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...
I will never forgive George HW Bush for being totally pawned by George Mitchell over taxes and spending.
Mitchell lied about everything and never cut a dime from the budget.
Also Bush listened to Sununu recommend Breyer for the Court. Stupid,stupid, stupid!
I think it is forgetfulness, rather than sadness. There are many domestic things that separate GHW/GW from Clinton, mong these - SCOTUS appointments (Thomas/Roberts/Alito vs Breyer/Ginsburg), as well as huge tax cuts under GW, and staunch pro-life laws passed under GW.
“huge tax cuts under GW”
Huh? Bush 43 had control of both Houses of Congress for SIX years. He managed to reduce taxes from 39.6% (which is what it was when he took office) to 35%. And the reductions were TEMPORARY that is: to expire by their own terms. so Bush 43 reduced taxes by 4.6% for eight years.
Reagan had control of only one House of Congress, the Senate, for six years. During his tenure, the GOP NEVER controlled the House, which is where spending and tax bills must originate under the Constitution. In spite of these disabilities, during his term of office Regan slashed the top marginal rate from 70% to 28%, a tax cut of 42% and it was PERMANENT.
Permanent, that is, until Bush 41 broke his pledge not to raise taxes and hiked it from 28% to 31%. His betrayal led directly to Clinton who promptly raised the rate to 39.6%.
George W. Bush’s tax cut was not “huge”. It was dinky and temporary. And it only returned 4.6% of the 11% Bush-Clinton tax hikes which his father and Clinton foisted on us. In spite of having a GOP Congress, Bush 43 kept the other 7% of the Bush Clinton tax hike and called the temporary 4.6% rebate a cut. Some huge cut that was! /sarc/
Unfortunately, he didn’t get rid of the (un)earned income tax credit, and he didn’t flatten the tax rates so that the deadbeats on the left could pay something remotely resembling their fair share (whatever that is). So yes, he did some good, but not very doggone much.
She was way too ‘subtle’ last night.
It was easily the least of any of her speeches.
Uh, I thought there would be no Math questions?
“She was way too ‘subtle’ last night.
It was easily the least of any of her speeches.”
You must have seen another speech than I did. It was a fantastic speech. I don’t know what you mean by “too subtle.” It is hard to respond to something as vague as your post.
There were important current events that she sidestepped, in particular Obaba’s deliberate destabilization of Egypt.
She left her most effective guns home.
The Harriet Meyers fiasco was planned. He let everyone blow their stack about her and then he pulled out his real choice.
The only really bad thing GWB did was to not stand up for himself, he let the MSM define him.
“There were important current events that she sidestepped, in particular Obaba’s deliberate destabilization of Egypt.
She left her most effective guns home.”
I usually agree with you, but not this time. The night was about honoring Ronald Reagan, not discussing Hosni Mubarak and the nuances of the Egyptian situation. Had she tried that, she would have wandered off into the weeds and the whole speech would have fallen flat. She only had 30 minutes, not an hour and a half. No one possibly discuss the domestic and foreign scenes in a single 30 minute speech and do so intelligently, while paying proper tribute to an icon of Ronald Reagan’s range and impact.
She speaks when she can influence events in a positive direction, not like McCain and Romney who are busy trying to get ahead of the curve and force Mubarak out, without considering the consequences. She does not have access to the intelligence reports and she knows that popping off without having the information can be destructive. She is wisely watching this from the sidelines because she knows that anything she says at this point is not going to be helpful. And last night was certainly not the time for it.
Likewise, and we will also have to counter their initial reaction of the GOP RINORCS and the Leftist Orcs who go all wizzy-tizzy whenever Governor Palin "enters the room."
Its as if tantrumming has become a convention with them, conduct worthy only of 2 year olds.We need to spank 'em consistently. And we neeed to start now.
No, she could easily have tied it to Reagan’s stalwart defense of El Salvador.
She passed up an H-Bomb that she easily could have dropped on Obama in a few sentences.
>> “not like McCain and Romney who are busy trying to get ahead of the curve and force Mubarak out, without considering the consequences. She does not have access to the intelligence reports...” <<
.
There is no reason to push Mubarak out, and all the intelligence that is needed to prove that Obama set this up deliberately is already out there in the open.
I don’t care what opinions you have, mistaken or not.
But kindly don’t be so presumptous as to suggest I’m Not ‘honest with myself.”
I honestly disagree with you but go on with your life.
Great post!
Excellent.
Very well done!
His failure to define himself was part and parcel of his ideological cluelessness. He couldn't fight the good fight because he had no idea how. He punched a few conservative buttons (tax cut, check, aggressive rhetoric, check, conservative judicial nominees) and then went back to being the nice, well brought up boy with no particular direction that he always was.
What you refer to as a failure to define himself was in fact a complete failure to lead the conservative movement which left the GOP drifting rudderless onto the rocks. Clan Bush has been an unmitigated disaster for the USA. Great grandpa sat on Wilson's War Industries Board. Grandpa was a planned parenthood activist and died in the wool progressive. Daddy gave us the ADA and W was the icing on the cake. He lead the way for Obamacare by extending Medicare. He expanded the federal role in education in cooperation with the late, unlamented Senator Kennedy (D Sunken Buick). His feckless faring policy looks tolerable only because the Dems wanted to be still more feckless. Everything we hate about Obama (stimulus, Obamacare) is a natural extension of the Bush administration. Obama even has the same Defense Secretary Bush ended up with. The Secretary of State is only distinguishable from Bush's version because she's shorter, fatter and paler.
Under Bush the conservative movement had a near death experience. Under Obama we're back with a vengeance. Suddenly we have a chance to turn the tide and move America back toward sanity. Nothing could be more misguided than nostalgia for President Bush.
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.