GOP to resolve that Reagan does not deserve support

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Proposed RNC Resolution on Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed that the Republican Party should support and espouse conservative principles and public policies; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan also believed the Republican Party should welcome those with diverse views; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed, as a result, that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent;

1. We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;
2. We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;
3. We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
4. We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
5. We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
6. We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
7. We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
8. We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
9. We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing, denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
10. We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee

Well, Reagan did actually grow government spending and the debt, he not only supported by signed into law an amnesty of illegal immigrants, he tranferred arms to Iran despite the arms embargo (odd way of containment), he was much more tolerant of gays and lesbians than the GOP would appear to remember ("Intolerance and hatred is not Reaganism. If he was around today, and had two gay friends out in Hollywood who decided to get married, Reagan would probably shake his head, and maybe crack a joke at their expense, but he might just send them a wedding present."), he also publicly opposed the Briggs Initiative in 1978 while preparing his run for President.

So, let's see how Ronald Reagan fares on Ronald Reagan's principles:

Government spending and debt? Nope.

Amnest for Illegal immigrants? Nope.

Containing Iran? Nope.

Intolerance for homosexuals? Not Ronnie.

Sorry, Gipper, you fail the test 4 out of 10. The GOP won't have no part of you. Well, no part other than your name under which the GOP tries to narrow it's appeal. Something you would indeed not have done.

[SMR 368]

Proposed RNC Resolution on Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed that the Republican Party should support and espouse conservative principles and public policies; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan also believed the Republican Party should welcome those with diverse views; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed, as a result, that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent;

1. We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;
2. We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;
3. We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
4. We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
5. We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
6. We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
7. We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
8. We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
9. We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing, denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
10. We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee

Well, Reagan did actually grow government spending and the debt, he not only supported by signed into law an amnesty of illegal immigrants, he tranferred arms to Iran despite the arms embargo (odd way of containment), he was much more tolerant of gays and lesbians than the GOP would appear to remember ("Intolerance and hatred is not Reaganism. If he was around today, and had two gay friends out in Hollywood who decided to get married, Reagan would probably shake his head, and maybe crack a joke at their expense, but he might just send them a wedding present."), he also publicly opposed the Briggs Initiative in 1978 while preparing his run for President.

So, let's see how Ronald Reagan fares on Ronald Reagan's principles:

Government spending and debt? Nope.

Amnest for Illegal immigrants? Nope.

Containing Iran? Nope.

Intolerance for homosexuals? Not Ronnie.

Sorry, Gipper, you fail the test 4 out of 10. The GOP won't have no part of you. Well, no part other than your name under which the GOP tries to narrow it's appeal. Something you would indeed not have done.

You're definitely putting words into Ronald Reagan's mouth. The bit about homosexuals is pure speculation. We don't know what he would do. Additionally, defending marriage as between a man and a woman is not intolerance.

On the budget and immigration, I think you have to realize there is a difference between what the man believed and what reality dictated had to be done based on having a Democratic congress and compromises that have to be made. If you asked Reagan, he would tell you he supported smaller government, as he said many times.

The point on Iran is completely intellectually dishonest simply because the Middle Eastern situation was very different 30 years ago, when Reagan was elected. Nuclear weapons for Iran weren't on the table and the balance of power was different. It's like saying that FDR disagrees with modern Democrats because he thought that we should have a war with Germany and Japan. It was a completely different situation. Since Reagan isn't here to give his opinion on modern foreign policy, I don't think we should make assumptions.

Edited November 24, 2009 by SMR

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You're definitely putting words into Ronald Reagan's mouth. The bit about homosexuals is pure speculation. We don't know what he would do. Additionally, defending marriage as between a man and a woman is not intolerance.

On the budget and immigration, I think you have to realize there is a difference between what the man believed and what reality dictated had to be done based on having a Democratic congress and compromises that have to be made. If you asked Reagan, he would tell you he supported smaller government, as he said many times.

The point on Iran is completely intellectually dishonest simply because the Middle Eastern situation was very different 30 years ago, when Reagan was elected. Nuclear weapons for Iran weren't on the table and the balance of power was different. It's like saying that FDR disagrees with modern Democrats because he thought that we should have a war with Germany and Japan. It was a completely different situation. Since Reagan isn't here to give his opinion on modern foreign policy, I don't think we should make assumptions.

Take the same sex marriage out (albeit using your argument of different times coupling that with Reagan's rather progressive and tolerant stance on the issue of homosexuals in those days might lead one to believe that Reagan might not be a supporter of gay marriage but he certainly wouldn't have spent a lot of energy and capital on defeating any such measure) and Reagan still fails the 80% test. Despite what he believed and said, the scorecard on small government and debt reduction is in and Reagan doesn't meet the test. Neither does he meet the test on illegal immigration. Wiggle all you want but the test isn't met. As for Iran, did an arms embargo exist at the time that Reagan transferred arms to that country? Did that arms embargo exist in a vacuum or because it was the policy of the US to contain that country? Is breaking the embargo how containment works?

