-
The Inoperative Jay Carney
May 23, 2013 | 134 comments
-
IRS Union Chief Stonewalls
May 21, 2013 | 57 comments
-
Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?
May 20, 2013 | 69 comments
-
The Liberal Union Behind the IRS
May 16, 2013 | 146 comments
-
Cumulus Media: Suicide of a Company?
May 14, 2013 | 64 comments
Political Hay
The Blanding of Ronald Reagan
There’s more to the 40th president than the kinder, gentler version even many conservatives portray.
What a lovely, lovely man.
Never a pointed word. Always soothing. Just one big kumbaya lug of a president.
Can’t we all be as civil and wonderful and eternally non-radically sweet in our political dialogue as Ronald Reagan?
Um….excuse me.
Snap out of it!
For reasons that appear unfathomable other than the clamor from GOP consultants selling their how-to-attract-Independents-Minorities-and-The Women’s Vote sure-fire soap suds — and that would be for a pretty penny not to mention in vain — a strange fate has befallen the former president.
Ronald Reagan has been bland-ed. By the Right.
The man Rush Limbaugh fondly refers to as “Ronaldus Maximus” is being recast by some Republicans as “Ronaldus Vanillus.”
Like Washington in all those bronzed statues everywhere, like Lincoln sitting immortalized in the big chair in the big stone temple on the Mall, Ronald Reagan has been marbleized.
Right before the eyes of those who know better, not to mention all those miles of videotape, the 40th president has ceased to be a real person when cited by some Republicans. Stripped of his considerable real-life capacity for straight talk, his uncanny knack for zeroing in on exactly the heart of his opponent’s real message, complete with a pithy dispatching of modern liberalism and its practitioners — the real Ronald Reagan has ceased to exist in the minds of those who lovingly summon his name at election time.
There’s no other possible reason for former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, incredibly once a Reagan staffer himself, to set himself up for such a public fall with his own presidential announcement speech. Going to elaborate lengths to re-create the 1980 Reagan campaign kickoff against the backdrop of the Statue of Liberty, Huntsman did everything but, apparently, the obvious: go back and read what candidate Reagan actually said while he was standing there.
It took the redoubtable Rush Limbaugh exactly microseconds of air time that day to find an audio of Reagan delivering that very speech. The contrast between Huntsman solemnly preaching his promises of civility towards the incumbent while Reagan dispatched then-incumbent Jimmy Carter with a series of brisk verbal volleys was like night and day. It made the new candidate seem weak, confused and not the smart man his followers insist him to be.
But Huntsman certainly isn’t alone in purveying the image of a brand-new blanded Ronald Reagan.
Earlier this year, Mitt Romney took to the pages of USA Today to praise Reagan’s “legacy of optimism.” He touches all the familiar bases of the Reagan record — yet seems mysteriously unable to demonstrate in his own campaign the very quality that Reagan had in spades — a fearless willingness to challenge the status quo.
Not long after this article, for example, Romney refused to take the Susan B. Anthony pledge on abortion. A refusal that in fact has nothing to do with abortion at all. The former Massachusetts governor and presidential candidate explained himself at National Review Online using this reasoning:
About the Author
Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (58) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jeffrey Lord
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/07/06/the-blanding-of-ronald-reagan
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The (Real) Great Divide
- The Vast and the Tiny
- Inside the Gates of Eden
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
LindaF | 7.6.11 @ 7:15AM
Too many Republicans and conservatives want to maximize "civility" and minimize conflict with the other side. Can't be done. We have to straightforwardly, with love and charity, tell them the truth. If they are offended, tough. Truth is one of those "value thingys" that is more important than someone's feelings.
BTW, I get my feelings hurt when I'm called "homophobic" - do you think those calling me that give a rat's a$$?
Alan Brooks| 7.6.11 @ 8:01AM
"We have to straightforwardly, with love and charity, tell them the truth."
It's not love, it's smarm; you only really care about your family. Agape love is rare, while smarm is dime-a-dozen. You think people don't know what is going on? we all know AS has a magazine to sell, but if you want another Reagan then find one, you aren't even trying.
Put up or shut up.
Clint| 7.6.11 @ 8:51AM
Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Barky Obama loses his.
Reagan Remembered.
Alan Brooks| 7.6.11 @ 9:04AM
But in all those years (22) since he left office, Clint, you haven't found anyone to replace him; you are sentimentally going by past laurels as at this time you have no Reaganite front-runner.
Drunken Sailor| 7.6.11 @ 9:33AM
And your still searching for another Kennedy. Get over yourself. We do not need another Regan. We need another person who understands and has the same beliefs as Regan.
Alan Brooks| 7.6.11 @ 12:15PM
Your track record since 1988 has been unencouraging. You can't keep saying every four years 'we need another top notch guy',
but then not run, or not elect one. We'll see, maybe next year you will surprise us all-- yet you can't blame so many for being so skeptical.
Drunken Sailor| 7.6.11 @ 12:37PM
You can't vote for canidates that don't run. Sometimes the best person for the job, just doesn't want it. Where we have failed it to convince them to take it. I'll give you that much.
Occam's Tool| 7.6.11 @ 8:57PM
Personally, I like Bachmann Turner Overdrive. Of course, it will piss Clint off to say this, But Mrs. bachmann worked on a Kibbutz after High School. Grit your teeth, C Elegans---easy for you, as a terrorist catamite, you're always doing it!
Clint| 7.6.11 @ 1:13PM
Before I refuse to take Brooks seriously, I have an opening statement.
My fellow American Spectator Readers. I'm pleased to announce that I've signed legislation to attack Brooks. We begin bombing in five minutes.
Reagan Remembered.
Handy| 7.6.11 @ 7:21AM
Good memories of Ronnie.
Our current president is so much worse than Carter, yet the crop of GOP hopefuls are simply too cowardly to speak the truth about Obama.
JimH| 7.6.11 @ 7:57AM
Reagan could be quite serious, this is the man after all who coined the term Evil Empire. But the Gipper did get his zingers in. It may just be time passing but I do remember that while he did so it was with a smile and a wink. It made them far more effective than the righteous rants which come from all sides of the political spectrum these days.
skip| 7.6.11 @ 7:21PM
Ronaldus Maximus
'New York Times'
September 22, 1980
"I've noticed that everybody that is for abortion has already been born."
Robert Pinkerton| 7.6.11 @ 7:58AM
I took a small inheritance shortly before the 1980 campaign started. Once Mr. Reagan was nominated, I gave his campaign the second political donation I have ever given. It was $1,000.00, and at that time it was the largest amount one was allowed to give to a candidate.
Now if the mythical "'free' market" is the most democratic institution mankind has ever invented, it is on a theory of, One Dollar = One Vote, for anything whatsoever. On that theory, then, that out-of-nowhere cash gift to Mr. Reagan's campaign was a ballot of a thousand votes in favor of, "... ceterum censeo delendam esse Muscoviam... [... beside that, I think Moscow ought to be destroyed...]" I was honoring "Ronnie Ray-gun," and I bloody well knew - and intended - that; the exponent of victory in (what I, and so many other Americans believed to be) the inevitably forthcoming war of final settlement between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Does this mean, Not Mr. Nice-Guy? Even the nicest of people can kill an attacker in order to protect their lives or the lives of those nearest and dearest.
jj| 7.6.11 @ 7:58AM
The thing is the economy is not Obama's fault. It was in the tank before he was sworn in. Most Americans know that.
It would still me this way even if McCain would have won. If huntsman lied about that he would lose the independents and that is who really decides elections. Reps vote for reps and dems vote for dems. The only reason we took 2010 is because most of the Dems stayed home. We need a moderate, Huntsman is our best shot.
