June 18, 2013 | 102 comments
June 13, 2013 | 54 comments
June 11, 2013 | 215 comments
June 6, 2013 | 91 comments
June 4, 2013 | 55 comments
Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, and the Politics of Dads.
(Page 4 of 5)
… [T]he Bush campaign was purposely attempting to alter the image of the Republican Party. And the party — rendered more open to change by eight years in the presidential wilderness — gave Bush the leeway to make necessary ideological adjustments… they [the GOP] must move beyond Reagan-era nostalgia.
And so — that’s what the Bush campaign did. Again — as specifically cited by Jeb Bush, Brother George W. lost the popular vote following this strategy, gathering a mere 47.9%. Needing, as mentioned, those 537 Florida votes and the Supreme Court to save his strategy.
And yet Brother Jeb, the son of Dad who talked about a “kinder gentler” government and lost re-election with 37% of the vote, still doesn’t get it. Dad’s formula being adapted by Brother George — and producing the results it produced.
Continued Jeb in his CPAC speech:
If Watson were to read the blogs, tweets, and Facebook posts that mention the Republican Party, it would find that all too often we’re associated with being “anti” everything. Way too many people believe Republicans are anti-immigrant, anti-woman, anti-science, anti-gay, anti-worker…and the list goes on. Many voters are simply unwilling to choose our candidates because those voters feel unloved, unwanted and unwelcome in our party.
As we have also pointed out, this is an old, old argument — and it never pans out. Listen to that Bush description: voters “feel unloved, unwanted, unwelcome”. This is precisely what Ronald Reagan argued against. As we quote here obviously not often enough, after the 1976 election — when yet another moderate Republican lost yet another presidential election (that would be Gerald Ford) a steely Ronald Reagan sat down with the New York Times to discuss just this idea expressed today by Jeb Bush. The headline:
Reagan Urges His Party to Save Itself By declaring Its Conservative Beliefs
Said the man who would later win two landslide presidential elections — 44 and 49 states respectively — and help Jeb’s Dad to his only landslide win, a 40-state landslide when running as Reagan’s heir:
A political party is not a fraternal order. A party is something where people are bound together by a shared philosophy.
Notice the difference between Reagan and Jeb Bush: Nowhere does Reagan talk about voters who “feel unloved, unwanted, unwelcome.” Why? Because Reagan never saw the GOP as a fraternal order.
One could on here… and on and on.
The real problem looming for the GOP is that if one scrapes the surface of Rand Paul — who has the makings of a very effective senator for his willingness to challenge the GOP Establishment —one finds an attachment to his father’s “stale and mossy” left-wing foreign policy ideas that have proved disastrous.
The real problem looming for the GOP is that one doesn’t even have to scrape the surface of Jeb Bush — who was a very good governor — to find a rigid attachment to the “stale and mossy” moderate Republicanism that made Mitt Romney the eleventh moderate Republican to lose the White House since this long and dismal practice got serious in 1932.
Rand Paul and Jeb Bush represent two-sides of the same coin.
A coin that has the images of Ron Paul on one side and George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush on the other side.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
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.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
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?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?