indictment?

We admire President Carter.

So do we.

EPU-ed — CNN just reported a Michigan Republican Congressman turned lobbyist just indicted for aiding terrorist groups? I didn’t catch the name….

p.s. to Kiddo — I’m with your last thread comment. No connection at all to Edwards campaign but I urge everyone to contribute @ johnedwards.com

Donate early, donate often…and we will get better Democrats.

Back to work now….

Gore Vidal once remarked the Senate’s rich sense of irony in naming one of the nation’s most unsafe airports after the president who fired the air traffic controllers.

History is going to be kind to that man..

Lets not forget that living standards for workers kept going down during his Presidency. Lets not forget selling weapons to Iran while Iran’s terror group Hezbollah was blowing up Marines in Lebanon.

Ronnie Wormfood.
Good place for ‘im.
There was a ton of nefarious shit going on under Raygun, which gave rise to the current crop of miscreant criminals running around DC like the cockroaches they are.
As a figurehead, he was a beaut.

Reagan — guzzle with impunity
Bush — shop ’til you drop…

you got this right on, Jane!

mutter, mutter, mutter, gotta finish that project…now, mutter, mutter….

That was in response to nice comments re; Jimmy Carter….need more coffee.

Mark Deli Siljander

should have said he’s from Michigan

Former Michigan Rep. Mark Deli Siljander is charged with being part of a ring that sent $260,000 to a warlord allied with the Taliban.

The result of the Carter Administration programs to promote conservation and efficiency was that the country’s total energy consumption didn’t rise above 1978 levels until 1994. And that’s with Reagan undermining them as much as he could.

But Cheney is sure that conservation can’t really accomplish anything other than making people feel good about themselves.

He went to the Waffen SS cemetery at Bitburg to reconcile the wounded
feelings of the Nazis just like Philadelphia MS. A Republican op told me
candidly once “We’ll never get the Nazis out of the Party, they are just
too entrenched.” Reagan was a union busting thug, bigot, you name it.

No, Ronald Reagan didn’t appeal to people’s optimism, he appealed to their petty, small minded bigotry and selfishness.

Jane, where is your patriotism and respect for the former actor President?

Hello again, Jane…

I was talking with my lady last night about Ronald Reagan. She asked me if I was proud of the fact that I voted against Mr. Reagan? Twice for guv when we lived in Sacramento, and twice for prez. I acknowledged I was very proud of those votes. She advised me… she was too. Lord, I love this woman.

This is the kind of garbage that makes me detest Obama. Prior to listening, I merely disliked him.

My first vote was for Jimmy Carter. I have always detested Raygun (raised in Ca.). I always remind his fans of the number of cabinet members of his (Raygun) that were indicted. They hate that.

Here’s the AP story: Siljander news.

He apparently also has Moony connections.

Ronald Reagan was also big on family values despite having a very dysfunctional family of his own. He played up to the religious Right but seldom if ever went to church. A fiscal conservative he quadrupled the national debt. A believer in a stand tall and tough foreign policy, his invasion of Grenada played like a bad comedy and after the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut he withdrew so fast the dust didn’t have time to settle. The Great Communicator, he was an empty suit who read whatever his handlers placed in front of him. His trickle down economics consisted mainly in the rich pissing on the middle class.

I guess the part I’m missing here is what halo did he have to let slip?

Gore Vidal once remarked the Senate’s rich sense of irony in naming one of the nation’s most unsafe airports after the president who fired the air traffic controllers.

And without intending irony, former GOP Virginia governor Gilmore wrote an op-ed at the time declaring that the airport should be renamed to commemorate the fact that Reagan had devolved control of the airport to local authorities, ignoring the fact that the name change was being forced on those local authorities by the federal government.

Jimmy Carter attempted to make the US live up to its professed ideals.

Reagan made people feel that it was OK to hate others.

Reagan offered the easy path and folks took it.

As a reult of his supposed inattentiveness, Reagan allowed a secret self-funding cabal to form within his administration that pursued a foreign policy that was contrary to the stated and sanctioned foreign policy of this nation.

Ronald Reagan also launched an incredible decade of greed, junkbonds, and ehtic mayhem that made portions of the middle class fall into poverty. He also inaugurated the Repug flight from reality, when he would cite movie scenes as his memory of events. He did give fine speeches, however, which he honed from the days of his radio show before he became governor of CA.

He went to the Waffen SS cemetery at Bitburg to reconcile the wounded
feelings of the Nazis just like Philadelphia MS. A Republican op told me
candidly once “We’ll never get the Nazis out of the Party, they are just
too entrenched.” Reagan was a union busting thug, bigot, you name it.

He went to the Waffen SS cemetery at Bitburg to reconcile the wounded
feelings of the Nazis just like Philadelphia MS. A Republican op told me
candidly once “We’ll never get the Nazis out of the Party, they are just
too entrenched.” Reagan was a union busting thug, bigot, you name it.

This on the blog where we were supposed to “give . . .respect because . . .is a candidate for the presidency”?

Mine, too! A proud, if unsuccessful, start.

Ronald Reagan’s Sleepy Hollow…

Don’t neglect the hypocracy. For example funding terrorists to murderously overthrow democratically elected governments using a money ring created by selling arms to our enemies.

Training OBL.

I do not recall while under oath starting in the 50’s or 60’s.

And the fact the he was (if not in spirit) the head of the Screen Actors Guild – and then goes on to bust unions. Not only that he was really working for MGM or whatever signing secret deals with them.

Lastly fighting against progress and then having his wife change to support stem cell research when….when he needed it (theoretically).

Putting on a Cowboy hat and boots and playing at wild wild west to declare a national emergency over Nicaragua was pretty funny as well.

What does the clip above say that spawned this thread?

Yeah, well, my first Presidential vote was cast for George McGovern.

Having respect for the office of the President of the United States of America is one thing.
Having a shred of respect for certain men who have held that office, or aspire to holding that office is quite another matter.

I respect the office.
I detest the President.

Same here.

and the office of “candidate”?

Thank you, Jane. Having been there and watched it happen, I find it repugnant that the man could not only be lionized on the Right, but even by some on the Left. George W. Bush is the result of the Reagan doctrine, not an aberration. Let us never forget that.

Ronald Reagan’s legacy — he made it safe to Hate again.

It was largly understood in Sacramento that the power behind the throne during the Reagan years was Nancy, his wife. Reagan was a Democrat, before he married Nancy, who was a very conservative Goldwater girl from Arizona.

And pardons for prez crimes, starting with Ford, allowed Raygun’s halo to be untarnished. And now the same thing will happen with W.

Mine was Johnson.

