Skip to comments.
Hagel: Reagan wouldn't identify with today's GOP [RINO whiner, tries to re-write history]
foreignpolicy.com ^
| 5/11/12
Posted on 05/12/2012 4:45:08 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Hagel is full of crap. Reagan tried to defeat Demonrats every chance he could. I am sick of liberals from either party trying to re-write the history of Reagan.
To: SoFloFreeper
Reagan tried to defeat Demonrats every chance he could.
Ahhhhhh, I think you're forgetting those "pesky" tax increases, not to mention amnesty for illegals.
2
posted on
05/12/2012 4:48:40 AM PDT
by
oh8eleven
(RVN '67-'68)
To: SoFloFreeper
Just be thankful that Hagel is a former Senator. Obviously real Republicans saw what he really was . A former RINO who should have been a Democrat in the first place.
3
posted on
05/12/2012 4:48:52 AM PDT
by
Venturer
To: oh8eleven
Ahhhhhh, I think you're forgetting those "pesky" tax increases, not to mention amnesty for illegals.
The 25% cut across the board in income taxes and especially INDEXING (HUGE under JC inflation) plus accelerated depreciation schedules for businesses more than offsets the fee and tax increases (mostly under the '86 TEFRA bill, which I agree he was snookered on, and perhaps precipitated the later S & L crisis). (And at least the 5 cent fuel tax increase, mostly used for roads and bridges, was actually needed.)
Reagan never had the House, and the RINOs were MUCH stronger in the Senate in those days (Warner, Percy, Packwood, Weicker, Specter, Heinz, Wilson, Kassebaum just off the top of my head)
4
posted on
05/12/2012 5:02:04 AM PDT
by
Dr. Sivana
(There is no salvation in politics.)
To: SoFloFreeper
UpChuck Hagel can go eff himself.
There is a reason why, in another 100 years people will read about and admire our 40th President even more, and when the name ‘Chuck Hagel’ comes up, those same people will say “who?”
UpChuck is nothing but an abnormal yeast cell in America’s annual pap smear.
5
posted on
05/12/2012 5:06:18 AM PDT
by
mkjessup
(Romney is to conservatism what Helen Thomas is to a high fashion model walkway.)
To: SoFloFreeper
Reagan’s tax increases(as President (I’m side-stepping his tax increases as Governor of California):
The 1982 tax increases - these were various restrictions on deductions, exemptions, etc., which had the effect of broadening the base. In conjunction with the 1981 tax reductions, these tax increases constituted a combination of cutting the rates and broadening the base. This is very much the Republican plan of today.
The increase in the Social Security tax - this came out of the Greenspan Commission on Social Security. It was to preserve S.S. for another generation. It did that, but we’re now a bit more than a generation later. We now need a plan to fix or actually improve S.S. Romney’s proposal is more of a fix than an improvement. But, it’s something. What does the current President offer? Anything???
Reagan on immigration - the Simpson-Mazzoli bill was another fix. It didn’t address the underlying problem. It too kicked the can down the road. We now have to address the issue again. I’m not sure we have a good plan or that any plan could actually pass Congress.
I could address other specific issues. But, instead, I’ll speak to the broader issue: Ronald Reagan addressed the big issues of his day. Mostly, we remember that he restored America’s confidence in itself in terms of being a world power and in terms of stopping inflation and turning the economy around. This required deftness in working with a Congress that was, on the House side, controlled by the Democrats throughout his eight years, and a Senate that, while controlled by the Republicans for the first six years of his Presidency, always had enough Democrats to block legislation through the filibuster rule. Accordingly, on many issues, Reagan “merely” did what was urgent and did not fix the underlying problem.
The next President will inherit a God awful mess, not only from Obama, but from the preceding administration. I doubt that he will fix everything forever. His goal must be to restore America’s confidence as the leader of the free world, to address the fiscal imbalance that threatens our country’s solvency, and to kick the American economy into high gear. If he can accomplish these three goals, he might join Reagan as a great president. Probably, to accomplish these things, he will need a measure of focus and not get drawn into politically unsolvable problems.
To: SoFloFreeper
JFK would not recognize the Democrat party now. Find one Democrat that would make a speech like his inaugural address.
7
posted on
05/12/2012 5:23:49 AM PDT
by
MCF
To: SoFloFreeper
JFK would not recognize the Democrat party now. Find one Democrat that would make a speech like his inaugural address.
8
posted on
05/12/2012 5:24:17 AM PDT
by
MCF
To: SoFloFreeper
Were Reagan alive today, he might say, yet once again, my party left me.
There are some days I actually miss BJ Clinton. What has this country become?
9
posted on
05/12/2012 5:25:37 AM PDT
by
NoKoolAidforMe
(I'm clinging to my God and my guns. You can keep the change.)
