“President Ronald Reagan famously spoke about a ‘Time for Choosing.’ While he is not here to experience the current moment, we who worked for him in the White House, in the administration, in campaigns and on his personal staff, know he would join us in supporting the Harris-Walz ticket.”
So insists a group of 17 individuals who worked for President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.
“The time for choosing we face today is a choice between integrity and demagoguery,” insist the signers, “and the choice must be Harris-Walz.”
The group’s announcement was released as an exclusive and ballyhooed as some sort of political bombshell by the biased CBS News. I would rather ignore it, but unfortunately — and predictably — the Left is seizing it with wild abandon to promote Kamala Harris. I’m personally and particularly struck that the same angry ilk attacking our new Reagan movie — and more specifically, denouncing the positive Ronald Reagan presented in that movie — are suddenly embracing the Reagan in this Kamala endorsement.
It’s akin to the hateful Left’s sudden embrace of Dick Cheney because of his Kamala endorsement. For over two decades, Cheney was a kind of Count Dracula to liberals, the fanged monster from the hills of Halliburton who conspired with George W. “Bush-Lied-Kids-Died” to bloody the world.
But alas, now the despised Dick Cheney is the toast of the Left, as is Ronald Reagan; or at least, this deceased Reagan claimed as a Kamala supporter.
There’s so much that’s striking about this CBS News story, beginning with the revealing headline: “Ronald Reagan’s former staff back Harris-Walz ticket.”
Zounds! Reagan’s “staff?” The whole damned thing?
In truth, the letter was apparently signed by 17 various individuals who worked for Reagan in some capacity in the 1980s. I can’t find a full list of the 17. The only one whose name I recognize among the handful listed by CBS is former arms negotiator Ken Adelman. As the CBS piece notes, however, “Adelman had endorsed former President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, as well as President Biden’s 2020 run.”
So, for Adelman to endorse the Democrat candidate again in 2024 is no surprise.
Other than Adelman, the other names listed by CBS are “Reagan” folks I’ve never heard of. What does “staff” mean? White House staff? Department heads? Cooks, cleaning ladies? Actually, one staff member listed is a photographer: Pete Souza. He was the chief White House photographer, including for other presidents, such as President Barack Obama.
It seems quite a stretch by CBS to dub this group “Reagan staff.” Do a Google search of other news outlets that picked up the story, such as the Daily Beast, the Hill, CNBC, and the Daily Mail. Most referred to the signers as “officials” or even “Reagan alumni.”
But let’s get to the heart of the claim by this group. Note the astonishing assertion: “[W]e who worked for him [Reagan] … know he would join us.” That is, he would join them in supporting Kamala Harris. They “know” this.
Ladies and gentlemen, short of communicating with the ghost of The Gipper, that is something that plainly cannot be said. I would dissuade such declarations, much as I would dissuade, say, the use of Ouija boards.
I’ve written eight books on Ronald Reagan, and I would never hazard such claims. In fact, I wouldn’t dare such a claim about Reagan endorsing anyone, whether Harris–Walz or Trump–Vance.
It would be more reasonable to attempt to claim that Ronald Reagan, if alive, would not endorse Donald Trump because of the aforementioned matter of “integrity” versus “demagoguery.” Even then, I don’t know what great integrity these individuals discern in the cackling Kamala Harris and weird Tim Walz. But granted, they feel that Donald Trump lacks the character to be president. Okay, fine. That’s why a lot of Republicans won’t vote for Donald Trump, at least not enthusiastically.
But not endorsing Trump is altogether different from endorsing Kamala Harris. Worse, claiming with certainty that Ronald Reagan, who died 20 years ago, would endorse Kamala Harris is a ludicrous leap. The 40th president might abstain on Nov. 5, 2024. But why insist he would openly join them in voting for a radical leftist like Kamala?
Allow me to be a bit more analytical about this. I do teach political science. Yes, Poli Sci really isn’t science — a gripe that I’ve bellyached about for decades (especially as a former pre-med student who majored in biochemistry/biophysics). But perhaps I could offer some specific parameters for a more sophisticated assessment.
In our next print edition of The American Spectator, which literally came off the press this past week, I have an article titled, “Reagan Conservatism Is Alive and Well.” What I say there can add some light to this claim about the dead Reagan allegedly endorsing Kamala over Trump.
In 2014, I published a book titled 11 Principles of a Reagan Conservative. It has gone through several printings, with the latest version being released this fall. The Young America’s Foundation has a special edition that it has given out to students nationwide by the thousands. In that book, I delineate 11 principles of Reagan conservatism, namely: Freedom, Faith, Family, Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life, American Exceptionalism, the Founders’ Wisdom and Vision, Lower Taxes, Limited Government, Peace Through Strength, Anti-Communism, and Belief in the Individual.
I can’t detail each of these 11 principles here. I need not do so for readers of The American Spectator. But here’s the crucial takeaway as it relates to November 2024. The Republican nominee, Donald Trump, could check the box on pretty much all 11 of those Reagan principles. At the least, the policies that Trump pursued as president align with most to all of them.
Here’s the crucial contradistinction: How many of those boxes could Kamala Harris check? Yes, you answered obviously and correctly: zero. (That would include the principle of freedom, which Ronald Reagan understood in a way fundamentally different from how a left-wing progressive like Kamala Harris or Tim Walz understand it.)
It is the height of folly to assert — with certainty — that Ronald Reagan would support Kamala Harris. Go ahead and argue that he wouldn’t back Donald Trump for reasons of character and temperament. But to knowingly insist he would endorse Kamala Harris is absurd.
READ MORE:
The Weekend Spectator Ep. 10: Reagan Critics Shut Down By Audience