If you look into Reagan’s actions with respect to MCA and SAG you will discover a highly corrupt individual

I didn’t think it was possible to dislike a president more than Ronald Reagan, until George W. Bush came along. What is Obama thinking?

BAC

Why does all that sound familiar?

Why does all that sound familiar?

That should be a reply to kiddo @ 40.

What do you think of when you hear the words William French Smith and Edwin Meese?

Attorney Generals that only look good when compared to Alberto Gonzales.

Respect is earned in the civilian world, these people have no rank
before or after election.

“When you’ve seen one Redwood you’ve seen ‘em all”. ‘I wish that anti-Viet Nam war protestor would lay down in front of my car’. “Trees pollute”.

Way O/T: I cannot get back to the Beck thread; just lets me sign in here. I wanted to respond to a question about my 60% statement. Sorry, I had gone to work. You may be right, and right now, I do not remember. If you remember pretty clearly, I probably misspoke/mistyped. (I’ll try to find our what’s wrong with my sign-in.)

And all Raygun’s mucking about in Latin America was a wet test for what W’s doing in the ME now. Here the reference: Empire’s Workshop—Latin America, the United States, and the Rise of the New Imperialism by Greg Grandin

Catsup is a vegetable.

My dad used to tell people at work a bit of RayGun truth and that they were voting against themselves…they never caught on until years later. Nearly to a person they all said: Damn you were right!
I only pray now that any more pension and health is not taken from them, and not to serious consequences for literally shoveling asbestos.

Ronald Reagan was not in favor of free-speech. He and I differed on this.

” We want Clarity, Optimism” We want Welfare moms from Chicago as Scapegoats and Crackheads to excuse the GOP’s hate/fear of African Americans.
The penalties for crack a drug used more by African Americans were way higher than the penalty for coke a drug used by Whites.
Obama are you aware that this difference led to 1 out of 10 African Americans going to jail?
Funny how with Meth a drug used by Whites the GOP and media are not going crazy to punish these people.

If I understand Barack, and I think I do, he was commenting on how Raygun was elected, the promises he made. Not how he ruled once installed.

I had forgotten that. ;0)

Oh, and I have it from a conservative authority that RayGun only pulled out of Beruit because of liberal pansies pressuring him – what a loser.

Yet another reason I say not “Obama Oh-Eight”, but rather “Obama? Oh, Wait” I can’t believe that Obama was actually praising St. Ronnie the man who as Jane correctly points out began his run in Philadelphia, Mississippi with Karl Rove mentor, Lee Atwater by his side.

Reagan was easily the most likable personification of fascism in American history until Beloved Leader came along, and fooled the sheeple by having Rove make the “average” white guy think he’d pop around with a sack of brots and a six of Bud.

One of the great PR jobs of all time is to revise Reagan. This meat puppet was actually controlled by the Baker/Meese/Regan cabal. Uncanny the similarity of the current cabal; a useless prick fronting a monstrous group of traitors.

This is what I meant in my 27:

In 1985, Reagan visited a German military cemetery in Bitburg, Germany to lay a wreath with West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, but it was found that the cemetery held the graves of 49 members of the Waffen-SS. In advance of the visit, many prominent U.S. government officials, veterans, Jewish leaders, Holocaust survivors, 95 Republican and 215 Democratic members of Congress, even First Lady Nancy Reagan protested and called on Reagan to cancel the visit,[110] but the president argued that it would be wrong to back down on a promise he had made to Chancellor Kohl. Reagan issued a statement that called the Nazi soldiers buried in that cemetery “victims” and some say equated them with victims of the Holocaust, but Pat Buchanan, Director of Communications under Reagan, argues: “President Reagan never equated SS troops and camp victims. He equated the teenage boys Hitler put in uniform and sent to certain death at war’s end with concentration camp victims.”[111] In the end, Reagan attended the ceremony where two military generals laid the wreath, as was customary.[112] In 1983, he told prominent Jews — notably Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir of Israel, Simon Wiesenthal, and Rabbi Marvin Hier of Los Angeles — of his personal experience vis-à-vis the Holocaust, saying “I was there,” and that that he had assisted at the liberation of Nazi death camps. He was in a film unit in Hollywood that processed raw footage it received from Europe for newsreels, but was not in Europe during the war.[

My bold.

If it hasn’t been mentioned already, this is how Froomkin begins today:

President Bush’s self-image continues to amaze. Wrapping up an eight-day Middle East trip, the man who has launched two wars and may be hankering for a third told ABC News yesterday that he is terribly misunderstood in the region.

“I mean, my image [is]: ‘Bush wants to fight Muslims.’ And, yeah, I’m concerned about it. Not because of me, personally. I’m concerned because I want most people to understand the great generosity and compassion of Americans,” Bush told Terry Moran.

“But yeah, look, I’m sure people view me as a warmonger and I view myself as peacemaker.”

Catsup is a vegetable.

So is ketchup. And since RR was such a firm believer in choice, the school cafeteria would let you choose which of those two veggies you wanted on your french fries.

Why is Obama trying to win over Reagen voters we already have 70%? The 30%ers who still love Reagen will never like him no matter how much he tries to such up.
On the other hand we hate the weakness of appealing to evil rather than fighting it.
John Edwards might be the only fighter we got.

Listen again & read Jane’s critique.

I know about the civil rights movement and Philadelphia, MS (and the daring reference to it in the original 1967 In the Heat of the Night), but Ronald who? I thought Reagan was a B-grade movie actor who presided over the demise of public service and responsible government. I hadn’t realized he’d become a demi-god. Are we now to say, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ronald?

Ron was Senile and getting worse but the MSM never called him on it.

Reagan made good use of his 4-F Captaincy in the Air Corps to get luv from the military in the 80’s. He was very deferential in public to the brass, and they loved him for it. I remember a quote of his, “When four stars talks to two bars (a captain) two bars listens”. God they ate that up like groveling sycophants.

Oh, and McDonalds employees “manufacture” hamburgers so are manufacturing jobs.

No, he’s just referred to by Rs (with reverence) and Ds (with sarcasm) as St Ronnie. He hasn’t quite made it into the Holy Trinity quite yet.

At least Reagan knew how to bully those too helpless to defend themselves. Remember Grenada (”Operation Urgent Fury”)? George W. Bush did not learn this lesson (Iraq) from his self-professed hero, Ronnie.

Today Tweety would be calling for the head of any Democrat who made that mistake. But Its Ok If Your A Republican seems to be his mantra.

Re:

This is the kind of garbage that makes me detest Obama. Prior to listening, I merely disliked him.

