How Kemp Helped Rescue America

Newsmax ^ | Sunday, May 3, 2009 | Jeffrey Bell

[Jim W N]

There were two big ideas that changed the world in the 1980s: Supply-side economics and a bold strategy for winning the Cold War. One was the handiwork of Jack Kemp, the other of Ronald Reagan.

It’s important to understand that the first, introduced into American politics by a then-young Kemp in the 1970s, preceded the second. No look back on the life of Jack Kemp is complete without the recognition that, without Kemp’s success, the Reagan-led peaceful victory in the Cold War could never have happened.

Restoration of strong economic growth while ending double-digit inflation was a vital political and psychological building block to Reagan’s optimistic, pro-active strategy in the Cold War. It facilitated a massive defense buildup while generating the domestic political strength that Reagan needed during the confrontational phase of his foreign policy in the early and mid-1980s.

[Jim W N]

One of the greatest regrets I have about Reagan was his V.P. choice: Bush instead of the likes of Kemp. V.P. Kemp almost certainly would have been elected president in 1988 if not for his own merits, simply on the coattails of Reagan. Kemp would have made a very good if not great President and probably would have been President until 1996, with his V.P. having a shot after that. The GOP would have been held to their conservative roots and America's political landscape up to today, would have been significantly different.

[fish hawk]

Even Kemp was turning RINO in his more recent years.

[Clock King]

A lot of conservatives disliked Kemp, but I liked him, and so did almost ever Black man I met. Kemp had a way of talking “to” black people, not talking “at” us, all the while offering conservative solutions and IDEAS to the problems. I think you’re right. If Kemp had been pushed higher up by the Republican Party, they could have finally split off (or carved a very large chunk of) the Black vote from the Demons.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Even Kemp was turning RINO in his more recent years.”

Supply side theory ended up being tax cuts with lots of spending. Bringing down the top rates was good, but Kemp ignored that the money has to come from some place as is taught on talk radio even now. (fortunately Reagan won the cold war which saved lots of $$$ later.)

Later in 1996 Kemp gave us the theory that tax cuts would pay for increased social spending to lure minorities into republican party. He lured no one in 1996 and the theory was tested later under GWB, not a pretty ending, nor could it be. It was the 1994 conservative republicans that insisted in NOT running up huge bills. But Kemps idea was delusional, the Santa that runs up your credit card to buy EVERYONE gifts.

My last complaint was Kemp apologized for being a republican, while running as VP, jeeze! Pathetic

[Jim W N]

I don’t know - the guy was a staunch fiscal conservative - where was he turning RINO?

[Jim W N]

Reagan was clear that “Government is not the solution, Government the problem.” I thought Kemp had that same clear Adam Smith/Milton Friedman vision. Are you saying he had it and lost his way, or that he was never that clear about the limited role of government?

[calcowgirl]

My major complaint about Kemp has to do with his sleazy business deals with Saddam Hussein and Hugo Chavez.
I posted a bunch of articles a year or so ago:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1972395/replies?c=160

I also seeth at his bringing us “enterprise zones” which have lead to corrupt redevelopment agencies and eminent domain abuse, not to mention more socialism.

Supply sider? Well, he for sure was no Milton Friedman.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Are you saying he had it and lost his way, or that he was never that clear about the limited role of government?”

I don't know about his early days, I knew little of him then, but I started studying him in 1993 16 years ago just after the Clinton election and my first impression as positive, I told people : “If only we had him run against Clinton in 1992 WOW” but then saw more and more of him when he talked about reaching out with compassion by not threatening the programs minorities depend on, and was saying tax cuts would increase revenues to pay for the programs, that everyone could join the party, republicans could get all groups. Well he was throwing a party on someone else's credit card. Republicans could never spend enough to outspend democrats

I really was trying to avoid dissing him on his death but this post title was over the top.

[djsherin]

***This unexpected resurrection of capitalism demoralized the global left.***

This country hasn’t practiced capitalism in a long time.

[Pelham]

That’s one impressive list. I thought I had kept up on what the old illegal alien lover was up to, but I wasn’t aware of the Saddam Hussein and Hugo Chavez scheming.

[dragnet2]

Sorry to hear about his death, but he was no friend of mine. As Californians voted for and overwhelmingly passed Prop 187, it was Kemp and some other insider politicians that bad mouthed and failed to support the proposition which would have denied tax paid benefits to illegal aliens.

The Fed gov, along with their state government co-conspirators burned out ballots, and declared our free election illegal.

The results of this massive government intrusion into our free election, can now be seen coast to coast, as the invasion of millions of illegals were emboldened enough to march on our cities and towns recently, while making demands and pushing foreign flags in our faces.

Spit*

[calcowgirl]

I don’t think the guy I was posting to ever addressed any of those articles, nor did any of the other shills on that thread. If it was a Democrat hanging out with Hugo and Saddam, there would have been 100 vanities. What a job, huh? Lobbying the White House to try to improve Hugo’s image? LOL.

His attacks on Prop 187 were also mentioned on that thread as well as this article he wrote about GOP “protectionists” who didn’t buy into amnesty:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1795883/posts

[sickoflibs]

Rush is lying (or mistaken talking) about Kemp right now saying his program saying he didn't take liberal positions to ‘reach out’ to get minorities. He is responding to liberals pointing out Kemp sold out to them. Kemp did claim you could fund the welfare state with tax cuts, and assumed minorities would eventually select tax cuts over welfare when offered both (in the 1990s), Rush is focusing on 1980s. Even whites, republican whites will take both when offered, not one.

The only resolution of this is that Rush thinks conservatism is both tax cuts and social spending together, but he will deny that. Rush is talking about Kemp in 1980s, but not referencing him in 1990s. He is doing this on purpose.

[Jim W N]

Has anyone got their head screwed on straight anymore?

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Has anyone got their head screwed on straight anymore?”

I have been listening to Rush for years (have 24/7) and have come to the conclusion his priority is in many (not all) cases to stick to simple narratives he hopes will resonate with audience. He is trying to sell “Tax cuts cure all ills” and is re-telling history in a way that sells it . Rush obviously longs for Reagan, much more than GWB, who can blame him?. So his listeners repeat the “tax cuts pay for spending” narrative. My other pet peeve is his leaving out of his story the Greenspan monitary stimulus and spending, both short term uppers.

Unforunately for Rush and others, and US their 'tax cut fixed everything' ran into conflict with Bush's "bail out banks or die" narrative.