Living in a car

[CarolAnn]

Living in a car ... in Wisconsin in WINTER.

I stopped to have breakfast at Denny's, this week, as I do about once a month. I noticed the guy in the car next to me was just sitting there and it is bitter COLD outside. Then I noticed he had every bit of the car full of waste paper, bits of this and that just crammed in there, except for where he was sitting and I realized it was insulation. Took me a minute to figure it out.

If I wasn't such a darned chicken, I would have asked him inside and bought the guy a hot breakfast. Too many "what if he's dangerous" - "what if he's on drugs" - what if - what if - junk went through my head. By the time I got my meal, I could see he had driven away, probably afraid I'd call the cops on him.

I put a second bug-out bag in my car this morning - if I see him again, I'll leave it on his hood. A little money, a nice warm blanket, some heavy socks and a T-shirt that I don't know where I got went into the zipper bag that the blanket came in. I'll find some hand warmers and gloves if I can and add those, and maybe one of the thermos travel mugs that clutter my cabinets. What else?

When I got home last night and the warm house air hit me, I was truly thankful. Again, with the hot supper and hot shower, nice clean, warm bed, clothes in the washer or drier, life is good and I am blessed. I hope I find that guy again - no good to think about doing something for others unless it gets done.

[Native87]

Well I thank God that there are people out there that care. I can understand your hesitantcy(sp) but it was justified. Things are getting real tough and hard times call for dog eat dog mindsets. What you have planned for the next time you see him and the car is a great and SAFE plan. I just want to thank you as just another human for giving a d@@n.

[NCLee]

Yes, thank you for caring!

Even if you don't see that man again, I'm sure the care kit that you've put together will help someone. And, even if it doesn't God knows what was in your heart yesterday.

Lee

[Pokeberry Mary]

In our old neighborhood a homeless man lived behind the dumpster in a small fenced enclosure at the corner gas station. I used to think I ought to put some bottled water there for him--but then I'd forget. Life is so full of things...

Why not carry along things you can give? What a wonderful idea.

[bookwormom]

we can all stop and say a prayer for that man, and all the homeless.

Maybe you run into him again.

[Cat Lover]

While I appreciate your kind thoughts, I think you're making a mistake.

Over the years, I have dealt with legions of "homeless" folks. Here's what I found:

There are many reasons that this situation might arise. I'll go over them in what seems to be their order of ocurrance:

The first is simply being socially dysfunctional, generally by choice. These are the hustlers 'putting one over' on the rest of us, the petty criminals using this as a way to provide cover for their activities, the ones who choose it from an extreme sense of 'independence,' and the angry fathers refusing to even try to pay child support. Many are convicted felons, dodging the registration requirements by frequently moving.

The next group are those who really can't care for themselves - whether it be from simple mental illness, drug abusing lifestyle, or retardation. I have encountered only two whose situation actually had a real medical cause.

By far the most rare bird in this flock - in two decades of dealing with this I have seen it a handfull of times - is the guy who can be compared to the pioneer of old: a person looking for a job and a home and an opportunity to improve themselves. The true 'self-reliant' type.

Whatever any of these folks need, it's not charity.

The first group needs to hit bottom before they will have any interest in climbing back up. Some - the criminal element - need the type of government housing that has bars.

The second group needs to be in an institution. Indeed, they WERE in institutions until Jimmy Carter showed some balls and refused to give the mental health lobby a blank check. The instutions, overnight, created this group by putting folks out into the streets .... then compounded the lie by claiming Reagan created the 'homeless' issue. The entire fiasco is thoroughly documented in the book "Wild In The Streets."

The third group needs the removal of artificial barriers and market restrictions. These are the folks who are pushed out of work by illegal aliens, convicts on work-release, probationers, etc. The effect of various governmental actions in increasing the cost of employment cannot be ignored either. These are the folks who cannot afford housing, as the various government programs have eliminated cheap housing from the market.

Indeed, for all three groups, it is the effect of well-intentioned government programs to make this problem worse - rather than fix it.

[CarolAnn]

You know, Cat Lover, you have some very good points, and I've given most of them some thought also. I've been on the receiving end of charity - and I have to say in most of those cases - charity sucks. It usually feels awful to get pity from someone, so it's a hard call to make.