Hmmm, my reaction was the opposite. I thought that Obama’s saccharine and innocuous paean to Reagan was perfectly in keeping with the themes of optimism and the audacity of hope of his campaign. Nothing jarring about the message, which is one of anti-fear-mongering which I approve of. I’m not really troubled by the lack of content in much of Obama’s pronouncements. He’s cleverly offering the citizenry the opportunity to paint their own political canvas and install Obama front and center. It’s a reasonable way to run a campaign.

Let’s consider the opposite tack for a moment. Ronald Reagan, whether we here at FDL like him or not is one of the most revered politicians in recent memory. To what end would Obama come out and attack Reagan? That would serve no political purpose whatsoever.

I’m sensing here a bit of overreach to read too much into the time-filling homage that Obama was offering up in the video provided. This is the first and only time I’ve heard Obama mention Reagan. Clearly this isn’t a main thrust of Obama’s campaign. Why make a mountain of a molehill?

For more substance, I liked this seven minute interview with one of Obama’s key staffers. This woman gave me a lot of confidence that Obama has surrounded himself with competent and intelligent staffers.

Barack Obama’s foreign policy
Senior Advisor Susan Rice outlines Obama’s “21st century approach” to foreign policy view

If it had been up to the republican congress in the 90s they would have named anything that did not move in the District of Columbia after St. Ronnie. Bad enough you have to fly into Reagan National now. They wanted him on coins, bills, buildings ad nauseum. I shudder to think what Junior will get named after him…might I suggest a landfill?

Oh man. First the SchWartzenegger wet kiss, and now this. I really want to like Obama, but it’s getting increasingly difficult. If he really feels this way…blech. If he’s following some sort of communication plan they have, he’s got to come back closer to the ranch, or he’s gonna lose more people than he gains by playing the Republican card.

Obviously the Republicans are missing the boat. They need a really catchy slogan. Something along the lines of “I support a bottle of ketchup in every home”.

The Raygun thing makes about as much sense as bragging about the LV Reviewjournal endorsement.

One of the reasons why Obama (or Edwards, or Clinton) should reach out to get Reagon voters at least not hate them, is that if the Dems want to do anything serious after the election, we are going to need ALOT of people across the spectrum on board to counter big industry (pharma etc.). One of the main problems with Bill Clinton is that the Rethugs came to be so furious with him (was it Carville’s actions in part) that they impeded him and the Dems at every step. This is also part of the problem with Hillary- she thinks only in terms of us/them.

“Experts agree: Meese is a pig!”

(Excellent graffiti campaign in DC during his tenure.)

aka pandering

You’re right. We could do worse. But it is not actively good.

agree largely with you.

RayDuray January 16th, 2008 at 12:33 pm 74
In response to eCAHNomics @ 20
Re:

This is the kind of garbage that makes me detest Obama. Prior to listening, I merely disliked him.
Hmmm, my reaction was the opposite. I thought that Obama’s saccharine and innocuous paean to Reagan was perfectly in keeping with the themes of optimism and the audacity of hope of his campaign.

–

But you would have to say what America needs right now is likely not cognative dissonance, no? If he wants to draw parallels that could be problematic (RayGun said plenty of nice things to get elected – and I will to. He united the country…with blindness to their own ruin, etc).

Well, one thing to be said in Reagan’s favor perhaps, is that this nitwit wanted only to blow up a small island. Lieberman and Bush are working to blow up the Middle East.

Re:

Reagan was a Democrat,

He was also a snitch at that time, turning in purported Communist sympathizers to the FBI while he served as President of SAG.

need ALOT of people across the spectrum on board to counter big industry (pharma etc.)

The only part of the spectrum that will counter the corportocracy is on the left. Trying to get the near right in the big tent is actively contrary to the goal. They’ll get in the way at every opportunity.

Yeah, I’m just so glad they didn’t manage to push through putting Reagan on the twenty-dollar bill. Though the move to put him on the dime (specifically to replace FDR) says a lot more about their true motives.

I worry if Obama becomes president, he will trust republicans and become a betrayed, frustrated president paralyzed by false promises and failed alliances. His optimism that he can bring the two sides together is noble but I fear danger because the GOP will use it to try to bring him down.

Before the Reagan crowd, anyone using the word “entrepreneur” in Texas risked getting the crap beat out of them. Suddenly, the all wanted to be one and the only thing holding them back was the government and leeches at the public trough.

Oh, yeah, Ronald Reagan, the ultimate flip-flopper. Was a Dem; became a Rethug. Was a union man; became union buster.

But didn’t he have a Democratic Congress? Many of them would now be called Blue Dogs or Bush Dogs, but at least in name, they were Dems. It may be time to assert a brand, but even with a Dem in the WH, could the Democratic party survive a purge of sorts of the Blue Dogs?

I don’t think it’s noble – I think it’s wimpy. Sorry

If Obama becomes prez, he’ll appoint a Supreme who will vote with the majority in the interest of bipartisanship.

Also from Froomkin:

In a joint statement with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Sharm el Sheikh, Bush sounded a bit defensive about his peace initiative: “I told the President I’m going to stay — there’s a wonder whether or not the American President, when he says something, whether he actually means it. When I say I’m coming back to stay engaged, I mean it. And when I say I’m optimistic we can get a deal done, I mean what I’m saying.”

If he was engaged there would be no need to come back.

Re:

If you look into Reagan’s actions with respect to MCA and SAG you will discover a highly corrupt individual

The documentary “The Last Mogul” has a surprising amount of scurrilous information about Reagan’s unique relationship with Lew Wasserman. Unsavory, to say the least.

I couldn’t vote until 16 months after I came home from the Nam.

Agreed. They have hated FDR ever since he escorted Hoover from the inaugural platform.

The parallels between that era and this are becoming eerily more similar every day…

Hi all-
Remember, also, for the ultimate blech factor, there was a movement in the early ’90’s to put Reagan on Mt. Rushmore.

It is to retch.

Wasn’t Reagan at one time prez of the Screen Actors Guild? It’s all so bizarre.

Hmm, I’m not sure if I agree with that. Republican politicians will certainly get in the way at every opportunity. But considering the big shift in party identification over the past few years, I think it’s possible there are more Republican voters who can still be brought back to the light. I don’t have any problem with reaching out to them, as long as it isn’t done using right-wing talking points that undermine our objectives.

Right. Used to be biddnessman. Texas has gone French since Texas Monthly
and women at A&M. Government contracts are the only free enterprise the
conservatives are good at, sole source no-bid, what an expensive joke.

I disagree VERY much with this! He has a far more liberal voting record than Hillary, and, as I recall Edwards too. Edwards, remember, voted for the bankrupcy bill, among many other things that he should regret now.

