Dear Conservative Presidential Candidates and Voters: Don't Believe the Polls...See Reagan, Ronald

Folks, many of us in the conservative movement may be feeling a bit low right now. Many of us may have seen the latest Rasmussen Reports sahttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifying that a conservative stalwart like Sarah Palin loses to Obama 50 to 33, or that or that Perry loses to Obama by a point or two, or that Bachmann faces a similar result as Palin. Don't believe the polls right now. The media is trumpeting them to discourage you. They are trying to tear you down. Look, the field of GOP candidates is in the double digits. There haven't been any head to head debates. The media is trying, as they have in the past, to sow the seeds of doubt so we end up with a Gerald Ford or John McCain again. Don't believe it. Look to history. Time Magazine, March, 11, 1980:

For several decades, it has been an article of faith among politicians and political analysts that no candidate can win a U.S. presidential election unless he can dominate the broad center of the spectrum, that all candidates on the edges of the left or right are doomed. Barry Goldwater's "extremism . . . is no vice" campaign of 1964 provides the classic evidence, reinforced by George McGovern's 1972 defeat in 49 out of 50 states. And since G.O.P. Front Runner Ronald Reagan relies upon a base of support that is on the far right wing of the Republican Party, some experts have long declared that if he wins the nomination, the G.O.P. would simply be repeating the suicidal Goldwater campaign. Ex-President Gerald Ford left no doubt about his views when he warned last month: "A very conservative Republican cannot win in a national election."

But last week, after Ford gave up his own ambitions and Reagan's nomination took on a look of inevitability, a reassessment was under way across the country. The consensus was that although many hazards lie ahead, Ronald Reagan indeed has a chance to be elected as the 40th President of the U.S.

National opinion polls continue to show Carter leading Reagan by an apparently comfortable margin of about 25%. They also show that more moderate Republicans like Ford would run better against the President. This suggests that Reagan is not the strongest G.O.P. choice for the November election and that he clearly faces an uphill battle.

See that, folks? This is just 8 months before election day, not over a year. And Reagan was down 25 points to Carter. There had been no debates yet. There had been no flurry of campaign ads. Continuing with the Time Article:

As recently as last month, before Reagan's New Hampshire victory, White House advisers looked forward with relish to the possibility of Reagan as their target. No longer. Says one Georgian: "People like what Reagan's saying about the economy, about foreign policy. He's offering simple solutions and that's what people want." Adds another White House aide: "To dismiss Ronald Reagan as a right-wing nut would be a very serious error—for us or anybody else."

California Pollster Mervin Field, who just last fall felt that Reagan's nomination would lead to a Republican disaster, has changed his mind. Says Field: "I just don't see how you could dispassionately and factually argue that it will be a Carter victory. It's going to be a very close race."

Unlike the situation in 1964, when Democratic Incumbent Lyndon Johnson was still very popular, Reagan confronts a Democratic President who, after a temporary surge in the national polls because of the crises in Iran and Afghanistan, is now plagued by declining job ratings. The odds are that by fall, Carter will be trying to defend his management of an economy with double-digit inflation and rising unemployment, gasoline prices of upwards of $2 per gal. and a reduced budget that offends many of the traditional Democratic-constituencies.

Sound familiar? Doesn't that sound like where we are now? Therefore, don't lose heart. Don't believe the Karl Rove/Bill Kristol/Dick Morris nonsense. A real conservative can win. People want simple answers because there really are some simple, but perhaps difficult to stomach for some, solutions. Don't believe that we have to pick a squish like Huntsman or a chameleon like Romney to win. We have seen that before and failed. Don't lose heart.

Conservative candidates, you need to be able to articulate the message that this is just not an economic crisis, but a crisis of the American spirit. That the American spirit itself, the spirit of entrepeneurship, innovation, and pride is being hampered by an out of control government. You need to be able to articulate that America is and can maintain being the best nation in the world. Articulate the problem, but present positive solutions. For, we know, despite the efforts of Time and others, that it IS POSSIBLE. Reagan did win. And people will go for truth over a shell game every time. Check out this last excerpt from the TIME piece:

Yankelovich believes that the American electorate has already shown a predisposition to replace Carter. This was manifested in the early eagerness for a Kennedy candidacy, which proved so disappointing when it became a reality. The brief bubbling of support for a Ford candidacy was part of the same feeling. If popular unhappiness with domestic and world problems finally comes to rest at Carter's doorstep, voters may begin to see all sorts of previously invisible virtues in Ronald Reagan.

