Posted on 08/06/2010 6:52:18 AM PDT by Bigtigermike
You had to live through it to recognize the metamorphosis. During those early days of June 2004, as the nation mourned the passing of Ronald Reagan, you would have never known he had been ridiculed and treated with disdain for most of his political career—not only by Democrats but by establishment Republicans. Frankly, I was stunned by the display of love and gratitude in 2004.
As the Reagan motorcade drove toward the Reagan Library for the final tribute, ordinary citizens along the route were paying their final tributes as well. It was an amazing moment.
But it was not always so.
When Reagan first ran for California governor in 1966, a lot of people, both Democrat and Republican, treated his candidacy as a joke. First, he had to get the nomination. Establishment Republican George Christopher, a former mayor of San Francisco, painted Reagan as a right-wing extremist and racial bigot. Having overcome that hurdle, he had to face governor Edmund “Pat” Brown, who was running for reelection and expected an easy triumph over the “B” actor.
One of Brown’s ploys was an infamous commercial he ran during the campaign in which he told a group of small children, “I’m running against an actor, and you know who killed Abe Lincoln, don’t you?” It didn’t work.
After two terms as California governor, Reagan took on Gerald Ford for the presidency in 1976. The entire Republican establishment opposed him. Again, the big guns came out to declare the challenger an extremist. It was an uphill battle, one that Reagan lost that year, only to claim the nomination four years later, this time defeating the establishment candidate George Bush.
Democrats in the 1980 campaign depicted Reagan as an idiot, a grade “B” movie actor who had starred with a chimpanzee, of all things.
They also used the extremist label on him, predicting he would lead America into World War III. Instead, his policies led the world out of the Cold War.
The identical tactics used against Reagan are now being used against Sarah Palin. Even though she was McCain’s vice-presidential pick, and you could say that makes her “establishment” in one sense, she never was at home in that role. Neither did Republican insiders consider her to be one of them. The political professionals in the McCain campaign had little more than disdain for her; that became publicly obvious after the election.
In Alaska, she truly had been a disturber of the status quo within the Republican Party. She was guided more by principle than party loyalty. Even today, as her Facebook numbers rise and her influence is felt via endorsements for candidates running for both state offices and Congress, she is shunned by the establishment. The same type of people who considered Reagan a simpleton and a neanderthal have dubbed her “Caribou Barbie.”
Her faults? Well, she didn’t graduate from one of the approved universities. How can you be president if you didn’t graduate from either Harvard or Yale?
Her speech is too common and ordinary. She makes up words like “refudiate.” At least she knows how to pronounce “corps.”
She gives her children weird names. She actually decided to give a Down Syndrome child the opportunity to live rather than take the sophisticated and more seemly route of abortion. She’s adamantly pro-life, which immediately brands her as one of those extremists.
Personally, I don’t know for sure that Palin is the best choice for president on the Republican ticket in 2012. Yet I respect her for standing firm on her principles and for allowing her Christian faith to be seen in practice.
What I do know for sure is that she is undergoing the same ridicule and disdain that Ronald Reagan once endured. If she handles it with as much grace and good humor as Reagan did, there may be no limit to what she can accomplish. I wish her well.
She’s getting the same venom as Reagan, for sure. I think what I’m not sure about is whether she is as capable as Reagan. Reagan after all had a long and interesting career, including SAG president, two-term governor of a large state, etc., etc., etc. He had been tested, it’s just that the liberals didn’t see it or acknowledge it.
I’m not certain that Palin has been tested to the extent that Reagan was by ‘76. She certainly is not as tested as he was by 80. But it sure seems like we are going to find out....
I pretty much hold the same opinion of her that this columnist does.
My only beef with her is her support of some RINOs.
She *does* have the potential to go far.
>I’m not certain that Palin has been tested to the extent that Reagan was by ‘76. She certainly is not as tested as he was by 80. But it sure seems like we are going to find out....
I’m quite certain she is nowhere near as tested as Reagan by 1976. I don’t mind Palin, but she lacks enough experience, and to be quite honest she does have baggage.
I would not object to her being president, but I don’t see it happening, and to nominate her would be quixotic.
Reagan was criticized. Palin is criticized.
Damn, she IS presidential. I had never thought of that.
He walked on two feet. She walks on two feet.
He rode in cars. She rides in cars.
He ate food. She eats food.
The real kicker for me was when I realized he woke up on sunny days and cloudy days. She does that very thing.
Folks, McCain compares himself favorably to Reagan. Enough already...
I once though like you did...but then I looked at what she faced in Alaska....the Republican party had disdain for her and tried to throw her out....they didn’t support her financially, yet she beat two governors of Alaska in one year, with no true campaign manager, little money and virtual no party support, on top of that she was called “dumb” and a lightweight and being 43 (young and a woman) she help to take down the oil companies and many “good ole boy” types....
Many of us knew of Reagan's political and constitutional awareness back in 79 and 80, but the vast majority in the press and in many of the power positions in the DNC and GOP discounted it. His appeal was to the people...just as Sarah's is...and that put him in the White House where over and eight year period, his record and actions spoke for themselves.
If given the opportunity...and I believe it is the people who will give it to her...I believe Sarah Palin will do the same.
((((((((Ping)))))))
Another ping X2 - LOL.
Great Post! It’s not Palin’s fault she doesn’t have the 30 years of political experience Reagan had. She gets it! She understands liberty. Yes She will make mistakes and Gaffes. Doesn’t everybody? Yes, the Katy Courics, Keith Obermann’s and Chris Matthews of the world will deride and make fun of her. Ever heard of the Contras in Nicaragua and how the left did everything possible to make Reagan look like a fool. We must support a candidate like Sarah if we are to make a difference. If you can prove to me that Duncan Hunter can be elected, I’ll listen. For now there is only Sarah!
Her time is a bit to the young side of her peak and Reagan’s was to the older end of his. Such is history.
Given the double-standard on judging professional women more by their looks, maybe it’s for the best that she is a bit younger rather than older.
He rode in cars. She rides in cars.
He ate food. She eats food.
Such intellectual brilliance and such daring commentary.
We're glad you could add to the discussion......
LOVE IT!
Oh my!
Yes, thank you! I had misplaced that one!
Nobody organized this kind show of respect where thousands spontaneously just "showed up". Once again, with Palin, the media shows they NEVER WILL get it, either.
You are being disingenuous!!.... The writer even said that he isn’t quite sure if she is right for the job, but what he is saying is that just like Reagan that Palin is going through the same type of things he faced and that despite all she is pressing through....and that means that the liberals must be very careful to think that ridiculing and mocking someone like Palin (who has very good political skills) will somehow knock her down from being President....Palin’s own political enemies said in Alaska that people highly underestimate her and they did to their own demise....SHEESH!!
She also supported carbon trading and the LOST Treaty. Now why would I consider that common sense?
Yes, the left was awful to her. They are also awful to Michelle Bachmann. They hate people who speak out about them.
She is a republican, a foe of democrats.
She has personally been vetted. The business with her daughter isn’t a reason to not support her. What about the other things like what policies was she for or against?
Maybe she has seen the light. We will find out should she enter the race. Her opponents will not let it slide.(as if the washed up retread candidates from 2008 have any reason to talk)
By the way, what did the oil companies do that they needed taking down? just asking
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.