Actually it was during the Reagan admin that the term “Blue Dog” was first coined, to describe the Dems from the south who bucked Tip O’Neill and backed a lot of Reagan’s programs in defiance of the rest of the majority. IIRC, Phil Gramm was one of the ring leaders who went on to become an R and ran for President himself as an R.

The big shift in voter identification has been because the Ds have better policies (as ineffective as they are at executing them). No need to pander if that continues to be the case.

Re:

What is Obama thinking?

That Ronald Reagan is the most popular President in history, according to recent polls.

If you don’t regret something you haven’t lived.

Ooops. Forgot the snark alert.

You missed my point – which was, you don’t want to go around antagonize everyone over every thing. On the BIG matters you stand your ground, but finding ways to get along more generally is smart – and it is where the US people are at now.

Edwards said that was a big mistake on his part during the debate last night.

How many Reagans does it take to screw in a light bulb? Ronnie was fond of homilies. Wasn’t he?

RAYGUN= first General Electric highly paid PATSY

If he was engaged there would be no need to come back.

Maybe he can get engaged to Condi while he’s there, and they can both live there. Then he won’t have to come back home to Laura. He also won’t have to come back home to lead the country. But I guess that would leave things to…Darth Cheney! And you think things are bad now. Just wait.

Yeah, you had to be 21. I was in a college Air Force ROTC training camp in August,1964, when Johnson made the first big committment of troops and bombing of North Vietnam. I was married with one child when I went on active duty and served from 1965 to 1969.

I actually cast my first vote at 17. In Kentucky, you could vote in the primary at 17 if you were 18 before the general election in November. At the time, KY and Georgia were the only states with the 18 year old vote. And yes, we could vote in the President’s race.

Decide which hill you are willing to die on.

Basic at Campbell AIT at Knox. . .no voting though, ha!

Well, when you state it that way, no politician should go out of her/his way to antagonize anyone.

We in this house like Edwards. We think he won that debate thingie last night, hands down.

We have 70% only a true economic collapse or a huge defeat at war could reverse “Shock Doctrine ” the 30%ers. Which I admit is possible but Bush and not us is doing that all by himself. I don’t want either to happen and thats why I comment here to try and change things.
We have the power to change things right now we just don’t have the will in the House or Senate.
Threaten to close army bases in GOP districts whose Representives support the war, tell them that we are doing it to pay for the war. Force the GOP to make uncomfortable either or choices.
We cannot let the GOP slide on paying the cost of this war anymore. After all once a Dem wins then they will blame us for paying for the war they didn’t.
Jimmy Carter fell into that trap Reagen blamed him for paying for a war which Ron supported.
Today’s Dems seemed to have learned nothing from history.

And with a degree too? Officer I assume?

Polygamy is de rigeur for many in the ME.

Yes, or, which hills you need to protect with extra fortifications so that it doesn’t fall.

Yeah.

I have a gay friend who lives in Pasadena who says that the talk about Rayguns was that he would sleep with anyone to give head get ahead in the movies.

That Reagan may be the most popular President in recent history is testimony to the power and efficiency of the propaganda apparatus, IMO.

Yes, it is. However, the one thing I find somewhat amusing about the whole business is how they’re in such a rush to get everything named after St. Ronnie. For people who like to pretend they’re absolutely certain they’re right about everything, the unwillingness to wait for the judgment of history betrays a fear that if they don’t build the monuments right now while people are still alive who remember him, future generations won’t agree that he’s a great hero.

The Reagan-name project most deserving of the name is the Ronald Reagan Building in DC. It’s a huge white-elephant office building that was started with great fanfare about how it was going to be built entirely with private investment, and then it went massively over budget and had to be bailed out by the Federal Government. The Reagan administration in a nutshell.

Both Clinton and Obama voted to re-authorize the Patriot Act on March 2, 2006.

This drives me absolutely nuts. So many “good Democrats” will tell you they hate Bush, but oh, they loved Reagan.

Are they brain dead? Or don’t they care enough to know even a little about the history of St. Ronnie?

Reagan was hideous. He was in 1981, and he still is today. (His legacy.)

Bill and Hill. I’m thinking seriously about needing an Alka-Selzer. Or perhaps a purgative. Maybe both. And then there’s Obama. The man who aspires to be the Great Compromiser.

if they don’t build the monuments right now while people are still alive who remember him, future generations won’t agree that he’s a great hero.

The first time I’ve heard of anything the current Rs are right about.

This post is seriously weak!! You’re busting the guys balls for saying favorable things about President Reagan. Do you also have a major meltdown when someone from the other side gives props to Bill Clinton? Didn’t Reagan win 49 states in 1984? No, you’re probably right, guys a serious loser! You certainly shouldn’t show respect to a guy that kicked the shit of us twice.

I honestly think Dems need to become MUCH smarter politically- and yes, bases is part of this. But, part of this is because the Dems basically wrote off the South after Reagan, and so that really empowered them in Congress. One advantage of Obama, and maybe Edwards (let’s see SC for example) is that old North-South divide for Dem support may be broken. That will make a big difference.

LOL it would fit his pattern of doing anything to get ahead.

Do you also have a major meltdown when someone from the other side gives props to Bill Clinton

When was the last time you heard anyone on the right say anything positive about Bill?

I’m getting too excited. I’m going home.

OK, and the bankrupcy bill? And the list of most liberal Senators? (It is a whole picture decision).

Someone from the other side gave props to Bill Clinton?

Damn. I missed it.

The Federal Government GREW under Reagan and SHRANK under Clinton.
Deregulation has done NOTHING for American consumers other than make them less safe.

Edwards had a pretty good voting record as a Senator but he has become much more progressive with respect to big business since ~’05.

Point taken. I had wandered from the jumping-off point of this discussion and was speaking more of the general idea of reaching out and telling them they’re welcome to come on board and help with the good things we’re going to do.

He went to the Waffen SS cemetery at Bitburg…

Bitte ein, Bit! ;-)

The bar has sunnk so low.

I remember Reagan refusing to acknowledge the AIDS crisis for the first few years of his administration allowing the epidemic to fester.

Progressives will never prevail until the engage and slay the ghost of Ronald Reagan, his cult of greed, and his insane economic theories.

And now is the perfect time to engage Reganomics, with:
o healthcare crisis
o the mortgage meltdown
o Ron Paul advocating an extreme form of regulation-free capitalism.

Reagan used the hostage crisis the same way Bush used 911. Reagan was a tiny bit more subtle than Bush. He did damage but nothing compared to Bush but I guess you have to start somewhere.

Oh my. You are obviously as sharp as a tack. I’m from the left and I think my feelings on Hillary and Billy are not aligned with the positive. Could you let us know your choice for the next prez?