I've also experienced a brief time of being homeless - was in Houston trying to find work so I could keep from losing my house in Arkansas (husband wouldn't/couldn't keep a job) - and I was relieved for the charity of friends who let me sleep on a couch, or even once on the floor of a warehouse. I had a dream where I was living in a cold, wet cardboard box and someone was knocking on it but I wouldn't come out. Then when I did, there was a pile of wrapped packages, all for me. That made me realize that the gifts of life are only there if you accept them and it helped me (somewhat) to accept well-meant charity. It's still a whole lot easier to give than to receive, in my opinion - that's why it should be done carefully & with sensitivity, if at all.

Teaching people to freeload like it's their right is the last thing I'd want to do, right next to letting someone freeze to death because I didn't do anything when I could and should have.

Is this the same guy that stole gas out of my car a couple of weeks ago? If so, I'm a little less mad about it than if it was just a spoiled teenager too lazy to work. I'll never know. And I may never know if the guy with a car full of trash insulation is a Viet Nam vet who never got the help from the VA that he needed, a dope addict, or someone just caught in the cascade of bad things the economy has brought to so many.

I can't judge it. But if I see him again, I'll ask respectfully if he'll accept the blanket bag. (It's clear, so he can see what all's in it.)

[AzLoneRider]

CarolAnn,
You're on the right track... Your action and intention is motivated by kindness. Sometimes all of the groups that Catlover mentioned just need an act of kindness....

[jonvee]

You're a sweetie CarolAnn.

I understand what Cat is saying too and I don't totally disagree, but sometimes you just have to give into those "random acts of kindness" feelings.

If you feel you are blessed and ok in this economy and all that goes with it and can spare a few tangible things - more power to ya girl:)

[cinok]

If he has a car he is better off then many of the homeless he also must be still hooked into society since he needs a a DL,ins,vech reg. Most homeless try to avoid situations that will draw attention from the LEO. He may be between jobs or working in your area and sending money home to the family.
In reference to Carter created the problem. Not entirely true but he didn't help the problem. Do realize that many need treatment but can not or will not of their own free will seek it because of their illness. So they become societies problem.

[Anon001]

CarolAnn,

I admire you for being as caring, thoughtful, and sensitive as you must be, especially being a ....um...... umm.... more "mature" woman and what would be construed as more vulnerable than.. say, a 20 year old 6'2" broad shouldered dude. lol

I don't think it matters why someone is in the condition they are in. If they are there because they spent their money on drugs instead of on rent and feeding the kids, then who knows; Maybe your random act of kindness would be the one that made the difference and turned someone around.

Do what your heart tells you.

Paul

[MooseToo]

i knew of a guy in jacksonville, fl who lived in his car - every year he bought a new mercedes - true story - my spouse worked in the mercedes dealership and it always fell to the new guy to shovel out the trade-in -

[Pokeberry Mary]

I've talked to some long time homeless folks and while I would never give them cash--for good reason--I do think it is a good thing to do to help them when you have the chance. A blanket, bottled water during the hot summer, a sandwich..

Those things are just decent human kindness--not enabling.

When Hubby and I were newlyweds we lived in our truck for a couple weeks until a friend kindly took us in and gave us a room. Within a month we had our own place--but sometimes things happen--in our case Hubby came up to Wisconsin to marry me and when we got back down to Oklahoma where he'd been working as a rough neck he found the rig had shut down.

We couldn't get anyone to rent a place without a job and it took a little time to find another job.

Once you've experienced some of these things and the way people treat you in such a situation-- 'looks' etc.. you realize that ANYBODY could be in such a situation and as the Good Book says:

To whom much is given, much is required.

I'm honestly ashamed I haven't done more to help those in need.

[Cat Lover]

cinok, I don't want to send this thread off on a tangent ... but I need to clarify exactly what I said.

I did not say the problem was created by Carter - I said it was deliberately created by a vindictive special interest group ("mental health professionals") for their own political (and financial) benefit. Carter just happened to be president at the time.

Also documented in "Wild in the Streets" is a second element, which also just happened to take place during Carter's term: various 'social interest' and 'rights' groups took municipalities to court over their practices of institutionalizing the dysfunctional amongst us. Simply put, these days you'd have trouble getting Hannibal Lechter committed against his will!

