Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Yes, Reagan was great, but it's time to move on
Chicago Sun Times ^ | Feb 11, 2004 | George Will

Posted on 02/11/2007 10:46:19 AM PST by PhiKapMom

Edited on 02/11/2007 12:14:43 PM PST by Lead Moderator. [history]

In this winter of their discontents, nostalgia for Ronald Reagan has become for many conservatives a substitute for thinking. This mental paralysis -- gratitude decaying into idolatry -- is sterile: Neither the man nor his moment will recur. Conservatives should face the fact that Reaganism cannot define conservatism.


(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: conservatism; reagan; reaganism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-237 last
To: Liz
Can't understand why Rudy's supporters get so hyper from the treatment Rudolfo is receiving from pro-lifers.

Pro-lifers are merely treating Rudy EXACTLY the way Rudy himself treats the unborn.........as a disposable nuisance

Abortion is savagery beyond imagination.

Psychiatrists with principles should come forward to explain the deep-rooted psychoses of people like Rudy who get a sense of personal satisfaction unleashing abortionists with knives and suction machines on helpless unborn babies, and the threat people like Rudy pose to the rest of us.

Put in a position of power, Rudy's obsession with legalized killing may not stop with the unborn. Those of us that espouse a reverence for human life shudder at the thought of this disturbed individual, Rudy Giuliani, being unleashed on America.


Very well put, Liz.

From JoinRudy2008.com

Protecting Children
Acting on his belief that “One of the most important responsibilities of government is to
protect children from harm,” Mayor Giuliani worked to create the city’s first independent
child welfare agency, reducing the foster care population by promoting a record
number of adoptions, and doubling child support collections by cracking down on
deadbeat dads, and implementing a program called HealthStat, which identified
unenrolled children eligible for health insurance.

Nary a peep regarding abortion. Reckon ol' Rudy doesn't consider that an 'important responsibility of government to protect children from harm'.


221 posted on 02/12/2007 2:27:38 PM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: streetpreacher
I agree. States should have been allowed to decide slavery, not the feds. What was the Republican Party thinking?

The states did eventually decide slavery but it took nearly eighty years, a war, and finally coercion to pass a constitutional amendment, the 13th, that required three quarters of the states to ratify it.

Up until that time, slavery was widely an accepted practice, American people bought Africans from other Africans and treated them as inputs of production (like a capital investment), and the practice was vaguely written into the US Constitution in Article 1, Section 9.

Yes, slavery was (and still is) detestable but it has to be viewed in in context and through the perspective of the politics of the day. And don't think the Republican's hands were clean on this one: a careful reading of the Emancipation Proclamation that President Lincoln issued only was designed to free slaves in rebel states only -- it was not directed at Northern slave holders...the Proclamation didn't even have any congressional authority, either.

But now that we've jumped this wretched hurdle in history, are you seriously proposing that something like this could return or are you just reaching back in history and pulling out the ugliest example of where there was a failure that couldn't possible reoccur? Or is it that you are just not a big believer in federalism and actually prefer the leviathan that has become the federal government? Or, were you just looking for any excuse to rebut my previous post because you don't much care for me or the things that I have to write? It has to be one of these choices here; which makes you either: a) irrationally fearful of things that won't happen again b) a misguided big-government extolling 'Conservative' c) someone who wanted to get a cheap shot at me because you didn't like my views.

which is it?

222 posted on 02/12/2007 5:19:26 PM PST by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: jla
Here's a legitimate question for the staunch pro-lifer: would you, in an effort to give incentives to women [women that do not wish to give birth and to raise their unborn children] to carry their babies to full term and finally give birth, give to organizations that facilitate adoptions and pay these pregnant mothers to not terminate their pregnancies?

If the answer is "yes", then why not participate in (or even start your own) non-profit group that uses a smarter, more cooperative approach to reducing the number of abortions performed in this country? If there are options like these, there's a much better chance to revisit and overturn Roe, no?

223 posted on 02/12/2007 5:29:39 PM PST by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

The republican party can leave conservatism behind if that's what they wish to do.

But they will do so at the risk of being the minority party for the rest of their existance.


224 posted on 02/12/2007 5:32:43 PM PST by Leatherneck_MT (In a world where Carpenters come back from the dead, ALL things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

No one is leaving Conservatism behind and don't know where a lot of us of advocating that social issues be returned to the States not the feds is not conservative.


