Mourning in America (Dubya as the Gipper's ideological heir)

Tech Central Station ^ | June 6, 2004 | James K. Glassman

[quidnunc]

A man detested by the liberal establishment, laughed at as stupid by the sophisticates, feared for his aggressive, forthright foreign policy by the Europeans….

A man who cut taxes and revived an economy, gave hope and comfort in tough times by speaking directly and powerfully to average citizens, and brought down oppressive regimes that threatened America….

Yes, Ronald Reagan, who died Saturday at the age of 93, and George W. Bush, who is seeking re-election at the age of 57, have a lot in common.

Clark Clifford, the late Washington lawyer and secretary of defense, called Reagan an "amiable dunce." So much for the perspicacity of the Georgetown set, who regard Bush, as well, as a dunce, but perhaps not so amiable — since, in some ways, helped by a Republican Congress, the current president has been even more successful than Reagan.

It was not George H. W. Bush, Reagan's vice president for eight years and his successor in the White House for four, who carried the torch. It is George W. Bush.

-snip-

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Bush is his own man. There shouldn't be any comparisons to Reagan, although Bush is to terrorism what Reagan was to communism.

[jmstein7]

Welcome to FR.

Bush is not amiable? How so?

[quidnunc]

Fess up, neither of you opened the link and read the article did you?

[aft_lizard]

Reagan was not a dunce and Bush is not amiable. To compare them is sick. Literally.
Who is comparing there personalities? Bush isnt a dunce and a man could not get elected, ever, if they werent amiable, period. Comparisons are better made on there political views and foreign policy.

[ReaganRulez2000]

I agree. Reagan was "The Great Communicator". No comparison possible.

[arasina]

I can see a strong similarity between the two. In addition, each is great in his own way. Obviously President Bush is not The Great Communicator, but many of his principles, morals and methods are the same.

[VaBthang4]

Loserdopians wont like the comparison at all.
GW and Dutch were indeed both cut from the same cloth.

[I_saw_the_light]

I think its the "vision thing". They both have a vision for a better, more free world, with America at the fore.

[atomicpossum]

Both are particularly similar when viewed as how their opposition defined them, as well. The Left's reaction to Bush and Reagan is almost indistinguishable-- the rhetoric is identical, and the end result is looking like it will be similar as well--re-election against effete, radically liberal opponents whose condescension to the common man and contempt for the concept of America as a special nation are only surpassed by their utter lack of appealling personality.

[Ohioan]

You must have gone to some trouble to find anything this silly to post.

Reagan developed into a thoughtful Conservative, who understood such basic distinctions as that between dependence on Government, and the independent spirit and personal responsibility, which made America possible. Before he was ever elected, he had annunciated not just claims to Conservative principles, but a demonstrated comprehension of Conservative principles.

The Bush election was purely a play on our wishful thinking.

Thus there was serious talk about getting the Federal Government out of local education and civilian health, during Reagan's First term. No, it was not accomplished; but neither were we subjected to an egalitarian farce promising "No Child Left Behind," nor an extension of Medicare that makes LBJ look like a Conservative.

And then there was the mistake of trying to stabalize Lebanon. When Reagan saw that it was costing American lives, for little real gain; he had the character to shift course. He did not let blind pride--personal hubris--endanger American lives. But I will not tarnish the memory of the beloved departed by even comparing his foreign policy to the present confusion of purpose.

Reagan offered substance eloquently; a sharp contrast to the empty platitudes of those who came immediately before and those who followed. (Now, in fairness, I will admit that the elder Bush did handle the first Gulf war very well; both in the execution and termination. The younger Bush handled the execution of his Gulf War well, but then lost his way in academic theories, bogging us down in the Theatre of the absurd.)

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[ValerieUSA]

[quidnunc]

Ohioan wrote: (You must have gone to some trouble to find anything this silly to post.) Reagan developed into a thoughtful Conservative, who understood such basic distinctions as that between dependence on Government, and the independent spirit and personal responsibility, which made America possible. Before he was ever elected, he had annunciated not just claims to Conservative principles, but a demonstrated comprehension of Conservative principles. The Bush election was purely a play on our wishful thinking. Thus there was serious talk about getting the Federal Government out of local education and civilian health, during Reagan's First term. No, it was not accomplished; but neither were we subjected to an egalitarian farce promising "No Child Left Behind," nor an extension of Medicare that makes LBJ look like a Conservative. And then there was the mistake of trying to stabalize Lebanon. When Reagan saw that it was costing American lives, for little real gain; he had the character to shift course. He did not let blind pride--personal hubris--endanger American lives. But I will not tarnish the memory of the beloved departed by even comparing his foreign policy to the present confusion of purpose. Reagan offered substance eloquently; a sharp contrast to the empty platitudes of those who came immediately before and those who followed. (Now, in fairness, I will admit that the elder Bush did handle the first Gulf war very well; both in the execution and termination. The younger Bush handled the execution of his Gulf War well, but then lost his way in academic theories, bogging us down in the Theatre of the absurd.)

Shakespeare wrote that bervity is the soul of wit.

As usual, you have demonstrated the wisdom of that dictum.

You have managed to hone pomposity and tiresomeness into an art form.

[quidnunc]

"Shakespeare wrote that bervity is the soul of wit." should read "Shakespeare wrote that brevity is the soul of wit."

[ModernDayCato]

I thought it was a terrific reply. I don't post much here anymore since the great purges, but I decided to add my .02.

Bush and Reagan are VERY similar in their optimism and belief in America's being blessed by God and destined to lead the world. That's a huge similiarity...but that's where it ends.

[Ohioan]

Shakespeare wrote that bervity is the soul of wit. As usual, you have demonstrated the wisdom of that dictum. You have managed to hone pomposity and tiresomeness into an art form.

And you have mastered the inapt response.

I was not demonstrating wit, but comparing two Presidents. Considering the topic, my response was very brief indeed.

As for tiresomeness? Look in the mirror.

William Flax

[q_an_a]

sometimes people write a post that is so full of holes that it makes power of reason seem like a Twinkie for a main course. Your post fits that description. You may be a nice guy, but your logic leaves much to the imagination.

The reason Regan left Lebanon was he was not ready to go to war in Russia. the stupid CIA knew less about Russia than they knew about Iraq.

[q_an_a]

"So, over these sad days, when we remember the greatest president of the 20th century, we should take heart. His legacy is in good hands."

All the McCain conservatives and the Buchanan xenophobes should look at President Bush with a set a principles about good and evil not about the specific words of the Constitution from 250 years ago. Even the framers knew changes would be made, President Bush is making us safer and he does not seem to care if he is reelected unless care means protection for safety now and in the future.

[ladyinred]

I was thinking this very thing as I listen to these wonderful news people (barf) talking about President Reagan's ending the cold war, defeating our enemy etc. and how he wasn't afraid to call them evil, etc. how President Bush is doing the same thing with Terrorists. All he gets is bashing from these leftists. But then, So did President Reagan at the time. Perhaps we are seeing how history will remember the Bush Presidency, but only perhaps.