A case to illustrate the point: I know a certain lady whom I sheltered through one winter, and effected a reconcilliation between her and her family. She was / is "homeless."

In her 40's now, she's an attractive lady. I want to say that about one hour out of 20 she's well balances, has great social charm, and is well spoken. The other 95% of the time, she's simply nuts. Nuts, with a violent edge- and she's a big, strong lady. Full of hate and paranoia, incoherent and angry. She can't hold a job .... and neighbors quickly tire of her.

She's extremely well known by the local police, who have routinely been asked to remove her from public places where she was causing trouble. Yet, their hands are tied; untill the day comes that she walks into the precinct and throttles the desk sargeant, they can't do much.

In her case, the cause is pretty plain: way too much drug abuse in her younger days. If you saw the film "Monster," you know the type of person I am describing. Indeed, like Aileen Wuornos, I'm only on her 'good guy' side because I never insisted on her having sex with me.

Incapable of functioning in society, and incapable of providing for herself ... a classic example of the sort of person who need to be in and institution. Alas, in her case, that won't happen untill she's actually convicted of a serious felony.

[momma_to_seven_chi]

To whom much is given, much is required.



I think that says it all. We should be giving more too. If people have enough to spend money and time on luxuries while others starve or stay homeless, then we aren't generous enough. I know our family wastes a lot that could help others.

[Stinger]

Not to argue, because in a lot of ways I don't care; but, Ronald Reagan did, indeed, put tens of thousands of, 'dimwits' out onto the streets of many large cities. I am (poignantly) familiar with what happened in Newark, NJ and New York City - OK.

Who cares exactly, 'Why' Reagan insisted that there was no money to keep huge hospitals like Roosevelt on Long Island open - It doesn't matter whether or not Jimmy Carter is the guy who originally cut off financing. The fact is that it was Ronnie Reagan's executive order that emptied out many of the larger VA and other public hospitals onto our city streets.

When I worked in Port Newark I would see these people everyday; and for a period of about 5 years, there, and during the Reagan Administration, they just kept on growing in number until: cold weather, sickness, relocation, and (I'm sure) starvation slowly made them all disappear.

The Lord Jesus Christ said that the poor would always be with us; and, if we would show kindness to Him, then we should do it by helping those who are less fortunate than ourselves. Now it's true; and I won't argue: Some of these people are, unquestionably, violent and the, 'scum of the earth'; however there are others who are less so and worthy of non-judgmental assistance.

I didn't want to get on a first name basis with any of these men; (and women) however I did used to carry extra money, a little food, and other items for them. Sometimes I would stop and leave one of these gifts in plain sight for one of them. (Never leave something where more than one person is going to be able to immediately find it.) I never got close to any of them, and continue to believe to this day that if I had somebody would have eventually cut me.

There were moments when I watched homeless women cry or yell out for joy after they found something I had left. I mean, Hell, we feed stray dogs and cats - Don't we? How much more so, then, another human being!

[cinok]

cinok, I don't want to send this thread off on a tangent ... but I need to clarify exactly what I said.

I did not say the problem was created by Carter - I said it was deliberately created by a vindictive special interest group ("mental health professionals") for their own political (and financial) benefit. Carter just happened to be president at the time.

Also documented in "Wild in the Streets" is a second element, which also just happened to take place during Carter's term: various 'social interest' and 'rights' groups took municipalities to court over their practices of institutionalizing the dysfunctional amongst us. Simply put, these days you'd have trouble getting Hannibal Lechter committed against his will!

A case to illustrate the point: I know a certain lady whom I sheltered through one winter, and effected a reconcilliation between her and her family. She was / is "homeless."

In her 40's now, she's an attractive lady. I want to say that about one hour out of 20 she's well balances, has great social charm, and is well spoken. The other 95% of the time, she's simply nuts. Nuts, with a violent edge- and she's a big, strong lady. Full of hate and paranoia, incoherent and angry. She can't hold a job .... and neighbors quickly tire of her.

She's extremely well known by the local police, who have routinely been asked to remove her from public places where she was causing trouble. Yet, their hands are tied; untill the day comes that she walks into the precinct and throttles the desk sargeant, they can't do much.

In her case, the cause is pretty plain: way too much drug abuse in her younger days. If you saw the film "Monster," you know the type of person I am describing. Indeed, like Aileen Wuornos, I'm only on her 'good guy' side because I never insisted on her having sex with me.

