You are on an individual archive page

Click here to return to the main page


Wikipedia does good things. Reward them.

The Daily Links Page
Got a link to submit?
  • New Evidence Proves First Flag Made By Betsy Ross Actually Shirt For Gay Friend
  • Colbert Leads Huntsman in S.C.
  • Polish prosecutor 'shoots self after news conference'
  • Jim Rome leaving ESPN. Bonus: Footage of Jim Rome getting attacked by Jim Everett & crying like a baby
  • Broncos, Tim Tebow stun Steelers in OT, win 29-23 in NFL playoffs
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Video: Remember 2008
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop faces weapon and drug charges
  • Video: Green Bay anchorman loves lamp
  • Video: Rodgers & Raji in the new Discount Double Check ad
  • Jim Rome: out of The Jungle and onto the (horse) farm
  • New IL Law Requires Photo ID To Buy Drain Cleaner
  • Fawn Cuddles Kitten, Hearts Explode
  • The priest who changed the course of history for the worse... by rescuing four-year-old Hitler from drowning in icy river
  • Get Fit or Get Fined: Web Service Offers to Charge You for Skipping the Gym
  • Fine proposed for botching US national anthem
  • Why Best Buy is Going out of Business...Gradually
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Edina boutique takes heat for trashing $4,000-plus gowns
  • Law Student Goes 'Homeless by Choice' Touts Value of Gym Club Membership
  • VIDEO: Snoop Dogg on 'The Price Is Right'
  • Flynn and Out
       [ 3 comments ]
  • Don't put Bielema on the firing line
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Your end of the season Vikings comment thread
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Mass. budget motel fights forfeiture by feds
  • Vikings scrutinize downtown Mpls. stadium site near basilica
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Kelly Clarkson criticized on Twitter after singer endorses Ron Paul for President 
  • Political Predictions for 2012
  • We're All Doing The Best We Can
  • Video Of Little Girl Getting Pissed Off About Pink Toys Will Make Your Heart Swell
  • The 10 best sports-related Hitler Reactions of 2011
  • Happy Endings on the housing crisis
  • Why You Just Got New York Times Spam
  • There Will Be No Friday This Week In Samoa
  • The Most Hipster State In The US
  • Online Merchants Home in on Imbibing Consumers
       [ 1 comment ]
  • On islamic fashion
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Sears as Lampert's 'Mismanaged Asset' Loses Customers to Macy's
       [ 1 comment ]
  • 5 social network predictions for 2012
  • Cheetah, chimp star of classic Tarzan movies, dies at 80
  • The Hottest Things on TV in 2011
  • Beer in cans: It's not just for Bud anymore
  • Seven Packers earn Pro Bowl selections
  • The Worst Angry Christmas Tweets In the World
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Minnesota cities try to hold back on rented housing
  • Why Iowa Shouldn't Vote First Anymore
  • Some Falcons Players Upset Drew Brees Went For The Record Last Night
  • We've Identified Jilted Packergirl
  • With its 'W' initiative, ESPN tries to solve the equation of serving women sports fans
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Owner surprised to find cat regularly catches bus
  • Charles Barkley: Skip Bayless Has Surpassed Peter Vecsey As The Biggest Jackass In The History Of Journalism
  • Handicapping the 2011 NFL MVP Race, 2.0

     

  • What Would Reagan Do?

       June 16, 2004

    Right-Thinking reports that a conservative group has prepared an ad comparing and contrasting Bush and Kerry with Ronald Reagan.

    It's about time. I realize the Bush camp was under tremendous pressure to not "politicize" the death of Ronald Reagan, but the parallels between the War on Terror and the Cold War are difficult to ignore.

    In the 80s, Reagan made the then revolutionary decision to not live "peacefully" with communisim. Communism was evil and it was in our long term interests to defeat it. That flew in the face of a decade worth of detente. In hindsight, Reagan was oh so right, but back in 1980 some people were seriously worried that his election would lead to a nuclear confrontation with the Soviets.

