Skip to comments.Five years later, the Tea Party prepares for their Reagan moment
Posted on 02/28/2014 7:04:09 AM PST by theruleshavechanged
"You see, Ronald Reagan was not part of the establishment," talk radio host Mark Levin reminded them. "He was an outsider, and like you and so many others throughout history, he had the courage to stand up and be counted."
Levin reminded the audience that Reagan and his supporters were once disparaged by the media and the "ruling class." To illustrate his point, he read assessments of Reagan from the media and his fellow Republicans in the late 1970s.
He cited a 1974 column from George Will suggesting that Reagan was too old to run for president and that Reagan supporters were "kamikaze conservatives" left over from the Barry Goldwater era.
"Does this not sound familiar to you?" he asked as he audience laughed.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Do you wave a Dont Tread on Me flag in your front yard or attend church on Sunday? Well the government has a new classification for you that lines you right up with the Al Qaeda. Youre now considered a domestic terrorist. If you made this list, congratulations, you are everything the government is worried about:
1. Those that talk about individual liberties
2. Those that advocate for states rights
3. Those that want to make the world a better place
4. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule
5. Those that are interested in defeating the Communists
6. Those that believe that the interests of ones own nation areseparate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations
7. Anyone that holds a political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable
8. Anyone that possesses an intolerance toward other religions
9. Those that take action to fight against the exploitation of theenvironment and/or animals
13. The Patriot Movement
14. Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians
15. Members of the Family Research Council
16. Members of the American Family Association
17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the North American Union
18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol
19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform
20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition
21. Members of the Christian Action Network
22. Anyone that is opposed to the New World Order
23. Anyone that is engaged in conspiracy theorizing
24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21
25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps
26. Anyone that fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations
27. The militia movement
28. The sovereign citizen movement
29. Those that dont think they should have to pay taxes
30. Anyone that complains about bias
31. Anyone that believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia
32. Anyone that is frustrated with mainstream ideologies
33. Anyone that visits extremist websites/blogs
34. Anyone that establishes website/blog to display extremist views
35. Anyone that attends rallies for extremist causes
36. Anyone that exhibits extreme religious intolerance
37. Anyone that is personally connected with a grievance
38. Anyone that suddenly acquires weapons
39. Anyone that organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology
40. Militia or unorganized militia
41. General right-wing extremist
42. Citizens that have bumper stickers that are patriotic or anti-U.N.
43. Those that refer to an Army of God
44. Those that are fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)
45. Those that are anti-global
46. Those that are suspicious of centralized federal authority
47. Those that are reverent of individual liberty
48. Those that believe in conspiracy theories
49. Those that have a belief that ones personal and/or national way of life is under attack
50. Those that possess a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism
51. Those that would impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)
52. Those that would insert religion into the political sphere
53. Anyone that would seek to politicize religion
54. Those that have supported political movements for autonomy
55. Anyone that is anti-abortion
56. Anyone that is anti-Catholic
57. Anyone that is anti-nuclear
58. Rightwing extremists
59. Returning veterans
60. Those concerned about illegal immigration
61. Those that believe in the right to bear arms
62. Anyone that is engaged in ammunition stockpiling
63. Anyone that exhibits fear of Communist regimes
64. Anti-abortion activists
65. Those that are against illegal immigration
66. Those that talk about the New World Order in a derogatory manner
67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations
68. Those that are opposed to the collection of federal income taxes
69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr
70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (Dont Tread On Me)
71. Those that believe in end times prophecies
72. Evangelical Christians
- See more at: http://viralsurvival.com/2014/02/27/american-domestic-terrorists-list/#sthash.T2DdtVoS.dpuf
The most important is this:
Luk 6:22 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake.
Luk 6:23 Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.
Yep, that’s a good read on the the signpost up ahead.
And where is this “Reagan” they refer to for 2016. I see nobody even close to “Reagan”....well Santorum but most here don’t care for him.
Wow. I had forgotten that George Will was the token conservative for the liberal media for more than 40 years. He needs to stick to writing about baseball, a topic that he actually knows something about . . .
This year, even the peoples republic of Maine has a genuine Tea Party candidate running for the Second Congressional District. Bruce Poliquin a native Mainer with a conservative streak the width of the Maine Turnpike is the man who can actually win and give Maine it’s first God fearing Constitution reading member of Congress in over 100 years.
FWIW, I have a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag hanging prominently in my window. I was also elected election judge in our precinct.
I’m sorry, but, we’ve got to stop looking for the “next Reagan.” We really do. And I think we need to also stop looking back upon his time with such rose colored glasses. Good things happen? Yep-taxes, military buildup, mentality at the top, economy. Bad things happen? Yep-growth of government, amnesty for illegals, Iran-Contra, Anthony Kennedy. It’s almost like he was a “compassionate conservative” which is a term I think just about everyone right-of-center hates these days.
A damn sight better than any alternative at the time but far from the ideal conservative Presidential material we are searching for today. Any candidate, today, who tried to win the GOP primary on the platform of above would be shouted down and out as an appeaser, a squish, “eastablishment,” and, moderate.
Few people want that particular Blessing.
Santorum is a one trick pony. He is in with the GOPe.
Whatever Will may have said about Reagan in 1974, he helped coach Reagan in his debate with Carter.
Will was given a lot of grief by his Washington insider buddies. Will said he was glad with what he did but wouldn’t do it again. Thank you Mr. Will, but we could have done without the mea culpa to get back in with your buddies’ good graces.
Any candidate, today, who tried to win the GOP primary on the platform of above would be shouted down and out as an appeaser, a squish, eastablishment, and, moderate.
This statement doesn't reflect the facts of what Reagan believed and ran on.
But they were results of his two terms.
You are cherry picking an 8 year presidential term, the greatest since Washington, that is a heck of a lot different from measuring/comparing candidates.
Nobody’s 8 year term is going to be anywhere near flawless, and that goes for Cruz and Palin as well.
No, I’m taking it as a whole. I’m looking at everything not just the things I liked. Plenty of things I and others here liked(you included) occurred during those 8 years. Plenty of other things that I and others don’t like (you included) happened as well. Best Presidency of my life? You. Bet. What I want to see from the next “conservative” elected to office? If any GOP/conservative POTUS of the future signed another amnesty or failed to significantly reduce the size and scope of government we would be here talking about them as a failure, no? We decry these very things today with regards to Congress so why would you accept them from Reagan or any else on the right?
Santorum was anti-Reagan and called his supporters “right-wing fringe” while describing himself as a “progressive conservative” in his campaign literature, when telling the press he wasn’t a Reagan Republican.
Santorum was always a dedicated Arlen Specter supporter, always, from campaigning with him during his (Specter’s 1996) presidential run to remove life from the party platform, to supporting Specter against Toomey in 2004 and 2010.
You missed the entire point of my post.
You are comparing 8 years of being president with the candidates.
Any candidate is going to have plenty for you to cherry pick and dislike, AFTER 8 YEARS AS PRESIDENT, wait until after they are president for that kind of comparison, we are talking about candidates, not presidents.
Candidates run on who they are and their platform, you are taking 8 years of presidency, and trying to create the lie that it was Reagan’s platform as candidate.
You are way off track with your apples and oranges confusion.
Santorum is a sweater vest wearing homo who should be be better off, as would the rest of the world, if he would do something more apropos to his level of competence such as move to a small town and sell shoes.
“you are taking 8 years of presidency, and trying to create the lie that it was Reagans platform as candidate...”
I never said that at all once anywhere in post I’ve written here. Where in Heck do you get that from?????
Once again, I am talking about the results of his two terms. Not what he ran on. Not what he said. Not the person we believed him to be. All that is fine. I am talking strictly about what happened during his time in office.
We want to look back on Reagan’s years as if they were some glorious perfect conservative utopia.....and they weren’t. There was a lot of bad stuff that happened in his time in office when it comes to modern conservative ideals. I have no qualms about looking back with stark, unvarnished honesty about that. I don’t want those things again.
Actually you did—”Any candidate, today, who tried to win the GOP primary on the platform of above would be shouted down and out as an appeaser, a squish, eastablishment, and, moderate.”
So you just wanted to rant against Reagan’s presidency and never meant to discuss candidates or the tea party.
It is still idiotic, why not just start a thread on Reagan, rather than hijack one by calling his presidency a failure?
My dear God, man, this is so ridiculous.
I was talking a pol running on that platform TODAY. Not Reagan running on that platform 30 years ago.
I didn’t call his Presidency a failure. I said it was not what a lot of us hoped it could have been.
And, seriously, this is too stupid to argue about. You don’t understand what I’m saying and I can’t explain it to. Stop it. Just stop.
Nobody is running on that platform, Reagan didn't run on that platform, you keep attacking Reagan's presidency.
You did call him a failure.
Best Presidency of my life? You. Bet. What I want to see from the next conservative elected to office? If any GOP/conservative POTUS of the future signed another amnesty or failed to significantly reduce the size and scope of government we would be here talking about them as a failure, no?"
Reagan's presidency was not a failure, and why do you want to keep ranting against him and some fake "platform"?
Why try to turn this into an anti-Reagan thread?