Incapable of functioning in society, and incapable of providing for herself ... a classic example of the sort of person who need to be in and institution. Alas, in her case, that won't happen untill she's actually convicted of a serious felony.

I did not intend to take it off target but my wife is an ER nurse and deals with this all the time if they are lucky she may be able to find the person in a bed for a 72hr hold but then they are back on the street since they cannot pay for the treatment.

[AlchemyAcres]

......it was Ronnie Reagan's executive order.....

Exactly which executive order (number and name) was that?


~Martin

[leera]

CarolAnn,you were probably right not to invite him to dine with you,for your own safety.

I have a dear friend who was homeless off and on for 8 years....battling drug addiction and alcoholism....after finally getting on the right path,she now has a beautful daughter,and a decent place to live.....

But for some people the reason they are homeless can be because there's not much else that can be done for them,or they refuse to do anything to make their situation any better.

If you do have a chance to give him a little something,don't let him know where you live,he may decide to follow you home....just be cautious is all....

[NCLee]

Exactly which executive order (number and name) was that?


~Martin

I'd like more details, too.

Especially since I remember when my own state and local governments made decisions to reduce funding and/or close some facilities. One, in particular is still hotly debated, especially since private developers are chomping at the bit to get that location.

Regardless of anything else, however, I still believe that CarolAnn did the right thing, both in her approach and her willingness to help someone else. My hat's off to you. You're one fine lady.

Lee

[jen_in_southtexas]

Carol Ann,

God Bless you for the thoughtfulness and good intentions in your heart. Even if you never see him again at least you know there are still good people who still have sentiments for someone in his situation and may he be blessed by them.

I think the gift of a bug out bag would be a wonderful gift.

-jen

[Cat Lover]

Stinger's comment is exactly why I brought up the broader issue, and the book that documents events (as I can confirm) as they really happened.

For various political activists to misrepresent or 'hijack' an issue for their own benefit is not new - nor does it help in solving the problem. The irony is that the folks clammoring for a 'solution' are often part of the problem. For example, the ACLU has participated in many of the lawsuits that 'freed' these wretched souls. Indeed, it's a given in any community that the ACLU will litigate against any loitering, panhandling, vagrancy, or camping ordinance, and will oppose efforts taken by Police to 'check the papers' of questionable people.

I once has a neighbor who worked full-time for a 'help the homeless' group. When their activities were reported by the press, I did the simple math: reported budget divided by the number of homelss they claimed to serve. I pointed out that had the group simply passed out the money, that would be paying each homeless person nearly $30,000/yr, and there would be no problem.:secret:

Let's just say that the response I got was not one you often hear from church organizations.:D

[Dawgus]

A few years ago, the place I worked for also had storage lockers on their property. There was one unit that always seemed to be cracked open, just a few inches, and after a few months, I found out why. There was a man living inside the unit, inside his car. He'd start the car for heat and had a hose that attached to the exaust and poked out the bottom of the door. Every unit had a light inside, and he put an adapter in the socket and ran it to a small fridge and a hotplate.
Every week, a bunch of us would put a small bag of groceries and other things in front of the door so he would find it when he opened it up. We found out that he would walk to the YMCA a few miles away to shower, so some of us left basic toiletries at times too. We would see him every afternoon, rummaging through the dumpster for things to take to the scrapyard. Since the place did more plumbing than fire sprinklers (what I do), there was almost always a hot water tank or something of good weight laying there. He'd toss it in the trunk and head for the scrap yard.
Sure, living in a rental locker is illegal, and I don't even want to know what he used for a bathroom in there, but he always seemed happy and cheery. No one ever said a word to him about living there, we all acted like we didn't know.
About a year after I left that company, he bought a new building and sold the old one along with the storage units. I've often wondered if the new owners know about him and if he is still there. Someday when I get a chance, I'll drive by and see if locker 625 still has the rollup door cracked a little bit.
(to add-living in a car is fine, just don't live BEHIND jen's truck, thats a dangerous place to be!)

[Stinger]

Exactly which executive order (number and name) was that? ~ Martin

Hey, don't take anything I say for granted. (I'm just another guy on the internet!) :D

You’re welcome to research this topic for yourself. As far as I'm concerned this is, ‘old news’; it’s there, on the internet, for anyone who wants to go to the trouble of finding it; but, yes, it’s difficult to pull up.

