Posted on 02/05/2011 9:57:52 AM PST by Brices Crossroads
As Sarah Palin addressed the Reagan 100 Celebration in California last night, I was almost distracted by her warm embrace of Reagan the man and what his vision and accomplishments meant to the country. There was no direct reference to the two Bush administrations, which spanned over half of the 22 years since the Gipper boarded the chopper bound for Rancho del Cielo...and his place both in history and in the hearts of his countrymen, who miss him so. Her address was both moving and pitch perfect.
And while there was no direct reference to the two Bush Administrations or to the Clinton Administration (which was spawned by the missteps of the first Bush), Palin very adroitly took them both to task and, at the same time, defended the Gipper. Noting that, by the time he left office, President Reagan had defeated the expansionist ideology of the [big government] Great Society, she lamented that:
"If history teaches us anything, it is that bad ideas are never gone for good.
FOR THE LAST TWO DECADES, WE HAVE SEEN BIG GOVERNMENT SLOWLY ENCROACH ON US. IT WAS SUBTLE AT FIRST, COUCHED IN THE LANGUAGE OF PROGRESS AND COMPASSION. But when the financial crisis erupted in 2008, big government rose up and presumptuously declared itself the answer to our problems...."
In 1988, I was in the Superdome for George H.W. Bush's acceptance speech at the GOP convention in New Orleans, and his call for a "kinder and gentler" America, which was both a euphemism for big government and a direct slap at his predecessor and benefactor, President Reagan (Kinder and gentler than what? Reagan, of course). I was reminded of this original dissing of Reagan--while he was still President, no less--when, on May 3, 2009, the latest of the Bush clan--Jeb--during a "listening tour" with Mitt Romney and Eric Cantor, called for the GOP to give up its "nostalgia" for the Reagan era and to "upgrade its message" perhaps taking a page from the Democrat playbook, noting that "the other side [Obama]has something."
Palin deftly juxtaposed Reagan's success in defeating the expansionist ideology of big government with the current failures of the same big government ideology, which BEGAN with the retrenchment of big government under the guise of "compassion" (whether "kinder and gentler" or "compassionate conservatism")during the first Bush Administration. In labeling this so-called "kinder and gentler" euphemism for what it is: the old "big government" bad idea dressed up in drag, Palin at once mounted a long overdue defense of Reagan's legacy and separated herself not only from the crescendo of this ideology personified in Barack Obama but from the "two decades" of its "subtle encroachment" by Bush-Clinton-Bush, without which Obama would never have been possible in the first place.
Governor Palin is the first major GOP figure since Reagan left office to step forward and defend President Reagan and his administration, albeit subtly, from the not so subtle slap at his Administration delivered by his Vice President, George H.W. Bush, in New Orleans 22 years ago and repeated by his sons both in their words and in their policies. In so doing she separates herself from the Establishment that always reviled Reagan and now reviles her, noting that the conservative movement, which Reagan birthed and to which she belongs: "has never been more engaged... and more willing to put up with what it takes to serve." Observing that Reagan was unique, she freely concedes that: "No. There is not one replacement for Reagan, but rather an army of patriotic Davids who are not afraid to stand up and speak out in defense of liberty. These Davids aren't afraid to tell Goliath, 'Don't tread on me.'"
The battle lines are drawn, and the Governor has drawn them herself, aligning herself firmly with the successful ideas of Reagan and against the carnage wrought by his successors' expansionist Great Society ideology in the last two decades. In 2012, it will not just be Sarah Palin versus Barack Obama, but Palin versus the Bush-Clinton-Obama "hydra of big government" that has grown at a gallop since the Gipper departed for his California ranch 22 years ago.
David versus Goliath, huh? Sounds to me like she is reaching into her pouch for a smooth stone...
Only takes a drop of cyanide to ruin a fresh glass of whole milk.
Granted, no one is perfect, but the spending/openBorders 1-2 punch is hard to justify.
Surely, it will be replayed on C-SPAN a few times, won't it?
...oh
I want to Blog for Sarah but mostly I get tripped up with bad copy....I admire Sarah Palin ..she can get out of any tangled mess the Bushes, Rove or the Bad Journalists throw at her. She takes on Obama like the piece of bad lawyer he is and communism and Socialism with its Central Planning...phew who needs me?
lol
I ‘ll shut up and sit down and write another $200 check for her Birthday on the 11th and send it to http://www.sarahpac.com
###
Tax cuts ......
Bush and his father were no different from Clinton in terms of policy. Just because the media attacked him doesn't mean the liberals didn't’ t approve of his agenda.
It's just like a couple months ago the leftist were attacking Obama as he passed 4 bills during the lame duck congress to make it look like he was moderating.
In fact liberals loved Bush 41 and 43 because they were for the expansion of government and the international bureaucracy that runs our country today.
Sorry but if you want to be honest with yourself both Bush presidents were flaming liberals.
As you see today all the ex advisors always attacking conservative candidates at the same time being soft on Obama.
“If you took at look at the clinton v. GWBush US Supreme Court picks you might see the difference. Does the name Ruth Bader Ginsburg ring a bell?”
The one thing I will grant is that both Bushes’ court appointments were superior to Dem Appointments. But even there, Bush 41 gave us Souter, the most left wing GOP appointment since William Brennan in 1956. And Bush 43, in a breathtaking display of cronyism, tried hard to put the totally unqualified Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court and, only after a conservative firestorm, did he pull her nomination and select instead the superb Justice Alito.