    After 9/11, Bush made the decision that we couldn't afford to "peacefully" live with Islamofascist monsters. And even now, with 9/11 still fresh in our minds, some people disagree with that decision. Some people like John Kerry. Back in the 70s and 80s he wasn't willing to confront communism. Now, he's not willing to confront terrorism. He is, however, willing to put his head in the sand and pretend the problems we face don't exist.

    Ronald Reagan was an optimist, but not in the dolty way the media has tried to portray it. Instead, he was optimistic because he believed in the greatness of America. However, he was also a realist. He saw the reality of the evil of the Soviet Union. His combination of optimism and realism was just what America needed.

    Kerry is his opposite. He's both pessimistic and unrealistic. Not only does he believe America is no longer capable of great things, I think he also thinks great things are no longer required of America.


    Posted by at June 16, 2004 10:22 AM

        The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/144

     

    Trackback Entries

     


    Comments

    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: jkhat at June 16, 2004 10:39 AM

    i wholeheartedly disagree that the ads are a good idea or that it's "about time." first, try as he may, bush is no reagan, and voters know that, especially "on the fence" or "swing" voters.

    In other words, the ads aren’t going to “fool” anyone into thinking that W is another Reagan. All they are going to do is piss off Republican voters (like me). It is a great disgrace and a cheapening of the Reagan Legacy to run ads comparing him to any presidential candidate, even a sitting Republican president.

    And for all of you with your judgment clouded on the issue, remember how you felt about John F. Kerry picking up the “F” in a ridiculous attempt to associate himself with Jack Kennedy. It's STUPID and does nothing to get people to vote for you. in fact, it's probably counter productive.

    How long until someone pulls out “I knew Ronald Reagan, I served with Ronald Reagan, and you sir, are no Ronald Reagan?” As big of a Bush supporter that I am, I would cheer that comment. George Bush as Ronnie II? Please. Have some respect. Take off your bushgoggles.

    Ronald Reagan attracted so many voters to the Republican party that today some many who voted for both Clinton and Gore (and probably Perot) proudly declare “I’m a democrat, but I was a democrat for Reagan.” These ads will drive those people AWAY from the party and are a HUGE mistake.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at June 16, 2004 10:51 AM

    My point wasn't to drawn similiarities between Bush and Reagan so much as to point out the similiarities between the international situations they faced and their respective responses to them.

    In that sense, Bush *is* the Reagan of the 00s and Kerry is the Carter/Nixon.

    To reaffirm, I wouldn't so much compare Bush to Reagan and I'd compare Islamofascists to the Soviet Union's evil empire.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: jkhat at June 16, 2004 11:12 AM

    No, the point was the television ads and what they convey, not what you were trying to do with your post about it. The ads are a terrible idea.

    Additionally, Bush is not “the Reagan of the 00s.” That is just ridiculous. Do you think that there is a new Reagan every 20 years? There is nothing revolutionary about “going after” terrorists. We always have, all nations always have. That John Kerry would rather not means that he is the Neville Chamberlain of the 00s. It doesn’t confer some sort of mythical Reagan status upon whoever happens to be sitting in the White House at the time if they do what we have always done.

    Terrorism is an evil, sure, but it isn't a new evil, and there is nothing revolutionary about fighting it. It is nothing at all like communism and presents few of the same problems. In fact, throughout the 60s, 70s, and 80s, it co-existed with communism on much the same scale that it exists today. Sure, the term itself has been broadened, so that might make those easily fooled think that it's a fast growing problems. Remember the "guerilla warfare" of the 80s? It'd be called "terrorism" today. The Vietkong? terrorists.

    After great men solve all of the worlds great problems, what will we call the men who solve the not so big problems? If the only problem that exists in 1000-odd years is jaywalking, will you call the man who "fixes" it "the reagan of the 3020s?"

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: jkhat at June 16, 2004 03:32 PM

    i see that the reagans agree with me.

    http://www.nbc6.net/news/3424816/detail.html

     
     

     

     


      page rendered in 0.0522 seconds | ©2004, 2005 Dummocrats.com