Posted on 02/25/2013 4:10:30 AM PST by Kaslin
That is, totally boss.
Both Hoover and George H.W. Bush ran on a platform of continuing the policies of their predecessors.
The GOP platform of 1928 was mostly about praising the Coolidge administration and pledging to continue doing the same: cutting taxes and reducing government debt. Hoover campaigned as being a part of that administration for 8 years and believing in "the American system of rugged individualism". He ran to the right of the generally centrist Al Smith, saying Smith and the Democrats believed in "the doctrines of paternalism and state socialism" that were popular in Europe at the time. (of course, the modern day Democrats, liberal media, and useful idiot neo-confederates will ignore history and make up BS that the Democrats were "the conservative party back then", and "the two parties switched sides" in the 1960s)
60 years later, in 1988, we essentially had the same thing. George H.W. Bush got the nomination because he had the name ID and had been part of the Reagan administration for 8 years. He essentially campaigned as Reagan's third term and ran well to the right of Dukasis, going after him as a bleeding heart peacenik Massachusetts liberal, attacking Duke's "revolving door prison system" in Mass, campaigning as a hardliner on crime and the death penalty, and giving a John Wayne type "read my lips, no new taxes" speech at the Republican National Convention. Idiot Dukakis actually ran against Reaganism when Reagan was still enormously popular with the public. Reagan also campaigned extensively for Bush.
Basically, Coolidge and Reagan weren't replaced with conservatives because moderates in their administration happened to be in the right place at the right time, to take advantage of their popularity and win the office on their coattails by talking like they were clones of their predecessor. There was no actual conservative "heir apparent" in the position to succeed them.
Reasonable minds can disagree on this one.
Reagan certainly had more significant accomplishments but that isn’t what I was basing it on.
Every President since Coolidge, other than Reagan, has been a wanker. Ike, a moderate Republican, is the next best/least wankerish, that says a lot. Hoover, Nixon, Ford and the Bushes, yikes. In that group POPPY Bush seems to look good, that’s just sad.
Tells us why Reagan dusted off the painting of Coolidge, and gave it a special place in the White House. Good read!
” Had Coolidge been President during the 1929 crash, I don’t think there would have been a depression.. Maybe a recession..”
100% spot on!
Very well written, and I include in this, your home page!
” Coolidge was almost an excellent champion of conservative values (sadly forgotten by history), but didn’t have those negatives in his presidency. Coolidge closed the immigration floodgates with the Immigration Act of 1924, and during his Presidency from 1923-1929, he greatly reduced the size and scope of the federal government. Federal spending remained flat during Coolidge’s administration, allowing one-fourth of the federal debt to be retired. The Revenue Act of 1924 reduced income tax rates and eliminated all income taxation for some two million people. Coolidge also represents a now long forgotten time (even during Reagan’s day) where the President and the executive branch saw their role as executing the laws of the land, not making them. Coolidge said it his job first and foremost to use his veto to stop bad legislation from becoming law, not to lobby for new federal laws. “
I agree with all of this. Reagan’s biggest mistake was the 1986 amnesty.
What's impressive is that the most prominent issues during his presidency are the same as those of today: taxes, spending, deficits and surpluses, national debt, and size of government. Coolidge met regularly with his Cabinet and Budget Director. The Budget Director's main emphasis was keeping tabs on federal agencies to keep their expenditures in line. By holding the line on spending like this, and vetoing a bunch of what he considered budget-busting bills (including veterans' bonuses), he made his share of adversaries in Republican-controlled Congresses, but he was able to keep the federal government in surpluses and pay down the national debt. As this was going on, the economy on the whole did very well, with the exception of agriculture.
BUMP
I am in the process of reading that work now, it is excellent.
What a great idea, to charge the budget director with keeping the heads of the administrative agencies in line. Brilliant!
Thanks for the ping!
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.