Posted on 03/19/2007 4:58:15 AM PDT by Aussie Dasher
The liberal media are having a field day trying to portray the Republican Party and conservatives in disarray. The crescendo has reached a new peak this week with Time magazine's cover picture of Ronald Reagan with a tear on his cheek.
But Time's story, "How the Right Went Wrong," is a superficial and simpleminded caricature of what is going on with Republicans.
First of all, as anyone with a passing awareness of political history knows, Reagan himself had anything but a cakewalk in reaching the leadership of the party and the presidency. His landslide victory in 1984 was the culmination of years of political struggle within his party. The beginning of his ascendance into national politics began 20 years earlier with his nationally televised speech in 1964 in support of the Barry Goldwater candidacy.
That same year, Republican candidate Goldwater was trounced by Lyndon Johnson.
The idea that anything as American as differences of opinion within a party and political struggles for leadership would bring Reagan to tears is a joke. The only tears about his party and this country that he shed were tears of joy to be part of this great, free country.
So as we approach an election year with an outgoing second-term president, and a vice president who is not stepping forward for his party's nomination, intra-party strife, as competing candidates try to define their own uniqueness, is as natural and American as apple pie. Ronald Reagan would have been perfectly at home.
It is actually not Republicans who are confused, but Time magazine.
When Reagan said, in 1985, that the "other side" was "bankrupt of ideas," he was right. He meant that Democrats had no answer to the challenges this country was facing other than the big-government materialism that had already been shown to be the problem, not the solution.
This is as true today as it was 20 years ago.
It is also true that the ideological core of the Reagan revolution _ traditional values and limited government _ points the way to our future as much today as it did then. And Time's reporters or anyone else would have a hard time finding conservatives who would question this.
So you have to wonder what world Time's reporters are living in when they write that "everything that Reagan said in 1985 about 'the other side' could easily apply to the conservatives of 2007."
What Time's reporters do not seem to understand is the difference between the challenge of finding the best, hopefully a great, leader and not knowing who you are.
Of course there are differences of opinion within the Republican Party, as there were during the Reagan years.
But regarding first principles, you just have to ask Republicans and Democrats who they are, and it is clear they know and that the core differences are not much different than when Reagan talked about "the other side" 20 years ago.
In a survey done a few weeks ago by the Pew Research Center, Republicans and Democrats were asked what traits they were looking for in candidates.
Among Republicans, 61 percent are more likely to vote for a candidate who is Christian compared to 38 percent of Democrats. And among these same Republicans, 86 percent are less likely to vote for a candidate who does not believe in God, compared to 56 percent of Democrats.
Sixty-four percent of Republicans and 37 percent of Democrats state that they are less likely to vote for a candidate who is homosexual, and 62 percent of Republicans and 25 percent of Democrats are less likely to vote for a candidate who has had an extramarital affair.
In general, Republicans consistently poll in the direction of lower taxes and more limited government, as compared to Democrats.
On health care, an issue central to defining what the future of this country will look like, according to a recent CBS/New York Times poll, 62 percent of Democrats as opposed to 27 percent of Republicans think we should have a single-payer government-run health-care system.
If journalists want to examine party disarray, perhaps they should be asking what it tells us about the state of the Democratic Party that Sen. Barack Obama, an unknown, with barely two years' experience in a major political office, can be a serious candidate for its nomination for president.
Leaders are not made with cookie cutters. As the historian Carlyle said, "The history of the world is nothing but the biography of great men."
The right did not go wrong, as Time would have it. Conservatives have no identity crisis. We're just in search of that leader who is as great as the agenda.
A bed of lies is never gets it right.
Time magazine, the epitomy of the Lefty msm, trying to understand conservatism is like trying to explain faith to an atheist. They have no capacity for understanding something that is foreign to them.
Wrong? How?
He did win the landslide in 1984.
The landslide in 1980 was a vote of hope - the one in 1984 was one of validation. I think that is the point.
I can give you 444 reasons why it was a landslide victory.
Not sure if she confused the year or if she was referring to his landslide victory in 2004.
