Stopped watching at "The never ending killing fields of Iraq".

Now, if the speaker goes on to accuse Bush Sr. for failing to remove Saddam after having Liberated Kuwait, I judged too quickly. I'm pretty confident though that this is just more of the revisionist history garbage blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.

I mean, if you want to rail against American exceptionalism, at least have the decency to blame the presidents prior to Bush(Carter and Reagan) who supported Saddam after the Iranian revolution, rather than the American president who finally took the right side against one of the most brutal tyrants and dictators of his time.

Congratulations! Your video, Reagan West Berlin Speech Balloon Pop, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 292 Badge!

Your video, Reagan West Berlin Speech Balloon Pop, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I believe it was Ronald Reagan who famously said, "Trust, but verify."

"Доверяй, но проверяй" is a Russian proverb.

So, yeah.

"To date, he says, the US has conducted tests on this type of missile system but to his knowledge none have been successful, flying for just a few seconds. "

Basically, Putin made a laughable claim that Russia already has a mach 10 missile, so China and the USA jumped down the rabbit hole.

Kind of like when Reagan started up the SDI star wars BS. Which some people believe led to the USSR dramatically boosting their defense spending, nigh bankrupting themselves and breaking up as a country.

The problem with all these Trumptards that are protesting the NFL because a few players aren't standing for the anthem, and just want them to do their job, though they DO do their job, which is play football. Meanwhile, they were singing the praises of Kim Davis when she refused to do her job when some people came in because some people sinned differently than her.

And as to how can they can see the interview and question the Fox and Trump narrative... They will NEVER question the Fox and Trump narrative. He could admit today he colluded because he owes tons of money to the Russian mob because of his money laundering, they wouldn't care, they'd just stat spitting out the Fox and Trump narrative that at least it saved us from the Demoncrats... just look at the shirts at Trump rallies about "I'd rather be Russian than Democrat", though not too long ago, even in the Reagan days, it was "better dead then red"... now I guess being aligned with the Soviets isn't bad, so long as you aren't Democrat... of course just look at Arkansas (I think it was), where even if turned out to be true that their one guy was a child molester, they'd still vote for him over a Democrat. That is how far these people are in the Fox and Trump mindset. Like Trump said, he could shoot somebody on the street and not loose a single vote. And near 100% of those people will be out to vote this November. If moderates and liberals want any chance of change, they'll need to turn out in droves, because he's already got 30+% of the voting population locked in and voting GOP this November, because they know they got more Supreme Court seats coming, and they are honestly afraid their faith is at stake if they don't vote GOP.

Are you under the impression Reagan started the cold war? If so, you're off by about 34 years - it started in 1947, under Truman. Would be hard to argue he knew nothing about politics, particularly at that point in his life...

I'll bet $100 that the first political murder we see this cycle will be a Trump nut killing someone they decide is a dangerous lefty....and another $100 the right will shrink from it by saying he's a lone wolf crazy person and not a real Republican following the talking points to their logical conclusions.....oh wait, that already happened in Charlottesville, where's my $200?

I guess they learned nothing from pizza gate, and why would they, it didn't hurt them a bit when one of their own attacked a pizza parlor full of kids with his rifle looking for Clinton to kill because they told him she was there selling child sex slaves.
Jubus Fucking Christ. They're actually trying to start a civil war spouting this bullshit to impressionable morons with guns and hatred, and they know it. If you're politically left of Reagan, buy some guns, you just might need them soon.
*promote exposing the thinly veiled call for civil war if Republicans lose control.

But can you blame 'all' of the problem on Bush/Obama?

I can recall many changes in the 80's from Reagan, huge cuts to school lunch programs, and many attempts to either reduce or totally eliminate the Department of Education.

In 89, Bush Sr. and the Governors of 'every' state held a summit, where they developed some of the first goals for future changes to education. These included some of the first recommended changes to standards-based education.

During both of Clinton's terms they steamed ahead at full speed on these goals, leading to massive changes forcing standards-based education. They implemented ESEA, which was succeeded by the two later programs you mentioned.

So we clearly can't pin it to just one group, as both led the charge at one point or another. This is what I meant by my statement. Neither Liberals nor Conservatives can point a finger and say, "Is this a dagger which I see before me, the handle toward my hand?" They both grasped it and wielded it.

So, now as you mention, we have a climate which puts incredible importance on standardized testing. Because of this, and how the schools are funded, students are basically learning how to pass a test based on minimum standards as set by the government. Students aren't taught what they 'can' learn, but what the government thinks they 'should' learn.

I graduated in 1992, so I missed the true first wave of standardized tests. But if I had not been, I know I would have been *incredibly* frustrated at being forced to learn at a slower pace because all students needed to pass. I can almost guarantee I would have acted out, become more of a clown and troublemaker than I actually was in school, because I would have been bored to tears.

As you mention also, we have a highly media based group of children today. I agree cell phones should be not be allowed.

As far as the publishers, perhaps it is less than noble to prey upon the environment that we have currently. I can't blame them, however, because it would be akin to blaming cell phone makers for making products that children want for connectivity to social media. Like any company, they are in it for a profit. It just happens to be that currently the profit is more in tests than innovative learning tools/textbooks. They are simply doing what they have to do, like any corporation. I'm sure a lot of that includes lobbying to keep standards based education in place.

We can blame a lot of different groups, even parents. But that isn't solving the issue. I have my ideas of how to begin fixing it, which may differ from yours because I am not in the 'business' nor do I have children. I would say the following would be some baseline changes I would implement or suggest:

1. School Uniforms - It makes it harder to differentiate between children and helps against the forming of cliques.

2. A complete 180 from standards based education.

3. We have to invest more money into hiring more teachers. Smaller classes means less stress, more personal interaction, and more time for the teacher to be aware of 'problems' before they blow up.

4. Students should only be allowed to access devices owned by the school, ones that are for education and not instagram. What they have available before and after school is on their parents, but they shouldn't have it in class.

5. I will probably take some flack, but I do believe that vouchers should be allowed versus forced public school attendance. Forcing people who cannot afford private schooling to send their children to public education means you remove choice of the quality of learning. Once public schools start to even out in quality due to the aforementioned changes, then we can remove vouchers.

You lost me at reagan.

Bob, I must congratulate you. Your caricature of gullible republicans is spot on.

I guess Obama is going down for being an illegal immigrant from Kenya, right? Hillary for Benghazi, and all federal law enforcement for......having some agents who don't like or respect orange Kanye, just like every Republican senator and representative just months earlier. I guess you're just lucky that wasn't Obama's move, or they would have released all their damming info about Trump and not implicated Clinton last minute, but somehow now that they're investigating Trump they're all deep state democrats (that threw an election to elect Trump).
You cannot be that dumb, the fact you remember to breathe is proof you have too much intelligence to believe such flipflopping theories that require amnesia of yesterday to believe today's new utter bullshit story.

It's hilariously transparent that, according to Trump, the FBI, CIA, and NSA are suddenly republican enemies (so much for being the law and order party, huh?) and Putin is your friend. Reagan would be so proud.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I missy Johnny. I definitely remember watching him a lot. It's amazing how presidential and smart Reagan seems these days ... can't figure out why ...

Your video, Johnny Carson as Reagan, a "Who's On First" spoof, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

it's hard to believe that Reagan is the 2nd best Republican president out of the last five and he was awful too with his version of trickle down economics, Iran contra, S&L crisis, ...; not sure why anyone would trust a Republican with the presidency