225 posted on 02/12/2007 5:33:53 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Broken Glass Republican -- Rudy 08 -- Take back the House and Senate in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

Define the issues -- and the appropriate stances on said issues -- that define Conservatism, Marine.


226 posted on 02/12/2007 6:25:10 PM PST by LowCountryJoe (I'm a Paleo-liberal: I believe in freedom; am socially independent and a borderline fiscal anarchist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Judging just by the title, one would have thought it was written by someone from MOVEON.org, if not it's chief benefactor, George Soros!!!

You know, the famous bunch that originated the profound statement that: "If you can't stand the heat, just move on!" Phhhhhhhhht!!!

Sure glad I didn't conclusion jump just based on the title!!! There are three things us old guys suffer from... neuritis, neuralgia and nostalgia for another Reagan... Go Duncan Hunter!!! (he's as close to genuine conservatism with electability as you're gonna git these days)

227 posted on 02/12/2007 6:36:09 PM PST by SierraWasp (Get the Recall petition papers ready for signing up to Recall Arnold in the Feb. 2008 Primary!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp

What I liked most about President Reagan was that he was optimistic and not afraid to tell it like it is!


228 posted on 02/12/2007 6:46:27 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Broken Glass Republican -- Rudy 08 -- Take back the House and Senate in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Yes, indeed! I agree!!!


229 posted on 02/12/2007 6:55:13 PM PST by SierraWasp (Get the Recall petition papers ready for signing up to Recall Arnold in the Feb. 2008 Primary!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
"As Diggins says, Reaganism tells people comforting and flattering things that they want to hear; the Madisonian persuasion tells them sobering truths that they need to know."

I disagree. I always thought Reaganism DEALT with the negative but DWELT on the positive.

230 posted on 02/12/2007 7:29:44 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Guilianni is a Liberal who cannot beat Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside

LOL, Good One! : )


231 posted on 02/12/2007 7:33:00 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Guilianni is a Liberal who cannot beat Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
How right your are. Reagan showed us all how to win, and it was some lesson!

I never did like Rockefeller.

232 posted on 02/12/2007 7:34:24 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Guilianni is a Liberal who cannot beat Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
"In the final analysis he was more worried about what the Democrat Media and the political establishment thought than he did about doing what is right."

Definitely agreed. That's my take on Newt as well.

233 posted on 02/12/2007 7:38:17 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Guilianni is a Liberal who cannot beat Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
"The sorry truth is that conservatism isn't a viable political philosophy nationally at the moment because there isn't a viable national conservative leader."

And the solution isn't Guilianni.

234 posted on 02/12/2007 7:40:21 PM PST by TAdams8591 (Guilianni is a Liberal who cannot beat Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
No one is leaving Conservatism behind and don't know where a lot of us of advocating that social issues be returned to the States not the feds is not conservative.

We have a Bill of Rights because God-given unalienable rights are not to be taken away by any man or any state.

Your comments are nothing but a phony ploy on your part, I'm sad to say, to gloss over your candidate's gross Leftism.

235 posted on 02/12/2007 7:50:05 PM PST by EternalVigilance ("With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: LowCountryJoe
If it comes from primarily the Pentateuch, then I want no part of those kinds of pious values infecting legislation.

The values expressed in the Torah are what makes liberty possible, nor is anything Yeshua said in conflict with it. Indeed, He said that any thought in conflict with Torah was equivalent to the deed.

I suggest you familiarize yourself with I Samuel 8.

236 posted on 02/16/2007 10:46:52 AM PST by Carry_Okie (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
The process that has led us to this juncture was described more than 30 years ago and is summarized here: The Ideological Corral.

If that makes sense to you now, and you admire its author's long distance vision, be aware that he had more.

For those possessing patriotism, faith, courage -- leadership qualities -- the author offered a remedy. It's a peaceful one: a process provided by America's Founding Fathers -- and by God as if in answer to a prayer. Although it's been weakened, yet it remains.

But to have a chance, it needed the right time. The remedy could only effectively begin when more than a few Americans felt that their two main political parties were comprised more of rulers than of public servants. You may not there yet, but you seem on the brink. You and I have never spoken of this before. PM me Jim.

Avoiding Sulla

237 posted on 02/17/2007 8:38:12 AM PST by Avoiding_Sulla (You can't see where we're going when you don't look where we've been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-237 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson