Posted on 08/07/2012 5:01:13 PM PDT by madprof98
Jeb Bush has expressed concerns about the state of the republican party, stating that Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting the nomination from today's GOP.
"I would concur with his assessment, I think we have to be mindful of Reagan's ethos of the big tent theory," said George P Bush. "The Republican party in order to be successful has to include people from all backgrounds, namely the Hispanic community."
Mitt Romney took a tough line on immigration in the republican primaries, but George P Bush says to win over the Hispanic vote, the presumptive nominee needs to focus on the economy.
"I think he needs to focus on kitchen table issues. That's the economy, solving our unemployment issue and dealing with education reform," explained Bush who's mother, Columba Bush, is Mexican-American. "Immigration of course is an issue - it's an important issue to the community - but first and foremost it's about how do we get back on the right track economically."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The ‘big tent’ philosophy is the Red Team vs the Blue Team, in which case the Progressives win.
It should be the Constitutional Republicans vs the Progressives. We need to teach the GOP-e what the issue really is.
And if they don’t understand, kick them the h*ll out.
Nip it in the bud. I voted for Reagan twice. No bush is worthy to shine his shoes.
We’ve had two Bushes. In a nation of 115,000,000 families, we don’t need a political aristocracy.
I’d be happier with Jeb than with Romney.
Jeb’s a Christian and tried to defend Terri Schiavo, up to the point of ordering the state police to protect her from Judge Greer. I think he should have gone ahead and done it (and I was at the vigil outside the hospital) but he thought that it would have been an act of executive power that was not a good precedent.
But remember that Jeb was governor before Bambi was president, and Bambi is now using executive power to conduct day-to-day business in DC and punish his enemies. Jeb would probably have gone ahead now because there is obviously no constitutional problem with an insane executive, but he actually had respect for the Florida constitution.
Incidentally, the person who kept Bush from getting the law passed and then the court order was Jim King, the Florida Speaker of the House, who was a good old boy RINO with lots of power, no morals, and a real hatred of Christians.
Jeb was a good governor of Florida and got business going down here, and he was very pro-conservative social positions, much more so than his brother or father. I live in Florida so I know this first hand.
Romney, on the other hand, is known as the “godfather of gay marriage” in MA and the “father of Obamacare.”
He’s not a Christian, comes from a murderous polygamist sect that had to be subdued by the US Cavalry and then forced to accept obedience to the US Constitution in order for Utah to be considered for statehood...at which point Romney’s great grandparents took off for Mexico so they could have a polygamous community there.
His grandparents were part of this and then went back to the US after Romney’s father was born simply because Mexico expelled the polygamist Mormon cults living there. So Romney’s father was born in Mexico and had to be naturalized when he got here.
Who is Romney’s grandmother? Probably nobody knows. One of the sister-wives, I guess.
And Romney has absolutely no problem with “gay marriage.” He promoted it in MA, and he has refused to say a single word about it here and has not let is “surrogates” talk about it either.
The solution is to convert them, all of them, even the marxists.
Do you know that Dr. Sowell was an avowed marxists during his college years. He became one of the leading lights of conservatism through real world experience and talking to conservative. I believe many conservatives have had the same experience.
Exclusion is not the answer.
Romney—Bush. Bush— Romney. Frying pan to fire to frying pan to fire. Etc etc....
Stay out da Bushes. Shamnesty pimps.
Some can be converted. Others don’t want to face reality. If folks aren’t willing or able to understand, they can’t be left to screw others up. We need to tell them to go somewhere else. And I count members of my own family among that group!
Reagan could get nominated in a heartbeat. We would nominate someone that just believed in the same things that Reagan believed in and held true to them. Reagan was not perfect... only one man has been... but he was the greatest President of my lifetime... and perhaps beyond. About 20% of what he did while in office... I did not support... but the 80% I did support was primo!
LLS
From the Address of Governor Ronald Reagan to California Republican Assembly
Lafayette Hotel, Long Beach
April 1, 1967
The 11th Commandment kept our party unified; but we were, and still are, a minority party. There is still much to be done in party building, in convincing independents and members of the opposing party that the course we chart leads to fiscal sanity, strong local government and individual rights and responsibilities.
