You’re no Ronald Reagan

posted at 4:30 pm on January 29, 2012 by Karl

The kerfuffle over Newt Gingrich’s status as a Reagan Republican will be a footnote to the 2012 campaign at most. But that does not mean we cannot learn from it.

On the surface, this is a silly issue. Last week, Mitt Romney was painting Gingrich as a minor figure of the Reagan revolution. This week ended with the following exchange during the CNN debate:

Wolf Blitzer: Governor Romney, you criticized Speaker Gingrich for not being as close to Ronald Reagan as he says he was. When you ran for the Senate, you said you were, quote, “You weren’t trying to return to Reagan-Bush.”

So the question is, do you think you can claim the Reagan mantle more than Speaker Gingrich?

Romney: Oh, of course not. ***

Romney then recited his biography, selectively omitting the 1994 Senate race which occasioned Mitt’s remark distancing himself from Reagan-Bush (a ticket which won Massachusetts twice). It’s an answer which tells the observant that Team Romney figured out this was a dumb line of attack (Newt can be unconservative, but Romney is not going to win an argument about Reagan). It also tells the observant that even after fumbling Mitt’s money issues, Team Romney was still capable of not recognizing that their attack would backfire in the first instance (Newt also launches attacks that boomerang, but Mitt is the one with the supposedly superior staff and organization).

While Team Romney was figuring this out, a scrum of conservative punditry ensued. Notably, Elliott Abrams (an assistant secretary of state under Reagan) attacked Gingrich for not having been sufficiently supportive of Reagan’s foreign policy. Jeffrey Lord (a former Reagan White House political director) defended Gingrich as one of Reagan’s best lieutenants, including the story of how Newt helped keep a firm line against tax increases in the 1984 platform against the likes of Bob Dole and Lowell Weicker. Lord later claimed that Abrams had never complained about Gingrich at the time and distorted Gingrich’s comments on Reagan’s foreign policy. Rich Lowry then went after Lord for smearing Abrams as jockeying for a job in a Romney administration and for providing only partial context of Gingrich’s foreign policy remarks.

So far, it appears that Lowry is correct that Lord has no evidence that Abrams was sucking up to Team Romney for a job. Moreover, the Abrams piece could easily have been a simple act of score-settling. I would not be surprised if Abrams and others in the Reagan administration were less than thrilled at Gingrich’s criticism at the time and feel vindicated by history (although history is not a controlled experiment, thus precluding a definitive judgment on the matter). However, Lord correctly notes (as does Reagan biographer Steven Hayward) that Gingrich was hardly a lone critic of Reagan’s foreign policy at the time in question. Newt cited George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Irving Kristol, and Jeane Kirkpatrick in his speech, while Hayward lists others, including Howard Phillips, Jack Kemp, George Will and William Safire.

The scrum demonstrates why Team Romney is running from the subject. The record tends to show that Gingrich backed Reagan on key issues and when he did critique the administration, he did so from the right. “More right-wing than Reagan in the ’80s” is not the frame Romney wants for Gingrich.

What can we learn from this episode (beyond the fact that Team Romney still has some bugs to work out)?

The reason that the right would spend a week discussing Gingrich’s connection to Reagan legacy is a testament to how much Reagan shaped the conservative movement and today’s GOP. By holding Reagan up as the ideal, he and his administration have become idealized — and it would serve us all well to be more clear-eyed about history here.

This episode is a timely reminder that the Reagan GOP was an occasionally fractious coalition. To moderates, Reaganomics was voodoo, while Reagan’s confrontational foreign policy seemed unconservative. Reagan was a politician who pushed the envelope… but his coalition also contained those who wanted to push it further.

It should be remembered that Reagan got to elected president as the result of many factors. He had experience running for president. He was an able and charismatic performer as a candidate, capable of disarming his critics with a down-to-earth chuckle as easily as a pointed barb. Stagflation had exposed the flaws of Keynesian economics. Iran and the Soviet Union exposed the impotence of Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy. Reagan’s election was as close to a perfect storm as one is likely to find in politics.

