[Al B.]

The Republican Party has not yet learned its lesson. In the era of Reagan his injunction to never speak ill of a fellow Republican was valid. We are in a new era, and in this new era, the weaknesses of the Republican Party have their source within the party. In this new era, Reagan would object to using his name to absolve those who remain a part of the problem.

Baloney. The Ford/Rockefeller wing of the GOP dominated the party back then just as the current Bush/Romney people do now. And yet Reagan continued to reach out to the establishment. Furthermore, the situation was pretty damn dire back in the Carter years if you recall. In his 1980 convention speech Reagan said:

"The major issue of this campaign is the direct political, personal and moral responsibility of Democratic Party leadership--in the White House and in Congress--for this unprecedented calamity which has befallen us. They tell us they have done the most that humanly could be done. They say that the United States has had its day in the sun; that our nation has passed its zenith. They expect you to tell your children that the American people no longer have the will to cope with their problems; that the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities.

My fellow citizens, I utterly reject that view. The American people, the most generous on earth, who created the highest standard of living, are not going to accept the notion that we can only make a better world for others by moving backwards ourselves. Those who believe we can have no business leading the nation.

I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose. We have come together here because the American people deserve better from those to whom they entrust our nation's highest offices, and we stand united in our resolve to do something about it.

Was Reagan engaging in hyperbole back then? I sure don't remember it that way.

[NYCslicker]

No he wasn’t.

I agree with you about that.

You missed the point of my post.

My point is that in addition to understanding the failings of the opposition party we need also understand the failings, and the potential failings, of our own party, especially when the error that is manifest, the error that Reagan was speaking of, is now attributable to both parties in a way that would never have been possible in Reagan’s time.

If the country was going to hell in a handbasket, and the policies driving that were being espoused by both Democrats and Republicans, Reagan would have applied the same scrutiny to Republicans as Democrats.

I’m advocating for each of us to be super-educated about candidates in both parties, to stop accepting Palin because she is Palin, and start expecting a very high level of conservative principals out of anyone who serves, be it the next Reagan, Sarah Palin, John McCain, whoever.

The lack of viable conservative candidates who are willing and able to serve should not be the determining factor of what we are willing to accept. The people applying for the job as our servants in politics should bring their standards up to our conservative standards. We should not be called upon to bring our standards down to them.

Do you think that union bosses accept anything but the most liberal candidates as acceptable? That’s what we are up against.