Aside from his dinky little temporary tax cut (which only returned a portion of the huge tax increases foisted on us by his father and Clinton), the rest of his domestic agenda was big government Republicanism at its worst...No Child Left Behind, Trillion Dollar Medicare Prescription Drug Expansion, Pork Laden 362 billion Dollar Highway bill and attempts to ram an illegal immigrant amnesty bill through Congress, to name just a few. All these things he did with a GOP congress (both houses) for 75% of his time in office. Reagan did ten times more (permanent tax rate cut from 70% to 28%, to name just one giant accomplishment) and he never had control of the House.
I didn't forget. Bush wasn't a philanderer. The end.
Bush's legacy IS Obama.
Eight Wasted Years...Margaret Thatcher used to talk about the ratchet effect. When the Left gets power, she said, they drive everything Left; when the Right gets power, they slow the Leftward drive, perhaps even halt it for a spell; but nothing ever gets moved to the Right. U.S. politics in the 21st century so far bears out this dismal analysis. What does the Right have to show for eight years of a Republican presidency? I supported George W. Bush in 2000 because I thought he had a conservative bone in his body somewhere. I supported him in 2004 because I thought him the lesser of two evils. At this point, I wouldnt let the fool park his car in my driveway. Bruce Bartlett was right, every damn word...Bill Gertz interview on Hannity and Colmes Gertz: Well he casts himself as a compassionate conservative and I argue that he's neither. That his administration is neither. He's done tremendous damage to the conservative movement... |
Randy Barnett is one of the great legal minds in America. He predicted that ObamaCare would be found unconstitutional when the conventional wisdom was unanimous that it would be upheld.
I am glad to see he has the intellectual integrity and courage not to be cowed by the Beltway herd mentality, which will disapprove of anyone who dares to speak the truth. It WAS a great speech. I don’t care how many little cookie pushing pansies come out of NRO and Hot Air and the Weekly Standard to tell us it was not.
And Jeb Bush needs to know that torpedoing her in 2012 is not going to work, any more than Poppy Bush could have torpedoed Reagan in 1980.
And he needs to realize that, in the unlikely event that it would work, he won’t be picking up the pieces in 2016. Conservatives will not forgive or forget, any more than we forgave Nelson Rockefeller. If he, or his greasy surrogates like Rove, Gerson and their ilk try it, the Bushes-—all of them-—including his son and any of the others who harbor political aspirations, will become pariahs.
The smart play for the Bushes is to groom the next generation for politics and quit trying to pursue the pipe dream that some behind the scenes strategy by the hamfisted Rove is gonna make Jebbie President in 2016. Ain’t gonna happen.
Well for one, neither Bush stole the publics property from the White House and had to be chased down and made to give it back.
Neither Bush used the military aides at the White House as servants to pass canapes around at soirees.
Just saying.
nothing says we should not hold up the good and denounce the bad.
About half way through Bush #2, he changed and became much more liberal. And truth be known, some of his ideas from the beginning (No Child Left Behind) were liberal from the get-go.
each Bush were upstanding people. They had good characters. sadly both’s domestic polices were terrible. Bush praised the military and was a good CinC when in came to aid and comfort and moral. But both suced when it came to strategy and winning wars.
Again we can strive to cpature the good while admitting the bad and where both Bush presidents have failed. In fact it is something we must do to not repeat. Just like reagan made mistakes. amenesty and icking Bush as VP were the two biggest with him getting us into lebenon
“let me fix that for you
to the Clinton Administration (which was spawned by the missteps of [the first Bush] Ross Perot)”
The statement is accurate and does not need to be fixed. Ross Perot only gained traction because “Mr. Read my Lips” broke the one promise that he repeated over and over again in the 1988 campaign and RAISED TAXES, which caused a minor recession in 1991-2 that was just enough to draw Perot into the race and the fiscal conservatives (teh forerunners of the TEA Party) OUT of the GOP and into Perot’s arms.
George H.W. Bush was responsible for the rise of Perot and for the Presidency of Bill Clinton. If he had merely kept his promise and refused to raise taxes, he would have won reelection.
She’s certainly growing in the right direction.
Ha! Missed that metaphor, but the “progress and compassion” hit me between the eyes. It was a pretty good speech. I hope to hear more from her in the near future.
Thanks for the analysis. Didn’t have a chance to see the speech, but I really like what Palin has to say about “compassionate” conservatism and big government.
Clearly, conservatism is favored by the majority of people, while liberalism is opposed by the majority.
The confusion comes because the values of liberalism (lying, cheating, stealing or policies of big government in general) are very often disguised as those of conservatism.
When this happens, people think they’re opposing conservatism but in fact what they oppose is liberalism disguised as conservatism. In the confusion, conservative candidates lose votes.
Differences between Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas are of degree, not kind. ..~ Angelo M. Codevilla -AMERICAN RULING CLASS AND THE PERILS OF REVOLUTION
Ever heard the phrase: “Give respect to whom respect is due; honor to whom honor is due”? We can praise both Bushes as Presidents for the most part as far as concerning foreign policies - WOT, first Gulf War, keeping this Country safe....etc. Palin has done so to W. And we can also honor W and George Sr for Thomas, Alito and Roberts as fine Supreme Court Justices in recent memory; but those two men had damaged conservatism especially overall economically, they diluted it with left leaning policies and although no President is perfect, they did things that were calculated and thought out that strayed from the Principles of Reagan and conservatism in general.” I abandon capitalism to save it” ?
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.