Yes, but there were also the “Reagan Democrats.” Per wiki:

The “Reagan Democrats” were Democrats before the Reagan years, and afterward, but they voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 (and for George H. W. Bush in 1988), producing their landslide victories. Reagan Democrats were mostly white ethnics in the Northeast who were attracted to Reagan’s social conservatism on issues such as abortion, and to his strong foreign policy.

Wiki goes on to say that the DLC was created basically to recapture those Reagan Democrats. There whole purpose was to move the party more to the center to accommodate the Reagan Democrats as preferable to letting them stay with the Repugs. The question I’m asking perhaps should be framed as, how do we win the hearts and minds of people and bring them into the party without alienating the more conservative among us. There was lots to be appalled about in the Bush administration. He really showed the soft underbelly of his party bigtime: rampant racism, corruption and incompetence at all levels, and a cornucopia of bad ideas. We need to take back a lot of votes, but we need to be careful not to steamroller over some very touchy feelings. My best advise is that most people, black and white, conservative and liberal, saw something appalling about the aftermath of Katrina.

Der Bitburger Pils smecht am besten!

If the Gods had wanted us to vote, they would have given us candidates.

William Blum, author of the Anti-Empire Report discusses Ralph Nader as “An Unreasonable Man”

Blum, the author of ““Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II”” is one of America’s real experts on our military interventions in Latin America over the past few decades. He was also brought up in one of those fake Osama Bin Laden tapes about a year ago and enjoyed a brief spurt in book sales. As Chomsky says “Far and away the best book on the topic.”

With that I wholehearted agree. But I think that doesn’t describe what Obama’s trying to do. His game, as I interpret it, is to move right to accomodate them, not to just invite them participate with us.

true (and having to repres SC may have been a factor), but then you can’t set Obama as below him in this respect, because the history isn’t there. And, FWIW, Edward’s business since then helping firms estab off shore offices in the Caribbean isn’t exactly positive (we really need those taxes if we are going to change the U.S.). Think about what Edwards did after leaving office in comparison with Carter (on housing) or Gore (on the environment). Again, I would support Edwards, but in my view each has pluses and negs.

Heh, Reagen went to the cemetery, I went to the Brewery! ;-)

Don’t forget the oil/pollution crisis. Carter was clear about what needed to be done. We need to remind Americans about that, too. We wouldn’t be fighting this horrid, stupid war if the country had listened to the stronger moral view.

Gee. I’d be happy just to get in the ring with Georgie Boy. I think three minutes ought to do it. Can I get into trouble for saying this? Ooooh. I hope so. ;0)

Why does Obama feel that he must pander to the right instead of letting the left help and support him? I don’t understand why the Dem base is rejected in favor of people who will never vote for him. Of course, Hillary has done this, too, along with Pelosi, Reid……

Basically, the Blue Dogs in Congress were just a manifestation of the so-called “Reagan Dems” which were mainly disaffected blue collar types, usually with HS educations who were still somewhat overwhelmed by the actions of the ’60s what with the student protests and civil rights movements.

Geaorge HW Bush says nice things about Clinton all the time. Although, that doesn’t matter. I don’t understand thed purpose this post. Speaking favorably about Ronald Reagan is disqualifier for a Dem Presidential canidate. That’s the most silly, slow-witted, crock of shit I’ve ever heard.

OK, and the bankrupcy bill? And the list of most liberal Senators? (It is a whole picture decision).

I have reviewed the voting records and “voting scores” from both liberal and conservative organizations for all three. Comparing is a little difficult due to when and how long each served as a Senator. As your example with Bankruptcy..Obama wasn’t in the Senate for either the ‘01 or the ‘05 bill.

My opinion is that there is very little difference overall among the three other than that Edwards seemed to have been a little more like to vote big business.

Whatever the early intentions, the reasons behind the DCC since then has been largely K-Street (corporate funding, hence support for corporate interests -bankrupcy bill etc) and Iraq war (fear of Kerry-style swift-boating, and equally importantly fear of being viewed as anti-Israel).

Yes, but there were also the “Reagan Democrats.”

And now we have the “bush doggie dems”. Raygun was very much the me and only me generation. His time spawned many a bad thing including Iran Contra and the selling of cocaine to finance illegal stuff and all the other stuff commented prior to this. The man was a swine.

and mostly due to the Clintons. What a crock about her claims that she has hands on management experience and that is what the country needs. Such bullshit. A President needs to be a pace setter, idea person.

The Reagan years were a blur for me. I was in process of becoming a wife, then mom, then single mom but I remember ONE THING exceedingly well. Everything got progressively harder and harder and harder.

Everything. Just kept getting harder, financially, career-wise, everything kept going up and up in cost and I just struggled on feeling nailed with each new turn, each new year. I remember that well.

I don’t get all the Sainthood bestowed on Reagan. And couldn’t BELIEVE that ridiculous (seems like 12) week long funeral and all the memorials, obits, and just outright openmouth crying when dude finally kicked it.

WHO ARE THOSE PEOPLE, I kept wondering. In the 7th year of Bu$hCo, I know them well. I GET it and studied what was up and why it kept getting harder during that time, when I was too busy trying to raise a little one alone to pay attention.

Reagan is over rated, to say the least. What an asshole, and laid the groundwork for the current asshole.
IMPEACH THEM!
i soooo feel for those in the trenches with little ones trying to survive this pResident, with no help.
siri

Well all this talk about the “Great Communicator” has pushed me over the top. I am heading for home for sure now. I need me some Lahoma.

Cause they know we have no where else to go.

Any sane traveller to the area would, my congratulations!

He might have kicked the shit out of you twice.

I read Blum’s Rogue State—A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower in 04. Good book.

In 1994, his doctors announced that Reagan had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s –

What they failed to mention was that the diagnosis had been made in 1967.

Thanks for the correction Steve, I appreciate it. Just for my info, were there other bankrupcy bills, or were there only the 01 and 05?

Why does Obama feel that he must pander to the right instead of letting the left help and support him?

(Bible) belts and suss panders?

Why does Obama feel that he must pander to the right instead of letting the left help and support him?

Because the voters already know that HRC is waaayyy to the right and he wants some of that voter action too. He wants the corporate world to feel happy with him in that he would not upset the moneyapple cart. Same old shit!

I’m sorry. I thought we lost those elections.

Is that snark? If not, wow.

sound of crickets chirping

The record Reagan made depicting the ‘evils’ of socialized medicine 40 years ago was disturbing. I wonder if his switch from dem to repub was swift &/or motivated more by what would get him ahead or real politcal belief.