Johnny H| 7.6.11 @ 8:12AM
Please stay home on election day, jj. Yes, this economy can't be blamed entirely on one man. But it's that man's (O'bama's) philosophies that epitomize the destructive nature of those policies. It's the continuation of those policies - big spending, over regulating, freedom and enterprise stifling policies that are at the core. He must go, just like Carter had to go. His administration owns this economy because they've done nothing but make matters worse. Wake up!! Huntsman is a status quo RINO. He and his ilk are just as bad as the committed leftists currently at the levers of power!!
Alan Brooks| 7.6.11 @ 8:55AM
The GOP very well might win, because the economy will be tepid in 2012. You know, though, that when a Republican becomes president he or she will modify his or her positions out of recognition? he or she wont do anything about the border because businesses want minimum (or below) wage labor, plus for other reasons. And so on.
Politics has become celebritized; it is bread & circuses.
JimH| 7.6.11 @ 8:45AM
Obama is to Bush as FDR was to Hoover. He took a bad situation and made it worse.
Alan Brooks| 7.6.11 @ 9:00AM
But you will run yet another RINO, you have been doing such since '88; it has come down to your finding a better RINO than in the past.
chester arthur| 7.6.11 @ 6:02PM
You put too much stock in what the press leftist are 'suggesting' the republicans run.Every now and then an election actually matters.This one does.The choice is still over a year away,and you'd have us give up before it really starts.This is going to be different no matter what the leftists 'suggest',no matter what the republican establishment desires.They've both lost control of the situation,with any luck at all.This time looks like one of those elections when a choice will be made.No matter what,Obama is unlikely to prevail.
Rocky| 7.6.11 @ 12:47PM
Funny you should say that because Reagan was a new deal democrat. If it wasn't for the new deal Reagan probably wouldn't have survived the Great Depression.
Rocky| 7.6.11 @ 12:47PM
Funny you should say that because Reagan was a new deal democrat. If it wasn't for the new deal Reagan probably wouldn't have survived the Great Depression.
William R| 7.6.11 @ 8:01AM
Ronald Reagan Isolationist
http://www.amconmag.com/blog/2.....lationist/
Reagan's Wisdom on the Middle East
http://orangepunch.ocregister......leave/619/
Occam's Tool| 7.7.11 @ 4:15PM
Ronnie destroyed the Soviet Union with minimal use of force. That's because Ronnie had available maximum use of force. Were you present during the Nuclear Freeze craze, William R?
He was a brilliant tactician and strategician. he was also willing to destroy the occasional collateral damage.
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.6.11 @ 8:05AM
I think, it just might be a case of "When your opponent is making a huge error, don't interrupt him."
Obama has 15 months left to screw himself into the ground...don't interrupt him.
As sad as it is...we probably have to hit bottom before we can decisively throw the bum out.
Let's allow a few more straws hit the camel's back first.
Al Adab| 7.6.11 @ 11:12AM
Absolutely, let him continue to dig himself into the hole. Sadly we all pay the price. What we seek is one of strength, character and spine who can reign in this out of control bureaucracy, get the spending undercontrol and recognize the enumerated powers for what they are. The times have changed since Reagan and while our principles remain, their application must find new forms aimed at preservingt and protecting this Constitutional system of government.
John Navratil| 7.6.11 @ 4:12PM
Ken,
Wouldn't it be nice if we could interrupt him? Unfortunately we are stuck with him and the damage he will do. The bad news is, he will be signing executive orders until January 20, 2013.
That's when Blago gets his pardon.
Jack London| 7.6.11 @ 8:07AM
Yeah, he was so disgusted with Carter he racked up a huge budget deficit, tripled the poverty rate, took us into an illegal war (killing 30,000 Nicaraguans in the process) and funded illegally, backed the terrible Israeli invasion of Lebanon, praised the apartheid regime in South Africa, armed Iraq and the Afghan mujahideen, ignored AIDS, and - wait for it - raised lots of new taxes.
