Posted on 07/06/2009 7:22:56 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[C]omparisons do a disservice to Reagan, who not only served two full terms as governor of California, but also spent decades studying the issues and immersing himself in conservative philosophy. His writings and radio commentaries make this abundantly clear. He proved people wrong because they objectively were wrong. This does not mean that whenever the media writes off or attacks a conservative politician that he or she is the next Reagan
****
to win and govern effectively you have to do more than "galvanize the party base" and "convince conservatives" -- you also have to convince independents and even some Democrats, as Reagan did [but] instead of going back to Alaska to gain more governing experience as many advised, Palin resigned after just two and a half years on the job. And there’s nothing to indicate that she has the slightest interest in boning up on policy. Honestly, what’s her incentive to study policy and do the boring task of governing? No matter what she does, her army of apologists will make excuses for her and lash out at those who dare to criticize her by accusing them of being liberal elitists who are threatened by her sheer awesomeness....
[N]one of this really matters if Palin intends to leave elective politics and become some sort of television or radio personality. My comments are only meant as a response to those who are still seriously suggesting her as a potential presidential candidate. Last October, an ABC/Washington Post poll found that only 35 percent of Americans thought Palin was qualified enough to be president, yet now her boosters expect us to believe that an additional nine months in office is all she needed to assauge Americans' concerns, allowing her to resign and prepare for a presidential run.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Quite the contrary. There's no single issue that I'm more against than socialized medicine, of any kind in any form. There's no more issue that I'm for than my rights under the second amendment. Romney is a non-starter on both counts.
I haven't yet decided who I'll support in a primary some three years away. But, I do like Barbour quite a bit, and I think Mike Pence, as a common-sense Midwesterner could do well against Obama in a a failing economic climate. I was asked this yesterday and I'll respond the same, I'm keeping an open mind about anyone except Romney.
Ah.
Avoiding the question. So Klein *is* gay.
Explains a lot then. :)
Bet he’s a Romney bot too.
Fine. But if we run a bunch of RINO losers again, and Obama gets a second term, we are finished as a world power.
I hope she isn’t Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy Roosevelt was a thorough welfare statist and advocate of government health insurance.
Times change. Today, Reagan would be attacked as RINO by freepers (he advocated and gave amnesty and paved the way for the massive illegal invasion). He also sold advanced weapons to Iranian mullahs (”contra-scandal”) and did not revenge the Iranian hostage taking when he took office.
So even Reagan wasn’t “the Reagan” we now try to believe. No candidate is perfect and no candidate should be worshipped as the Messiah.
Absolutely. This is but the tactics of the left to get us squabbling amongst our selves while they proceed with their agenda.
Reagan was no doubt the man for the times, whether Sarah turns out to be the woman for the times remains to be seen but Reagan was Reagan, we need to let Sarah be Sarah.
Bump.
“The point being is that you wouldn’t know a winner if it came up and bit you in the ass. The fact that you don’t realize Sarah is the real deal is your problem.”
Interesting. You can make a blanket observation over one comment I made? With that kind of razor sharp insight, and abiltiy to draw sweeping conclusions with minimal evidence, I expect that you are fantastically wealthy. I mean, how could you not be? In fact, with your flawless ability to see things that may not be immediately obvious to most, perhaps YOU should be the next GOP candidate for POTUS? How could we go wrong with someone of your quick wit and ability?
Welcome to FR.
I don't know and I don't care.
There, I answered your question. Can the rest of us try to have a serious discussion about the article now?
Thank you!!!!!
Are conservatives so desperate for a savior that they will accept someone with no resume or mastery of policy issues? Reagan had gravitas, Palin hasn’t earned that yet. That’s not to say she cannot get there some day but she has become the Obama of the Right in this country.
The sad thing is that the Repubs have no one else that appeals to the base and that can also attract independents and centrist voters like Reagan did.
Sarah’s still is the biggest attraction in the Republican Party. She can still draw tens of thousands to hear her speak. I can’t think of anybody in the party with that kind of star appeal.
[Got a viable substitute for Reagan?]
We will shortly be in the midst of a full blown depression. To save ourselves from total destitution, a revolution will be needed else we will be herded over a cliff like lemmings.
I along with every other armchair quarterback can list all of Sarah Palins limitations. But when the revolution comes, Palin is the only one positioned to lead.
Unless someone figures out a way to dig up Reagan, I’m falling in with Palin’s army. It may not be the most politically correct, but by gum it is the only option out there that is headed in the right direction.
Of course I’ve heard of him. But I set the odds of someone jumping from the military to the White House pretty slim right now.
Obama is most certainly no Reagan. He never finished his first term in the U.S. Senate, and campaigned for president from day one of taking office there.
But Obama is now in the White House. The rules have changed, apparently. I don't think necessarily for the better, but they are what they are.
**********************
Agreed. Who is/are our opponents? Do we need to find a perfect candidate?
Why this need to compare Palin to Reagan, Thatcher or others?
I'd rather see a strong candidate who is their own person, and not a weak reflection of someone else.
I’ve never been enamored with Palin, but there’s no denying her popular appeal. While one can make a point for calling her ignorant (no one should have been surprised and unprepared to find leftie journalists going for her throat), she’s very clearly a conservative and has shown more backbone than most conservative leaders.
She is not perfect and she is no Reagan. But Reagan himself was flawed. We should stop expecting perfection from our leaders. Such a man simply does not exist. Let’s see what she does next and what she has learnt from her experience of being the conservative candidate. If she continues to promote conservatism, whether in politics or the media, we should still support her.
Exactly what do we know about his politics...?
There’s nothing serious being said this week about Governor Palin - it’s all hyteria.
Mostly by liberals of both parties.
But at least it’s distracting attention from 24/7 Jacko.
Face it. When Governor Palin announces her plans - then we can have a serious discussion.
This is all just smoke. Smears. And a whole lot of Mitt Romney operatives at work, incorrectly thinking this is their big chance to score a knockout punch.
Couldn’t be more wrong..
“One other thing. “
Here’s your one other thing: You’re hypersensitive like a little girl. Read my posts, I didn’t say one negative thing about Palin, it was an observation about the obssesive, and in my opinion, unhealthy following she has on FR.
You drew conclusions out of thin air. And that, makes any further observations you have, irrelavent.
Good Day.
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.