The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email
Text Size

Reader Mail

Fumbling Around

Republican leadership: unlikely. Painting an Obama picture. An invidious comparison. Plus more.

(Page 2 of 4)

Unlike Reagan, President Bush has taken the fight to the enemy on their home turf. Klein ignores that it was President Bush who ordered the surge in the face of opposition from Donald Rumsfeld and many in the Pentagon. Reagan bowing to Weinberger did nothing to punish Iran or the terrorist who murdered hundreds of Marines and Sailors in Lebanon. Estimates vary as to how many al Qaeda fighters have been killed in Iraq, but the London Times estimated 12,000 since 2003 (a 3:1 kill ratio). These numbers do not include members of the Taliban, Baath insurgents or other Muslim terrorists.

Reagan's Middle East legacies were foolishly ending the Iran-Iraq War, saving the PLO from annihilation and inadvertently helping Syria dominate Lebanon. Bush can take pride in liberating 2 countries and killing thousands of America's enemies in the Middle East, something no other US President has done. If Reagan had been more like President Bush would things be different today -- and for the better.

As Ronald Reagan could tell Philip Klein, Katrina recovery was a "states' rights" issue.  Does Klein believe President Bush should have ignored all US governors and used Katrina as an excuse to expand Federal power at the expense of the states? If Barack Obama is unfortunate enough to be in office when such a massive natural disaster strikes the US I'm skeptical Klein will cheer a massive Federal power grab at the expense of the states.

Chuck Schumer described that Reagan "was a conservative we could work with (i.e., roll)." You can bet they'll never say that about Bush 43. 

Klein is right when he points out that Bush's failure to communicate damaged his Presidency. Unlike the Reagan and Clinton administrations, President Bush naively believed the American people would look beyond the media static. When even conservative pundits parrot liberals it's obvious it's not a safe or wise presumption. Had Bush been more PR savvy, ignored the Secret Service and visited New Orleans immediately after Katrina, things might have been different for his last 3 years in office.

Conservatives should ignore those who believed liberal blue-dog Democrats would move their party to the right, thought throwing away an election or two was good politics, foolishly think the conservative movement can survive and even shape the political landscape without Reagan's Republican Party and have so distorted and bastardized Ronald Reagan's record and legacy that the Gipper would now be a RINO.

The conservative movement is far from dead, but it needs fresh champions that aren't infatuated with rehashing liberal talking points dressed up as conservative reflections.
-- Michael Tomlinson

NEW ANGLE
Re: George H. Wittman's Murder and Mayhem in Mumbai:

How much press has been wasted on this war on terror? Don't most stories present the same truths? Aren't those who do these acts known to most of us by now? Do we have a good picture of who we are fighting? 

Let me put it this way: If I were a "supreme" leader of an organized religion, and my religion was being used as the energy force to gather soldiers, etc., would I not have long ago come forward to my fellow believers and others with how I felt toward those who were engaged in terrorist behaviors, etc.?

What does this say about us, the targets of this hatred? We deny our desire and need to condemn this religion; we just want to slice off what may be considered the bad elements, much like a surgeon tries to do with a partial mastectomy, hoping he has captured all the cancer cells within his work.

How about his patient? Who is really carrying around the fear along with the possibility of death here?

What will it take for us to finally decide on a "final" solution for this problem? I've got it: a nuclear bomb that goes off on our side of this game. Or perhaps that bio-chemical weapon. Three thousand deaths in one day doesn't seem to do the trick like it did in World War II. Even then we had to wait until our enemies over reached.

Why do those Islamic leaders all seem to have scowls whenever we see a picture? Could it be hatred, both internal and external?

Does real evil have a place here? I certainly think this way...and that's from watching those planes get high jacked and blown up in the 60's by Yassar and his boys. Lots of years experiencing this evil, this non-uniformed warring by you know who...victims of American oppression and her friends!

