want to tell everybody what to do. Every time out lawmakers do their thing (make laws) someone out in flyover country loses the right to do something

The guy was hopeful, and he made us feel good about being Americans again, after the shame of Carter, after Watergate, after the RINO Nixon (whom Reagan ran against previously), etc...

How couldn't you like the guy?

Read Dinesh D'Souza's book "Ronald Reagan - How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader", and Peggy Noonan's "When Character was King" to get some background on the man. Just a great guy.

I mean, there's tons of stories about him, but one, when he was Governor, there was some random hippie protest, and it was either a sit-in or a "die-in" where the students would just act like they were dead (they did lots of stupid stuff). I think this one was a sit-in, and he's walking about of the auditorium building through campus, and they're all just sitting there silently "protesting". He walks past them and starts to tip-toe, and goes "shhh..." and even the protesters start to chuckle.

Back then, I was an Alex P. Keaton, the character from Family Ties that idolized Reagan. I was a dork that acted two to three times my age, and was proud to do so. Reagan was smart enough to realize that his job was putting people in place to succeed and letting them do what they were good at.

He was REVILED by all in Washington and one of the few who has been there in my lifetime that I actually supported.

I think today is an appropriate day for each of us to "remember that the crisis we are facing .... After all, why shouldn't we believe that.... We are Americans." - Ronald Reagan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6_OGDOb...

I owned a struggling small business during the Carter years. I remember our President telling us the future was dim. We were being held hostage by OPEC and a flagging economy while Americans citizens were being held in captivity by Iranian terrorists. The country was reeling from one crisis to another. For those of you too young to remember those days, it was very similar to America today. During the Carter Administration the news media coined a new expression, "the Misery Index." This was the combination of inflation, unemployment, and mortgage interest rates, all in the high double digits. Malaise was what they called this brush with socialism. Yes kids, that's another similarity. Mr. Carter never observed a problem that was not best served by a bigger and more involved government.

Then along came Ronald Reagan. Media talking heads labelled him "Bonzo", after the lead character in one of his B movies, "Bedtime for Bonzo". I believe Bonzo was a monkey, today that would be a racist thing to say. The media was never kind to conservatives. During the primaries the country club republicans labeled Reaganomics "Voodoo Economics!" The party was split, as usual. Somehow Reagan prevailed in the primaries, then mopped the floor with Carter by offering hope for a better tomorrow and a cool confidence that gained the return of the hostages from Iran on inauguration day. Freely offered on the very first day of a new era of American Exceptionalism.

He brought a couple of youngsters along with him to engineer the economy. John Rutledge, a recent college graduate with a very short resume and different ideas about capital formation. And Art Laffer, the inventor/discoverer of the Laffer curve. They say he first drew the graph on a cocktail napkin. How American is that? Together with the help of a bi-partisan Congress they laid the cornerstone of Reaganomics and the largest post war expansion of the American economy in history. The momentum carried through Reagan's 2 terms, G.H.W. Bush's 1 term, Bill Clinton's 2 terms, and the first term of G.W. Bush. That's about 24 years of momentum. While this was going on, Reagan, "The Gipper", was rallying the citizens of this great Nation. He caused us to believe in our own ability to do better, be better, and create a better lifestyle than the progressive Utopia could ever afford. It was right there, for the grabbing. All we need do is look up at the possibilities instead of down to all the problems. Work together to solve our own problems rather than wait for a government man to "help" us. Progressives will say Bush, the younger, screwed it up. In my opinion I believe it was Usama Bin Laden. He caused us to divert trillions of dollars, at all levels of government and business, on security and other measures we had not planned on spending. That took a lot of steam out of the forward expansion

Why do I create this short synopsis for those that weren't here to remember? To try, in my feeble writing style, to communicate to the generations that follow me, there is a better way. The last great hope of mankind still lives. To all the 99%ers I would say, you have more ability to solve your own problems, rise above the obstacles before you, and become the people you were meant to be, than any EBT card and monthly gov't entitlement can commute. All you need is leadership, an idea, motivation, and a path cleared of government red tape. That may seem impossible, but it can happen over night. It already did in November of 1980.

And to the elders I would say it is our responsibility to provide the generations to come with these four simple tools listed above. Progressives win elections by offering equal success to all. That is a lie! Success is a do it yourself proposition. I can't give my daughter success. I can give her money, but that is not success. Success is creating your own personal magnificent obsession, then each day working to fulfill that dream. It's the step by step journey to something worthwhile. In making that journey the money, marbles, and chalk come along with it, naturally. I can't give her or any younger a dream. If we as elders can give them leadership, motivation, and remove the regulation nightmare, I believe they will supply their own ideas. That's the way I see America, and that's why I am a follower of AS.