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Proposed RNC Resolution on Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed that the Republican Party should support and espouse conservative principles and public policies; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan also believed the Republican Party should welcome those with diverse views; and

WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed, as a result, that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent;

1. We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;
2. We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;
3. We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
4. We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
5. We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
6. We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
7. We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
8. We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
9. We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing, denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
10. We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee

Well, Reagan did actually grow government spending and the debt, he not only supported by signed into law an amnesty of illegal immigrants, he tranferred arms to Iran despite the arms embargo (odd way of containment), he was much more tolerant of gays and lesbians than the GOP would appear to remember ("Intolerance and hatred is not Reaganism. If he was around today, and had two gay friends out in Hollywood who decided to get married, Reagan would probably shake his head, and maybe crack a joke at their expense, but he might just send them a wedding present."), he also publicly opposed the Briggs Initiative in 1978 while preparing his run for President.

So, let's see how Ronald Reagan fares on Ronald Reagan's principles:

Government spending and debt? Nope.

Amnest for Illegal immigrants? Nope.

Containing Iran? Nope.

Intolerance for homosexuals? Not Ronnie.

Sorry, Gipper, you fail the test 4 out of 10. The GOP won't have no part of you. Well, no part other than your name under which the GOP tries to narrow it's appeal. Something you would indeed not have done.

On immigration--well, it is DUE TO Reagan's 1986 scamnesty and its ongoing side-aftereffects that there is a need for fora like the several on VJ!

[HAL 9000 96]

Mention the Gipper and how hypocritical the GOP has become as of late and you get all kinds of interesting, reactive analysis ey Reinhard?

[Saddle Bronc 124]

You're definitely putting words into Ronald Reagan's mouth. The bit about homosexuals is pure speculation. We don't know what he would do. Additionally, defending marriage as between a man and a woman is not intolerance.

On the budget and immigration, I think you have to realize there is a difference between what the man believed and what reality dictated had to be done based on having a Democratic congress and compromises that have to be made. If you asked Reagan, he would tell you he supported smaller government, as he said many times.

The point on Iran is completely intellectually dishonest simply because the Middle Eastern situation was very different 30 years ago, when Reagan was elected. Nuclear weapons for Iran weren't on the table and the balance of power was different. It's like saying that FDR disagrees with modern Democrats because he thought that we should have a war with Germany and Japan. It was a completely different situation. Since Reagan isn't here to give his opinion on modern foreign policy, I don't think we should make assumptions.

Take the same sex marriage out (albeit using your argument of different times coupling that with Reagan's rather progressive and tolerant stance on the issue of homosexuals in those days might lead one to believe that Reagan might not be a supporter of gay marriage but he certainly wouldn't have spent a lot of energy and capital on defeating any such measure) and Reagan still fails the 80% test. Despite what he believed and said, the scorecard on small government and debt reduction is in and Reagan doesn't meet the test. Neither does he meet the test on illegal immigration. Wiggle all you want but the test isn't met. As for Iran, did an arms embargo exist at the time that Reagan transferred arms to that country? Did that arms embargo exist in a vacuum or because it was the policy of the US to contain that country? Is breaking the embargo how containment works?

BTW, addenda:

3. We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

he could have done this in 1982, by supporting offshore drilling @ home during so-called "oil-glut"--that oil would have all been domestically-produced, reducing import-bill and its contribution to deficit (can't say "would reduce deficit" as other factors could-and-would have grown)

6. We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

7. We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

last I checked, both of these goals would require growth in a portion of government, and would seem to be at odds with smaller-government goal (but in keeping with Ronnie, who didn't reduce overall government anyway)

8. We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

Does it not sound hypocritical to dedicate this to a man who may have committed adultery, and definitely DID divorce?

Seems on sum that Ronnie comes up with 2/10 rather than 6/10 described in article.

[SMR 368]

You're definitely putting words into Ronald Reagan's mouth. The bit about homosexuals is pure speculation. We don't know what he would do. Additionally, defending marriage as between a man and a woman is not intolerance.

On the budget and immigration, I think you have to realize there is a difference between what the man believed and what reality dictated had to be done based on having a Democratic congress and compromises that have to be made. If you asked Reagan, he would tell you he supported smaller government, as he said many times.

The point on Iran is completely intellectually dishonest simply because the Middle Eastern situation was very different 30 years ago, when Reagan was elected. Nuclear weapons for Iran weren't on the table and the balance of power was different. It's like saying that FDR disagrees with modern Democrats because he thought that we should have a war with Germany and Japan. It was a completely different situation. Since Reagan isn't here to give his opinion on modern foreign policy, I don't think we should make assumptions.

Take the same sex marriage out (albeit using your argument of different times coupling that with Reagan's rather progressive and tolerant stance on the issue of homosexuals in those days might lead one to believe that Reagan might not be a supporter of gay marriage but he certainly wouldn't have spent a lot of energy and capital on defeating any such measure) and Reagan still fails the 80% test. Despite what he believed and said, the scorecard on small government and debt reduction is in and Reagan doesn't meet the test. Neither does he meet the test on illegal immigration. Wiggle all you want but the test isn't met. As for Iran, did an arms embargo exist at the time that Reagan transferred arms to that country? Did that arms embargo exist in a vacuum or because it was the policy of the US to contain that country? Is breaking the embargo how containment works?