To: SoFloFreeper
Hagel?
Chuck Hagel?
That one?
This one?
10
posted on
05/12/2012 5:30:01 AM PDT
by
rlmorel
("The safest road to Hell is the gradual one." Screwtape (C.S. Lewis))
To: SoFloFreeper
The Republican Party has drifted so far to the right and become so partisan in recent years that President Ronald Reagan wouldn't even want to be a part of it, former Nebraska GOP senator Chuck Hagel told The Cable.
So Chuckie, a GOP candidate for president saying he supports gay adoption is too far to the right for you? I'd love to hear what your perfect "moderate" candidate would support.
11
posted on
05/12/2012 5:33:41 AM PDT
by
cripplecreek
(What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
To: oh8eleven
Reagan made the mistake of believing the Democrats would fulfill their end of the ‘compromise’. He raised taxes on the promise that spending would be cut. The Dems increased the budget exponentially. The Amnesty was the was the incentive for the ‘progressives’ to agree to enforce existing law. They didn’t do that either.
If Ronald Reagan were alive today, he wouldn’t recognize this nation. Ronald Reagan KNEW economics. He understood ‘Debtism’. He just couldn’t stop it. Everyone wants to get rich quick.
12
posted on
05/12/2012 5:34:23 AM PDT
by
griswold3
(Big Government does not tolerate rivals.)
To: Dr. Sivana
Reagan never had the House, and the RINOs were MUCH stronger in the Senate in those days. Exactly correct. Reagan managed to flip the Senate with his landslide election in 1980 to 53-47. He got it up to 54-46 the following congress mainly by managing to flip Senator Phil Gramm from Democrat to GOP. But the GOP lost the Senate (55-45) in 1986.
The Democrat dominated House (unlike the feckless GOP house majority in our current congress) was not afraid to use the power of the purse to get what they wanted. They correctly calculated that 1986 would be a flipping point in the Senate for two reasons:
- Fatigue almost always sets in during the final two years of a president's two term presidency. Voters have largely forgotten about the last administration and grown more cynical and critical of the one in office.
- The six year cycle is up for many marginal Senators barely pulled across the finish line by the president's coattails.
13
posted on
05/12/2012 5:34:26 AM PDT
by
Vigilanteman
(Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
To: SoFloFreeper
Reagan would not identify with Amerika. Hagel is a dumbass of the highest order. Go ahead Liberals, Double-Down on the destruction of Faith, Family and Values. It’s gonna get ugly and you just can’t stop.
14
posted on
05/12/2012 5:35:07 AM PDT
by
eyedigress
((zOld storm chaser from the west)/?)
To: SoFloFreeper
"...The Republican Party has drifted so far to the right and become so partisan..." I maintain that the right has actually drifted to the Left, but the Left has gone so far radically to the left that gulf between the two is much wider.
Plus, the Left has nuked and purged their moderates to the point there is a large no-man's land between the two parties. The last person on the Left I had any respect for, Zell Miller, is long gone. And seeing how liberal the Republican Party has largely become, that says a LOT about where the Left really is.
15
posted on
05/12/2012 5:35:54 AM PDT
by
rlmorel
("The safest road to Hell is the gradual one." Screwtape (C.S. Lewis))
To: cripplecreek
I'd love to hear what your perfect "moderate" candidate would support. Parental rights for turkey basters?
16
posted on
05/12/2012 5:39:04 AM PDT
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
To: SoFloFreeper
We all change to meet new challenges. Reagan was conservative and practical. But the nation has never faced the dangers it does now from the radical left, a president who has no idea of the ideals ingrained in Americans, the constant threat of Islam, etc. Conservative Republicans know the ways of the past can no longer be applied and there must be a new way of governing.
17
posted on
05/12/2012 5:48:43 AM PDT
by
elpadre
(AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
To: SoFloFreeper
We all change to meet new challenges. Reagan was conservative and practical. But the nation has never faced the dangers it does now from the radical left, a president who has no idea of the ideals ingrained in Americans, the constant threat of Islam, etc. Conservative Republicans know the ways of the past can no longer be applied and there must be a new way of governing.
18
posted on
05/12/2012 5:48:43 AM PDT
by
elpadre
(AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
To: SoFloFreeper
Hagel may be right. Reagan would be screaming “Where is your BACK BONE????” Other than that Hagel is his usually jerky self
19
posted on
05/12/2012 5:49:11 AM PDT
by
Nifster
To: oh8eleven
Ah I think you are forgetting the promise of the democrat controlled Congress to cut spending three dollars for every dollar of tax increase. Reagan was fooled once not twice.
Go back and take your blinders off
20
posted on
05/12/2012 5:50:56 AM PDT
by
Nifster
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson