1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Have We Ever Enjoyed A Good Run?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Boom_70, Mar 19, 2008.

  1. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Things were fine in Brooklyn, except for that little home run in 1951, and that guy moving the local baseball team to the West Coast.
     
  2. chester

    chester Member

    I recall things not being terrible (then again, I was still in college at that time) but it wasn't all rosy either. Didn't they have to shut the government down for a short while because of the budget, or was that in '97?
     
  3. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    shutdown was Nov of 1995 - The president worked during that time though.
     
  4. Yes, we've had a good run.

    For the last 232 years.
     
  5. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    I've always subscribed to the thought that things are never as good or as bad as they seem. Right now, though, there seems to be a greater level of exasperation as I've ever seen in the time I've been on this earth.

    There seems to be a far greater willingness to point fingers at this point, play the blame game, work 'talking points' rather than actually figure out how to fix things and make it better. I'm not saying telling people they're wrong is a bad thing, but at some point you've got to illustrate what could be done to get things back on the right track.
     
  6. Starman

    Starman Well-Known Member

    He had a lot to do with rocketing the budget deficit and the national debt over the moon to pay for his military budget explosion, for which we'll be paying for the next 50 years. Then we can get to work on Junior Bush's budget deficits.
     
  7. Yeah, God forbid he spend money on the military. Not like the Soviets were able to keep up or anything.
     
  8. BTExpress

    BTExpress Well-Known Member

    It was sooooooo important that we had 50,000 nuclear warheads to the Soviets' 45,000.

    If we had stopped at 100, we still could have destroyed their country and saved billions of dollar.
     
  9. Yeah, it was important. That's why we won. That's why you're free to spout stupidity on a message board.
     
  10. BitterYoungMatador2

    BitterYoungMatador2 Well-Known Member

    Ever been to Russia? I have. That shithole was gonna' crumble regardless.
     
  11. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    Am I to take it I would be speaking Russian right now if not for the number of nuclear weapons the U.S. had in comparison to the U.S.S.R?
     
  12. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    Why do conservatives hang on to the Reagan-ended-Communism dogma?

    There's virtually no evidence to substantiate it. Records indicate the Soviets were in serious trouble at least in the 70s, probably the 60s, and the military adventure that accelerated what would have been an Ottoman Empire-like decline (Afghanistan), started before Reagan took office. The arms race had little to do with it.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page