There is a detailed article on Reagan’s presidency and the closing of numerous VA hospitals available for AORN; but you have to join in order to read it.

http://www.aornjournal.org/article/S0001-2092(07)66983-X/abstract

Here’s one of the free (abbreviated) articles:

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-1276295.html

Snopes.com has, also, gotten in on the topic. One knowledgeable source on Reagan’s California governorship and its treatment of the state’s mentally ill population during the 1970’s offered the following remarks. (In my opinion this is, in fact, the very same administrative practice Ronald Reagan continued while in the White House.)

The law that Reagan signed was the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS), passed by the legislature & signed into law in 1967 by Governor Ronald Reagan. The idea was to, "Stem entry into the state hospital by encouraging the community system to accept more patients, hopefully improving quality of care while allowing state expense to be alleviated by the newly available federal funds." It also was designed to protect the rights of mental patients. It was considered a landmark of its time - a change in the attitude toward mental illness and its treatment.

The law restricted involuntary commitment, among other things. It allows people to refuse treatment for mental illness, unless they are clearly a danger to someone else or themselves. It facilitated release of many patients - supposedly to go to community mental health treatment programs.

Reagan's role, besides signing the bill, was using it as a reason to cut his budget. What Reagan did was, at the same time the bill was passed, to reduce the budget for state mental hospitals. His budget bill, “Abolished 1700 hospital staff positions and closed several of the state-operated aftercare facilities. Reagan promised to eliminate even more hospitals if the patient population continued to decline. Year-end population counts for the state hospitals had been declining by approximately 2000 people per year since 1960."

This law presumed that the people released from hospitals or not committed at all would be funneled in community treatment as provided by the Short Doyle Act of 1957. It was, "Designed to organize and finance community mental health services for persons with mental illness through locally administered and locally controlled community health programs."

It also presumed that the mentally ill would voluntarily accept treatment if it were made available to them on a community basis. However, because of the restrictions on involuntary commitment, seriously mentally ill people who would not consent to treatment, "Who clearly needed treatment but did not fit the new criteria or who recycled through short term stays - became a community dilemma. For them, there was nowhere to go." Once released, they would fail to take meds or get counseling and went right back to being seriously ill.

Also, unfortunately, at the time LPS was implemented, funding for community systems either declined or was not beefed up. Many counties did not have adequate community mental health services in place and were unable to fund them. Federal funds for community mental health programs, which LPS assumed would pick up the slack, began drying up in the early 1980s, due to budget cutbacks in general. The Feds shifted funding responsibility to the states.

(Outdated) Sources:

http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~cmhsr/history.html
http://www.desertpacific.mirecc.va.gov/news/lps-reform.shtml#history

Snopes.com/Kathy B./Reply To, ‘Did Reagan Kick People Out Of Institutions?)

http://msgboard.snopes.com/message/ultimatebb.php?/ubb/get_topic/f/37/t/001063/p/1.html

You don’t have to take anyone’s word for it. You’ve got a computer; go crazy; and research the subject for yourself. ;)

[AlchemyAcres]

You’re welcome to research this topic for yourself.

Oh, you can bet that I did!

I went through all of Reagan's executive orders last night and could not find one that appears to have anything to do with what you assert.

Reagan did sign into law The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1986.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinney%E2%80%93Vento_Homeless_Assistance_Act

~Martin

[MissouriFree]

Oh, you can bet that I did!

I went through all of Reagan's executive orders last night and could not find one that appears to have anything to do with what you assert.

Reagan did sign into law The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act of 1986.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinney%E2%80%93Vento_Homeless_Assistance_Act

~Martin


Agree Martin,
And beside which "FEDERAL " mental health hospitals would that be that the president has control over. Internet rumor and nothing more that the president to could do such a thing.
Waiting for any valid site that supports such a claim is going to be a long wait.