On top of your game today :)

re: Blue Dogs

Remmeber how long it took the Ds to get rid of the rascist southerners? And we didn’t even do it on our own; had to leave it to the Rs to steal them. Are we glad they’re not in our party anymore? Are we glad we don’t have to compromise with them? Yes, lost the majority for awhile, but no regrets.

Ditto Blue Dogs, only hopefully we’ll replace them with better Ds contemporaneously instead of suffering the loss before finding the better spot.

One of the things which helped bring RR to power was a split in the Democratic Party. It probably was only a contributing factor, but for Jimmy Carter was too conservative for many Democrats. Ted Kennedy opposed President Jimmy Carter in the primaries. Although the two weakly shook hands, it was obvious that the damage was not repaired. It’s one of the reasons now that some of us start getting a little edgy when Democrats start stating their opposition to other Democrats in ways which are hard to back down from and ultimately help the Republicans.

I mentioned here before that I think it is deeper than this. I don’t see Obama’s “reaching” at this point as one of particular policy decisions. Rather, I think that having his mom and dad split so early, coupled with the complexities of his own early life situation (moves everywhere in different cultures) he (like many divorced kids) really longed to find a way to bring his parents back together. He is one of those people who sees unity worthy of doing in its own right. And, we will get much more done as a nation if we can get as many on board as possible.

I remember seeing a lot of signs around saying ‘Raketan Raus!’ Spangdahlem and Bitburg were the planned sites for the Pershing II’s at the time…

RR was the ultimate benefactor of the public murder of a generation’s
best Democratic leaders, the split follows that up.

Oh, that WE.

Nancy Davis Reagan (born Anne Frances Robbins on July 6, 1921) is the widow of former United States President Ronald Reagan and was First Lady of the United States from 1981 to 1989. Born in New York, her parents divorced soon after her birth; she grew up in Maryland, living with an aunt and uncle while her mother pursued acting jobs. As Nancy Davis, she was an actress in the 1940s and 1950s, starring in films such as Donovan’s Brain, Night into Morning, and Hellcats of the Navy. In 1952 she married Ronald Reagan, who was then president of the Screen Actors Guild; they had two children. Nancy became the First Lady of California when her husband was Governor from 1967 to 1975.

She became the First Lady of the United States in January 1981 following her husband’s landslide victory, but experienced criticism early in his first term due largely to her decision to replenish the White House china. Nancy restored a Kennedy-esque glamor to the White House following years of lax formality, and her interest in high-end fashion garnered much attention. She championed recreational drug prevention causes by founding the “Just Say No” drug awareness campaign, which was considered her major initiative as First Lady. More controversy ensued when it was revealed in 1988 that she had consulted an astrologer to assist in planning the president’s schedule after the 1981 assassination attempt on her husband’s life.

so true.

he (like many divorced kids) really longed to find a way to bring his parents back together.

Children of divorced parents seldom succeed in getting their parents back together, and many would admit, after self-examination, that’s it’s a good thing their parents didn’t get back together.

so much for that New Years’ resolution, a self-imposed moratorium on workday blog consumption and participation…

Have to disagree. We should never have given up the south to the Rs. Since the Rs were giving them attention they went in that direction. Not all people in the south are racists and would have been a good base to start to build. The south was traditionally Dem and it was rejected. The idea seemed to be “oh, well, they’re ALL just a bunch of racists and we don’t want them.” An opportunity lost – IMO

And how would you have gone after the non-racist south?

Pull Up a Couch? New Wed afternoon feature at FDL?

seriously…that’s an interesting point. Thanks.

It seems to me that whether he won or not is somewhat irrelevant…the questions I’m hearing, are, was he a good man? Did he serve the country well? Should he be admired as a person or as a President?
To my mind, the gutted tax base and infrastructure, the race-baiting, the transfer of wealth from the poor- and middle-class to the wealthy, allowing AIDS to spread, the covert wars, Iran-Contra, the lies, and the thousands of innocent dead in Central America say he was not.

If I interpret this video correctly, Obama is no longer reaching across the aisle, rather he has leapt across it. I WILL NO LONGER CONSIDER VOTING FOR THAT MAN.

Draw straws. . .or come to Athens!

Didn’t Reagan win 49 states in 1984? No, you’re probably right, guys a serious loser! You certainly shouldn’t show respect to a guy that kicked the shit of us twice.

I must admit, I have little to no respect for Ronald Reagan. But you’re right, he did kick the shit out of us twice. Or rather, his ideological temperment did. And right now we have a golden opportunity to recapture some of those very disillusioned hearts and minds. But it needs more careful framing, and a lot less gloating.

Thanks for the correction Steve, I appreciate it. Just for my info, were there other bankrupcy bills, or were there only the 01 and 05?

I don’t know the date from memory but the Republican Congress passed a Bankruptcy law in the late ’90’s that Bill Clinton vetoed; then came the ‘01 which Edwards pushed hard for and HRC voted for but didn’t become law. Then ‘05 and HRC voted against cloture and missed the final vote because Bill was having heart surgery.

Strange… today that huge fact is never mentioned, it is almost as if
they were always myths rather than real people, more advanced than we
are now. Maybe that was the “problem” then, but now this amnesia has
elevated a series of human jokes to presidential power.

It’s quite obvious if you listen to Obama speak he is talking about how Americans were ready for a change in the 1980 election, OBVIOUS because he says it.
I know you can’t speak ill of bloggers here and I’m not, I just think Jane may not have listened to what HE said. He’s not aggrandizing Raygun he’s merely pointing out the mood of the electorate.
If y’all keep inbreedin’ like this you’ll wake up with a sixth finger on one hand.

Jeez: Tell it like it is! Maybe there are some of us here who should start a 12-step program called: FDL-anonymous. (none of the other sites are as bad as this one). I am down to logging in as “payback” for finishing a certain amount of editing, then…I…hang…around…for too long. Help!

He was a skunk.

Re:

But you would have to say what America needs right now is likely not cognative dissonance, no?

Oh, I’m completely in favor of cognitive dissonance right about now. The more the public feels out of synch with the Bush propaganda as promoted by the MSM, the greater the repudiation in the fall.

Countin’ chickens up in here!

And I have to disagree with you here. For way too many of the Ds turned Rs in the south, they had the convenient “I didn’t leave the Dem Party, it left me” meme. Having grown up a liberal in the south, I know there are many liberals down there but there are far more who were looking for excuses.

The same way you win voters in other places. I notice you said we “got rid of” them. As if they didn’t pass the smell test. Just garbage to be thrown away. I don’t think it is ever smart to toss voters aside and they are, after all, Americans.

What he meant (I think) is that Reagan (and his myriad of supporters) changed the US significantly. One can’t deny it. Most of us would say for the worst (same with Thatcher in England). But as with post-Thatcher England, we can bring up the standard of living here if we vote smartly.

you’ll wake up with a sixth finger on one hand.

How do you know that I don’t already have one? Some have commented that I type fast. *g*

I believe you are being naive. Most white people in the south and many in this country are racists. Plenty of people don’t even realize they are racist.

I grew up in Metairie where Duke and Vitter climbed out of the slime and joined their fellow repugs diapers and all. I witnessed it. That and disregard of women. Lived in Knoxville, Memphis, Gulfport, Winston Salem.

“smile” -thanks.

Sorry. I didn’t mean to ruffle feathers. I just think this is a huge over reaction. He admires one of our dead Presidents. I admire some of them myself. I don’t think Obama should be rapped on the knuckles for it.

Yes, he was. Proud to have voted against him twice.

You missed the story of Ronnie banging Miss Davis while Jane was having their baby.

There are many ways to win votes, some better than others. Rove wins votes through dirty tricks. Specifically, what would you have done to attract non-racist southerners & what % of the white southern voters do you think they are?

Maybe true, but growing up in the once/still very judgmental calvinist New England, we were not much better (and indeed slaves were being purchased in this area before the south). My sense (and this in part from Carter) is that Southerners actually know each other better, and there is more cross-currency which has merits of its own. This is why SC will be very interesting esp in the Dem primary. Specifically the white/black breakdown on the 3 dem candidates.

I grant that disaster is a form of change. Obama visibly does not consider the Reagan Revolution a disaster. IMHO, Obama talks like a typical Republican, who view that everything that is wrong with this country now is due to the fact that GWB did not accurately conform to Reaganism.

I agree.

hence the hands across the aisle deal.

IIRC, blacks are half the D primary voters in SC. So the breakdown between Hillary, being the wife of the first “black” prez, Obama, potentially the first real black prez, and the white native, Edwards, will be very interesting indeed.

Wow! I just came in at the end of this thread, but that’s a damning conclusion.

Re:

I read Blum’s Rogue State—A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower in 04. Good book.

Since you appreciated that one, let me recommend another in a similar vein, Peter Dale Scott’s “The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America” published by the University of California Press.

Kucinich on the House floor raising the point that they are voting, once again, on wording in the defense authorization act (vetoed by Bush) which includes false affirmations of Iran’s nuclear program, contrary to everything the recently released NIE says.

It was not just the white south, but the white working class, especially
catholic north that became so-called Reagan Democrats then… they are
now Republicans, left the party, gone… build a new one with any of them
that want to, but bulk will be new people, younger, ready to get moving
out of this rut.

Off on the business of the Queen. See everyone later.

Metairie

Ooh, ooh. I know how to pronounce that!

I don’t see Obama’s comments that way, but…. On the mess we are in, while this is how the rethugs may see things, I think the bigger problem is Dems who have climbed into bed with the corporations (Biden, Lieberman, Rahm, Schumer) – and into the mid-east war attack group (same group)-and of course many more.

IMHO, Reaganism is the root of the problem with the country, and the embracing of Reaganis is exactly what is wrong with Democratic leadership.

go ahead let me hear it.

Nailed!

Hmm. I couldn’t get through to the video before. Now that I see it I agree that he’s too kind to Reagan, but I can also see that his main point is that we have the chance to have a major change in the direction of the country like Reagan accomplished, not that his change would be in the same direction as Reagan. This I agree with completely, and it’s one of the major reasons I support Edwards. *g*

Watch the clip. Obama is not praising Reagan’s policies. Watch the clip.

Jane has a new post upstairs for us! I will have one further comment in response to MikeMc as soon as I’m done with this post.

I’m a glutton for that kind of stuff. It’s in my shopping cart. Thanks.

erm
the present administration has made the Clintons shine by comparison
there has been a consistantly escalating race to the bottom since 1980

Meh-tuh-ree

Hmmm. Perhaps all of this acrimony culd have been avoided had Obama chosen some prez who really changed the direction of the country in a positive way, and did it be getting everyone together.

you right cher.

Sorry. I didn’t mean to ruffle feathers. I just think this is a huge over reaction. He admires one of our dead Presidents. I admire some of them myself. I don’t think Obama should be rapped on the knuckles for it.

You certainly didn’t ruffle my feathers. And I must admit, I don’t care much one way or the other about Obama; I’m an Edwards advocate. However, I am only concerned with a win for the Democratic party this time. We need to select judges and we are the only ones who will stand a chance of cleaning up any of the mess Bush made.

BTW, I don’t condemn folks for being respectful of US presidents of either party, no matter how bad I think the president was personally. I don’t consider it a fault to respect the office. Sometimes I just have a hard time living up to that, as in the case of GWB.

Bill Clinton has been taking some direct shots at Obama of late. I think Obama is trying to bait Bill into saying something about Reagan that will upset people.

And one more for the road?

Pepe Escobar’s “Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving Into Liquid War” is a well written peek under the covers of the Empire’s Lack of Decolletage.

To sample some of Escobar’s warez, you might look at his “Roving Eye” series at Asia Timees.

I just listened to the clip. I really didn’t get that Obama favored Reaganism. It seemed to me he was trying to explain Reagan’s election and why he’s the idol of a good sized part of the electorate. I always thought Reagan was a danger to everything I believe, but I had to try and understand why some people thought otherwise.

I favor Edwards, but was proud of all 3 last night and support whoever is nominated. I really don’t think Obama favors Reagan economic or foreing policy at all. If he said the guy had nice hair, it wouldn’t mean he supported him.

Sorry. Too many books awaiting. I gave you your one shot to add to my list. *g*

The author of this post watched this clip through a well worn filter. She clearly did not hear what Obama said.

Hey, not a problem. :)

What I like to do here in Central Oregon is to request these turgid and depresing reality based books through the library so I can beef up their collection. Just one more way to be an activist. :)

Cheerio!

Great idea. I, however, cannot read a book without writing in it. So the only thing I get from the NYPL is books on tape.

Indictment!

INDCTED REAGAN REPUBLICAN!

I don’t have a problem with Obama using Reagan’s appeal to win over some of the Reagan Democrats. I just wish he had left Bill Clinton’s name out of it. That was really gratuitous and unnecessary. I also personally think that the excesses of that era really opened up the potential for alot of people, especially minorities and women.

“He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like, you know, with all the excesses of the 60’s and 70’s and government had grown and grown but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. And I think people just tapped in – he just tapped in to what people were already feeling. We want clarity, we want optimism…”

Obama want a major change … in the direction of motherhood and apple pie. Where’s the fucking beef?

