John Thompson, former Georgetown basketball coach
Posted on 01/22/2008 2:02:22 PM PST by unspun
I was first elected to the Georgia House of Representatives 34 years ago. I have watched this party change for a long time. Some changes have been better than others.
Two years after that first election, I went to work on the Reagan campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. I was one of the leaders of that campaign in Georgia, and my friend, Paul Coverdell, led the establishment's efforts to nominate President Ford.
It was the typical establishment-versus-interloper campaign. Most of the friends I had made in the party were in the establishment. Most of them thought the nomination of Ronald Reagan was not only impractical, but would destroy our party.
Reagan had just served two terms as the governor of California. His record was not all that conservative. He signed the biggest tax increase in the history of the state. He got the best he could get with a Democrat-dominated general assembly. He signed a bill legalizing abortion. But governors have different challenges than presidents.
Frankly, most of the establishment couldn't have cared less about abortion. They thought the discussion of it was, well, tacky. But we were, at the time, the party that Barry built, and the new foot soldiers cared about abortion.
Their concern with Reagan was that he just wasn't up to it. What did he know about foreign policy? How could he stand up to the Soviets? Did he understand detente?
During that campaign, as in all campaigns, the establishment sat at the head table, and the rest of us milled around the small round tables below.
Coverdell approached me, after Ford had won the first several primaries, and urged me to switch sides. Paul was convinced that Ford had the best chance of winning. Paul recited all of the reservations mentioned above and then said, "John, Reagan cannot win. No one will take him seriously." That was also the consensus of the Republican writers and commentators.
I said, "Paul, I think politics is all about what you believe. I know what Reagan believes. I have no idea what Ford believes. But you need to watch Reagan connect with the people. He is the best communicator I have ever seen. He is bringing new people into the party. And these are folks you won't be meeting at the club for lunch. They carry a lunch bucket to work. Or a brown paper bag."
Four years later, I worked again for Reagan and Paul worked for George H. W. Bush. Again, the Wall Street crowd sat at the head table, and the Main Street crowd sat at the small round tables on the floor.
The same arguments came from the establishment. His tax cut idea was a "riverboat gamble." In fact, his tax cuts doubled the size of the economy and doubled revenues to the treasury. Unfortunately, they spent that and more.
Reagan didn't understand that the world is a dangerous place and dealing with the Soviets required a more "understanding" policy. It also required a willingness to sign more treaties. They didn't know that Reagan had no interest in understanding the Soviets. He wanted communism consigned to "the ash heap of history."
It was a neverending series of put-downs until New Hampshire. Then it was over.
Reagan won that election with the support of Larry Lunch-bucket and Betty Brownbag. They were called the Reagan Democrats. When we celebrated that victory, I asked some of them why they chose to join us. They said, "When he talked, we felt that he was talking to us." The Reagan Democrats believe they have been ignored since 1988.
The establishment doesn't like change. They have always felt that their seats at the head table were threatened by those new to the club. The establishment that so ardently opposed Reagan's nomination in 1980 crawled all over each other to chair his 1984 race.
Today they now see themselves as those who put Reagan in power. His presidency was their presidency. They believe they are the keepers of the flame.
Today's establishment includes elected officials, consultants, lobbyists and even conservative writers and commentators. Unless you allow them to write the rules and approve of your positions you are unwelcome. Anyone who does not genuflect before their altar is "not conservative."
When you look at the many fine candidates seeking the Republican nomination for president, who do you believe can best speak to those Reagan Democrats?
I believe that candidate is Mike Huckabee.
When Reagan became president, one of his first moves was to reduce income taxes from 70 percent to 50 percent and ultimately down to 28 percent. As pointed out above, both the size of the economy and the federal revenues doubled in eight years.
Huckabee doesn't want to lower income taxes. He wants to abolish them - along with the IRS, the most intrusive, coercive and corrosive federal agency ever. Mike would replace those taxes on income with a sales tax - the FairTax. Every American will become a voluntary taxpayer paying taxes when you choose, as much as you choose, by how you choose to spend. How conservative can one get?
