Replies

Thank you for your response. I appreciate it.

No problem, this has been an interesting conversation. :) One thing, though, I want to make clear. When you said "The problem with that logic, is that it didn't hold true after Carter."

From my point of view, it did hold true after Carter. Reagan stayed in the party, and he was nominated. What if Reagan had bolted? President Howard Baker or John Anderson? No way that would've happened. Who was running against Reagan for the 1980 nod? Certainly not ANY conservative who had the cajones he had!

I know passions run deep about keeping the party conservative. I share them, too. I just hope we don't become so fractious that we begin to resemble the Democrats of the 1980s: all pissed at each other because no one is "perfect".

None of the candidates is perfect. Even our Hero #40 gave us amnesty for illegals, Sandra Day O'Worthless and Anthony "Swing Vote" Kennedy. I don't say it to denigrate him, I only say it as a reminder that we're all flawed.

The Democrats hated what Clinton did in signing welfare reform (after a long fight) and they especially hated his support of NAFTA. But they also knew he was their champion and voted for him overwhelmingly.

Anyway, this has been a good conversation. Take it easy, and let's hope the more conservative candidate wins this November. :)

Thank you for your response. I appreciate it.

No problem, this has been an interesting conversation. :)

I agree, and thank you for your participation.

One thing, though, I want to make clear. When you said "The problem with that logic, is that it didn't hold true after Carter."

From my point of view, it did hold true after Carter.

I believe my comment here was meant to relate that folks swarmed to Reagan after Carter. It was not to imply Reagan left the party.

Reagan stayed in the party, and he was nominated.

Yes he did stay in the party, but I don't believe he went out of his way to back Ford. Ford had run a vicious campaign against Reagan calling him unfit to hold the office of the presidency. In effect Ford destroyed the ability for Reagan to campaign for him. And I believe that cost him.

What if Reagan had bolted? President Howard Baker or John Anderson? No way that would've happened. Who was running against Reagan for the 1980 nod? Certainly not ANY conservative who had the cajones he had!

Howard Baker, John Anderson and a guy named George Bush were running. Bush was favored up front, but by the time Reagan had explained that he had paid for that microphone, it was over. Reagan somehow connected to the public that day, and that support only grew until the election. I believe the media learned a lesson back then. And since that time they have manipulated the reporting of the leading candidates to foster support for their fair haired boy. Even in the 1980 election, the media idd everything it could to destroy Reagan's popularity. The party leadership did so as well.

I say this, because it's become quite evident that the party had a vision of where it wanted to go. Reagan was essentially an outsider, even if popular with the public. He hadn't signed on to the globalist plans like Bush had. I have personally believed that Reagan set back globalism by about fifteen years.

I know passions run deep about keeping the party conservative. I share them, too. I just hope we don't become so fractious that we begin to resemble the Democrats of the 1980s: all pissed at each other because no one is "perfect".

I believe that is an admirable goal, but if it's at the cost of letting the McGovern wing of the republican party control the party's direction, I revolt at the thought. And what is taking place today, if not that very thing.

The old democrat party didn't buy into the swill that McGovern shoved down it's throat. None the less, that's been the party's direction ever since. And I don't want to reinforce the same thing taking place in our party, and low and behold that's exactly what is taking place. The conservative leanings of the republican party has been hijacked. Conservatism might just as well be a dirty four letter word as far as the leadership is concerned. At least that's how I see it.

None of the candidates is perfect. Even our Hero #40 gave us amnesty for illegals, Sandra Day O'Worthless and Anthony "Swing Vote" Kennedy. I don't say it to denigrate him, I only say it as a reminder that we're all flawed.

I agree that we are. And I believe that Reagan is forgiven much. He was a multi-faceted guy who did some wonderful things and some not so wonderful things. I still give him absolute credit for bankrupting the U.S.S.R. by building a massive military force, then putting the icing on the cake by setting up a 'space defense initiative' obsticle to Soviet Domination that the Soviets knew they could never overcome financially.

That isn't all. By the time Reagan had left office, something like ten to fifteen socialist/communist states had fallen. He freed up tens of miilions of people just during his term in office. And shortly after that term, hundreds of millions of humans followed suit. The iron curtain fell and the rest is history.

Reagan didn't have one victory, with a bunch of liberal stuff to counterbalance it. He had a number of major victories, and had some liberal stuff in there to tarnish it to a certain degree.

Reagan didn't focus on one theater and let the others drift. He was working on many fronts. I don't see the same thing today. I see one conserted effort in one area, and alot of other stuff overlooked.

The Democrats hated what Clinton did in signing welfare reform (after a long fight) and they especially hated his support of NAFTA. But they also knew he was their champion and voted for him overwhelmingly.

Okay, good example. What were your thoughts on that? Did you admire the democrats for being loyal to party? I wondered how people could sell out the nation for political purposes. I told myself that I could never follow suit and do the same thing. While it is somewhat of a stretch to compare this to the Clinton fiasco, down deep it is the same. If our nation is drifting left under republican terms in the White House, we're eventually going to get to Marxist nervana, no matter what. Do we put the brakes on that or not? Ah yes...

Anyway, this has been a good conversation. Take it easy, and let's hope the more conservative candidate wins this November. :)

I agree. And I appreciate your willingness to discuss this without taking it personal. Take care.

RD

D1