Maybe there once was a time when our two-party system was less a difference in philosophy than a contest between partisans loyal to the old school tie, but no more. Last November, millions of people voted to change, or at least pause to review, the philosophy of the party leadership now in power. They did not just decide to change hats and join the other club for a while.
Fortunately for those millions of concerned citizens, we too had paused to take inventory. We discovered we could no longer afford the luxury of internal fighting, backbiting and throat-cutting. We discovered our philosophical difference with those presently in power was greater than any grudge or split within our own ranks. Were ready and in position to offer an alternative for those concerned citizens who wanted to join with others, not to win a contest, but to preserve a way of life.
We must keep the door open – offering our party as the only practical answer for those who, overall, are individualists. And because this is the great common denominator – this dedication to the belief in man’s aspirations as an individual – we cannot offer them a narrow sectarian party in which all must swear allegiance to prescribed commandments.
Such a party can be highly disciplined, but it does not win elections. This kind of party soon disappears in a blaze of glorious defeat, and it never puts into practice its basic tenets, no matter how noble they may be.
The Republican Party, both in this state and nationally, is a broad party. There is room in our tent for many views; indeed, the divergence of views is one of our strengths. Let no one, however, interpret this to mean compromise of basic philosophy or that we will be all things to all people for political expediency.
In our tent will be found those who believe that government was created by “We, the People;” that government exists for the convenience of the people and we can give to government no power we do not possess as individuals; that the citizen does not earn to support the government, but supports a government so that he may be free to earn; that, because there can be no freedom without law and order, every act of government must be approved if it makes freedom more secure and disapproved if it offers security instead of freedom.
Within our tent, there will be many arguments and divisions over approach and method and even those we choose to implement our philosophy. Seldom, if ever, will we raise a cheer signifying unanimous approval of the decisions reached. But if our philosophy is to prevail, we must at least pledge unified support of the ultimate decision. Unity does not require unanimity of thought.
And here is the challenge to you. It is the duty and responsibility of the volunteer Republican organizations, not to further divide, but to lead the way to unity. It is not your duty, responsibility of privilege to tear down, or attempt to destroy, others in the tent. As duly chartered Republican organizations, we can all advance our particular sectarianism or brand of candidates for the party to pass on openly and freely in a primary election.
But, as volunteer organizations, we must always remain in a position that will let us effectively support the candidates chosen by the entire party in a primary. To do less is a disservice to the party and, more importantly, to the cause in which we all believe.
Our 11th Commandment is perhaps more profound than we realize. “Thou shall not speak ill of any Republican.” To do so means we are inhibited in the support we can give that Republican if he should become the nominee of our party. Certainly our task is harder if we must challenge and refute charges made by our opponents if those charges were first uttered by us.
It is my belief that, as Governor, I should neither endorse a primary candidate nor involve myself behind the scenes in primary campaigning. To do so is a misuse of the office with which I have been entrusted. When the primary is over, I believe I have a commitment – a contract if you will – to wholeheartedly support every candidate chosen by the party.
You, on the other hand, as individuals and as an organization, should be so involved. You, by your membership in a volunteer group, have proven you are activists – leaders in furthering the philosophy which brings us together. You must, therefore, be leaders in setting campaign standards – ready to endorse the party choice – just as ready to repudiate any candidate of campaign which refuses to abide by those standards.
Fight as hard in the coming primary as you can for your candidate, but be against only those we must defeat in November of 1968. Let no opposition candidate quote your words in the general election to advance statism or the philosophy of those who have lost confidence in man’s capacity for self-rule.
Just a year ago, we were a party almost totally without power. The two-party system existed only in theory. Out of sheer necessity, we achieved unity and victory. With that victory, we bought time – time to rally our forces for what may be our last chance.
As a result of our victory, we stated something in this State. We are being watched … watched by those all across this land who once again dare to believe that our concept of responsible, people-oriented government can work as the founding fathers meant it to work. If we prove that here, we can, as I have said before, start a prairie fire that can sweep across this country.
But to start that fire, we must nurture the flame here at home or it will flicker and die and those who come after us will find only the ashes of lost hopes and dead dreams.
So do I. But I am never shy about sharing my opinions.
Neither am I, but that means my family & I are barely on speaking terms. :-)
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.