I read a comment before by a reader that said Trump is messing up their chance of “seeing a president (Ted Cruz) as close to Reagan as possible in my lifetime.”
In another post a reader, JohnS, asked:
Why the incessant drumroll of Trump/Reagan? Reagan had his positions almost for life, and openly ran on what he did previously. Trump was ‘born again’ recently after 40 years of cutting conservatives throats. Please have a bit of respect, the man is dead and can’t defend himself.
But there is a Reagan record to look back on.
Reagan’s record as California governor
His first year as governor, Reagan raised taxes equal to 30% of the state general fund. No other governor had ever done that.
Reagan signed the nation’s most liberal abortion rights bill of the time.
Reagan opposed a ballot initiative that would have permitted the firing of teachers for being gay.
He signed the Mulford Act, which was California gun control legislation that criminalized open carry.
One of the most shockingly progressive things Reagan did was his selection of running mate in 1976. His pick was Richard Schweiker.
Schweiker was a congressman and senator from Pennsylvania (1961-1981.)
Schweiker supported
-The creation of Medicare
-Increases in Social Security
-The creation of federal rent subsidies.
He had an 89% rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action.
He also opposed the effort of defeating the communists in Vietnam and he voted nay on 2 Nixon SCOTUS picks:
G. Harrold Carswell and Clement Haynsworth. (Nixon’s second pick, in lieu of Haynsworth, was the nomination of Harry Blackmun, the author of the court’s opinion in Roe v. Wade.)
I’m not sure what Reagan saw in Schweiker. Had Reagan won, Schweiker would be a heartbeat away. He’d also be running for the job of president, the unspoken rule being that the veep was next in line.
Of course, Reagan’s choice of running mate in 1980 was George HW Bush, not exactly a conservative stalwart. Reagan’s choice gave us a one-termer in Bush, which gave us Clinton.
Reagan, as president, was the first to ever start taxing social security benefits. It was means-tested, though, and while he only taxed people who could “afford it,” he expanded the earned income tax credit (EITC). Yes, Reagan lifted millions of low-income workers out of poverty, but in tandem with the tax on social security it was essentially vast wealth redistribution.
Let’s be honest here. I loved Reagan, but not so much for his deeds, but because of the way he unified the various conservative coalitions despite his record.
Supply-siders, the religious right, libertarians, hawks and big business all reflect upon Reagan favorably, whether Reagan delivered for them or not. Reagan projected an aura that made us believe that America was great again after the dismal malaise-ridden Carter years. It worked on me. I clearly remember being depressed as a young adult by goofed up military operations under Carter, followed by the return of our hostages within hours of Reagan’s inauguration. The US Hockey team took on the Russians and the chant of USA! USA! was unabashed, unapologetic and thoroughly Reagan era.
Reagan seems to have set the policy bar high for conservatives, a place that Reagan himself never actually lived. The Reagan legacy exists not to be scrutinized too carefully, content that its existence forces conservatives into a furious race towards the right.
I’m happy with that.
Can America be great with a person at the helm that isn’t quite as conservative as we would like them to be?
Of course. Reagan proved that.
Very nice analysis!
It’s how we remember Reagan, NOT what he actually did that persist. For example:
Don’t forget that the immigration problem we face today really begins with Reagan trusting and then being deceived by the Dems.
Yet we remember him as inspiring us to believe in the greatness of America again…kind of sounds familiar, doesn’t it?
What I like about Trump? He is a business man, he understands running
a business. Business owners need a business friendly president.
Cruz is not that person.
@ BFH
I applaud your honest, diligent and accurate writings on our beloved Reagan. Thank you.
Whenever I heard the “right wing” media bring up Reagan as the Conservative Saint, I scratched my head and thought perhaps I was nutty and my memory was failing me.
So glad to know others can see reality and like Reagan and don’t have to paint him with “conservative” colored glasses.
It looks like not only does the left re-write history, but also the right.
Great post BFH. Things to consider, Reagan replaced Moon Beams father. The state was fiscally a wreck. I don’t understand the open carry thing and can’t remember wtf at the time but there’s no excuse for that. Especially when his friends included the likes of John Wayne and Charlton Heston.
Trump deserves his own legacy. I’m all in and I’m very impressed and I’m no zombie. Maybe it’s time to stop comparing him to anybody else. I’m anxious to see what he can do. Also on another point in the long run Reagans strength was gathering a bad ass team. Trumps strength is gathering a bad ass team. Attorneys never assemble any team because they’re convinced nobodies smarter than them. You know, like Teddy.
Well said! Most thinking people give careful consideration to their beliefs, and as an individual resolves their beliefs over time there is an evolution and sometimes sometimes changes in how they may implement their beliefs. Mine have changed, as I have seen the whole country has changed. And at this point I want to see somebody as president that wants America to be Great Again! Right now my #1 choice is TRUMP!!!
The open carry was said to have been a direct response to a directivet where the Black Panthers patrolled the streets with open carry (after having been reminded by their leaders that it was legal to do so.) It was called CopWatching.
The charge against Reagan at the time was that it was racially motivated, that he caved to people saying that something had to be done because it was black men exercising their rights.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
I don’t believe it was racially motivated. If it were white people patrolling the streets as vigilantes the same thing would most likely have gone down.
BFH, That brought it back like A slap
In the face, Oakland. Go figure. One of his very few mistakes.
In fact, it was that famous Black Panther Huey Lewis and the News that started all that shit. Wait, that’s not right.
I believe the love affair with Reagan stems from his “not putting up with crap” demeanor and actions, but most of all because of his resounding and obvious love for the United States of America.
Thank you, Fur, for finally exposing the fact that Ronald Reagan was not, in fact, a “conservative”(By the way, could someone send me the rules and definitions of how I become a REAL conservative?)
Reagan had great speech writers, like Peggy Noonan, who voted for Obama. Does she seem conservative to anyone here now?
I’ll vote for Trump or Cruz, but I’m not stupid enough to vote for a Commie/Democrat. And if I DON’T vote because my particular candidate doesn’t win the nomination, I’m ensuring my country’s destruction via a socialist, America-hating leader. Bernie or Hillary. Take your pick.
Wake up, and grow up, “conservatives”.
Tamminator, OK, I’m with you on the definition of a conservative. Reagan was the best damn Govenor California ever had and the best Damn President we ever had. He constantly moved the ball forward FOR conservatives. Ted Cruz does not belong in this conversation. He’s opportunistic and certainly abandond Conservative principles with his weak ass attack on Trumps first amendment rights. The guys a weak sister.
It’s simple. Trump’s biggest promise – a HUGE border wall and enforced immigration. Conservative enough for me and solves many problems – economy, jobs, crime, entitlements, welfare, drugs, sanctuary cities, etc…
(I know I must be very frustrating for die-hards of both Trump and Cruz to be around.)
I won’t sit by and see Cruz bashed for not being a conservative. Of course he is.
And he’d make a fine president.
I’ve been told that iOTW is becoming Trump Central.
This is a charge leveled by people that do not understand, at all, where I am coming from.
I wish people that email me with tips would come forward and tell everybody what I say to them when I attempt to orchestrate and balance “something for everyone.”
Just recently I emailed someone and told them I couldn’t use their Trump stuff because I will not post anything that makes it seem like I’m putting a shovel to Cruz.
Cruz can still win this. In fact, I think it’s 50/50 at this point.
There are certain things about Cruz that aren’t 100% desirable to me. The same for Trump.
My beef is with the people who are all-in with one of the candidates to the point where they are on hair triggers about their guy.
Why does it seem like I’m defending Trump more?
The answer is obvious.
He’s being attacked more.
There is no “NEVERCRUZ” coalition out there, threatening to sabotage the election if Cruz is voted in.
There isn’t a media analyzing a nothing burger Cruz event like it’s the Zapruder film, salivating at the prospect that maybe Cruz’s manager grabbed a girl’s arm and this might finally be what does him in.
I’ve received tips from readers about supposed Cruz sex scandals.
I’m not posting that stuff, but it’s exactly the stuff you see lobbed at Trump with absolute glee.
This is Trump Central??
Where’s Pinko?
This is Trump Central??
Why is MJA attacked in the comments by Trump people? Because she posts pro-Cruz stuff and anti-Trump stuff.
MJA is still posting here. She is a huge part of this site. Would she survive at Trump Central?
Is Pinko still posting here?
Wouldn’t he be if this was Trump Central?
There is no pleasing everybody.
FUR, I’m a fart in a wind storm here but you posted a couple days ago go follow a blog that’s all in for one or another and see how much fun that is. EXACTLY. I don’t visit many places but it seems to me every other site is in the bag for one or another. Not a lot of constructive dialogue. I could camp at the CTH. How boring would that be?
Yes, and as annoying as I currently think Woody, Boom and JohnS are, they are important to the site.
Are they banned?
Have I asked them to leave?
Will I come down with some hammer if they mirror back to me the same sass I dole to them?
Boom made a damn manly post today. A common ground sort of post. I’m anxious to see what follows.
We know you won’t. But you’re not fooling me. It’s a lot more fun to torture them slow than to just cut them off. LOL.
Oh, for God’s sake, just vote Republican. At least THIS year we won’t have to vote for the nominee pushed on us by the Rethuglican oligarchs.
It’s going to come down to Cruz or Trump. Let’s all get real about this.
The numbers have already eliminated Kasich an Rubio.
Here’s one that MJA can use when she gets “Cruz is anti-Freedom of speech” attacked:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgFD03kAA28
.
It’s from Pamela’s post about Trump and freedom of speech. Hard core Trump fans might not want to watch it. lol
I’m for Pamela all the way to the end of this war.
Goodnight all!
Pamela sees both sides …
http://pamelageller.com/2016/03/76316.html/
This time for real, goodnight!
If you are done patting yourself on the back for this elaborate straw man argument;
I never said, nor implied that I agreed with all of RR’s positions. I have been open about me disagreement for some of them on this site.
What I said was that he was a known quantity and could be depended upon to be the man he had always been.
All great men have feet of clay, as a matter of fact all men do. That is why a rational individual looks to character.
Reagan did not run from his past, he ran on it, as any honest man would do.
Contrast that to a man who is now claiming he never promised to seal the border, just half of it.
So, go back, and fisk your post against my statement. You came up with nothing that contradicts it, much less gives any credence to Trump being Reagan.
Just the fact that Reagan united the Republican party and Trump is rending it speaks to the issue better than anything else.
I understand why most bloggers won’t say negative things about Trump. He has been open about his intent to change the law so that he can attack and financially cripple those who print things he disagrees with.
Wherever Reagan took California, here’s where the progs have left it, today. Depressing as anything I’ve read in awhile:
https://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-weirdness-of-illegal-immigration/
….Lady in Red
BFH wrote:
‘I wish people that email me with tips would come forward and tell everybody what I say to them when I attempt to orchestrate and balance “something for everyone.”
Just recently I emailed someone and told them I couldn’t use their Trump stuff because I will not post anything that makes it seem like I’m putting a shovel to Cruz.’
*********
I’m that someone and coming forward. From BFH’s e-mail:
‘otherwise it just
seems like we’re putting a shovel to Cruz, and
that’s not fair.-bfh’
As soon as I read his response I understood and agreed. He’s said it repeatedly on posts, it makes sense to me and I agree. I’m not disappointed or angry or going to take my toys and stomp off to another site or sulk. There are plenty of pro – Eugenia’s choice candidate I could go to if I wanted, however, I don’t want a site where everyone agrees with me and we all think alike. Where’s the challenge, the thinking or the fun in that?
You think you have the best qualified candidate then put forth the discussion that advances your candiCalling people &$!@*** doesn’t win friends, influence people or get them to take a serious look at your candidate.
That was me Eugenia posting the above. Browser problems, head ache, vet appt – shiiiiite
Interesting point, Eugenia! Sometimes, it seems the denizens here are not so thoughtfully and tastefully open-minded about other views, but, ah, never mind. ….smile.. ….Lady in Red
LIR neither am I at times. We’re all human and content to be so, I hope.