And this is your hero president...
roadmaster| 7.6.11 @ 8:25AM
Parroted like a true blue, dhimmicrat drone. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own "facts."
richard ryan| 7.6.11 @ 8:30AM
Not sure what your sources are London, but you should seek out some new sources for your information. Your comment is BS. Tripled the poverty rate? Absurd. Reagan's policies lifted more people economically than any time in the history of the planet.
Con Chef (NB) | 7.6.11 @ 8:42AM
Right. As opposed to giving 900 million to Hamas, sitting silent as Iranian protestors were shot dead in the streets, & starting an "illegal war" of his own. Just think, no Nicaragua, maybe the Soviets might've been able to install stooges like Chavez, Morales, & the idiot in Brazil even SOONER. How "cool" would THAT'VE been?
Simpleton.
Alan Brooks| 7.6.11 @ 8:57AM
London, you are a Marxist, Marxism is an outmoded 19th century ideology.
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.6.11 @ 11:24AM
Jack
Your lies are only overshadowed by your ignorance.
Big Java| 7.6.11 @ 12:44PM
Yawn
Conservatism is about truth| 7.6.11 @ 4:39PM
He's right Reagan did do all those things. He also granted 100% amnesty for illegals and cut and ran when terrorists bombed our marines in Lebanon. The top paid 50% during most of his Presidency. He's the biggest RINO of all. BTW calling someone a Marxist with nothing to back it up just makes you sound stupid.
Conservatism is about truth| 7.6.11 @ 4:39PM
He's right Reagan did do all those things. He also granted 100% amnesty for illegals and cut and ran when terrorists bombed our marines in Lebanon. The top paid 50% during most of his Presidency. He's the biggest RINO of all. BTW calling someone a Marxist with nothing to back it up just makes you sound stupid.
skip| 7.6.11 @ 6:58PM
skip | 6.15.11 @ 5:40PM
"What is childish, you idiot, is to repeatedly post over lengthy periods of time blatantly unintelligent and blatantly dishonest statements, without ever citing any credible or legitimate source to support any of the unintelligent and dishonest statements, while always ignoring rebuttals that intelligently and honestly refute your statements, you idiot."
Anyone care to guess who I was replying to?
Occam's Tool| 7.7.11 @ 4:11PM
Dear Skip:
John the Islamist, Jack London, Jack in Wi. (a bunch of Jacks, hmmm...), William R, Clint.... a couple come to mind, sir. You are well informed and perspicacious.
Occam's Tool| 7.6.11 @ 9:00PM
Yeah, Jack, he's my hero. Given that israel was being shelled by your heroic terrorists in Lebanon, the Israelis pushed them out.
He raised taxes after slahing them by 2/3. he destroyed the Soviets (Bush I was President when it happened, but Ronnie laid the groundwork. I was there.)
He armed the mujahdeen because his first emnemy was the Soviets. He would have annihilated the Afghans and Iraqis and Iranians, because that's what he did to the Libyans. he would not have engaged in "non-intervention." He would have Crushed them.
Occam's Tool| 7.6.11 @ 9:05PM
Sorry, a few typos above. "Slashing," "He," "Enemy."
But Ronnie would have annihilated the terrorists after 9/11 and taken the damn oil.
skip| 7.6.11 @ 11:27PM
idiot | 6.15.11 @ 6:52AM
"I would say we need more stimulus, a mortgage debt relief program, and long-term infrastructure/education investment."
idiot | 6.15.11 @ 12:52PM
"By the way, my plan is pretty much mainstream economics from even conservative economists."
skip | 6.15.11 @ 1:24PM
"The idiot is now provided with a bonus opportunity to attempt to redeem his idiotic economic posts establishing what a monumentally epic idiot the idiot is by citing a specific reference to one of the conservative economists the idiot has generally referred to.
Any idiot is invited to hold his breath beginning now."
idiot | 6.15.11 @ 2:52PM
"Goodness me you are a child.
For anyone else read this from Bruce Bartlett..."
skip | 6.15.11 @ 5:40PM
"Bartlett is a keynesian, you idiot. Keynesian economics advocates government regulation and control, you idiot.
Bartlett was fired from the Center for Policy Analysis, a nonpartisan research organization advocating free market solutions and opposing government regulation and control, you idiot.
Bartlett was discredited by the Wall Street Journal for his economic arguments, you idiot, primarily, wait for it, you idiot, his arguments on tax policy."
Anyone care to guess where who the idiot is and where the idiot got the 'wait for it' from?"
POST American| 7.6.11 @ 8:54AM
---STILL MORE pointless Reagan necro-mancy
as the awesome political, economic, cultural,
moral and ACTUAL snuff film that is the
Globalization and EUGENICS agenda,unfolds
here and worldwide -----FOR REAL.
AGAIN, this bizarre lack of outrage, or even
comment, suggests not only effective social
programming and medicated 'compliance'
---BUT some sort of VAST cyber-surveillance
blackmail op.
REALLY
TRULY
NO JOKE
Drunken Sailor| 7.6.11 @ 12:39PM
I liked your ramblings better as DeeSee
John Navratil| 7.6.11 @ 4:08PM
Drunken Sailor,
DeeSee or not, it's the same BeeEss. Pointless - literally.
Ken (Old Texican)| 7.6.11 @ 11:22AM
Post American,
I suggest you are "post-rationality".
Take your meds.
DaveS| 7.6.11 @ 12:19PM
Write the names of all the 20th and 21st century Presidents in a vertical list. Which ones jump out, as though they were in 3D? There are only a few, but I bet some jump out for haters and lovers the same.
Reagan anticipated the time he'd be needed. He'd been in the race for the minds of citizens long before he sought the Presidency on behalf of those citizens and his country. This was not ambition to satisfy, spoils to take or opportunity of which to take advantage. Who can say that now? Who looks like they are behaving like Obama and offer a similar 'deliverer' message that is long on careful phrases but short on substance?
Big Java| 7.6.11 @ 12:43PM
President Reagan understood that politics is a
contact sport.
To you, Mr President.
JP| 7.6.11 @ 3:43PM
Many people forget that GW Bush garned more votes in 2004 than did Reagan in 1984. Despite his landslide, almost 40 million people voted against him. Reagan was hated by at least 30% of the voters; the moderate votes for Reagan was more a relfection of joining the winning side late. Mondale was an awful candidate.
Reagan's coattails peaked in Oct-Nov of 1980. After his victory over Carter, his ability to to influence local elections waned. And the RINOs in his own party detested him. They (Snarlin' Arlen and Packwood to name 2) would eventually get thier revenge in 1987 with the Robert Bork nomination to SCOTUS. The Beltway GOP intelligentsia never warmed to him despite the efforts of conservatives like W. Buckley. However, the RINOs had no choice; as is the case with most RINOs they lacked courage to take him on. And the lessons of David Stockman were taken to heart. Don't underestimate the Gipper.
By and large, Reagan was mildly popular. Probably the greatest cross-over fans were a group of East Coast Intellectuals who were to become known as NeoCons. From the late Alan Bloom to Podhoretz to Horowitz, a certain type of Democratic intellectual was attracted to him. On the other side of the aisle, Pat Buchanan and Taki (the Paleocons) loved the Gipper. But, by and large, intellectuals, artists, and liberals couldn't stand Reagan.
Things went downhill with Iran-Contra and the 1987 Wall St Crash. RINOs couldn't wait for one of thier own (VP Bush) to get elected; the Dems took control of the Senate in '86, and Reagan fatigue set in by '87. Reagan's best days were during his first term. Almost of his economic and foreign policy triumphs occured before 1985.
I can still remember the vitriol of the MSM and Ruling Class. Reagan, even more than Bush, was one of the most hated men in national politics. Hatred for Reagan was even stronger than that directed at Nixon. Columnists from Mike Ryoko to Anthony Lewis, to David Broder spilt alot of ink decrying the idiocy of Ronald Reagan. What upset them all was the fact that he was probably the finest politican since FDR -perhaps even superior.