Not only does Reagan face a weakened President, he also presents a less frightening prospect than the apparently more reckless Goldwater. Says TIME Washington Bureau Chief Robert Ajemian: "To many people, Reagan is reassuring, almost parental. He is too fatalistic and too modest to be a crusader."

So far in this campaign, Reagan has done little to damage that image. Says Florida National Committeewoman Paula Hawkins, a John Connally supporter: "He has been dignified, professional under stress. He responds well when he gets punched. He's gentlemanly, answers with humor and with enough acid to let you know he has heard."

There is evidence that voters other than Republican archconservatives are beginning to support Reagan. In last week's Illinois primary, according to one poll, 40% of the Republican vote was cast by Democratic and Independent crossovers, and roughly 30% of these went to Reagan.

Just as the Republican Party is closer to Reagan's point of view than it was eight or even four years ago, the country as a whole has moved right. Reagan's reach for the center will be shorter now than before. Says Pollster Yankelovich: "Reagan should not assume this is a mandate to define a right-wing program for the country. Rather it is a chance to define a new policy for the center."

But to say that Reagan can be elected is by no means to say that he will be. On the contrary, he looks very much the underdog. Some party operatives are plainly unhappy with his selection. In Massachusetts, where both Bush and Anderson defeated Reagan, party leaders are not yet reconciled to the Reagan candidacy. Says one: "There's a vacuum of leadership at the national level; and what appears to be the Republican Party's response? A 69-year-old man who has done virtually nothing for years. We're at the same stage the Whigs were. There's no choice."

Don't believe those like Rove, who had no relationship to Reagan during the revolution, or the others who now hold up Reagan but then snubbed him. They were wrong and he was right. Read the whole article and use it as inspiration. We don't have to settle, folks. As Mr. Reagan himself said, we have it in our power to begin the world over again, a line from Paine's Common Sense that applied to Paine, to Reagan, and to us now.

So, Bachmann, you have a shot. Perry, so do you. Palin, as much as they want to destroy you, you too can still win. Find that determined but positive message and stay true to those principles. It can be done. It has been done. It needs to be done again. We cannot survive another Obama term.

A Tale of Two Presidents, One Great, the Other Crap

Yes, another Reagan vs. Obama story. Why? Because the truth needs to get out that this recovery is bogus and Obama is the worst president since Jimmy Carter. From Investors Business Daily, which has charts and graphs and thingies:

It's been nearly two full years since the recession officially ended, and the economy is still struggling to get off the ground. It didn't have to be this way.

When the Commerce Department released its estimate for first-quarter growth — a meager 1.8% — President Obama's chief economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, at least conceded that "faster growth is needed to replace the jobs lost in the downturn."

Wow, Austan, you must have gotten a gold star in Obvious in school! But, back to the article:

Compare the two worst post-World War II recessions. Both the 1981-82 and the 2007-09 downturns were long (16 months and 18 months, respectively) and painful (unemployment peaked at 10.8% in 1981-82 and 10.1% in the last one).

What's dramatically different, however, is how each president responded.

Obama massively increased spending, vastly expanded the regulatory state, and pushed through a government takeover of health care. What's more, he constantly browbeats industry leaders, talks about the failings of the marketplace and endlessly advocates higher taxes on the most productive parts of the economy.

In contrast, Reagan pushed spending restraint, deregulated entire industries, massively cut taxes and waxed poetic about the wonders of a free economy.

The result? While the Reagan recovery saw turbocharged growth and a tumbling unemployment rate, Obama's has produced neither. Consider:

• GDP. In the seven quarters after the 1981-82 recession ended, the economy cranked out quarterly growth rates that averaged 7.1%. Under Obama, GDP growth has averaged a mere 2.8%. (See chart at right.)

• Unemployment. Under Reagan, the unemployment rate had fallen to 7.5% by this point in the recovery. Under Obama, it's still stuck at 8.8%.

• Long-term unemployment. There were far fewer long-term unemployed by this point in the Reagan recovery; just 18% of the unemployed had been without a job 27 weeks or more. Under Obama, that figure is an astonishing 45%.

• Consumer confidence. By this point in the Reagan recovery, the Conference Board's Consumer Confidence Index had hit 100. Today, the index stands at just 65.4.

• Deficits. Under Reagan, the federal deficit was trimmed to 4.8% of GDP by 1984. Under Obama, the deficit is expected to climb to 10.9% of GDP this year.

Obama and his defenders like to say he inherited the worst downturn since the Great Depression and that things would have been worse still had he not acted. But the recession was almost over by the time he took office — and officially over just six months after that.

So while Obama's policies had little to do with bringing an end to the Great Recession, they've had everything to do with producing what is by far the worst economic recovery in the past 70 years.

Reagan understood Economics 101. But of course, he didn't go to an Ivy League school like Obama did. But remember, so too did GW Bush, HWBush, and Clinton. And remember, Bubba had to have help from an Ohio State graduate balancing the budget to get his recovery going....So maybe the Ivy League doesn't know economics. Just sayin.

Bottom line: Reagan was competent and exceptional. The only thing about obama that could be exceptional is his own ignorance and faith in a failed economic outlook.

WMDtv: Reagan Tribute Show -- Opening

I'll have the full episode available "soon" but wanted to post this clip from the old cable access show (Dayton, OH market) right away...

Rep. Latta Introduces Ronald Reagan Commemorative Coin Act

Release:

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Bob Latta (R-Bowling Green) recently introduced H.R. 497, the Ronald Reagan Commemorative Coin Act, which would instruct the U.S. Treasury to mint coins in honor of the life of the 40th U.S. President, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Under this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury would mint $5 gold coins and $1 silver coins to commemorate President Reagan. The coins would be minted at no cost to the federal government, and proceeds would support Army Emergency Relief (AER), which provides assistance to active and retired soldiers.
Through his service in the Army Air Force during World War II, Ronald Reagan acted and assisted in the production of more than 400 training films. Proceeds from one of his films titled “In the Army” went to AER. Over its years in existence, AER has aided over 3 million soldiers and their families in states of financial emergency, and the Ronald Reagan Commemorative Coin Act will further support the cause of this organization. Congressman Latta made the following statement after introducing H.R. 497:
“As we reflect on the life of the 40th President of the United States upon what would be his 100th birthday, the Ronald Reagan Commemorative Coin Act is a fitting way to honor this great individual. If passed, this Act would also help retired and active members of our Armed Forces, through a cause that Ronald Reagan himself believed in and supported.”
H.R. 497 has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. Introduction of the Ronald Reagan Commemorative Coin Act runs simultaneously with national events observing the 100th birthday of former President Ronald Reagan.

What Was That About the Era of Reagan Being Over?

As we approach the 100th anniversary of one of America's greatest Presidents, Ronald reagan, I can't help but point out that many of our intellectual superiors have been completely wrong on their call (read "their wish") regarding the end of the Era of Reagan.  Newt Gingrich, of all people, tried to say it was over.  He was wrong.

But isn't interesting how, for the most part, it is "leaders" on the right who try to claim the end of Reagan's influence?  On the left, we see President Barack Obama trying his hardest to cloak himself in Reagan's aura.  Also note that to do so, lefties have been twisting history to reflect their views.

Commentators have been quick to say how much Obama is like Reagan because he is appearing to shift to the middle in his tone and rhetoric.  The problem with this analysis is that very few people actually believe Obama means what he says.  Democrats have failed to heed Obama's call for a "new tone" and while some will point to the "Date Night" at the State of the Union, we have already heard from Democrats that that was nothing more than a one night stand.

Reagan would have hated it anyway.
What the liberals mean when they call for bi-partisanship and a change in rhetoric is that conservatives ought to just shut up.  Basically, the left got a severe butt-kicking in that last election and now they need time to recover.  I can't help but think of Yassir Arafat who would do the same thing.  The PLO Chairman would ramp up hostilities and some faction would attack Israel, but Arafat would play the Victim Card when Israel retaliated after Palestinian aggression.

America has real problems and we deserve to have a real debate about the direction our country has been taken.  This isn't the time for political correctness.  Our political elites have been kicking the can down the road and now we've reached the dead end.  We should be talking about a Constitutional Amendment that requires a balanced budget.  We ought to be having a conversation about eliminating ineffective government programs and consolodating redundant ones.  We could be chatting about reducing spending to levels that are manageable with the resources we have available.  Government is not the solution.  Government is the problem.  Ronald Reagan said that...  He was right then and he is right now.