This year, the GOP remains a fractious coalition, but its candidate will be no Ronald Reagan. (Occasionally, Ronald Reagan was no Ronald Reagan.) Moreover, if America is lucky, the economy and state of the world will not make Barack Obama look as bad as Jimmy Carter. It is by those parameters that GOP primary voters should be making their choice, rather than hoping a perfect storm rolls in.

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

None of them are a Ronald Reagan…

OmahaConservative on January 29, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Guaranteed that 99.9% of the people who comment on this thread will not have read Karl’s long, boring post here.

Karl, get yourself back to the green room where you belong.

Brevity….its the soul of wit.

Jailbreak on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Best part….LOL

The scrum demonstrates why Team Romney is running from the subject. The record tends to show that Gingrich backed Reagan on key issues and when he did critique the administration, he did so from the right. “More right-wing than Reagan in the ’80s” is not the frame Romney wants for Gingrich.

idesign on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Go Newt go all the way :)

residentblue on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Didn’t I just read this earlier in the week?

multiuseless on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Mitt is being improved by frying in the fire. So even if you are for Mitt, vote to keep him… frying in the fire a little longer.

anotherJoe on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Go to http://rushlimbaugh.com. The true story is there for all to see.

ProudPalinFan on January 29, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Tabloid Trash

Amjean on January 29, 2012 at 4:35 PM

But it’s hard to make a case Romney was ever a Republican, much leass a Reagan.

Dr. Tesla on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Romney better state getting ready for the attacks on the Bain lawsuit over collusion.

KBird on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Didn’t I just read this earlier in the week?
multiuseless on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Nothing against Karl, but there’s really nothing new here. It’s just a reminder the status quo is the status quo.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

This is pretty idiotic analysis. Romney never pretended to be a Reagan conservative. He along with the other candidates mentioned Reagan 5 times in his debates. Newt, however, mentioned Reagan 55 times and in several debates credited himself with the collapse of the USSR.

When you wrap yourself around Reagan like that, you better hope you were 100% with Reagan.

haner on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

None of them are a Ronald Reagan…

OmahaConservative on January 29, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Nailed it out of the gate. But RR would spank one of them really good.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Guaranteed that 99.9% of the people who comment on this thread will not have read Karl’s long, boring post here.

I read it. It is boring.

LOL

gerrym51 on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Mitt is being improved by frying in the fire. So even if you are for Mitt, vote to keep him… frying in the fire a little longer.

anotherJoe on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

BS! Romney hasen’t even had his dainty fingers burnt yet…LOL

idesign on January 29, 2012 at 4:37 PM

To me, Romney is basically Evan Bayh type of Democrat, he doesn’t come across as nutty MNSBC type on tv but he supports the liberal stuff all the same.

Dr. Tesla on January 29, 2012 at 4:37 PM

When you wrap yourself around Reagan like that, you better hope you were 100% with Reagan.

haner on January 29, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Better not, because often Newt was against Reagan from the right, especially on taxes in 82 and in RR’s 2nd term.

You might love yer boy, but read up smart one.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM

At times…I think of James Stockdale…Perot’s running mate!

KOOLAID2 on January 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM

haner, also on taxes in “read my lips, no new taxes” in Bush papy’s fiasco.

Many RINOs and establishment hate him vehemently for rattling the cozy R minority. They didn’t care who was president, or who had the majority, so long as they had their comfortable seats.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Just wanted to say that if Romney is nominated I will vote for whoever isn’t Romney or Obama. Those two arent’ far enough apart to make much of a difference…furthermore the Republican party will be dead to me.

And yes I know all the squishes will say well good riddance and don’t let the door hit you on the way out…fine. Try and win without me.

I would vote Obama before I vote Romney. At least with Obama the R’s will have some motivation to fight. With Romney the R’s will be partying like it is 1999 with my money and my freedom. Better the enemy I know then Romney.

PierreLegrand on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Just remember that Reagan wasn’t Reagan until after he was finished being Reagan.

In other words, while in office he was vilified as the Amiable Dunce, etc., etc. and was very much the human being.

It wasn’t until he left office that it really sank in what a marvelous president he had been.

Things had been so rough during the Carter years, what with the economy really in the dumps and the humiliation of the Iran Hostage Crisis nipping hard on the heals of a lackluster Ford Administration and the trauma of Watergate and the lingering bile from Vietnam…

Things were dark when we turned to Reagan. With him as our leader, it really was morning in America.

*sigh*

turfmann on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Obama will be claiming to be Reagan’s real heir by Summer.

profitsbeard on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Better not, because often Newt was against Reagan from the right, especially on taxes in 82 and in RR’s 2nd term.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM

But on the critical issue of the Soviet Union, Newt was on the wrong side of history. Reagan’s meeting with Gorbachev which Newt panned was pivotal to the Soviet Union’s collapse. Newt’s judgment was found wanting. Not every position from the right is necessarily right.

haner on January 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Main reason why Dole hates Gingrich is because the latter opposed Dole on taxes. Dole was in charge to pass the increases, every time.

Worked out good for Dole, Bush-papy, didn’t it?

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Obama will be claiming to be Reagan’s real heir by Summer.

profitsbeard on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Too late. He already has.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Ironically, Reagan had to face a GOP establishment attack machine that is very much like the Romney attack machine that has gone after every solid conservative in this primary.

Romney is the LAST guy to claim anything Reagan.

magic kingdom on January 29, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Wow, lookie who is the “foodstamp president“, again.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Obama will be claiming to be Reagan’s real heir by Summer.

profitsbeard on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Too late. He already has.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM

I know, I know… but I mean in actual campaign ads.

It’s Morning In America Again with Obama

U in morning optional.

profitsbeard on January 29, 2012 at 4:44 PM

I would vote Obama before I vote Romney. At least with Obama the R’s will have some motivation to fight. With Romney the R’s will be partying like it is 1999 with my money and my freedom. Better the enemy I know then Romney.

PierreLegrand on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

I really hope you rethink this.

magic kingdom on January 29, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Obama will run to the right of Romney.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:46 PM

OT: DEVASTATION FOR NEWT. RUNNING BEHIND ALL OTHER CANDIDATES IN SWING STATE HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCH-UPS:

GALLUPUSATODAY POLL OF SWING STATES:

Obama 47% Romney 48%
Obama 50% Paul 43%
Obama 51% Santorum 44%
Obama 54% Gingrich 40%

andy85719 on January 29, 2012 at 4:46 PM

profitsbeard on January 29, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Yep, he’s a sausage made from: Muenchhausen, Orwell, Pinocchio and Machiavelli, in the least. Put a sprinking of Marx on the concoction and what a cocktail!

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:47 PM

andy85719 on January 29, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Means nothing at this time, for any of them.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Guaranteed that 99.9% of the people who comment on this thread will not have read Karl’s long, boring post here.

i’m only here for this:

Newt/Callista/West 2012

Triple team the chicago thug machine!

NEWT!
NEWT!
NEWT!
NEWT!
NEWT!
NEWT!

GhoulAid on January 29, 2012 at 4:49 PM

Bob Dole, you will remember from George Stephanoupolos’s memoir of his time in Clinton’s White House, totally cut the legs out from under Newt Gingrich and House Republicans during the government shut down. According to the Democrats, they were within twenty-four hours of caving to the House Republicans’ demands, but Bob Dole surprised them all by caving first.

Dole went on to lose to Bill Clinton and still hates Newt Gingrich for it because Gingrich was the face used to attack Dole — a man who would have been the hero in the fight had Dole not caved.

There are some unending old feuds going on.

INC on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Newt and Bill Clinton are a lot alike.

Philly on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

It’s clear that Romney will never come close to Ronald Reagan. While Newt was working for the conservative movement, Romney was opposed to Reagan and busy making millions at Bain Capital. One of the companies Romney ran for Bain was involvd in Medicare fraud (the entire time Mitt ran it, the company’s profits soaring as a result of overcharging and worse) but Mitt knew nothing about it, of course:

http://www.therightscoop.com/blood-money-mitt-romneys-medicare-scandal/

pacificisland on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

I really hope you rethink this.
magic kingdom on January 29, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Not a chance…I have had enough. I wanted to fix it. I used to believe that there was a political answer and now I realize there isn’t. The political class is far too entrenched for us to regain our freedom by reducing the size and scope of our government.

We seriously have a guy who once advocated using Hezbollah as a model for spending our money around the world…my money. Then not satisfied with that accomplishment he went on to create the model for the biggest jump to socialism this country has ever seen. Romney is a rotten to the core thief. No better than Obama.

Hardcore conservatives will either stay away in huge numbers or vote for anyone but those two.

PierreLegrand on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

By holding Reagan up as the ideal, he and his administration have become idealized — and it would serve us all well to be more clear-eyed about history here.

Indeed. Love, love, love Reagan, but he was not as perfect, especially not in the 2nd term. What major assets he had are all his, for eternity. Not to overlook the flaws. It is easy to make the dead perfect, see John Kennedy.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:52 PM

profitsbeard on January 29, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Reagan never praised Hezbollah….

idesign on January 29, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Here we go again. Newt proposes commission on in vitro fertilization.

http://t.co/BeESRAh0

andy85719 on January 29, 2012 at 4:54 PM

So did you all see Romney winning the prized approval from ….wait for it ……
Spooky Dude Soros ?
http://www.therightscoop.com/soros-not-much-difference-between-romney-and-obama/

burrata on January 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Newt/West 2012

thedevilinside on January 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM

andy85719 on January 29, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Just celebrate. Your guy has ‘won’.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Newt/West 2012

thedevilinside on January 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Hey, you stole that from me :)….but good on you.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 4:56 PM

My guy? My guy? I have fluctuated between these two for weeks now. But come on, a commission on in vitro! A very costly base on the moon! I want to hear about things that are actually relevant to the present, not wacko stuff.

andy85719 on January 29, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Hardcore conservatives will either stay away in huge numbers or vote for anyone but those two.
PierreLegrand on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Meh. The perennial coach-potato non-voter complainers are always written off anyway.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 4:59 PM

So did you all see Romney winning the prized approval from ….wait for it ……
Spooky Dude Soros ?
http://www.therightscoop.com/soros-not-much-difference-between-romney-and-obama/

burrata on January 29, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Think this through. Why would George Soros be trying to get Republican voters to pass over Mitt and nominate someone else? Think it through. Who does Soros want to win the 2012 presidential election? Wait for the epiphany… It’ll come…

Rational Thought on January 29, 2012 at 5:00 PM

GALLUPUSATODAY POLL OF SWING STATES:

Obama 47% Romney 48%
Obama 50% Paul 43%
Obama 51% Santorum 44%
Obama 54% Gingrich 40%

haner on January 29, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Meh. The perennial coach-potato non-voter complainers are always written off anyway.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 4:59 PM

At your peril. They put Obama over the top in 2008.

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 5:02 PM

GALLUPUSATODAY POLL OF SWING STATES:

Obama 47% Romney 48%
Obama 50% Paul 43%
Obama 51% Santorum 44%
Obama 54% Gingrich 40%

“Vote for Newt, annoy a liberal!”

“Vote for Newt, annoy a liberal!”

“Vote for Newt, annoy a liberal!”

“Vote for Newt, annoy a liberal!”

haner on January 29, 2012 at 5:02 PM

haner on January 29, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Newt/West, just to annoy you :)

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m hoping the 45th President ends up being even better than Reagan. The challenges that face us are at least as large as what Dutch took on, and we are broke, broke, broke.

DumboTheAvenger on January 29, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Newt is channeling Corazon Aquino with his “People Power” spiel (aka, “I forgot to raise enough money to compete”).

Is he going to wear yellow, too?

Philly on January 29, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Newt/West, just to annoy you :)

Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 5:03 PM

That’s what she should have said, “Vote for Newt, annoy the establishment.” But annoy a liberal? Newt is an early Christmas gift for Obama with ribbons.

haner on January 29, 2012 at 5:06 PM

Meh. The perennial coach-potato non-voter complainers are always written off anyway.
whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 4:59 PM

At your peril. They put Obama over the top in 2008.
Schadenfreude on January 29, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Non-voters have zero effect. They’ve taken themselves out of the game, that’s factored in (or “factored out”) no matter what the election. There will always be people who are too into eating pizza while being enthralled with “Dancing With The Stars” to get up and go anywhere – other than to the fridge for refills, of course.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Newt is stuck in the 1980s, it seems. Perhaps that’s why he thinks he is the second coming of Reagan.

Philly on January 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM

I liked the article, a little dry maybe but I’m not exactly a purveyor of keen insight so I can appreciate some intellectualosity.

Yeah I made that word up. You can copy it if you like.

Bishop on January 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m hoping the 45th President ends up being even better than Reagan. The challenges that face us are at least as large as what Dutch took on, and we are broke, broke, broke.

DumboTheAvenger on January 29, 2012 at 5:04 PM

+1

I hear ya.

haner on January 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Hardcore conservatives will either stay away in huge numbers or vote for anyone but those two.

PierreLegrand on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Romney and his shills in the establishment like McCain and others insult me as a bigot, bible thumper, hobbitt, STFU, and then expect me to go vote for them. I have more pride than to be insulted and then vote for the turds doing the insulting. “Ain’t NEVER gonna happen. Never.

they lie on January 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM

People here and on talk radio really need to stop pretending Reagan was the second coming of Christ.

He was good news after a terrible time, but he was far from flawless.

So stop holding him up as what Muslims refer to as Mohammed, ‘The Ideal Man’.

He was just a man.

CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:08 PM

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m hoping the 45th President ends up being even better than Reagan. The challenges that face us are at least as large as what Dutch took on, and we are broke, broke, broke.

DumboTheAvenger on January 29, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Agree

Philly on January 29, 2012 at 5:11 PM

People here and on talk radio really need to stop pretending Reagan was the second coming of Christ.
He was good news after a terrible time, but he was far from flawless.
So stop holding him up as what Muslims refer to as Mohammed, ‘The Ideal Man’.
He was just a man.
CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:08 PM

It’s not so much about Reagan these days, it’s wishful thinking for a make-believe Zombie-Reagan who never has, nor never will, existed.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:12 PM

It’s not so much about Reagan these days, it’s wishful thinking for a make-believe Zombie-Reagan who never has, nor never will, existed.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Precisely. My family, along with a huge number of other Americans, benefited greatly from the Reagan years. But along with the good there was some bad, and some seriously illegal unconstitutional BS. The hagiography is nauseating, and Mark Levin – self-proclaimed constitutional expert and certified cheer-leader – is amongst those who are frankly embarrassing themselves.

CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Negative Newt 24/7 attack attack attack.

Romney awesome, bow bow bow, 24/7, praise, bow, praise, bow, scrape, praise, bow

astonerii on January 29, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Newt’s amnesty paln – and that’s exactly what it is – eventually will destroy the country.

It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to fight to save the country from Obama only to see it become a third world hell hole.

bw222 on January 29, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Newt’s amnesty paln – and that’s exactly what it is – eventually will destroy the country.

It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to fight to save the country from Obama only to see it become a third world hell hole.

bw222 on January 29, 2012 at 5:18 PM

You don’t get out much do you, dear?

CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:22 PM

It’s not so much about Reagan these days, it’s wishful thinking for a make-believe Zombie-Reagan who never has, nor never will, existed.
whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Precisely. My family, along with a huge number of other Americans, benefited greatly from the Reagan years. But along with the good there was some bad, and some seriously illegal unconstitutional BS. The hagiography is nauseating, and Mark Levin – self-proclaimed constitutional expert and certified cheer-leader – is amongst those who are frankly embarrassing themselves.
CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Eh. I don’t mind so much that Reagan, as he was, the real Reagan of the past, is idolized. He stands among the greatest of American Presidents. It’s the deny of reality in expecting The Zombie-Reagan, in all his perfection to rise and lead the way back to greatness. While that’s fine as a fantasy, we live in an imperfect world filled with imperfect people and we are stuck with working with that reality.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:24 PM

The arguments between Romney and Gingrich supporters are comical and tragic. Arguing about which is the most conservative strikes me as akin to a competition for the world’s tallest midget (little person).

They both supported TARP, the individual mandate, and cap and trade. Gingrich proudly endorsed Medicare Part D in the last debate and Romney supported the stimulus.