There was a move in the late 60's and early 70's that resulted in rules that patients could not be held against their will.
even the state law that they quoted from California did this and was a patient protection act. a good thing.. The Act in effect ended all hospital commitments by the judiciary system, except in the case of criminal sentencing (e.g. convicted sexual offenders) and those who were "gravely disabled" defined as unable to obtain food, clothing, or housing

[AlchemyAcres]

I learned a valuable lesson back in the 80's

That sad, scruffy looking, knit hat wearing (in summer), old bicycle riding, torn clothing wearing, vagabondish, "dirt poor" person that I felt sorry for and helped turned out to be a member of one of the wealthiest familes around....living sub-frugally and hermit-like off the family trust!!!!! :eek: Probably could have bought and sold me 100,000 times!!! LOL

Things are not always what they seem!!

I now only help those who I'm absolutely sure need it!!!


~Martin

[Stinger]

‘You can't help those who simply will not be helped. One problem that we've had, even in the best of times, is people who are sleeping on the grates, the homeless who are homeless, you might say, by choice.’ - President Reagan

(1/31/84, Ronald Reagan, Good Morning America, On Defending His Administration Against Charges Of Callousness.)

Or, my personal favorite –

'His indifference to urban problems was legendary. Early in his presidency, at a White House reception, Reagan went up to the only black member of his Cabinet, Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Samuel Pierce, and said; ‘How are you, Mr. Mayor? I'm glad to meet you. How are things in your city?”

(6/11/04: Another Ronald Reagan Guffaw As Quoted In The Albion Monitor Article, ‘Reagan’s Homelessness’)

AlchemyAcres, (and any others who feel like chiming in) :)

Apparently there are quite a few people who would disagree with your viewpoint. You, may however, be correct in as much as President Reagan did not close down any of these psychiatric or VA hospitals by executive order. Instead he and his administration seem to have done it as a matter of ongoing routine daily policy.

(So, to use another one of President Reagan’s own favorite excuses; ‘Apparently I misspoke when I used the expression, ‘executive order’. What I should have said is, ‘ongoing domestic policy’. Sorry, I hope I didn’t waste too much of anybody's time.) :D

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1817&dat=19850308&id=HzodAAAAIBAJ&sjid=8KUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4229,2384999

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/6/11/reagan_and_the_homeless_epidemic_in

http://www.dailynugget.com/2004/06/ronald-reagan-the-bad-and-the-ugly/

http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/135/reagan.html

http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-06-09/business/17430568_1_deficits-billion-defense-spending

The dumping of mindless and severely disturbed people onto the streets of American cities, mostly during the 1980’s, appears to have been the result of numerous political acts, decisions, and subsequent legislation conducted, largely and in part, during the Reagan presidency.

During the late 1980’s I lived with this social phenomenon almost everyday; I watched it grow; and I saw these people wandering around various city streets on a daily basis. Perhaps you’re correct, none of this was done by Ronald Reagan’s specific executive order; however, it certainly did happen! It appears to be a problem that began immediately before the Reagan era, and continued on for, at least, several more years after he left office.

In my opinion, to date, Reagan’s presidency has played the largest and most active role. Anyway, the suffering of these, ‘street people’ is now finished. Geraldo never did a special on their plight; and the national news media was able to successfully ignore them. They’ve, now, all died off; and, like I said, I really don’t care anymore about these events than most other people do.

What’s done is done. So, let’s all hope that the current President doesn’t come up with an even more deleterious financial health plan that will put even more Americans out on the street, devoid of any genuinely useable medical benefits, and silently screaming for help.

I’m finished with this topic now. You can have, both, the thread and whatever fond political memories you choose to entertain. Again if I, ‘rocked anybody's boat’ I apologize. ;)

[AlchemyAcres]

I only asked that you back up your assertions with facts which you've failed to do.
The burden of proof is on you.

Instead he and his administration seem to have done it as a matter of ongoing routine daily policy.


In my opinion, to date, Reagan’s presidency has played the largest and most active role.

You're ignoring the The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act.

Inventing Homelessness....

http://www.nationalreview.com/reagan/horowitz200406101407.asp

Homeless in America.......

http://www.nationalreview.com/flashback/anderson200406080847.asp


~Martin

[nhlivefreeordie]

‘Apparently I misspoke

You did. Why not try reading something factual about Reagan rather than left wing hate blogs.
Try " The Crusader " by Paul Kengor if you really want to learn who Reagan was, it is apparent by your posts that your preconceived notion has you blind to the truth, as evidenced by Martin's quick rejection of your original premise.