Rep. John Linder, R-Duluth, has served in the House of Representatives since 1992.
Huckabee needs to first control his own failure of a family before he could ever hope to be elected to any office again.
His son is a dog-torturer and killer. The Huckster used the influence of his office to derail any police investigation of that incident.
And you support this collectivist theocrat? Maybe someone should question your possession of good sense, sir.
Incidentally, the last time I was in Arkansas, the roads were terrible and I prayed driving over their rickety “structurally deficient” bridges. So much for your spin on why Elmer Gantry raised taxes.
what do consenting adults do in their own self postings is their own business until the moderator notices...
Small?
You are to kind.
I was thinking fully fortified with manure.
“Inform me. What danger does Mormonism pose for Christianity?”
Simply put, it is a counterfeit. Someone reaching for the real thing might pick up the phoney. It is like having an important medicine on a shelf where someone has subsituted poison for the real thing but in the same bottle with the same labe. They drink it to get better, but wind up dead.
Also, whereas most Christian denominations would never advocate taking away freedom of conscience (thus allowing mormons to worship as they please), if mormons ever get in substantial power they will in subtile ways attempt to suppress other faiths not their own. I know this is a hard sell to get folks to believe this. Mormonism is not all Donny and Marie smiles.
If you really want to understand this, there are others here on FR that can explain this issue much better than myself.
I'm not mormon. Your opinion is subjective. Religious persuasions should have nothing to do with our elections. Especially since Mormonism and Christianity are quite similar.
Also, whereas most Christian denominations would never advocate taking away freedom of conscience (thus allowing mormons to worship as they please), if mormons ever get in substantial power they will in subtile ways attempt to suppress other faiths not their own. I know this is a hard sell to get folks to believe this. Mormonism is not all Donny and Marie smiles.
BS. Christianity is not all fluff either. As a matter of fact Christianity has a more violent history than Mormonism. What you post is crap.
If you really want to understand this, there are others here on FR that can explain this issue much better than myself.
I've been over to the religious threads. None of those Christians who hang out on the Mormon bashing threads have yet to explain anything to my satisfaction.
Well, God bless ya — keep your flame retardant’s on.
I’ll take one exception to this article. I strongly doubt a Pres. Huckabee would nominate a Sandra Day O’Connor.
It would make me like him a lot better if he would announce DH as his running mate. We need to know now.
Does he buy into the scam of man made global warming?
My nomination for yesterday's Post of the Day.
The GOP and conservative talk radio are being dominated by those who believe "conservatism" is a cover for egocentrism and, frankly, greed. When they hear words like "care," or "compassion," it is their nature to think "Why, that has to mean that someone is after my money!"
Huckabee has, on occasion, talked about the responsibilities of Christians and they think "Government! Taxing me! Gasp!!" when Huckabee wasn't even speaking about government.
Alas, FR is being dominated by the same sad mentality.
"Is not life more important than food....?"
Huckabee hasn't taken the bait about that. He puts off the question and speaks of the need to conserve, protect the enviorment and acheive energy independence. He is trying to redirect attention and people-energy from the former to the latter -- which I think is excellent statesmanship.
He has famously spoken of Hunter as someone who would make an excellent Sec. of Defense.
But does he have the courage to say outright that it’s a scam?
Reading into things, but I suspect he would think of that as a way of losing the ability to lead. He has said that he does not know to what extent the environment is affected by such things as carbon gasses.
It's going to take a mound of evidence over time, to pull most of the alarmists heads out of their, um, askew views.
Maybe Thompson then:’)
My thoughts exactly. Huck is using the Lord's name in vain.
I think Hunter supporters are kind of in shock and some FRs are taking advantage, and pounding. All these accusations can be rebutted but as for me... I’m too tired to defend him...right now
John Thompson, former Georgetown basketball coach
Hopefully it won’t take as much time as teaching a global warming alarmist the truth about solar radiation....
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.