nutsey pelosi always looks like that.
but; carl levin; is he physically impaired?
he was the only one i saw sitting down...
Posted on 06/09/2004 4:26:33 PM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
America's greatest president has gone home. God worked through Ronald Reagan (news - web sites) on Earth and now He's taken him back. Reagan is survived by his wife, three children, and the hundreds of millions of people he saved by winning the Cold War. Thanks to him, the United States of America never ceased to be, as Reagan said, "a place to escape to" -- the last stand on Earth.
No thanks to liberals, I might add. More enraging than their revisionist history of Reagan, is liberals' revisionist history about themselves. Now liberals claim they liked Reagan at the time. This is extremely believable -- aren't we all fond of someone who regularly exposes us as liars, cowards and hypocrites? It's just human nature.
In fact and of course, liberals loathed Reagan. Their European friends loathed Reagan -- the protests against our current president are positively anemic compared to the massive protests against President Reagan when he went to visit our dear "allies," whose sorry asses we spent billions of dollars defending against the Soviets for 50 years. Even the moderate Republicans currently trying to insinuate themselves onto Reagan's legacy weren't especially fond of Reagan at the time -- especially when attacking him publicly would get them invites to the tonier Georgetown cocktail parties. Only authentic Americans loved Reagan.
From the descriptions in the media, you would think the reason Reagan was beloved by Americans was that he was an affable fellow who could tell a good joke. That's a description of Bob Dole, not Ronald Reagan.
Reagan was a March hare right-winger. He had enough faith in the American people to know that as long as the facts were clear, they would rise to the occasion and be March hare right-wingers, too. As Reagan himself said, back in 1964: "Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and me believe that this is a contest between two men ... that we are to choose just between two personalities."
Reagan forced Americans to confront the real ideological divide between conservatives and, as he said, "our liberal friends." But now liberals are trying to muddy the political waters by passing off Reagan's popularity as a result of his personal magnetism. I note that liberals were strangely immune to that magnetism at the time. Only now do they talk about Reagan's outsized personality as if he worked some sort of beguiling magic over the electorate and tricked them into supporting policies they never quite understood.
While Reagan had undeniable magnetism, what set him apart was that he had the courage to speak the truth and trust the American people. In the 1964 speech that launched his political career, "A Time for Choosing," Reagan never smiled. He told no jokes -- though he did say some amusing things inasmuch as he was talking about "our liberal friends."
In the throes of the Cold War -- still hot in Vietnam -- Reagan forthrightly said liberals refused to acknowledge that the choice was not between "peace and war, only between fight and surrender." In words that would have come in pretty handy in Spain just a few months ago, he said liberals tell us "if we only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he will forget his evil ways and learn to love us." All who disagree with the "peace" crowd, he said, "are indicted as warmongers." To this, Reagan said: "Let's set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace -- and you can have it in the next second -- surrender."
This wasn't sunny old grandpa carrying candy around in his pocket for children. After watching Walter Cronkite's coverage of the Vietnam War in December 1972, Reagan told President Richard Nixon, "under World War II circumstances, the network (CBS) would have been charged with treason."
Reagan quoted "Mr. Democrat himself," Al Smith, for the proposition that the Democratic Party was no longer the party of Jefferson, Jackson and Cleveland, but was now the party of Marx, Lenin and Stalin. (And that was 30 years before they tried to push Hillarycare on us.)
Reagan was a bulldog, completely, implacably right-wing on every issue. He was the right-wing Energizer Bunny. He never quit and he kept beating liberals. He cut taxes 25 percent across the board his first year in office; he walked away from Gorbachev at Reykjavik; he fired all those air traffic controllers -- and wouldn't let them come back even when they wanted to; he gave speeches about "welfare queens" and polluting trees; he nominated Antonin Scalia (news - web sites) and Robert Bork to the Supreme Court; and he enraged grim liberals when he warmed up his radio mike by saying, "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."
But now they're telling us Reagan was a "pragmatist." Well, not according to him. As he was wrapping up the Republican primaries in 1980 and moderate weenies in the Republican Party were trying to move him to the "center," Reagan said: "No, I'm not moving my positions any. ... I believe the same things that I've been speaking on for years, and I don't see any reason to change."
Thank God he didn't. Because Reagan lived, the world is a better place.
Cuomo is just another liberal stooge...Clinton ? the man is demented.
I refuse to look at that lying socialist bitch. I hear you would turn to stone if you so much as glace at her.
I would still have to list Lincoln as Number One - he brought the country through a civil war! But RWR is in the Top Five: Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, FDR (gasp!), and Ronald Reagan.
Time for choosing
http://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/rendezvous.asp
nutsey pelosi always looks like that.
but; carl levin; is he physically impaired?
he was the only one i saw sitting down...
You know, I didn't see Hilary in the rotunda today. That's nice!
Wow, Rita X. the Freakjob formerly known as Rita from Detroit. She used to call Mark Scott, a local Detroit host and tell us all about how white doctors would remove the tails from white babies before they were released form the hospital. For proof, she sent Mark some drawings from Ripley's. She was a total black racist. Hopefully she's in jail by now cause she was one scary broad.
White babies are born with tails? Is that why my twin nieces go through so many diapers?
Standing and applauding loudly!!!!!!!!!!
ping
She absolutely nails it.
W could go far just by reminding people that Reagan was a great man with great ideas. Then if he would share those ideas...
I've expressed a desire on quite a few threads that I wish they could have moved the President's remains by train and taken him across the country.
I had no doubt that millions on millions would line the tracks. Could you imagine the total shock of the libs if there were finally 'hands across America' and they were all Republicans!
I've changed my mind, now I want some cable station to play Reagan's speaches, starting from '64. And the full length version too, not the damn funny clips.
She sure is..............glad she's on our side.*~*
That may be true, but it was because of the abosolute need to build up our military. Something that is within the Constitutional power and duty of the federal government. The only way he could get that done was to not simultaneously cut spending on all the liberal pork barrel and give away programs, in return for support from labor Dems and Country Club Republicans. As he saw it, it was about survival of the country.
Clinton, and to a lessor degree the Bushes, OTOH, cut defense (pre 9-11) and increased domestic spending. The federal "take" in terms of fraction of the GDP was higher at the end of Clinton's terms, than it had been at the end of Reagan's.
Great article!
Yes, I noticed Pelosi's grin. I figured between face lifts and Botox, her skins so tight it pulls the corners of her lips in an upward arc.
And those eyes look like they might explode any second. Anybody ever seen Pelosi and the Budweiser ferret in the same room at the same time?
Nancy, I'm sorry to tell you, there's no way you can hide the ugliness inside.
Oh, yeah..he said it. In fact, he gave a history lesson going over the eloquence of Lincoln's speeches, like those at Gettysburg, while talking about the rheotirc of FDR. He made a point to say that RWR had speech writers and that the thoughts were never his own. He essentially called him a shallow man. He even said that Reagan made compassion, unfashionable.
Interesting, since CNN talked about this and even conceded that with the release of Nancy's personal letters and RWR diary, the liberals had him all wrong. He was, in fact, an extremely substantive person...who while filled with idealism (a liberal trait), actually sought to fulfill those dreams through substantive acts, unlike liberals who talk a good game. David Corn was even worse on CNN as the debated Laura Ingraham.
...
... 
Yes I saw David Corn opposite Laura at lunchtime. David Corn? From The Nation? How many people read The Nation and who the heck is David Corn? I thought Laura put in firmly in his place.
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.