Republicans generally regard Ronald Reagan as a fine man and a great President. Conservatives, who are not all Republicans, tend to feel the same way. So why is it that Republicans in general, and especially conservative Republicans, now go out of their way to besmirch the best advice they were ever given by a man they revere?
There is a famous line from the old cartoon strip, “Pogo,” which goes, “we have met the enemy and he is us.” Amusing, thought-provoking, but I really don’t want to live my life as part of a cartoon strip, gals and guys. So here’s the only advice you should listen to from a maverick Democrat like me: “Remember Ronald Reagan’s advice and live by it.”
Reagan’s most famous dictum is very simple: “Do not speak ill of another Republican.” That seems to be easy enough to remember. Not quite as famous, but just as valuable: “Someone who agrees with you 80 per cent of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20 per cent traitor.”
Yet every day I read where some guardian of conservative Republican purity is busy rooting out not the twenty-per-centers but the one and two per cent “traitors.” Yeah, ten years ago he voted to raise the local sales tax a half penny; he’s a flaming liberal. You’ve heard it, too; don’t bother to deny. Well, I am someone who agrees with the Republican positions about 85 to 90 per cent of the time, so I’m a bigtime 10 per cent-plus traitor to the cause. But reflect on this: without my vote, and the votes of others like me, Republicans can’t win diddlysquat come election time.
I now have to use an example, and I’m going to use RNC Chair Michael Steele because I am a Michael Steele fan, despite the recent purity-guardian consensus that rates Steele as a 7 or 8 per cent traitor. Hark back to the time when Steele was asked during a TV interview about Rush Limbaugh being the “leader” of the Republican Party. There was a right answer and a host of wrong ones; Steele gave a wrong answer, muddling on about how Rush Limbaugh is an “entertainer,” yadda yadda, and don’t you know that James Carville was delighted to hear that.
The right answer? So obvious: Do not speak ill of another Republican – - that’s the voice of Reagan, of course; therefore, Steele: “Rush Limbaugh is a faithful Republican and a very articulate conservative.” Someone who agrees with you 80 per cent of the time is a friend and ally, not a 20 per cent traitor. “He and I don’t always agree on every issue, but generally we’re on the same side.” Then, segue: “But if you honestly want to speak with an elected official of the Republican Party, I’m right here, so what’s your next question?”
Why do you think that Democrats are fond of saying that “the era of Reagan is over” and Republicans should “forget Ronald Reagan?” Sage advice, offered out of the kindness of their hearts, a gesture of good will? Or is it because they’re afraid that Republicans will remember Ronald Reagan, and the advice he gave?
So that’s it; you can heed Reagan’s advice, or not; your call; all the man accomplished was winning two terms as President, ending the cold war, and kicking off an economic boom; I’ve said what I was moved to say, and now I’m going back to dissecting Obamacrats, who I perceive to be actual threats to our liberty.
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” – - Ronald Reagan.
Tags: Conservatives, Reagan, Republican Party, Ronald Reagan
Bad Behavior has blocked 530 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Another, interesting view on the “ideological purity” thing:
http://politicsdmz.typepad.com/politicsdmz/2009/05/regan-was-far-from-a-reagan-conservative.html
Amen brother! The purity jihadis would guarantee Democratic dominance for a generation if they had their way.
I think this is a sign of Republican disarray and desperation. They screwed up multiple times over the years, and capped it off by nominating a 50% “traitor” who ran a horrible campaign, and now they don’t know what to do.
That’s a major problem with non-ideologically centered political parties: they wander and roam and lose their focus. Then, they get the crap beat out of them, which forces them to focus again.
Or so let’s hope.
@James Shott – The virtue of the parliamentary system is that parties are ideologically centered, although that doesn’t insure that one won’t lose focus on occasion. It does tend to draw the lines more neatly. In the USA, party loyalty is generally determined by family, with occasional upheavals such as the realignment in the South in the 60s and 70s, or by expedience; ideology usually is a secondary consideration. This wouldn’t be a recipe for disaster but for one serious problem: the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have effectively monopolized the electoral system, making ballot access for others very difficult. This tends to engender a lesser-of-two-evils attitude among a large number of voters, which is not good for the country in the long run.
I recall that McCain had an 83% or so conservative rating by the group that rates such things, so he was within Reagan’s 80-per-cent rule, even if barely. What passes for “conservative” these days often has little or nothing to do with traditional values, IMHO, and a lot to do with maintaining control from the “right” wing of the Party. I see more consistent conservatism coming from Libertarians – - let’s face it, if a Libertarian had been elected President in 2000, there would have been no Iraq War and we wouldn’t have added $4,000,000,000.00, give or take, to the national debt in 8 years.
[...] President Reagan, Pink Floyd is on like 3, a “Mr. Floyd” is on line 3, [...]