You're probably right but 1980 is the year I will ALWAYS remember!
God bless and keep The Great Ronald Reagan.
If any party is in trouble it would be the rat party. The top two, Hillary and Obama are immenently beatable by almost any Republican.
Very compelling numbers that are consistent with a previous Pew survey showing Republicans Can't Win Without Christian Conservatives.
FREEPER ALERT: Upon reading this poll, Rudeo's Campaign Machine will go into Mach One Spin Mode.
Watch so-called "Republican" Rudeo Giuliani have a couple well-rehearsed "Come to Jesus" moments. His campaign handlers will have Rudeo on bended knees, praising the Lord to high heaven. A Bible might suddenly appear out of nowhere. Maybe even a rosary (for the Catholic vote).
Add to those numbers, an astounding 88% who said they had a problem with Rudy Giuliani not attending his son's graduation (separate poll made after Andrew Giuliani outed his father as a miserable no-show Dad with an overbearing shrewish third wife who orders Rudy not to see his children).
Man, the Rudeo people are gonna go ballistic. Cases of valium and vodka are being delivered to Rudeo campaign hdq as we type.
Good article. The propagandists are at it again conducting the psychological attack/control war for the dhimmicrats. The Time magazine cover is the latest, obvious example.
The GOP is in disarray but conservatives are not.
This is news? Time gets it wrong on almost everything almost all the time.
'84's the one I recall most vividly.
I worked with a grad from MIT who was a staunch Mondale supporter, so liberal and left he hurt, and entirely believed Mondale would unseat Reagan.
What made it so memorable is I told "Marv" I'd heard something about a "brooming" but not being as educated as a MIT graduate I'm not supposed to be as politically astute as he.
He said "Brooming!?!" I said , "Yeah - something about Reagan beating Mondale with a broom."
Man, was he PO with me. (put out)
Time magazine is trying to do a few things....
1) Sell magazines. Dems will be happy, and say "Ya! I told you"
Cons will say, oh what is happening. I need to check it out.
2) Shape our knowledge base. This would benefit their
liberal mindset.
3) Keep themselves from getting blown up by Al-Qaeda terrorists,
for reporting the whole history of Al Qaeda from Morocco/Algeria/
Egypt to Afghanistan/Somalia/Iraq
bttt
From the article:
"Conservatives have no identity crisis. We're just in search of that leader who is as great as the agenda."
That's the way I see it. We are HUNGRY, nay, FAMISHED for True Leadership within our party. And we don't suffer fools gladly, either.
"Man, the Rudeo people are gonna go ballistic. Cases of valium and vodka are being delivered to Rudeo campaign hdq as we type."
I'm sick to DEATH of the Rudy-Bots around here. What on Earth can they possibly see in this man, other than they "think" he can beat The Beast? You know what? I would NEVER wish her on my Country, but if 4 years of her is what it takes to seriously shake the shoulders of those in the GOP and make them get a CLUE, then so be it.
I'll not compromise, not for that beotch, not for anyone. I expect no less from my fellow Pubbies. :)
The equally lecherous Benito Mussolini started making appearances at Church when he came to power, accompanied by the papparazzi, of course.
You got that right, DIW.
Notice that only social conservative Republicans are being asked to compromise their long-held principles (principles that made the party what it is today).
This is the MO of The Everything-For-Us-Nothing-for-Conservatives crowd.........THEY takeover the party, and toss US overboard.
Course this crowd made one ignorant assumption--assuming social conservatives would roll-over and play dead, to let a bunch of cross-dressing, abortion worshippers walk all over us.
Aint gonna happen.
You got that right, DIW.
Notice that only social conservative Republicans are being asked to compromise their long-held principles (principles that made the party what it is today).
This is the MO of The Everything-For-Us-Nothing-for-Conservatives crowd.........THEY takeover the party, and toss US overboard.
Course this crowd made one ignorant assumption--assuming social conservatives would roll-over and play dead, to let a bunch of cross-dressing, abortion worshippers walk all over us.
Aint gonna happen.
Are they still selling Time Magazine?
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.