Reagan v. Reagan: I Stand with Mike, Ron Jr. Got Facts Wrong

Well, to paraphrase the Great Communicator, "there you go again." Ron Reagan, Jr., indeed, has been a horrible keeper of the Reagan flame and has done almost everything in his power to embarrass his father. Even in death, Ron has to try to make his father to be a senile president, with accusations in his latest book, brought out this year to make money on his father's legacy since this would have been President Reagan's 100th birthday. Check out this video where the truth finally catches up to Ron and he realizes he got facts wrong, kind of like his entire life.

Ron makes charges about his father's last term and Reagan not being "with it." Gee, let's see: we had Soviet negotiations, we had Iran-Contra, we had all sorts of fires needing to be put out. On the day he "observed" his father, maybe President Reagan was tired. It is disgusting that Ron Jr. has made nothing of his life except being a caster of stones on the enduring legacy of Ronald W. Reagan, 40th President. Isn't it something that the son who has no Reagan DNA, Michael, is the most like his father. Says something about nature vs. nurture.

A Real Patriot and American President Commemorating D-Day

God bless those who charged up those beaches and parachuted into the fire.....



And to those noble boys at Ponte du Hoc....

Boehner on Reagan Statue Dedication

Remarks:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) delivered the following remarks at the ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda today dedicating the new statue of President Ronald Reagan:

“Mrs. Reagan, Madame Speaker, Honored guests, let me first say thanks to the California Delegation, especially Jerry Lewis and Ken Calvert, for all their efforts in making this day possible.

“On October 27, 1964 Ronald Reagan gave a nationally televised address supporting Barry Goldwater, the Republican nominee for President. And while Goldwater was later defeated by Lyndon Johnson, many Americans watching that day immediately sensed Reagan would one day become President.

“The title of Reagan’s speech was ‘A Time for Choosing.’ In it, Reagan crystallized the choices for voters: would people vote for self-government, or would they submit to being ruled by elites in far-distant capitol. Reagan’s poke at domestic social engineers was accompanied by a vigorous defense of American’s greatness abroad. He reminded Americans that they have a ‘rendezvous with destiny.’

“As California governor in the sixties and seventies, Ronald Reagan proved over and over he had the mind of a committed conservative and the temperament of an extraordinary leader. As President, Reagan displayed his unmistakable skill in communicating a vision of American exceptionalism.

“But it wasn’t just vision that moved people his way, it was also his tone. He was always quick with a smile or a self-deprecating joke. He once said ‘I have left orders to be awakened in case of a national emergency – even if I’m in a Cabinet meeting.’ He clearly had the pulse – and the respect – of the average American.

“Ronald Reagan developed an alliance with Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II. These three gifted individuals lead the West out of what the author John O’Sullivan has called ‘The Nightmare Years’ of the late 1970s. Together they literally changed the world for the better.

“Today we honor President Reagan’s lifetime of achievement and we honor his legacy of economic and political freedom. Early in his Presidency, he fought to enact a set of tax cuts authored in part by a fellow conservative who would have been honored to be here today – Jack Kemp. The tax cuts President Reagan enacted dropped rates that were as high as 70 percent. This allowed entrepreneurs to build, expand, and create jobs.

“Reagan’s economic policies inspired the largest peacetime expansion in U.S. history. This growth was predicated on free trade, low taxes, deregulation, and curbing runaway inflation. I recently had the privilege of touring the Reagan Ranch near Santa Barbara. One of the best things I saw was the table used to sign the Kemp-Roth tax cuts. The free market policies set in motion on that very table were responsible for creating an estimated 35 million jobs through 1999.

“And this is another part of Reagan’s legacy. This little piece of rock is from the Berlin Wall. Those walls came down because of Ronald Reagan’s relentless commitment to freedom and his insistence on an American victory in the Cold War. He was unafraid to say what the Soviets actually were, the ‘Evil Empire.’