Actually, the test is based on what the candidates believe and considering Congress writes the budget and immigration bills, it's unfair to judge a president based on legislation. Yes, he signs the legislation, but he has to accept a budget and maybe it was the best he was going to get. Arguing that Reagan was for big government is laughable and absurd. On immigration, I am not sure of his stance, but that is 1/10.

And on Iran, you are still comparing apples to oranges. The point is, the Iran situation is different today than it was then. The current Iranian President was elected in 2005. Atomic weapons have been on the table only in this decade. Saddam Hussein lost power (if you don't know why this makes a difference in Iran, you don't understand the Middle East). The country has different leaders, different capabilities, and there is a different balance of power among it's neighbors. Iran is just a name. It's a different country from a foreign policy standpoint today than it was 30 years ago. To assume that Reagan would have the same policy stance is presumptuous, insulting to his intelligence, and, moreover, ridiculous.

[SMR 368]

BTW, addenda:

3. We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

he could have done this in 1982, by supporting offshore drilling @ home during so-called "oil-glut"--that oil would have all been domestically-produced, reducing import-bill and its contribution to deficit (can't say "would reduce deficit" as other factors could-and-would have grown)

6. We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

7. We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

last I checked, both of these goals would require growth in a portion of government, and would seem to be at odds with smaller-government goal (but in keeping with Ronnie, who didn't reduce overall government anyway)

8. We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

Does it not sound hypocritical to dedicate this to a man who may have committed adultery, and definitely DID divorce?

Seems on sum that Ronnie comes up with 2/10 rather than 6/10 described in article.

3. You seem to misunderstand market-based reform. It means that that government doesn't drive it. As President, therefore, Reagan could not have done something to cause market-based reform. Also, in the current political climate, this point is about opposition to cap-and-trade. I think there is little evidence to say that Reagan would support cap-and-trade.

6. Reagan didn't preside over a war in Iraq or Afghanistan so anything you could have put here would be irrelevant. Good thing you didn't even try to make a point. (although I think Reagan would have listened to his commanders on the ground. At the very least, he wouldn't have deliberated for 13 weeks while soldiers are dying).

7. Conservatives have always supported smaller government and bigger military. This is a whole other debate that would be very tangential, but I don't understand why you think this means that Reagan would disagree with point 7. In any case, Reagan didn't face a similar situation and since he isn't here so you can ask him, get a Ouiji board or stop claiming to know what he would say. On second thought, I don't believe in Ouiji boards so disregard that part.

8. Nice try. Reagan is quoted to have said that his biggest regret was the failure of his first marriage. After so many years, that was his biggest regret. Sounds like he valued marriage. What's hypocritical about a man who made a mistake, admits it, and doesn't want others to make that mistake?

Edited November 24, 2009 by SMR

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Mention the Gipper and how hypocritical the GOP has become as of late and you get all kinds of interesting, reactive analysis ey Reinhard?

What better figure to get a rise out of the disoriented GOP than the Gipper. He's invoked so much - especially by the vocal far right - and yet it seems they know so little about him. It's quite amusing.

[HAL 9000 96]

In-deed!

Its likely an appeal to the masses... since their far-out ideology doesn't cut it pragmatically nor under most rational scenarios on its own.

[nowhereman 1]

Mention the Gipper and how hypocritical the GOP has become as of late and you get all kinds of interesting, reactive analysis ey Reinhard?

I have said many times that Reagan was a great President, but the GOP is a shadow of its former self. Reagan was great because he made America a better country & had a lasting (positive) effect on the world (e.g. the fall of the Berlin wall & many communist nations). Modern Republicans seem more intent on bashing Democrats (and even moderate Republicans) & setting President Obama up for failure than actually doing anything to return our great nation to its former glory.

[SMR 368]

In-deed!

Its likely an appeal to the masses... since their far-out ideology doesn't cut it pragmatically nor under most rational scenarios on its own.

Good job patting yourself on the back while ignoring the fact that the original post is a crock of baseless assumptions.

[HAL 9000 96]

Mention the Gipper and how hypocritical the GOP has become as of late and you get all kinds of interesting, reactive analysis ey Reinhard?

I have said many times that Reagan was a great President, but the GOP is a shadow of its former self. Reagan was great because he made America a better country & had a lasting (positive) effect on the world (e.g. the fall of the Berlin wall & many communist nations). Modern Republicans seem more intent on bashing Democrats (and even moderate Republicans) & setting President Obama up for failure than actually doing anything to return our great nation to its former glory.

Exactly. If they're not extremists like themselves, they're not worthy of being considered Republicans. How messed up does a Party have to get with such extremism before 'the masses' realize they're being duped into either turning their party into a symbol of such extremism or (likely better given the previous scenario) losing the party to further fragmentation?

Reagan was known by many names, one of them being a Pragmatic Conservative. That should speak a volume unto itself.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Republican Purity Test...