Posted on 12/01/2010 12:06:59 PM PST by pissant
Editor's note: Ed Rollins, a senior political contributor for CNN, is senior presidential fellow at the Kalikow Center for the Study of the American Presidency at Hofstra University. He is a principal with the Dilenschneider Group, a global public relations firm. He was White House political director for President Ronald Reagan and chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee.
(CNN) -- The first date is over. Not much happened. President Obama and his new governing partners, the House and Senate Republicans, met at the White House along with the Democratic leaders and discussed the unsolvable issues between them.
Even though they made no decisions and both sides went their separate ways, they agreed to start negotiations on extending the tax cuts. That in itself is the beginning of a positive process. They actually talked to each other and talked of a plan for action.
As with real dating, both sides have to get along or nothing will happen. So maybe this situation has more in common with an arranged marriage.
The American voters are the substitute parents, and they want this marriage to work or at least to be civil. And we, the voters, hold the shotgun.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
LOL.
Maybe a 24 year old like yourself is impressed with a reality show family running for the White House.
I’m not.
Like one of the old time posters around here said this morning, “This is turning into a damn freak show.”
That’s pretty good Haiku!
Actually she did use the comparison - but it related to her chances for winning election. She said (paraphrase) nobody expected Reagan to win either.
The this twinkie builds his straw man “Palin compares herself to Reagan” - she compared her election chances.
Its just propaganda. A death rattle.
I’ve never seen so many pussies afraid of a girl. It just goes on and on.
It’s funny.
Palin was the most popular governor in America. She had an approval rating over 90% in her state. Obviously her skills in governing were appreciated by the people who knew her best.
Then, after being selected for the VP slot, the smears began. Some of the ugliest vitriol I’ve ever seen in politics, all false, were advanced non stop.
They continued when she went back to govern the state, as the national establishment of both parties recognized what a threat she was to their little boys club.
It is really sad to see Republicans falling for this propaganda B.S.
The more she is attacked, the more I feel compelled to defend her.
The thing I like the most about her is; She is like sunlight to a vampire, her inherent goodness causes the banal and vituperous evil snarks from both parties to shriek in horror.
Excellent! That means she has more than 18 years to: move to California, establish residency, be elected Governor, serve for eight years there and run it effectively, and then begin pursuit of the presidency.
I have to believe The Gipper would wholeheartedly agree.
Well then ask the palinesta (politely) who is holding the gun to your head to put it down. Otherwise, learn the difference between "have" and "want".
this argument right here in this thread is as old as time. the Democratic party used to be the “next in line” party like we have been lately.
Harry Truman told JFK that he shoudnt run because it was “not his turn”.
there comes a time when you need a new generation of leadership.
You’re right. She did say that.
You again? Find another hobby.
the idea that those on the right who are opposed to Sarah “fear” her is laughable. It’s almost as big a joke as the last open borders celebrity some here tried to push down our throats with Fear the Fred
“And she thinks McCain’s a great guy. I don’t.”
She has a very heartfelt tribute to McCain and all vets and soldiers in her new book. It’s pretty powerful stuff
I suspect that she disagrees with McCain about a lot of things but she won’t talk ill of him. It’s not gratitude for the veep nod either. Read it.
I don’t consider reality show star to be a contradiction with being a strong leader at the same time.
Reagan started out calling ballgames for the Iowa Cubs on low power AM radio. Became an actor and the host of infomercials. Was that a freak show ? Not exactly.
And some compare that to a reality show.*scratches head*
Good lord there won't be an election for two more years and already some want to scrum.
Wooo, the long knives are really coming out! The estabs must have all gotten the memo: DESTROY SARAH!!! Well, this is what she thrives on. I’m not a cultist, it’s just that no one like her has come along since, well...never mind! (Whistling with hands in pockets).
Anyways pissant is alright, he is never vicious about this stuff.
Palin 2012 baby.
RR was not elected to Govenor till 1967 when he was 56 years old. Palin was elected Govenor when she was 44 years old. So one can reasonably argue that Palin made the same acheivement in 10 years less time.
My point is about comparisons is that if you are going to compare acomplishments and “leagues”, compare fairly allowing an equal number of years. If we make that comparison, consider this:
Reagan began his political career as a liberal Democrat, admirer of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and active supporter of New Deal policies, but in the early 1950s he shifted to the right and endorsed the presidential candidacies of Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956 as well as Richard Nixon in 1960 while remaining a Democrat.
So at about the same age, Regan was still a Democrat. His first endorcements of Republican candidates for President came at ages 41 and 45. He did not reveal his advocation of a smaller government solution until his famous speach in Oct of 1964 - when he was 53 years old.
RR was a great man but he aged into his greatness. Palin has learned her leasons at a far earlier age.
Indeed, Palin could have run for Senate in Alaska as the Tea Party favorite, as she clearly outclasses Miller if not Reagan. If she is as popular in Alaska as the fanboys on this board suggest, she would have cruised to victory (although her support for Miller didn't help him much, apparently) From the Senate seat she could have proved her strengths for all to see, demonstrated her policy expertise and ability to persuade all those establishment types we so revile to come over to her side of the debate.
Perhaps having accomplished this, the independents and moderates that she needs to attract would rally to her in 2016 or 2020. As it is, she has a tough row to hoe to gain their support now.
Big difference.
Reagan wasn’t doing Bedtime for Bonzo movies in his ramp up to the White House.
Where to start with such obfuscation and abject ignorance?
She not only ran, but cleaned up Alaska in bipartisan fashion in her time as Governor, where she also enjoyed top approval ratings.
She’d also have to convert from being a staunch Hollywood Democrat in that time, if you what to insist on taking the tortured Reagan comparison down the line.
She has already accomplished much more than Reagan did at the same age and on the RIGHT side the entire time.
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.