Of course not all conservatives shun liberals any more than all liberals shun conservatives.

Sure there are areas where political demographics prevail but not on the scale you imply. In my 13 years in the south I was never questioned about any political affiliation. I found most people there to be conservatives but there were plenty of liberals also. Far too many to be considered to be a tiny minority and we all worked, went to church, and socialized together and had no difficulty.

The atheist part is another matter. I lived in the Bible belt and there were many Baptists as well as charismatics there who would make an attempt to convert an atheist but after being refused a few times they would withdraw. Personally I had no problem with non believers but from my discussions with fellow church members there I found that many Christians believe atheists to be controlled by Satan, or at least they feel that they need to limit their contact with atheists. It is a anti Satan defensive thing down there. It isn't so much a superior type attitude as much as it is a self protective thing.

I must add through that my church made no delineation between believer and non believer when anyone needed help in any manner. Food, shelter, clothing, medical need, transportation, etc were freely given to anyone in need. They see all people as God's children whether or not that person agrees.

Using OPP as an example, some atheists here go out of their way to attack Christianity. They vilify and demean Christians and our faith and they do it in a vile and filthy manner as if the more base they become, the more proud they are of it. Christians are just people like everyone else and after having something one holds dear spit and trampled on, the insult becomes too much and we become provoked to defend ourselves. My view is, believe what you do or don't believe but don't shove it down my throat. Not you...I'm speaking generically. If there are Christians here who butt in and preach, take them on one on one, but some atheists here go after anyone who mentions God even if the atheist isn't being spoken to.

I say that because some atheists and Christians have hair triggers and big mouths. A few of either can cast a shadow on their larger group respectively.

You have your "interpretation" of the Reagan firing of the air traffic controllers. Your intrepretation is wrong. When Reagan took office, we were in an inflationary spiral that could not be tolerated any further. It was out of control. Unions demanded more money and got it, so prices went up to cover the added cost. Then unions demanded more money and prices went up to cover the added cost. And again and again with nobody really getting ahead because prices went up as fast as wages. When Reagan took office, the Japanese invasion was gaining momentum. American business could not continue to raise prices and expect to compete with Japan. Jobs were disappearing because business was going bankrupt. The inflationary spiral had to be broken. Reagan was an astute economist and recognized this problem long before others. Firing the Air Traffic controllers was more symbolic than anything. It was a wake-up call to unions who were blind to the growing global economy. The next big event was the bankruptcy of Continental Airlines. The company re-formed without a union, and that started a domino effect among companies that were on the brink of disaster. These events broke the inflation spiral and along with supply-side economics, which rolled back stifling regulations and lowered corporate taxes, business began to grow again. The longest, strongest economic expansion in the nation's history followed, creating millions of middle-class jobs.

So events in history are not just events devoid of interpretation. You are interpreting the events from a very liberal perspective. Firing a few thousand air traffic controllers was a bad idea from a liberal perspective. But one has to consider the millions of jobs that were saved in industries totally unrelated to air transportation. Breaking the inflation spiral was a key step in that process.

If Reagan's administration was corrupt, what do you call the corrupt infestation that we endure now? If Reagan did no unsavory things, Obama beat him ten-fold.

Yes. Paul Volker was one of the finest fed Chairmen of our lifetime; and he had much to do with the economic turnaround. But no one person or action could turn that freight train around alone. The cycle of union demands and price increases had to be stopped, as part of the process. Reagan and Volker made it work together. I am damned proud of them, even if you jealous Democrats can't see or admit the truth.







It was an important moment in American history, though because Ronald Reagan was in the first months, really, still, of his presidency. He'd been inaugurated in January, 1981. And he was in the middle of rolling out what we call the Reagan revolution. And Reagan wanted to really turn back the clock, you might say, to an approach to American government and politics that was pre-New Deal. And part of that meant reorganizing the relationship between government and the labor movement.

The PATCO strike happened at this important turning point in American history, and it left a very profound legacy, because, Ronald Reagan first threatened those strikers to return to work within 48 hours of their walkout, and when they did not, he fired them. Not only did he fire them; he permanently replaced them. And with that action, he sent a powerful message that many employers even in the private sector acted upon after that, and it was a period of getting tough with the union movement that a really marked a profoundly important turning point.
It was an important moment in American history, PATCO's troubles began with a disaster, and that was a mid air collision over New York City in 1960. It became evident to those controllers back then that changes had to be made particularly in the equipment and some of the working relationships there many issues but it was a difficult time to make those strides. The union wasn't formed until 1968. By 1975 a lot of the issues had become huge, The Federal Aviation Administration had solved some of the issues but their still some serious issues out standing such as " The lack of defense of controllers by the FAA in case if incidents or accidents the controllers had to get their own attorneys and pay out of their own pockets.

There was a pay disparity between Airline pilots and controllers were paid.. they weren't complaining of being under paid but the disparity was a festering issue that had been apparent for a long time. Ironically PTCO supported the candidacy of Ronald Reagan as well as Richards Nixon at the time. PATCO had gotten its first federal contract under Nixon, so when Reagan ran in 1980 they had a record of being able to negotiate with presidents of both parties and went to both Reagan and Carter to see who would help them the most and Reagan reached to them, he wanted a few unions to endorse his candidacy. He saw the air traffic controllers as some one he could work with many of them were military vets and socially conservative. It was deep irony that PATCO did endorse Reagan and he won and they expected great returns but when the negotiations began They were in for a surprised. Reagan had boosted he was a life time paid up member of the AFL-CIO and was past president of the Screen Actors Guild, and wrote a reassuring letter to the PATCO President

Once elected Reagan doubled crossed the union and declared the strike a peril to the national safety. He invoked the anti -union Taft Hartley Act which had been legislated under Harry Truman a Democrat in 1947 this empowers any president to break strikes and it's still on the books. For 35 years, in all that has been written about PATCO in the capitalist press, the lies, deceit and broken promises of both Republicans and Democrats in collusion with the repressive capitalist state have been covered up. The Washington Post—a “liberal” capitalist newspaper—ignored this despicable, double-dealing conduct that led to PATCO’s downfall. An article, headlined “Echoes of a Broken Strike,” focuses on the subsequent decline in strikes, union membership and organizing workers., was written by Charles J. Whalen, senior political economist at the Institute for Industry Studies, Cornell University. Whalen stated, “In the immediate aftermath of the PATCO strike, many observers reported that Reagan’s action marked a turning point in U.S. labor relations.
History has shown this assessment was right on the mark. If it is true

that the strike is labor’s ‘only true weapon’ as some unionists suggest, then practically the entire movement has been disarmed. This also indicates that the legal right of workers to organize and
bargain collectively has little real meaning. This event had absolutely nothing to do with breaking the inflationary spiral. That was brought about by FED Reserve Chairman Paul Volker. The Fed had begun raising interest rates in 1977 and by 1908 tipped the economy in to recession at witch time the central bank took it's foot off the brake but inflation keep rising as people rushed to buy before the prices went up. So shortly after the economy recovered briefly in July 1980 Paul Volker orchestrated a series of rate increases that took fed funds from 10 % to near 20 %
What followed was a painful recession, Manufacturing states were battered, mortgage lenders were devastated. My business was housing it came to a complete halt we were out of business. Growth snapped rather quickly when the Fed took its foot off the break but there had been considerable suffering during the recession and the affect on those who had been sacked was felt for years but the actions of Volker and the Fed broke the back of the inflationary spiral and Reagan sacking the air traffic controllers had nothing to do with It, but did set the trend of union beat downs with the orgy of mergers, acquisitions, hostile take overs and leveraged buy outs that occurred in the 1980's. Sully Sullenberger retired, does not recommend a young person become an airline pilot the pay is so cheap now. It was once a well paid occupation but no more. Conservatives place Reagan on a pedestal and give him credit for things he had nothing to do with and ignore that 133 members of hi administration were either indicted imprisoned or investigated for crimes against the people. Reagan knew when he sold arms to Iran and funneled the profits to the contras in Nicaragua he was committing treason but he OKed it any way his was the most corrupt administration since Warren Harding and the Tea Pot Dome scandal but to conservatives he was the Messiah