All of these programs form 90%+ of the issues that caused the tea party to form, especially Obamacare. Neither one of these candidates is a tea partier at heart. BOTH of them are establishment and people that argue that one or the other is the “establishment” candidate are deluding themselves.

iwasbornwithit on January 29, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Jailbreak on January 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM

We prefer your Green Room posts to Karls.

No, Wait…

massrighty on January 29, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Obamney 2012. That’s the ticket.

Eat your peas, Murica.

Key West Reader on January 29, 2012 at 5:27 PM

The fact of the matter is there is no one in politics today that’s Ronald Reagan. Sad, but true.

GOPRanknFile on January 29, 2012 at 5:29 PM

We prefer your Green Room posts to Karls.

No, Wait…

massrighty on January 29, 2012 at 5:27 PM

LOL. Which name would he use? Roger Waters, The Wall, The Final Cut, Flickering Flames, or Jailbreak?

kingsjester on January 29, 2012 at 5:29 PM

That’s what she should have said, “Vote for Newt, annoy the establishment.” But annoy a liberal? Newt is an early Christmas gift for Obama with ribbons.

haner on January 29, 2012 at 5:06 PM

You leftists fear the Newt. You also fund Romney.

Key West Reader on January 29, 2012 at 5:31 PM

The arguments between Romney and Gingrich supporters are comical and tragic. Arguing about which is the most conservative strikes me as akin to a competition for the world’s tallest midget (little person).
They both supported TARP, the individual mandate, and cap and trade. Gingrich proudly endorsed Medicare Part D in the last debate and Romney supported the stimulus.
All of these programs form 90%+ of the issues that caused the tea party to form, especially Obamacare. Neither one of these candidates is a tea partier at heart. BOTH of them are establishment and people that argue that one or the other is the “establishment” candidate are deluding themselves.
iwasbornwithit on January 29, 2012 at 5:26 PM

But it’s so much fun blaming an other-worldly, phantom “establishment” (i.e. everyone who criticizes whomever your guy may be).

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:31 PM

If Romney, (You know, the Democrat who is impersonating a conservative Republican) wins, It will be Mourning In America and the US Constitution will remain in the ditch into which it has been kicked.

Go Newt and Cuda!

Landon Thompson on January 29, 2012 at 5:31 PM

kingsjester on January 29, 2012 at 5:29 PM

I never even considered this – is Jailbreak really the Wall?

massrighty on January 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM

massrighty on January 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Yep..Portlandon compared past posts. Same style. Same maniacal laugh. Same Troll.

kingsjester on January 29, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Obama = Punishment for America

Romney = Punishment for America

/They. Must. Punish. America. The Ink is Black the Page is White………. Together we learn to read and write.

Key West Reader on January 29, 2012 at 5:34 PM

It looks like we’re going to be saddled with yet another RINO this time around. We may as well re-elect Obama. At least then, “we the sheeple” might actually vote for a conservative in ’16. Better we get an opportunity to get Rubio or Jindal in than Romney. Apparently, the people of this country haven’t suffered enough yet.

cajunpatriot on January 29, 2012 at 5:36 PM

Our perfect storm this year is a drip named Romney.

fogw on January 29, 2012 at 5:37 PM

It wasn’t until he left office that it really sank in what a marvelous president he had been.

turfmann on January 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Yup. I was guilty of “you don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone” thinking, too.

Fallon on January 29, 2012 at 5:41 PM

I hate to sound like David Brooks, but maybe it is time to move on from the time of Reagan. Every election, a bunch of RINOs get together and squabble over which of them deserves the Reagan mantle. Reagan wouldn’t be impressed. And more importantly, it does nothing to cut the enormous government growth (both before and after Reagan).

