It was much later Reagan was seen as being a man of ideas. Actually, it was not until his writings for his radio commentaries were found that many Reagan insiders discovered those ideas were Reagan's original thoughts, rather than someone elses.
The Noonan's and Brooks have Bush fatigue, and they miss being with the popular crowd, like they were from 1980-1991, and again in 2002. They are pissed off, and want a scapegoat, but don't want to just bash Bush. They see certain political players now as Bush clones. Worst of all, they are jealous of Obamamania, and know their careers are over, as they will be too old to matter during the next conservative revolution.
It is Brooks and Noonan who are devoid of ideas, not Palin. Politically and ideologically, Palin is closest politician to Barry Goldwater's western state libertarian Republicanism to be seen since Alan Simpson retired. She is very libertarian in both her political views and political actions, and it is sad this has been hidden by the MSM since she was selected as McCain's VP candidate. That is very Reaganesque to have strong social conservative views but to maintain a libertarian political philosophy. Instead the MSM portrays here as three-headed monster who runs a pentecostal theocracy in Alaska. And the dip$hit (I'm an intellectual!) Brooks buys into that because he is stupid enough to believe his colleagues (look! they're intellectuals too!) at the NYT. He should know better, but sometimes I think only Bernie Goldberg has figured this one out.
Maybe we needed a Carter to get a Reagan, and maybe we need an Obama to get a Jindal or Palin.
The douchebag wing of the GOP is so dense as to confuse a western anti-statist (who just happens to attend a pentecostal church) with the “fire and brimstone” crowd.
You never win by losing.
LLS