“Reagan rejected the moral relativism of his day that was blind to the distinction of tyranny and freedom. Ronald Reagan saw America as a city on a hill, set apart by a God who intended us to be free. In his first inaugural address, he said ‘Freedom and the dignity of the individual have been more available and assured here than in any other place on Earth.’ Three years later, commemorating the fallen warriors at Omaha Beach, Reagan said ‘We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we may always be free.’

“Today, our freedom is defended by a 1,092 foot-long aircraft carrier. The 5,500 sailors of the USS Ronald Reagan hail from every state and every continent. Their motto is ‘Peace Through Strength.’

“Ronald Reagan’s legacy is intact and I’m confident will be for generations to come. If you study the man and his times, you’ll see the rhythm of life described by Shakespeare: ‘All the world’s a stage and all the men and women merely players; … And one man in his time plays many parts.’

“Ronald Reagan played his parts brilliantly. With words and with deeds he inspired his countrymen to great heights and provided a clear vision for his generation. We are honored to add his likeness to this great hall of statesmen and patriots.”

Why Didn't Reagan Respond to Beirut Bombing?

Via the Rush Limbaugh email recap:

Trick liberal Open Line Friday Question: Why didn't Reagan respond to the Beirut bombing? Answer: He sunk Iran's Navy -- in a single afternoon.

This is some forgotten history that needs to be remembered...

RELEASE: "Ronald Reagan's Voice to Hit Airwaves Again"

PR Newswire:

SIMI VALLEY, Calif., March 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Ronald Reagan's voice will soon be heard across the land again, according to plans announced today by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation.

"We are proud to announce that a series of thirty segments of Reagan's five-minute daily radio commentaries will commence airing on April 28, 2008," reports Duke Blackwood, executive director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Foundation. In that period, Ronald Reagan wrote over 1,000 radio addresses that clarified his vision for America.

Non-political in nature, the series which will be titled "Ronald Reagan Speaks for Himself," hopes to reach the several generations of Americans who never heard him speak on issues such as the economy, immigration, abortion, terrorism, taxes and more.

In one address, Reagan describes his contribution to a time capsule:

"I wrote of the problems we face here in 1976 -- The choice we face between continuing the policies of the last 40 yrs. that have led to bigger & bigger government, less & less liberty, redistribution of earnings through confiscatory taxation or trying to get back on the original course set for us by the Founding Fathers.... On the international scene two great superpowers face each other with nuclear missiles at the ready -- poised to bring Armageddon to the world."

"Radio was one of Ronnie's first loves," said former First Lady Nancy Reagan. "The radio addresses became such an important part of his life. When he became president, he continued with them every Saturday. I'm pleased Americans will have a chance to hear a selection of these important commentaries."

Harry O'Connor, who originally proposed the idea of Reagan's daily radio show in 1974, will work with the Reagan Foundation to produce the new series. "Each commentary will have a brief introduction by Peter Hannaford, who served as Reagan's communication director in the '70's," said Mr. O'Connor. "This introduction will establish the connection between the radio addresses and contemporary issues."

Further details on this new program, and which radio stations will air these addresses, will be provided in the near future on http://www.reaganlibrary.com.

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan organization that sustains the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum, the Center for Public Affairs, the Presidential Learning Center and the Air Force One Pavilion. Located in Simi Valley, California, the Library houses over 55 million pages of Gubernatorial, Presidential and personal papers and over 100,000 gifts and artifacts chronicling the lives of Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Recently, the Library hosted the final debate between the Republican candidates for the presidential nomination. It now also serves as the final resting place of America's 40th President.

Having heard a few of these on CD, I can honestly say that this is a good thing for America...Ronald Reagan's views on all sorts of subjects were entertaining and thoughtful commentaries that are as topical today as they were when they first aired.

Today in History: Reagan Shot

I am reminded by the History Channel's email that today is the anniversary of the Reagan shooting. Here is how they describe the event:

On March 30, 1981, President Ronald Reagan is shot in the chest outside a Washington, D.C., hotel by a deranged drifter named John Hinckley Jr.

The president had just finished addressing a labor meeting at the Washington Hilton Hotel and was walking with his entourage to his limousine when Hinckley, standing among a group of reporters, fired six shots at the president, hitting Reagan and three of his attendants. White House Press Secretary James Brady was shot in the head and critically wounded, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy was shot in the side, and District of Columbia policeman Thomas Delahaney was shot in the neck. After firing the shots, Hinckley was overpowered and pinned against a wall, and President Reagan, apparently unaware that he'd been shot, was shoved into his limousine by a Secret Service agent and rushed to the hospital.