Reagan, unlike FDR, never commanded a homogenious majority. Despite huge problems inside and outside of his party he was able to cobble together temporary alliances to get his landmark bills through. He also knew when to pick fights and when to compromise (he compromised much more than Republicans today wish to admit). Reagan also perfected the image of public grace. His many memorable speeches and public appearances allowed him to tower above his opponents, who looked petty in comparison. This was the connection with the people so often remember. But, like Truman before, Reagan's popularity was greatest after he left office.
DaveS| 7.6.11 @ 4:23PM
Iceland '86, any day of his Presidency, any lucid day of his after January '89: these were all good eras or days for us. We realized how good he was - just as we recall now how bad Carter was - after the Office was left behind. We left behind MAD, iron and concrete walls separating European brethren, perpetual stalemate, and Vietnam Syndrome.
The man never took off his jacket or tie while in the Oval Office - such was his respect for it and his duty towards it.
chester arthur| 7.6.11 @ 6:08PM
Remembering the vitiol of the press toward Reagan means about as much as an Obama promise.The press didn't like him,just as the press always dislikes anyone with an I.Q. above their age who doesn't spout political correctness.
Reagan Loyalist| 7.6.11 @ 4:30PM
Alan Brooks is a blight on this forum. "Sir, if you had any decency you would go to HuffPro and leave deep thinking to others. Please consider spewing elsewhere!"
David Shoup| 7.6.11 @ 6:58PM
"Even Karl Rove seems to have blanded Ronald Reagan," Karl Rove would do this???? Sure as Hell!!!!!! Karl Rove is one of the Establishment Republicans! Duh! I never respected the man, even moreso after he trash talked Christine O'Donnell of Delaware. No wonder we are in $14 TRILLION of debt with left wing Democrats and left wing Republicans "compromising". I want to use unprintable bad words to describe those thieves and charlatans. Something with an "M" and an "F".
Al Adab| 7.6.11 @ 7:40PM
The Left will always despise Reagan just as Conservatives will always react to FDR. While Roosevelt began our long decline into tyranny, so Reagan proved the validity of Conservative philosophy even though he only managed to implement about half of it. For that proof he will never be forgiven by the statists. There is a reason his new statue in London has a piece of the Berlin wall at its base.
Occam's Tool| 7.6.11 @ 9:03PM
And there is a reason our Ambassador to London didn't drop EVERYTHING and attend the placement of the Statue. Obama is a virulent maggot. Bachmann 2012!
skip| 7.7.11 @ 11:53PM
"Obama is a virulent maggot."
How very well informed. And perspicacious. And enjoyable to type.
Cutch| 7.6.11 @ 10:41PM
I WILL NOT WASTE TIME ARGUING WITH ANYONE. I AM NOT WAITING FOR ANOTHER RONSTER THE REAGAN (God bless him!). WE MUST ALL BE REAGANS NOW. WE MUST GO TO WAR WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT REPUBS AND THEN THE STATISTS. LET'S MOUNT UP.
POST American| 7.7.11 @ 1:54AM
---FINALLY
would Reagan, anyway, your 'ideal' of Reagan, be cowering
and equivocating in the face of the Globalization-RED China
TREASON op? ---in the face of a declared,
unthinkably hideous EUGENICS agenda?
WOULD HE?
---------FURTHER
-would all those who went fought and died in
the 2, largely instigated, World Wars, and in
Korea, have gone and sacrificed ---FOR THIS?
Would they? ---have gone and fought and died?
REALLY? --------------NOW, go look in the mirror
-ONCE AGAIN-
REALLY----------------------?
weddingdress | 7.7.11 @ 5:19AM
I WILL NOT WASTE TIME ARGUING WITH ANYONE. I AM NOT WAITING FOR ANOTHER RONSTER THE REAGAN (God bless him!). WE MUST ALL BE REAGANS NOW. WE MUST GO TO WAR WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT REPUBS AND THEN THE STATISTS. LET'S MOUNT UP.