You have your "interpretation" of the Reagan firing of the air traffic controllers. Your intrepretation is wrong. When Reagan took office, we were in an inflationary spiral that could not be tolerated any further. It was out of control. Unions demanded more money and got it, so prices went up to cover the added cost. Then unions demanded more money and prices went up to cover the added cost. And again and again with nobody really getting ahead because prices went up as fast as wages. When Reagan took office, the Japanese invasion was gaining momentum. American business could not continue to raise prices and expect to compete with Japan. Jobs were disappearing because business was going bankrupt. The inflationary spiral had to be broken. Reagan was an astute economist and recognized this problem long before others. Firing the Air Traffic controllers was more symbolic than anything. It was a wake-up call to unions who were blind to the growing global economy. The next big event was the bankruptcy of Continental Airlines. The company re-formed without a union, and that started a domino effect among companies that were on the brink of disaster. These events broke the inflation spiral and along with supply-side economics, which rolled back stifling regulations and lowered corporate taxes, business began to grow again. The longest, strongest economic expansion in the nation's history followed, creating millions of middle-class jobs.

So events in history are not just events devoid of interpretation. You are interpreting the events from a very liberal perspective. Firing a few thousand air traffic controllers was a bad idea from a liberal perspective. But one has to consider the millions of jobs that were saved in industries totally unrelated to air transportation. Breaking the inflation spiral was a key step in that process.









It was an important moment in American history, though because Ronald Reagan was in the first months, really, still, of his presidency. He'd been inaugurated in January, 1981. And he was in the middle of rolling out what we call the Reagan revolution. And Reagan wanted to really turn back the clock, you might say, to an approach to American government and politics that was pre-New Deal. And part of that meant reorganizing the relationship between government and the labor movement.

The PATCO strike happened at this important turning point in American history, and it left a very profound legacy, because, Ronald Reagan first threatened those strikers to return to work within 48 hours of their walkout, and when they did not, he fired them. Not only did he fire them; he permanently replaced them. And with that action, he sent a powerful message that many employers even in the private sector acted upon after that, and it was a period of getting tough with the union movement that a really marked a profoundly important turning point.
It was an important moment in American history, PATCO's troubles began with a disaster, and that was a mid air collision over New York City in 1960. It became evident to those controllers back then that changes had to be made particularly in the equipment and some of the working relationships there many issues but it was a difficult time to make those strides. The union wasn't formed until 1968. By 1975 a lot of the issues had become huge, The Federal Aviation Administration had solved some of the issues but their still some serious issues out standing such as " The lack of defense of controllers by the FAA in case if incidents or accidents the controllers had to get their own attorneys and pay out of their own pockets.

There was a pay disparity between Airline pilots and controllers were paid.. they weren't complaining of being under paid but the disparity was a festering issue that had been apparent for a long time. Ironically PTCO supported the candidacy of Ronald Reagan as well as Richards Nixon at the time. PATCO had gotten its first federal contract under Nixon, so when Reagan ran in 1980 they had a record of being able to negotiate with presidents of both parties and went to both Reagan and Carter to see who would help them the most and Reagan reached to them, he wanted a few unions to endorse his candidacy. He saw the air traffic controllers as some one he could work with many of them were military vets and socially conservative. It was deep irony that PATCO did endorse Reagan and he won and they expected great returns but when the negotiations began They were in for a surprised. Reagan had boosted he was a life time paid up member of the AFL-CIO and was past president of the Screen Actors Guild, and wrote a reassuring letter to the PATCO President

Once elected Reagan doubled crossed the union and declared the strike a peril to the national safety. He invoked the anti -union Taft Hartley Act which had been legislated under Harry Truman a Democrat in 1947 this empowers any president to break strikes and it's still on the books. For 35 years, in all that has been written about PATCO in the capitalist press, the lies, deceit and broken promises of both Republicans and Democrats in collusion with the repressive capitalist state have been covered up. The Washington Post—a “liberal” capitalist newspaper—ignored this despicable, double-dealing conduct that led to PATCO’s downfall. An article, headlined “Echoes of a Broken Strike,” focuses on the subsequent decline in strikes, union membership and organizing workers., was written by Charles J. Whalen, senior political economist at the Institute for Industry Studies, Cornell University. Whalen stated, “In the immediate aftermath of the PATCO strike, many observers reported that Reagan’s action marked a turning point in U.S. labor relations.
History has shown this assessment was right on the mark. If it is true

that the strike is labor’s ‘only true weapon’ as some unionists suggest, then practically the entire movement has been disarmed. This also indicates that the legal right of workers to organize and
bargain collectively has little real meaning. This event had absolutely nothing to do with breaking the inflationary spiral. That was brought about by FED Reserve Chairman Paul Volker. The Fed had begun raising interest rates in 1977 and by 1908 tipped the economy in to recession at witch time the central bank took it's foot off the brake but inflation keep rising as people rushed to buy before the prices went up. So shortly after the economy recovered briefly in July 1980 Paul Volker orchestrated a series of rate increases that took fed funds from 10 % to near 20 %
What followed was a painful recession, Manufacturing states were battered, mortgage lenders were devastated. My business was housing it came to a complete halt we were out of business. Growth snapped rather quickly when the Fed took its foot off the break but there had been considerable suffering during the recession and the affect on those who had been sacked was felt for years but the actions of Volker and the Fed broke the back of the inflationary spiral and Reagan sacking the air traffic controllers had nothing to do with It, but did set the trend of union beat downs with the orgy of mergers, acquisitions, hostile take overs and leveraged buy outs that occurred in the 1980's. Sully Sullenberger retired, does not recommend a young person become an airline pilot the pay is so cheap now. It was once a well paid occupation but no more. Conservatives place Reagan on a pedestal and give him credit for things he had nothing to do with and ignore that 133 members of hi administration were either indicted imprisoned or investigated for crimes against the people. Reagan knew when he sold arms to Iran and funneled the profits to the contras in Nicaragua he was committing treason but he OKed it any way his was the most corrupt administration since Warren Harding and the Tea Pot Dome scandal but to conservatives he was the Messiah

Of course there actual liberal Christians that vote Democratic not all conservatives are hateful one of my best friends is a conservative and we have interesting conversations and respect one another and I don't even know what his views on religion is except we agree that one of Islam's problems is it has never undergone a reformation But I have to tell you when an Evangelical tells me I'm of the devil I don't see that as defensive I see is a demonizing and offensive and when they hit on me to try and convert me It feels no different that when I've been hit on a couple times by homosexuals to see if I like to play

Those work programs kept food on the table for some of my great uncles who worked WPA and my father in law spent some time working in CCC. Between 1933 and 1944 thec government hired 11 million workers before that there were people along the eastern seaboard living on boiled dandelions while dairymen poured their milk out on the ground. ranchers shot their heard because they could not afford to feed them and there was not a price that could cover the cost to transport their products to market. Teen age hookers turned tricks in hobo jungles risking pregnancy disease and even death for a dime a trick, There were more young men riding the rails under the passenger cars than there were paying passengers in the cars above all going somewhere in search of work. The word was " look pal if you don't want this job for the price I'm willing to pay just keep on movin because the next hungry son of a bitch that comes stumbling down the road will take it " The WPA & CCC ended all of that It did not end the depression but it relieved the human suffering and provided work for those who desperately needed it

If Reagan's administration was corrupt, what do you call the corrupt infestation that we endure now? If Reagan did unsavory things, Obama beat him ten-fold.

Yes. Paul Volker was one of the finest fed Chairmen of our lifetime; and he had much to do with the economic turnaround. But no one person or action could turn that freight train around alone. The cycle of union demands and price increases had to be stopped, as part of the process. Reagan and Volker made it work together. I am damned proud of them, even if you jealous Democrats can't see or admit the truth.