Obama’s only saying that the tide goes in and the tide goes out. Reagan came in at a time when Americans wanted to try something new and different. What Reagan promised was not necessarily better, and Obama doesn’t even imply that it was.

Obama’s first statement in the clip gives it away: I don’t want to present myself as some sort of singular figure . . . There’s nothing objectionable about making a comparison between himself and Ronald Reagan. Reagan came in with the tide, and so is Obama. Both are products of the times they live(d) in.

Obama, republikan-lite, woo-hoo! Three cheers for Ronnie Raygun. “The optimism” and “the dynamism”. Return to entreprenerealship. “Clarity,” about what? The Soviet menace? Taxcuts? Big gov military spending? Please. Notice during the last debate, Obama says the president provides leadership (re:visionary) and “the people” provide change. (People, who? when? when they’re not being squeezed and hung out to dry?) There is nothing in his definition of prez about policy and all that. It’s all corporate fluff ofvisionary at the helm, which sounds alarmingly Republikan.. What follows is something like “surrounding self with good people.” He can’t provide the vision of government that Edwards or even Hillary can.

Blogs are a place where anything goes and for the most part this is a good thing. But after watching this clip multiple times and reading the author’s post multiple times I’m begining to wonder. Does the author feel any resposibility to her readers, who are so clearly influenced by her opinions? If she does, surely she should go back, watch the entire clip again, and realize the error of her ways.

Yes let’s think about those feelings Raygun tapped into. Apple pie for the fundamentalists. Tax cuts for those who want to be rich. Big gun stance on the Soviet Union. And everything else? Shot to hell. It’s a myth. Even the most deluded Republikans (and I know some) have to admit it. It way too cynical of Barack Obama– or even scarier, if he means it. And if Barack Obama gives another “visionary at the helm” speech. I am going to throw up. It’s an insult to those of us who know that this country needs to be picked back to pieces, DOJ, New Orleans, education, etc. etc.

yea. this is on the right track but Veracifier.com hits it right on the money!

The Reagan era was the beginning of the America that I used to know going straight to hell. I can’t believe this guy is talking about excesses. Excesses like drug experimentation? Ahem. Or excesses like feminism and the civil rights movement? I guess people can and will make excuses for this, but I don’t see how you can rant and rave about Joe Lieberman and then swallow this garbage.

Obama is paraphrasing what the voters were thinking back in 80. He’s not saying this is what he thought.

Thank you. yes.
I think Obama’s commenting on what happened in the election.
and about speaking to optimism and vision in general.

Yes precisely those “excesses.” Last night during the debate Obama said something like: men, “particularly black men” need to be less absentee, and more accountable for their children’s upbringing. I need the transcript, but I believe Obama said this in response to some thread about the deterioriating state of our schools. Not once does he question the conditions that lead to parental absenteeism, like working three jobs to make ends meet, or no job at all (on account of them all going overseas thanx to Chimpy and his free trade confederates), etc. etc. Not once does Obama say scrap “No Child Left Behind.” He just wants to make teachers feel they’re not being punished by it. It’s all bull hinky triangulating.

Yes but he doesn’t offer the policy to back it up. In effect he’s praising Raygun’s demagoguery.

An update from TPM, clarifying…
“You can watch Obama’s full interview with the RGJ here.

Late Update: Here are some comments Obama made about Reagan’s presidency on Meet the Press in October 2006. In them, he made it far clearer that he disagreed with Reagan’s ideas:

But I think, when I think about great presidents, I think about those who transform how we think about ourselves as a country in fundamental ways…And, you know, there are circumstances in which, I would argue, Ronald Reagan was a very successful president, even though I did not agree with him on many issues, partly because at the end of his presidency, people, I think, said, “You know what? We can regain our greatness. Individual responsibility and personal responsibility are important.” And they transformed the culture and not simply promoted one or two particular issues.”

Ok, I listened to Barack. I had been unimpressed, now I am convinceed that an adeguate grasp of history, even of history which he experienced, simply eludes him.

Reagan appealed to the small-minded and venal, to hubris and to myths of superiority. Which ‘excesses’is Obama alluding to? Nixon’s? Vietnam? Carter’s attempt to encourage some honest perspective regarding energy policies? Perhaps it was the DFH’s?

Regardless, Reagan was and is a model that should be emulated in ANY fashion.

Barack is asking us to be simple-minded and inattentive.

Yes, there was distrust of government (for which certain Democrats, think Johnson, MacNamara and Rusk as well as Republicans, Nixon-Agnew-Kissinger etal bear total responsibility) but essentially his is recycling old Repug ‘narratives’ and trying, I think, to appeal to the feeble-minded who would like to see the sainted Ronnie’s visage on Rushmore.

I had thought that Obama lacked depth, now I’m certain of it.

Thank God for FDL. The same people who shrieked that the Clintons were horrible racists through their mistaken interpretation are now celebrating Obama’s statement on Reagan, in spite of him clearly denouncing the “excesses” of the previous decade. The double standard is truly staggering. I can only imagine the horror if Clinton made the same statement.

Mind/Finger Synapse Collapse (M/FSC)

Should read:…’Reagan was and is a model that should NOT be emulated …’

Amazingly, few people seem to mention the Republicans spent 640 million dollars of our money to bury him – Natsbrin

Well, it seemed to me that Obama was saying the Reagan united the country and that Bill Clinton didn’t and that America wanted a return to the entrepreneurial spirit which I assume he thinks was a good thing which sounds a lot like a Republican lines from the past 25 years.

Obviously Obama is really just a secret ultra-liberal who is getting the Republicans to love him.

Of course I’d vote the guy against a Republican, but I think a lot of people project liberalness onto Obama without having thought throw why.

Responding to RonD January 16th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
I remember well the drive to put Reagan on Mt. Rushmore. Say what? That would be glorifying mediocrity. Used to say Reagan was just a bad actor with a great scriptwriter (Peggy Noonan was the real source of all that “Reagan optimism.”) And I agree with the “empty suit” depiction. I think he was vacant–in the earliest stages of Altzheimer’s–when he was elected in 1980. His was a superficial charm, not a particle of substance. Somewhere, in someone’s cluttered attic, is the Reagan equivalent of the Portrait of Dorian Gray with all the muck stuck to it that never adhered to Teflon Ron. He was one of the “hollow men,” as T.S. Elliott so aptly put it. Never liked him. (Except, my mother said, when I was a toddler and Ronnie was on TV. She said I had a crush on him and would cry, “Wonald Weagan! Wonald Weagan!” whenever he appeared on the screen. But I think he was a Democrat then… What did I know at a year and a half?)