Page:   12 3 4  

Letter to the Editor View all comments (12) | Leave a comment

OCPatriot| 12.4.08 @ 12:36PM

Fear is the key
In the L.A. Times, Neal Gabler has an article that analyzes exactly what "conservative" Republicans have been doing, tracing their strategy back to Senator McCarthy, not to Senator Goldwater, who in 1964 lost in one of the biggest landslides in American electoral history and wrested the party from its Eastern establishment wing.
According to Gabler, the myth tells how Nixon co-opted conservatism, talking like a conservative while governing like a moderate, disenchanting true believers. Ronald Reagan, next, embraced it wholeheartedly, becoming the patron saint of conservatism and making it the dominant ideology in the country, even though he didn't practice it in terms of fiscal responsibility or size of government. George W. Bush picked up Reagan's fallen standard and "conservatized" government even more thoroughly than Reagan had, cheering conservatives until his presidency came crashing down around him. That's how Gabler believes the mythology tells it.
Gabler's thesis is that the real connection is from Sen. Joe McCarthy, to Nixon to Bush and possibly now to Sarah Palin. McCarthy attacked alleged communists and the Democrats whom he accused of shielding them, as well as the centrist American establishment, Eastern intellectuals and the power class, many of whom were Republicans, including moderate ones. McCarthyism became a means to play on the anxieties of Americans, convincing them of danger and conspiracy even when they didn't exist, which he used to build power and support. George H.W. Bush used it to get himself elected, terrifying voters with Willie Horton (and denigrating Dukakis as a commander-in-chief). His son used fear of 9/11 and convincing voters that John Kerry was a coward and a liar and would hand the nation over to terrorists, tried and true McCarthy tactics used very aggressively, and W. then used fear and stealth in pushing through totalitarian unconstitutional measures. The thread continued through McCain and then Palin, probably through Rove (who also coached W.), and I quote from Gabler, "That's why John McCain kept describing Barack Obama as some sort of alien and why Palin, taking a page right out of the McCarthy playbook, kept pushing Obama's relationship with onetime radical William Ayers."
What Gabler believes is that, because of this tradition, the Republican Party will continue to move rightward. Fear and blame; rabble-rousing; the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys and Bill O'Reillys; and now Palin. This is the direction the Party will take. Probably because it cannot be believed as the party of small government or fiscal responsibility or moral integrity; all credibility lost in the harsh reality of events; at least not until people forget and these actualities become memories and fade. It is a dangerous approach because it incites people to do violent things, especially as times become more stringent.
It is, I believe a shame, because some of the original precepts of fiscal responsibility and keeping government out of peoples' lives and moral integrity are well worth preserving. The Republican Party which stood for those princples was a Grand Old Party. But, I hate to say it, those are all too easily trumped by fear-mongering and, I might add, difficult to achieve. I would nominate the Republican Party today as the Party of Fear, as opposed to the Party of Solutions. And, if that's the direction it's going in, yes, it's a shame.
The consistent thing about guys like Jeb Bush, in line with the old Republican philosophy, is to be against something, not for it; to be in a position to scare people, not to advocate good positive things. Putting people and ideas down is the tack they have taken; witness McCain's whole campaign; witness Sarah's natural proclivities. So Jeb Bush starts off by surfacing and proposing that the Republicans start a "shadow government" to watch, and criticize, and follow what Obama's Administration does closely. What bothers me about this, deeply, I might add, is the fact that it is not being supportive in any way. No one is saying, if we want to survive, we have to work together, guys. No, the implication is that "they" (Democrats) are the enemy. And in this terrible time, when the country is literally falling apart, and everybody is unsettled, these isolated Republicans are settling in to be critical. As if they aren't losing their savings, too; as if they are exempt; as if, should the country really fail, they wouldn't be affected. Quite a blind spot. isn't it. They aren't even pretending to help, to support, to work with their counterparts to make things better for everybody, themselves included. How antedeluvian, how "old school", how traditional, how like McCarthy and all of the Republican demogogues, to stand back and continue criticizing the Democrats who are working very hard, very earnestly, to fix what went wrong with this country. So Jeb Bush is nothing more than another toxic Republican, joining in the long line of negative right-wing naysayers and destroyers, no better than Limbaugh and Hannity and O'Reilly. Pretty disgusting, I'd say. Stand on the sidelines and criticize while the Titanic goes down; criticize everything the crew and captain does. Disgusting, guys, absolutely disgusting.
For more, see: www.ocpatriot-runningcomments.blogspot.com.

Paul| 12.4.08 @ 1:17PM

Chaplain Tomlinson: I appreciate your hearty defense of our President Bush, but your comparing him favorably vs. President Reagan is getting a bit too facile.

1. When Reagan raised the cap gains tax rate it was as a bargaining chip to get the marginal income tax rate down to 28%. I mentioned this to you you several months ago, you may recall.
2. No, Reagan did not disband the Dept of Education, but if you were in Mass. during the 1996 Kennedy - Romney senate race you'd have been amazed at the viciousness of the attacks Romney endured when he made the same proposal. And with a House under Democrat control Reagan would not have been successful in doing so. In any case Bush 43 saw the quixotic nature of this and abandoned it as well.
3. Reagan accelerated the emasculation of the Interstate Commerce Commission during his time in office; it was disbanded in 1994.
4. Reagan also put the Civil Aeronautics Board out of business in 1984.
5. Reagan dereugulated domestic oil prices in 1981.
6. Reagan put the FAA controllers union in its place - big time - in 1981.

Best Regards

frost| 12.4.08 @ 3:45PM

Going thru some notes in my computer from 4 1/2 years ago, back before General Portaeus' surge, when a series of McClellans were still goofing up a winable war -- shortly before I came to the reluctant conclusion that Dubya's gotta be tied with Jimmy Carter as the AllTimeWorst president ever; hell, his spending even exceeded LBJ, and that's saying a bunch. Anyway, from that file in May, '04, these observations (since compounded by other multiple goof-ups too numerous to mention, Mr. Tomlinson): Dubya's become a whore, no better than the worst of congress -- backed Kennedy's huge spending plan on education, the gigantic "farm bill" with Tom Daschle's amendments, signed the campaign finance law -- the 15+ Billion-dollar AIDS in Africa fiasco… among other things. Then, there were steel price supports. He also "folded" after opposition to ANWR was stated by the Greens, Democrats and stupid Republicans; didn't have the courage to push for more US oil. Worse? Bush inherited a horrible CIA and miserable intelligence; he finally replaced George Tenet, a horrible CIA boss, and presented him with the Medal of Freedom? This delusional president was heard to "express confidence" in the CIA -- then, was blocking an investigation of the intelligence failures? That's bad.
Further, he's agreed to those tax-rebate measures which include $$$s to "low income" people who haven't paid taxes. And he pushed again for an extension of unemployment benefits (Urban League speech 7/28/03); having an "audience" with Jesse Jackson when conservative blacks can't get a hearing or any backing. He failed to speak up on the U-of-Michigan affirmative action policy and other rulings by the Supremes, which included the states' rights position on sodomy.
The prescription drug pandering by Republicans has turned out to be another sad joke, and Dubya's been very quiet about that addition to creeping Socialized Medicine.
He was "in bed" with Mexico's Vicente Fox, and the border continues to be a sieve, and until he gets the INS working, if he ever does, and has the courage to shut down all illegal immigration, he's simply not doing his job! He never even spoke up on the subject of Drivers Licenses for Illegal aliens which, in so doing, is tantamount to giving it his blessing. Immigration "reform" it's called? And, oh, speaking of the "border" - pardon the departure - Dubya didn't back Miguel Estrada's judicial nomination sufficiently well - left him "hung-out-to-dry" - the Republican Senators didn't care enough to force an end to the Democrats' filibuster, which could have been done easily by simply working 'round-the-clock.. And, as if that weren't enough, finally (again), how 'bout that double standard with Israel? Sure, we can defend ourselves, but we ask the Israelis to reserve more patience than we would? But, wait-a-minute! "Defending ourselves" with a dopey color-threat system, searching Norwegian grandmothers (with a fear off offending Arabs through the legitimate profiling of potential terrorists) and the goofy incompetent, Norman Manetta as Transportation Secretary? His "covering" for the Saudi Arabians (spies supporting terrorists?) and calling 'em friends?.
And other things, like a major increase in the National Endowment for the Arts? Give me a break. Sorry George -- you ain't got my vote.
And, more recently (5/26/04) these additional points which add up to being a Disaster --
Cozying up to the UN and not pushing the Oil-For-Food corruption fiasco - a total; fraud with kickbacks, payoffs and "percentages." Then, the government's suit against the State of Oregon on the Assisted Suicide law (which had been approved by voters), which AttnyGen. John Ashcroft had railed against in earlier speeches. This suit was one of the very few ruled upon by the Ninth Circuit Court with which I agree; our government has no business trying to dictate what its individual states' citizens decide.
Okay, that was a partial critique from a number of years ago. He finally got things turned around in Iraq, 'way too late, and we're still fronting those abysmal costs -- he appointed a few judges, cut a few taxes, but, again, he's been totally inept, still tied with Carter for the dubious aforementioned distinction. God, he's been an awful president. And now, Obama?!? We'll be in Costa Rica in two weeks.

Alan Brooks| 12.4.08 @ 6:31PM

FDR, considered one of our greatest presidents, was a CONGENITAL LIAR. Even Truman thought so but Harry was too "nice" (whatever nice means) to say so very often. Truman was lucky FDR died so soon, if Truman had had to serve under him in peacetime it would have been unbearable for the honest Truman.

So being very dishonest doesn't always hurt an image in the history books. Nixon was rehabilitated. Carter, who was/is smarmy to the point of being very dishonest is loved like, um, Mandela...

frost| 12.4.08 @ 7:02PM

A gullible fool, Jimmy Carter's only meaningful achievement was helping Ronald Reagan get elected. For this and only this may we be grateful to him. Undoubtedly, the most dishonest politician I’ve ever read of is Jimmy Carter, period... said Bob Novak (one of the very few columnists I trust)
And, I can't help but wonder why do we even worry about Obama? If a guy like Jimmy Carter didn't ruin this country, no one can.
Remembering that it was H. L. Mencken who observed that ex-presidents should be hung in the interests of public sanitation, this additional quotation, if you can take one more: "Sometimes, when I look at all my children, I say to myself, 'Lillian, you should have stayed a virgin.'" - Lillian Carter (mother of -)....

A lan Brooks| 12.4.08 @ 7:21PM

Amy Carter ought to be sterilized, just to be sure.

C Marshall| 12.4.08 @ 9:10PM

Gee, OCPatriot, who knew Neal Gabler was such a deep thinker. I always thought he was a hack movie critic. It's mythology alright, liberal mythology.

ruth| 12.5.08 @ 1:43AM

OCPatriot, what a knee slapper!!! Your Obamassiah hasn't even been inaugurated and already you are haranguing us about our negativity. This after 8 years of your side screeching BUSHITLER!! Shut Up!

ruth| 12.5.08 @ 1:59AM

Mr. Tomlinson, I understand your defense of President Bush, but I do believe that it is a leader's primary duty to communicate with the people. I don't know why the president withdrew from us, but what good did it do him or the country to allow the hostile left/mainstream media define him and his policies? I think he bears a good deal of responsibility for our party's turmoil, and I think the saddest part is that it was so unnecessary. He is a good man who, I believe, is being unfairly maligned. We all are the poorer for his unwise decision to not use the bully pulpit more.

Pingback| 7.1.09 @ 1:37PM

Obama's honeymoon is over - now it's his recession - US Message Board - Political Di links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…entirely on Booooosh. But CON$ pretend to be rational blaming the 1982 Reagan Recession, the worst recession since the Great Depression, on Carter two full years into Reagan's first term. The American Spectator : Fumbling Around The American Spectator SIDE BY SIDE WITH THE GIPPER
Philip Klein: Reagan's first two years in office were an expansion of the Carter depression __________________ Accuse your opponents…

Pingback| 7.9.09 @ 10:38PM

Great Yard Sign Explaining President Obama's Change - Page 3 - US Message Board - Po links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:

…him? The last campaign was 22 months long! But CON$ were blaming the 1982 Reagan Recession, the worst recession since the Great Depression, on Carter two full years into Reagan's first term. The American Spectator : Fumbling Around The American Spectator SIDE BY SIDE WITH THE GIPPER
Philip Klein: Reagan's first two years in office were an expansion of the Carter depression __________________ Accuse your opponents…

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Articles From Reader Mail

http://spectator.org/archives/2008/12/04/fumbling-around
ADVERTISEMENT

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Who Castrated Ann Coulter?

David Catron | 2.6.12

The Delousing of a Movement

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 2.9.12

Bigoted Barack, Red in Tooth and Clause

George Neumayr | 2.10.12

Justice Ginsburg Should Resign

William Tucker | 2.8.12

Coulter Care

Peter Ferrara | 2.8.12

Unsafe at Any Smoke

Eric Peters | 2.10.12

Middle-Aged Man Takes a Holiday

Christopher Orlet | 2.9.12

ADVERTISEMENT