MeatHeadinCA on January 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Bill Clinton and Re-rend Wright

/Raw video

Key West Reader on January 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM

I had just turned 10 when Reagan took office and had just turned 18 when I cast my first vote to help pick his successor. During the Regan-era I went from a Child to a young woman. Though I was lucky to be raised by opinionated, conservative parents-I really wasn’t paying much attention to politics during much of the Reagan presidency. Like many teenagers, I was in my own little self-absorbed world. One thing I was aware of was that America was a great place under Reagan. It was a glorious time to come of age. It wasn’t perfect(SS cemetary, Iran contra, Beirut USMC bombing, ‘Soviets are gonna blow us up’…etc.-but all in all it was a grande time. I was watching live when RR said ‘Mr. Gorbachev, Tear down this wall!’. I got the chills when I heard that. I started to think that JUST MAYBE that far away fixture of my childhood and adolescence might just come down. So it did-less than a year after Reagan left office.
My senior year in high school I decided that I didn’t agree with the ‘crazy old man’ in the WH-and couldn’t understand why my parents were supporting a blithering idiot. I became a future liberal democratic voter. i lasted a whole moth-mainly because I knew what I stood for…and that ‘stand’ wasn’t on the left.
I don’t cry much-but when Reagan died I sobbed like the little girl that I had been when he took office.
Spawn was born during Clinton’s first term. In November, he’ll cast his first vote-hoping that his small effort will help us get a leader who will start this nation on the road to greatness again.
In November of 1988, when I cast MY first vote…I didn’t have to worry as much about the state of our Nation. Thanks to an Illinois boy named Ronald Wilson Reagan and his policies…this nation was ALREADY Great!

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Every election, a bunch of RINOs get together and squabble over which of them deserves the Reagan mantle. Reagan wouldn’t be impressed.
MeatHeadinCA on January 29, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Yup. Reagan was his own man, I suspect he would be pleased with a candidate who is likewise.

whatcat on January 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Nicely said, kid.

kingsjester on January 29, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Like many teenagers, I was in my own little self-absorbed world.

You still are but then you are amusing, occasionally.

CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:51 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Nicely said, kid.

kingsjester on January 29, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Ditto.

Some here cannot grasp what the shadow of the USSR was like.

Or the malaise of the Carter years.

INC on January 29, 2012 at 5:51 PM

So does Sarah back amnesty now also?

Swerve22 on January 29, 2012 at 5:51 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Nicely said, kid.

kingsjester on January 29, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Ditto.

Some here cannot grasp what the shadow of the USSR was like.

Or the malaise of the Carter years.

INC on January 29, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Thank you both.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:53 PM

None of these candidates are Reagan. But there is one with a history of supporting Reagan and one who did not. The governor lied about Fred Thompson, he lied about Rudy, he lied about Mike Huckabee and McCain. While he was ahead, he ran a clean campaign but once he fell behind he lied about Gingrich and I would not be shocked if he was the money behind the women who came out against Cain. Romney is a liar and a dirty campaigner against those of his own party. I simply will not vote for this man under any conditions.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on January 29, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Romney’s tactics are the same he used at Mountain Meadows.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on January 29, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Hardcore conservatives will either stay away in huge numbers or vote for anyone but those two.

PierreLegrand on January 29, 2012 at 4:51 PM

It’s true that there are “stay-at-homers” for every election, but many Republicans specifically said in 2008 that they were going to stay home “to teach the Party a lesson”.

Their selfishness (and stupidity) has already resulted not only in the worst President in US History, but a babbling 5-time Draft Dodger Vice President, the most corrupt Attorney General in American history, and two Far Left Supreme Court Justices. If O’bama gets 2 or 3 more SCOTUS Justices, it’s all over.

Only an idiot would consciously ask for more of the same.

Del Dolemonte on January 29, 2012 at 5:55 PM

I simply will not vote for this man under any conditions.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on January 29, 2012 at 5:53 PM

So you’ll vote for Zero?

Thank you for sharing.

CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:55 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Nice story there, thanks for telling it.

JPeterman on January 29, 2012 at 5:56 PM

CorporatePiggy on January 29, 2012 at 5:55 PM

ABO except for Paul.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM

Nice story there, thanks for telling it.

JPeterman on January 29, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Sorry. Brevity ain’t my strong suit. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Romney’s tactics are the same he used at Mountain Meadows.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on January 29, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Gee, I didn’t know that Mitt was around for the Mountain Meadow Massacre. That would make Mitt 155 years old.

He’s aged well.

JPeterman on January 29, 2012 at 5:59 PM

JPeterman on January 29, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Good one!

annoyinglittletwerp on January 29, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2