Huckabee worries Republicans will 'Balkanize themselves' (Huckabee smears Reagan)

The Hill, Washington DC ^ | 2011-05-06 | Shane D'Aprile

[RitaOK]

Don’t repeat the propaganda of the so-called elites of the GOP, they’re wrong. “ =================

I hope you’re right, but general election voters are not conservative particularly when nearly half of our population is on welfare, food stamps or entitlements. It is an impossible dilemma in a general election campaign today to forge a conservative path when it inevitably threatens free loaders.

[SoConPubbie]

2. Did not sign the largest tax increase up to that time? He of course was promised $3 of spending per $1 of tax increases, but alas bought a pig in a poke and signed on with no mechanism to get any spending cuts. Of course I guess he could have vetoed any spending bill that did not include those cuts, BUT HE DIDN’T.

I think you meant he was promised $3 dollars of spending cuts for every $1 dollar of increased taxes, and that is the truth, your spin notwithstanding.

He did not have control of congress during that time, the Dems were in control of the HOuse, and maybe the senate.

So the net effect of the bill would be a strong net decrease of the net size of government, and you fault him for going for that?

You fault him for not knowing that they would totally renege on their promises?

You been cruising Media Matters much lately?

[SoConPubbie]

I hope you’re right, but general election voters are not conservative particularly when nearly half of our population is on welfare, food stamps or entitlements. It is an impossible dilemma in a general election campaign today to forge a conservative path when it inevitably threatens free loaders.

The general percentages of voters in the political "buckets" of Liberal, Conservative, and moderate have not changed much.

If we actually get a candidate who actually believes what she/he is saying, and communicates it well, and does not send the message we have to compromise with the left as the current crappy GOP elite (as they have always done) are doing now, we win big.

Otherwise, we lose.

[SoConPubbie]

3. Did not sign an actual illegal immigrant amnesty bill? I don’t care what other pig in a poke he bought with it, he signed it and got nothing

He wasn't promised anything, it was in the bill.

Strict enforcement at both the Business Level and the Border, neither occured because the Feds refused to enforce it.

More revisionist crap from you.

[Tempest]

sounds about right.

[SoConPubbie]

1. Did not nominate S.D. O’Connor to the US Supreme Court?

Reagan had no reason to believe that O'Connor would become the moderate justice that she would become when he nominated her.

[RitaOK]

My perspective is that Republicans seem to think that they can only win by appeasement. Which is a terrible option in itself. “ ========================

That about says it all. Compromise and conciliation has Republicans failing conservatism and naturally unable to teach something they no longer practice.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Hucksterbee.

He should be playing guitar in a Holiday Inn lounge ;-)

[JLS]

“He wasn’t promised anything, it was in the bill.

Strict enforcement at both the Business Level and the Border, neither occured because the Feds refused to enforce it.”

How weak is that? Who was the Feds? The Reagan administration is who.

So your claim is that Reagan signed an amnesty bill with enforcement in it, but fail to administer the enforcement. So you are saying Reagan was worse on immigration than I did.

[JLS]

“Reagan had no reason to believe that O’Connor would become the moderate justice that she would become when he nominated her.”

Why not? Are you claiming Reagan did not do a good job of vetting her or are you claiming Reagan was incompetent?

Of course he should have known and worried she might become what she did. That was his job.

[SoConPubbie]

I did not distort facts. Name me one distortion in what I said. Are you claiming Reagan:

....

2. Did not sign the largest tax increase up to that time?

You distorted the facts on that one.

It was the largest tax-hike only in peacetime, taxes had been raised at a much higher rate during war in the past.

[SoConPubbie]

Of course he should have known and worried she might become what she did. That was his job.

She became more moderate AFTER she became a Justice.

Was he supposed to have the power to read the future?

[JLS]

“He did not have control of congress during that time, the Dems were in control of the HOuse, and maybe the senate.

So the net effect of the bill would be a strong net decrease of the net size of government, and you fault him for going for that?

You fault him for not knowing that they would totally renege on their promises? “

What do we call republicans today who make agreements with Dims who stab them in the back? We know as Reagan should have known at the time that the Dims would of course lie and renege to increase the size of government. Oh yeah, that name, RINOs. I would not go so far as to call Reagan a RINO, but any GOP president that signed that bill today would be called one my many on here.

The actual net affect of the bill was increased size of government and decreased deficit pressure to cut spending. So yes I fault him for that.

BTW, you are a champion excuse maker for Reagan’s bad policy moves. I hope you are not such an excuse maker in real life.

[SoConPubbie]

How weak is that? Who was the Feds? The Reagan administration is who.

So your claim is that Reagan signed an amnesty bill with enforcement in it, but fail to administer the enforcement. So you are saying Reagan was worse on immigration than I did.

So the Bill became law on November 6th, 1986.

How long do you think it would be before they would be able to objectively figure out that it's provisions were not being actively enforced?

So you are saying Reagan was worse on immigration than I did.

No, just more of your left-wing revisionist crap when it comes to Reagan.

[SoConPubbie]

BTW, you are a champion excuse maker for Reagan’s bad policy moves. I hope you are not such an excuse maker in real life.

BTW, you are just as bad as the left-wing at skewing the truth where Reagan is concerned, or maybe just naive enough to believe their crap. Personally, I think it is the first, because you sure are putting the most negative spin and negative assumptions on facts where Reagan is concerned.

[napscoordinator]

Was he supposed to have the power to read the future?

Yes! lol. Just kidding.

[JLS]

“So the Bill became law on November 6th, 1986.

How long do you think it would be before they would be able to objectively figure out that it’s provisions were not being actively enforced? “

1. It was Reagan’s job to see the bill was enforced from the start. Are you again trying to argue Reagan was incompetent?

2. Are you claiming Reagan did not know it was late in his second term and that enforcement deals were highly dependent on the will of future administrations?

You can make all the excuses you want. They don’t change the actual facts.

[onyx]

Thanks very much, SoConPubbie. The keywords in my reply to JLS were *late at night*. I am just now signing out from our freepathon thread. I don’t have the time nor the energy to engage tonight.

[SoConPubbie]

Why not? Are you claiming Reagan did not do a good job of vetting her or are you claiming Reagan was incompetent?

Of course he should have known and worried she might become what she did. That was his job.

From the book: "The age of Reagan: the conservative counterrevolution, 1980-1989 by Stephen F. Hayward":

"Reagan's confidence in was initially justified. She sailed through an easy Senate confirmation and during her first years on the Supreme Court she was a solid conservative, voting with her Stanford Law School classmate and fellow Arizonan Justice William Rehnquist in as many as 92 percent of the Court's decisions. O'Connor's defection from Conservative jurisprudence lay in the future. At the moment, the appointment was hailed as a Reagan triumph."

Do you like repeating the talking points of the left?

[JLS]

“Was he supposed to have the power to read the future?”

That is the task of a president when appointing a Justice to the Supreme Court. The Dim presidents never seem to have a problem, though I keep hoping one of their appointments some day will disappoint them.

While you never know, I am pretty confident that Alito and Roberts will not go the way of O’Connor.

I admit it is a tough job, but O’Connor was a pretty weak nominee from the start. Though she was appointed to the Arizona Senate by a GOP governor, “... she was appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals by Democratic Arizona Governor Bruce Babbitt.” Might that have been a bit of a red flag?