Posted on 06/12/2004 3:15:49 AM PDT by goldstategop
When Ronald Reagan emerged on the California political scene in the mid-1960s, the conservative movement was a collection of ineffective, naysaying right-wingers huddling in Orange County and San Gabriel Valley backyards, feverishly parsing school books for signs of communist or pornographic influence and flirting with the oddball extremists of the John Birch Society.
Reagan taught manners to these misfits and, in the process, gave them respectability. He shared their intense patriotism, their economic and social conservatism and their militant anti-communism, but he was likable, more genial than fierce.
Most important, Reagan understood that a successful political movement had to be inclusive. Ironclad adherence to right-wing philosophy would not win the votes of moderate Republicans or of the growing number of Democrats disenchanted with their party's support of strong civil rights laws and its soft attitude toward student demonstrations.
Charmed by his personality, enthralled by his speeches and celebrity and wowed by his political skills, California conservatives lined up behind him enthusiastically, as did conservatives around the nation in the years that followed. They became an essential part of what he called "a prairie fire," sweeping through the growing suburbs of the West and the South and ultimately into the once reliably Democratic working-class neighborhoods of the Midwest and ultimately into the once reliably Democratic working-class neighborhoods of the Midwest and East.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
No I'm not. All I'm point out with 36% of the population, conservatives are not yet a majority. We have to convince people who aren't brain-dead liberals they're better off with us than with the other side. That's why Ronald Reagan made a connection with people who didn't agree with him on every issue. We need to do the same.
We are 40% of the Republican Party, 50% in Mass, and our Rino's still ignore us. Ronnie would have been a Greater Prez if he hadn't listened to the FDR pubbies. People loved Reagan because he had a core set of values that were unwavering, in guy talk, he had nads that clanged.
He got into trouble when he deviated and played politics, Reagan Rats want a Prez that stands for what they stand for, Home, Country, and Family with out compromise.
I don't think Reagan ever represented "country club Republicans" --- in fact it was that type who turned off his mike when he demanded it be turned back on. Reagan was a true Conservative --- but he actually had gay friends like Rock Hudson even though he wouldn't have promoted the homosexual agenda. Maybe he saw the good in people.
Reagan was a true leader, I can see people who are actually liberals but when they talk about Reagan they agree with him and start talking like Conservatives --- not that they really changed completely. Some Conservatives can lead people who are already Conservatives but Reagan had the rare ability to move people into the Conservative area.
Modern Conservatism is defined by the Goldwater agenda and revulsion to the 60's agenda. Reagan was the first to exemplify this and I don't think that, in his second term, he was well served by his advisor's.
"Reagan understood that a successful political movement had to be inclusive. "
The republicans MUST be inclusive or they will cease to exist. To obsess about so called rinos instead of going after democrats is just plain head-in-the-sandism.
I agree with that --- the other type of Republicans got right to work trying to reign in Reaganism --- they never wanted Reagan to win the Republican nomination in the first place. Reagan represented the Conservative takeover of the Republican party.
It depends on what is meant by inclusive --- Reagan was a uniter and brought people toward the Conservative side which is why he won real landslide elections. He never promoted welfare programs or homosexual agendas or abortion to be inclusive --- he liked everyone and invited everyone to follow him. He slashed government programs because he believed that people were equal and skin color or ethnic background wouldn't hold someone back and he won higher percents of minority votes than those who try other ways to be inclusive.
That was a strong message to the future frogs of this world, there are some things that detente can't buy, and he backed it up, love the man.
That's because Bill Boyarsky lacks the creativity to show how conservatism works to solve problems for people who would otherwise find coercive government appealing.
naysaying right-wingers huddling in Orange County and San Gabriel Valley backyards, feverishly parsing school books for signs of communist or pornographic influence
From this vantage point and considering the current product of the public schools, it looks like they were right to be parsing those books.
Parents who don't check out their children's textbooks, teachers and schoolyard buddies are on the same level as parents who feed their children junk food and unlimited TV. This generation of parents is hardly aware of the 40% illiteracy rate and those who do know about it don't connect it up with their local schools.
That said, Reagan was smart enough to take half a loaf and then come back later for the other half. Winning by increments is still winning.
Too much inclusion and the Republicans become meaningless, and it doesn't matter if they exist.
Exactly. Reagan was a "Big Picture" conservative: Supply side economist, anti-communist, pro-defense, rugged individualist values from head to toe. He believed in jobs as an ecnomic program, and the family as the truest governing unit.
Further, Reagan was brilliant in his understanding (that you point out) that winning incrementally is still winning - even if the increments come years later, as in when Clinton signed the "End of Welfare As We Know It" bill. THAT was pure Reagan,...nearly a decade after Reagan had left office.
Lastly, all true Reaganites follow his 11th Commandment: "Thou Shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican." That is how you build majorities. That is how you win, even if incrementally.
Very well said. Jobs are the best way to get into the American Dream. Family is basic.
I know some immigrants, LEGAL immigrants. They came in by the law, not under the border.
They work hard, they want to make something of themselves. They give good value on a day's pay.
They're getting a piece of the American Dream, by EARNING it.
I'd trade 10 of our layabout 'the world owes me a living' types for one more of them.
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.