To Reagan, or Not to Reagan: GOP Split on Party Icon

“”Marginal tax rates are the lowest they’ve been in generations, and all we can talk about is tax cuts,” said McHenry, R-N.C.”
Holy cow, I have hope that the Republicans may yet have a chance to ‘get it.’ Most Americans feel that this country is the best in the world, and are willing to pay to keep it that way. Reagan came in at a time when the top tax rate was something like 70%. Now it’s 35% and the top bracket – the so called millionaire’s bracket – has been eliminated entirely. With all the cuts slanted towards the rich, the effective tax paid by a multi-million dollar earner is regularly in the range of 20%.
Get off the tax cuts and onto efficient government that isn’t all about banning abortion and fighting gay marriage and rejoin the mainstream.

Instead of Reagan, why don’t the Republicans shape their party after Lincoln? Oh wait…Lincoln wouldn’t work. He was too LIBERAL. He stood up for the rights of all people, not just for the rights of the rich.

Reagan would have a tough time even getting nominated by his own party now. He was not very religious and apparently that is a requirement. McCain took a lot of heat for that and it was not until Palin came along was the “base energized.”
Add to that Reagan won 51% of the vote in 1980. Hold that election today with current demographics and he would only get 47%.
Republicans have alienated moderates and non-whites..
Hispanics don’t usually vote Republican in presidential elections. In Reagan’s landslide in 1984, Reagan only managed to win 44 percent of Hispanics. In Texas and California caucasians will be or already are the minority. Texas will be a swing state in 2016.
It seems looking to Reagan would be a mistake.

All I remember about the 80s was that the yuppies (young upwardly mobile professionals) got rich and Reagan busted the air controllers union and AIDS was first diagnosed and Reagan built up the military by increasing the Pentagon budget. I don’t remember much else. I don’t think all boats were lifted during that time like they were during Clinton’s presidency. But then again, that time was before the boom and bust cycles caused first by dotcom businesses and then by the housing bubble.

Reagan was a social conservative, but not a fiscal conservative: he never balanced a budget in 8 years in office. As for trying to be “forward looking and relevant,” I have to laugh. How can conservatives – whose entire political philosophy is based on the nostalgic desire to return to the past – ever be “forward looking?”
Right now you have a president who is competent, and an electorate that just survived (barely) eight years of Republican/conservative incompetence. No “messaging” is going to change that. I predict Obama will win a second term, a democrat will be elected after him, and each will enjoy a solid Democratic majority in Congress. The country will prosper, our international standing will keep improving, and Rush Limbaugh will be the punchline for a lot of very very funny jokes as well as the acknowledged spokesman of a (much smaller) party of Rush clones……

Thanks Sammy…Now for the rest of them.

leftyintexas posted “Reagan was the one who started taxing social security payments. Really nice guy, huh? ” And unemployment benefits. I lost my job after 15 years, I needed unemployment to tide me over until I could find a new job, and Reagan cuts it by about 25% while giving a huge tax cut to the rich (who were NOT struggling to survive). Didn’t Reagan once say that unemployment insurance is a pre-paid vacation for freeloaders? Well Ronnie, someone who worked for 15 years is NOT a freeloader. I PAID into that system. What a total jerk he was. And to those who think he was so great, you know what YOU can kiss!

Conservative philosophy is all about being absent at the helm. They want to deregulate everything, but the problem is humans are selfish and greedy and need regulation, as our mortgage mess has shown us.
Hopefully people will be smart enough NOT to fall for whatever marketing message they try to sell and remember what damage they do.

I saw John McCain talking this morning about the need of the conservatives to be more “inclusive” and how the government needs to stay out of people’s lives. I couldn’t agree more, but actions are louder then words. How can you be inclusive and claim to stay out of peoples lives while your party’s agenda includes passing laws to restrict freedoms in matters such as abortion and same sex marriage? Especially troubling is the alignment with the Christian right, who want to make EVERYONE a conservative Christian through legislation… So much for religous freedom.
Here’s some advice for the conservatives – Drop Rush, Coulter, the rednecks, and Evangelicals… and more importantly keep your noses out of the social issues!

The conservative republican party needs to hold true to ideals such as limited gov’t. LOW tax rates (and for those squaking about tax cuts for the rich…well it is really really hard to cut anything from ZERO — The “rich” are the only ones paying taxes. The middle class pick up some and the lower income well they get back more than they pay in – its called welfare distrubution through tax “refunds”)
The reason the party is in the tank is because moderates have taken control and the true conservatives are not happy. There was not a real Republican in the 2008 race. McCain was the Democrat and BO the Socialist candidate. But people were so blinded by his skin color they couldn’t see him for what he is.
REagan understood strong national defense. He understood our greatness as a country. Reagan understood capitalism and while he wasn’t perfect he led this country (and the world) into a better place than Carter had left it.
We may not need aother Reagan, but we do need someone who believes in the greatness of this county. We need someone who inspires business men to start and grow new companies (and jobs) We do not need a president who wants to “punish” businesses for reacting to our taxes by outsources jobs. Why are they doing it in the first place? because our policies make it difficult for companies to do business and make money without having their profits siphoned off by a greedy Robinhood FEderal Gov’t who thinks they know better how our own money should be spent.

Rep. Schock’s comments seem to be right on. It’s human to get stuck on the past but things change so quickly nowadays. The young are always there first: Kennedy, the 60′s generation, etc. Reagan was impressive in his impact but can we imagine Cheney, Limbaugh or Gingrich being as effective. Some of these images are so negative. Cheney, a five time deferment specialist has the nerve to attack a true hero like Powell. It seems the kinds of things Meghan McCain is talking about is what will be necesary.