The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : About Mitch Daniels's Truce

Text Size

About Mitch Daniels's Truce

By W. James Antle, III on 6.9.10 @ 4:23PM

I think Ronald Reagan showed you could devote the bulk of your political capital to immediate needs -- winning the Cold War and whipping stagflation -- without totally surrendering on other aspects of your agenda. Reagan wasn't a culture warrior but the country still knew where he stood on social issues. I think that would be a better model for Mitch Daniels to contemplate than unconditional surrender.

View all comments (2) | Leave a comment

Bob Miller| 6.10.10 @ 8:55AM

While he lacks the type of executive experience Mitch Daniels has, Mike Pence is a lot sharper about cultural and international issues.

Roy| 6.10.10 @ 11:16AM

Yeah. Daniels may be misreading something. People whose primary focus is "cultural issues"(a euphemism for whether babies continue to get vivisected) are not the loudest right now. That's because they are not feeling as betrayed by Republicans as people whose primary focus is economic issues.

Whatever his faults, GW Bush picked, bar NONE, the BEST judges of any president since Roe v Wade. Better than Reagan, who picked coin-flippers O'Connor and Kennedy. Four more years of Bush, and we'd have had two more Alitos on the court instead of Kagan and Sotomayor, and thousands if not millions of babies would not get vivisected.

So, much as I don't agree with a lot of things that happened 2000-2008, as I see it, the goal is that Democrats lose, at least enough to get us back to where we were in 2006.

However, if I start to see Republicans making this kind of "compromise" it'll be a very different story. Just because I'm mostly yelling about spending these days doesn't mean I've forgotten.