The president was shot in the left lung, and the .22 caliber bullet just missed his heart. In an impressive feat for a 70-year-old man with a collapsed lung, he walked into George Washington University Hospital under his own power. As he was treated and prepared for surgery, he was in good spirits and quipped to his wife, Nancy, "Honey, I forgot to duck," and to his surgeons, "Please tell me you're Republicans." Reagan's surgery lasted two hours, and he was listed in stable and good condition afterward.

The next day, the president resumed some of his executive duties and signed a piece of legislation from his hospital bed. On April 11, he returned to the White House. Reagan's popularity soared after the assassination attempt, and at the end of April he was given a hero's welcome by Congress. In August, this same Congress passed his controversial economic program, with several Democrats breaking ranks to back Reagan's plan. By this time, Reagan claimed to be fully recovered from the assassination attempt. In private, however, he would continue to feel the effects of the nearly fatal gunshot wound for years.

Of the victims of the assassination attempt, Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy and D.C. policeman Thomas Delahaney eventually recovered. James Brady, who nearly died after being shot in the eye, suffered permanent brain damage. He later became an advocate of gun control, and in 1993 Congress passed the "Brady Bill," which established a five-day waiting period and background checks for prospective gun buyers. President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law.

After being arrested on March 30, 1981, 25-year-old John Hinckley was booked on federal charges of attempting to assassinate the president. He had previously been arrested in Tennessee on weapons charges. In June 1982, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity. In the trial, Hinckley's defense attorneys argued that their client was ill with narcissistic personality disorder, citing medical evidence, and had a pathological obsession with the 1976 film Taxi Driver, in which the main character attempts to assassinate a fictional senator. His lawyers claimed that Hinckley saw the movie more than a dozen times, was obsessed with the lead actress, Jodie Foster, and had attempted to reenact the events of the film in his own life. Thus the movie, not Hinckley, they argued, was the actual planning force behind the events that occurred on March 30, 1981.

The verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity" aroused widespread public criticism, and many were shocked that a would-be presidential assassin could avoid been held accountable for his crime. However, because of his obvious threat to society, he was placed in St. Elizabeth's Hospital, a mental institution. In the late 1990s, Hinckley's attorney began arguing that his mental illness was in remission and thus had a right to return to a normal life. Beginning in August 1999, he was allowed supervised day trips off the hospital grounds and later was allowed to visit his parents once a week unsupervised. The Secret Service voluntarily monitors him during these outings. If his mental illness remains in remission, he may one day be released.

We almost lost Ronaldus Maximus that day...

TIME, a Crying Reagan, and How the Right Went Wrong

This story in TIME is something of a mixed bag. I really could do without the manipulated cover shot of Reagan shedding a tear...although, one does have to think Reagan would agree with the sentiment expressed in this paragraph:

But everything that Reagan said in 1985 about "the other side" could easily apply to the conservatives of 2007. They are handcuffed to a political party that looks unsettlingly like the Democrats did in the 1980s, one that is more a collection of interest groups than ideas, recognizable more by its campaign tactics than its philosophy. The principles that propelled the movement have either run their course, or run aground, or been abandoned by Reagan's legatees. Government is not only bigger and more expensive than it was when George W. Bush took office, but its reach is also longer, thanks to the broad new powers it has claimed as necessary to protect the homeland. It's true that Reagan didn't live up to everything he promised: he campaigned on smaller government, fiscal discipline and religious values, while his presidency brought us a larger government and a soaring deficit. But Bush's apostasies are more extravagant by just about any measure you pick.

Conservatives and their organizations have gotten intellectually lazy since the Age of Reagan. Instead of winning debates on ideas, conservative organizations seem to relish in opportunities to cut off the symbolic heads of the political enemies from our own party (yea, I'm looking at you COASTers). We have a LOT of work to do and it seems to me as if the conservative movement has lost its edge, the happy warrior that could engage in the struggle that is American culture and principles. We used to win these debates based on the merits of our arguments, now we're happy with taking it out on a cake.

There is enough to disagree with in the article. Let's take this bit, for example:

In this environment, nobody looks good if you have an R by your name. It doesn't matter who you are," says a Republican campaign consultant in the Midwest. "I don't see how that changes between now and Election Day. It's the war; it's huge. It's just huge."

I'm not buying that this is an actual Republican campaign consultant from the Midwest. It isn't the war that caused Republicans from the midwest to lose, it was the corruption. And quite frankly, any analysis that tells you differently is not to be trusted.

Again, if you're going to be the Party of Ideas, you have to have some. And then, you have to live up to the principles that you support. If you're going to take the high road on moral and social issues, you had better have a spotless record and a strong constitution for ethical behavior.

Then there is this brand of idiocy:

"Conservatives are divided on the Iraq war, but there is a growing feeling it was a mistake," says longtime conservative activist and fund-raiser Richard Viguerie. "It's not a Ronald Reagan type of idea to ride on our white horse around the world trying to save it militarily. Ronald Reagan won the cold war by bankrupting the Soviet Union. No planes flew. No tanks rolled. No armies marched."

Ah, the Pat Buchannon wing of the conservative movement gets its time in the spotlight... Republicans didn't lose because they weren't isolationists. Hey, Richard, if we stick our heads in the proverbial sand, the Islamofascist enemy that we face will hack it right off. Not to mention the fact that we are facing a global economy...if America is to continue to prosper, we must continue to engage the world.

But the right's view of McCain changed when he ran for President in 2000. What bothered conservatives wasn't just the fact that he challenged the Anointed One in a party that treats its primaries like a royal accession. It was also the glee with which he went after all its institutions, from the special interests to the theocrats to Big Business. "Remember that the Establishment is against us," he exulted after winning the New Hampshire primary. "This is an insurgency campaign, and I'm Luke Skywalker." Then again, as both Reagan and Goldwater showed, there is nothing more fundamentally conservative than an insurgency.

Ugh...this is just too much crazy talk. You get the idea, the article has its flaws.

One last thought on a related idea: conservatives are supposed to be okay with the idea that change doesn't happen overnight. It seems to me as if today's conservative movement gets too easily discouraged and ultimately prefer a loss of yardage instead of taking the ball a few yeards closer to the first down. We'll never score, if we don't move the ball forward. Barry Goldwater scolded conservatives to "get to work" and it seems as if we are about due for another such admonition.

Reagan Presidential Library to Host GOP Presidential Candidates' Debate

From PR/US Newswire:

Mrs. Ronald Reagan will invite the major GOP Presidential candidates to the Reagan Library for a presidential debate on May 3, 2007. The Library has confirmed MSNBC cable as the television partner and THE POLITICO as the internet partner for this historic event.

THE POLITICO (http://www.politico.com) will stream the debate live and provide an exclusive and unprecedented opportunity for viewers to question the candidates via the internet.

The debate will air nationally on MSNBC cable, with full coverage on http://www.MSNBC.com.

"Ronnie always hoped the Library would be a place where policy makers could debate the future," said former first lady Nancy Reagan. "This presidential debate provides the opportunity to fulfill his wishes."

This event will be the first time a Presidential Debate has been held at a Presidential Library, and a unique opportunity for web cast viewers across the country to ask questions of the candidates.

Located in Simi Valley, California, the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library (http://www.reaganlibrary.com) houses over 55 million pages of Gubernatorial, Presidential and personal papers, an extraordinary collection of photographs and film, and over 100,000 gifts and artifacts chronicling the lives of Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Home to Air Force One 27000, it now also serves as the final resting place of America's 40th President.

The Ronald Reagan Freedom Square

From AFP via Breitbart:

Opponents of Poland's former communist regime reportedly want to pay a posthumous homage to US President Ronald Reagan by erecting his statue in the place of a Soviet-era monument.
In an open letter to the mayor of the southwestern city of Katowice, the former anti-regime activists said that the staunchly anti-communist Reagan had been a "symbol of liberty," the Polish news agency PAP reported.

As a result, they said, he deserved to become the centrepiece of the city's Freedom Square, replacing a monument to the Soviet troops who drove out the occupying Nazis in 1945.

They also said that they wanted the site to be rebaptised "Ronald Reagan Freedom Square."

City hall spokesman Waldemar Bojarun said that Katowice's councillors would consider the issue.

A fitting tribute to the best president this country has had in my lifetime.