Reagan's Son [The NYT Sunday Magazine's cover story re: President GW Bush]

The NY Times Sunday Magazine - Cover Story ^ | Jan. 26, 2003 | Bill Keller

[petuniasevan]

That's true enough; some of them "protest" by voting Green or Libertarian, depending on worldview.
It does have the effect of fragmenting the Dems' power base.
The Dems' responses of hysterical rants and hyperbolic accusations/mudslinging are backfiring; some people have wised up.

[InABunkerUnderSF]

George W. Bush a CONSERVATIVE??? The guy that tried to get Califonia to elect Ricky the RINO Riordon Governor, a CONSERVATIVE? The guy whose flunkies have about destroyed the party of Regan in Regan's home state, a CONSERVATIVE???

What a laugh.

[nopardons]

Laugh all you care to, the assessment is correct. President Bush the younger is Reagab's heir and is as Conservative as he was.

[billhilly]

I saw your post and believe you are right. Also, I hope you are right.

[billhilly]

Is it Reagab, Regan or Reagan? I vote for the latter.

[nopardons]

Methinks that the newbie is a disruptor. Even I, who seem to be FR's Queen of typos, that never get corrected, have NEVER misspelled REAGAN. :-)

[billhilly]

{;^)

[Howlin]

ROFLMAO! I mean REALLY!

[Howlin]

Despite all of the missteps, scandals, and other disasters of this administration

Scandals? He's got the wrong administration, hasn't he?

[petuniasevan]

Well, some weasels have manufactured a few.

The public isn't buying that brand this year.

[Liberty Valance]

Dang, i like this!

Liberty

[billhilly]

Early bird?

[Howlin]

My dog wanted to go out and it's so cold out there my brain is wide open.......LOL.

[billhilly]

Welcome aboard, whatever the reason.

[mc5cents]

This probably got the DU'ers shorts in a bunch too:

I began this exercise inclined to think of Bush as Reagan Lite -- that is, a president with shallower, unschooled instincts in place of the older man's studied, lifelong convictions, and without the mastery of language that served Reagan so well. Perhaps, I'd have said, he is a bit of a Reagan poseur -- the White House being such a studio of contrivance and calculation. I ended my research more inclined to think that Bush is in a sense the fruition of Reagan, and that -- far from being the lightweight opportunist of liberal caricature or the centrist he sometimes played during his own election campaign -- he stands a good chance of advancing a radical agenda that Reagan himself could only carry so far. Bush is not, as Reagan was, an original, but he has adapted Reagan's ideas to new times, and found some new language in which to market them. We seem not only to be witnessing the third term of the Reagan presidency; at this rate we may well see the fourth.

[fporretto]

Dubya has been a very pleasant surprise, even when he's acted on policies that I've disapproved -- because he shows both a willingness to learn and the courage of his convictions. That combination of moral confidence and personal humility is more powerful than any arrogant SOB's know-it-all attitude, no matter how smart or knowledgeable he might actually be.

I don't really like the idea of anyone having as much "power over" as the President of the United States has, but perhaps the Bush Administration will succeed in persuading the country at large that federal power (in particular) needs to be kept under firm restraint -- by exhibiting such restraint, compelling similar restraint on Congress and the judiciary, and then letting the results speak for themselves.

A free people can lose its freedom muscles, simply by not exercising them. I think that describes what's happened to us this past century. We eschewed personal initiative and responsibility, and called for government angels to bear us up, lest we dash our foot against a stone. Thus, we forgot how to walk -- many of us, at any rate -- and had to accept being carried. And he who is carried loses his choice of destination.

But functions not completely lost will return with use. If Bush and his team, with a bold program of tax cuts, regulatory scalebacks, and appointments of strict constructionists to the federal bench, can prod us into motion again, we'll relearn our freedom skills quickly enough to please the staunchest libertarian: me.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com

[Marauder]

... it will be a cold day in h*ll before any Dem site ever recognizes how much actual damage former President Clinton did to the entire Dem Party.

I believe you nailed it, Summer.

[LS]

Don't buy it summer. The ONLY time we've seen large numbers of "dissatisfied" voters was in 1992, and that only because of Ross Perot and his personality. Yes, if a wierd personality comes out of the woodwork, and, like Perot, insulates himself from press inspection for most of the campaign, he can get 10% of the vote.

But if you think the Libertarians or the Greenies are going to get 10% of the vote, it ain't gonna happen. This is a two-party system. The only times in post-Civil War American history where a third-party candidate (1912, 1992) has had an impact, it arguably elected the LEAST desirable of ALL the candidate (Wilson, Clinton).

[LS]

I fully agree. I don't think Democrats OR modern Libertarians have yet come to grips with the phenomenal damage that the "small government" President Andrew Jackson did to the nation, and Clinton was by far the worst, ever. His foreign policy stupidity will keep us busy for 20 years, and only the GOP Congress kept him from a total meltdown of American social and economic policy.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

I don't mean that in an evil tone either. I just think it will be a cold day in h*ll before any Dem site ever recognizes how much actual damage former President Clinton did to the entire Dem Party.

Actually, I think the damage is from guys like Daschle and Leahy.

Clinton was wildly and undeservedly popular and fooled much of the nation into viewing him as a centrist.

Then, along came Daschale, Leahy, et al, who weren't as slick and let the public see the true, left wing obstructionist, face of the Democratic party.