Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michael Reagan: The GOP Should Dump Its 'Litmus Test'
Front Page Magazine ^ | Feb 16, 2007 | Mike Reagan, the eldest son of President Ronald Reagan, heard on more than 200 talk radio stations

Posted on 02/16/2007 8:30:44 AM PST by meg88

The GOP Should Dump Its Litmus Test By Michael Reagan FrontPageMagazine.com | February 16, 2007

The philosopher Diogenes is said to have wandered around ancient Greece holding a lantern and seeking to find an honest man.

My fellow Republicans, sans lanterns, are now wandering around the political landscape seeking to find the perfect Republican presidential candidate.

I don’t know if Diogenes ever found that honest man, but I do know that those Republicans are never going to find the perfect candidate, simply because he does not exist.

Some Republicans insist that the only perfect candidate would be a clone of my Dad, Ronald Reagan. Aside from the fact that there is no such thing, it’s important to recognize that Ronald Reagan, as he often admitted, was anything but perfect.

One of the criticisms about former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney focuses on his record concerning the abortion issue. We are told by the modern day Diogenes clones that he can’t be trusted to fight abortion because he once, more or less, supported a woman’s right to butcher her baby.

It may come as a surprise to these purists, but Ronald Reagan once supported abortion too. Yet nobody ever questioned his strong pro-life credentials after his conversion to Republicanism. They accepted his sincerity. Why can’t they accept Mitt Romney’s?

Romney’s record shows he should be totally acceptable to all conservatives, yet because of one dubious question concerning the validity of his conversion to the pro-life side, he is deemed unsuitable to carry the conservative banner.

The same is true of Rudy Giuliani. On every major issue, he is a solidly conservative and extraordinarily adept executive, but because he backs abortion and some form of gun control, America’s mayor -- the hero of 9/11 and the man who did the impossible by cleaning up New York -- is all but ruled out as a 2008 candidate.

Not one of the major candidates is free of some real or imagined flaw that offends some conservatives.

This is madness, and if it does not stop, the GOP is going to lose the presidential election in 2008. In the search for the perfect candidate we are going to end up with an imperfect candidate. Keep in mind the truism that agreement with someone on most issues and disagreement on others is seen as normal, but should you agree with someone on every single issue imaginable … well… to put it plainly, psychologists say you’re nuts.

I recently got a letter from a conservative Christian organization that asked me if the current GOP candidates are the best the Republican Party has to offer.

“Is it possible that GOP conservative ranks are this thin?” the letter writer asked. “Has the GOP nothing better to offer? Should not pro-family pro-life voters also want a low taxes and limited government candidate before they vigorously support him? Increased taxes and expanded government hurts everyone. Was Ronald Wilson Reagan an anomaly and did he represent the values of his party?

“These GOP candidates,” the letter instructed me, “are little better than Bob Dole, Gerald Ford, or [George] H.W. Bush. Did anyone notice they all lost?”

This makes me wonder if anybody can stand up to the litmus test these people are applying to candidates.

Ronald Reagan had one litmus test he applied to candidates. Were they Republicans? If they were he backed them all the way. He would let the party choose the candidate and he would support and vote for the candidate. He didn’t go sniffing around trying to find some flaw in their character or their past. Once nominated, they were his choice.

And nobody was more candid in admitting that he was anything but perfect than my Dad. He knew that like all men, he had his flaws and he spent a lifetime combating them. Had today’s GOP litmus test been seriously applied to him, he could not have passed the test.

The Democrats don’t have litmus tests. If the nominee is a Democrat, they support their candidate all the way, and if they lose it isn’t because they didn’t fight like demons for their man or woman.

If we want to win in 2008, Republicans had better wake up, and quit talking Ronald Reagan and start being like Ronald Reagan.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: 1issuelosers; 2008; 2008election; 2008gopdisaster; 2008gopmeltdown; 2008waytowin; 2liberalparties; 2moreconservative; 2socialistparties; 2thanthou; abortion; abortionbigdeal; abortionlover; absolutedisaster; asolutists; charlatans; conservativesout; dumpconservatives; fake; forgetprinciples; frauds; giuliani; gop; gopmeltdown; guaranteedloser; howtolosebigin2008; iam; ifweloseitsyourfault; isupportliberals; itsjustafetus; leftofhillary; liberalgop; liberallosers; liberaltakeover; libgopspam; lifedoesntmatter; mediascandidates; mediasellouts; michaelreagan; michaelreagansright; mittromney; mr38percent; nocorevaluesforme; nominee; paleosexposed; partysplitters; partyuberalles; phonies; politicsvsprinciple; primaries; reagan; republicans; republicrats; rinobait; rinodroppings; romney; ronaldreagan; rudygiuliani; rudyhappens; screamingstuckpigs; sellouts; sharkjumpers; singleissuevoters; tearuptheplatform; time2change; vote4liberals; weresoscrewed; whoneedscorevalues; zeroprinciples
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 681-700 next last
To: meg88
Michael Reagan: The GOP Should Dump Its 'Litmus Test'


Let's ask Mikey, he'll eat\vote for/anything!

501 posted on 02/16/2007 1:11:29 PM PST by Ronaldus Magnus (Presidential candidates should support their party's platform.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Some Republicans insist that the only perfect candidate would be a clone of my Dad, Ronald Reagan.

He's correct. There will never be another Ronald Reagan, nor should there be.

502 posted on 02/16/2007 1:11:45 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk

Wow... great post!


503 posted on 02/16/2007 1:12:44 PM PST by pgyanke (RUDY GIULIANI 2008 - BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO COMPROMISE YOUR PRINCIPLES ANYWAY... WHY WAIT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 486 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper

Right.


504 posted on 02/16/2007 1:13:24 PM PST by onyx (DEFEAT Hillary Clinton, Marxist, student of Saul Alinsky & ally and beneficiary of Soros.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 502 | View Replies]

To: My GOP
Whatever. Sean Hannity, Michael Reagan, and Rush Limbaugh are all open to Rudy, three great conservatives.

Perhaps they are, but then, none of them has embraced him as their favorite either.

Being "open" to a candidate is not equivalent to supporting him for the nomination.

And at this point...that is what we need to be focussed on. Who we conservatives are going to nominate.

505 posted on 02/16/2007 1:14:44 PM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: My GOP

I am not decided yet, but it does appear from what I read here that the 'electorate' at large seems to like Rudy.


506 posted on 02/16/2007 1:14:49 PM PST by Roland Hand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: My GOP

Thats good enough for me!


507 posted on 02/16/2007 1:15:00 PM PST by Roland Hand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 450 | View Replies]

To: My GOP
It always occurred to me, when I was a Goldwater fan in the 60's that conservatives where people who, were fiscally conservative, for smaller government,judicial restraint, strong defense, fair free trade, pro business, less regulation, etc. I don't ever remembering it being about social issues at all.
508 posted on 02/16/2007 1:15:11 PM PST by Roland Hand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 462 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

why do we HAVE to accept a RINO right now?

We don't have a primary winner yet.

We DO have primary condenders.

I soundly reject the notion that I must accept a RINO "because" when even the democrats don't have a final choice.

What we should be asking is how many RINO women, ala Christine Todd Whitman, will jump ship to vote for Hitlary just because she is female.


509 posted on 02/16/2007 1:15:20 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross; My GOP
Check this recent thread out:

"H.R. 1022: To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes" ^

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1785142/posts

510 posted on 02/16/2007 1:15:23 PM PST by LiveFree99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 494 | View Replies]

To: garv
I guess Michael forgot his dad ran against a sitting Republican president.

Yeah, in the primaries, which Reagan wasn't nominated.

511 posted on 02/16/2007 1:15:53 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: princess leah
I am a pro-lifer, but I still firmly believe that the WOT is the most important issue facing this nation. I was born in New York City and I now live and work in New York City, and knew several people in the Towers on September 11, 2001. I know people who went to more than a dozen funerals. If it hadn't been for the tech bubble bursting in late 2000/early 2001, I'd have been there too and I wouldn't be around to post this.

We cannot allow Shrillary, Obama or Edwards be President. To be perfectly honest, I cannot understand how people who call themselves patriots would go the 3rd party route (or the stay-at-home route) and let Bin Ladin's preferred party win by default.

The primary function of the Federal government is to protect the people. How better to protect them than to contine to wage the WOT?

512 posted on 02/16/2007 1:15:57 PM PST by kellynch ("Our only freedom is the freedom to discipline ourselves." -- Bernard Baruch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: meg88
Michael Reagan: The GOP Should Dump Its 'Litmus Test'

Why not. They've already dumped their principles.

L

513 posted on 02/16/2007 1:16:16 PM PST by Lurker (Europeans killed 6 million Jews. As a reward they got 40 million Moslems. Karma's a bitch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alia

Thanks. :-)


514 posted on 02/16/2007 1:16:24 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: My GOP
Now that Michael Reagan has said some will actually realize this

Excuse me. Just who did you think Michael Reagan was talking about....did he NAME anyone, perhaps Pat Buchanan or such...in his piece?

515 posted on 02/16/2007 1:17:06 PM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: meg88
"The Democrats don’t have litmus tests"

Baloney! ROFLOL!!

516 posted on 02/16/2007 1:17:15 PM PST by Jim Robinson ("Electable" gave us Gerald Ford and Bob Dole. Voting for the right-wing kook gave us Reagan. ~ A.C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roland Hand
It always occurred to me, when I was a Goldwater fan in the 60's that conservatives where people who, were fiscally conservative, for smaller government,judicial restraint, strong defense, fair free trade, pro business, less regulation, etc. I don't ever remembering it being about social issues at all.

Ah yes the good ole days when Rudy and Rockefeller Republicans ruled the Republican Party and were nothing but back benchers in Congress and on the courts. I can understand how some long for those days and after todays non binding resolution bs in the House, they appear to be making a big comeback.

517 posted on 02/16/2007 1:17:48 PM PST by jwalsh07 (Duncan Hunter for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker
Opposition to Rudy is more then led by ONE issue, it's led by every plank of the Republican party except pro-defense. If we are going to vote for a Liberal that has only one redeeming value, let's go recruit Leiberman. He has already proven he can retain enough Dems and Indy's against another Dem to win. And he, at least, has a cleaner personal life.

Ouch!

That's going to leave a mark!

518 posted on 02/16/2007 1:19:03 PM PST by Paul Ross (Ronald Reagan-1987:"We are always willing to be trade partners but never trade patsies.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: meg88
I'm with ya there, if Newt doesn't get in...I guess it has to be Rudy

Duncan Hunter

519 posted on 02/16/2007 1:19:44 PM PST by Go Gordon (I don't know what your problem is, but I bet its hard to pronounce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
Yeah, in the primaries...

And what point are we at in this election process? I'm pushing back against those demanding GOP loyalty to Rudy... now!

520 posted on 02/16/2007 1:20:27 PM PST by pgyanke (RUDY GIULIANI 2008 - BECAUSE IF YOU'RE GOING TO COMPROMISE YOUR PRINCIPLES ANYWAY... WHY WAIT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 681-700 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson