Why Reagan lives on

Posted by RonC 7 years, 11 months ago to Government
45 comments | Share | Flag

Today marks the ten year anniversary of Ronald Reagan's death. For many the faith, hope, and courage of this Past President lives on.
SOURCE URL: http://dailysignal.com/2014/06/05/reagan-lives-10-years-death/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_content=DD140605&utm_campaign=dailydigest


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 10
    Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
    I owned a struggling small business during the Carter years. I remember our President telling us the future was dim. We were being held hostage by OPEC and a flagging economy while Americans citizens were being held in captivity by Iranian terrorists. The country was reeling from one crisis to another. For those of you too young to remember those days, it was very similar to America today. During the Carter Administration the news media coined a new expression, "the Misery Index." This was the combination of inflation, unemployment, and mortgage interest rates, all in the high double digits. Malaise was what they called this brush with socialism. Yes kids, that's another similarity. Mr. Carter never observed a problem that was not best served by a bigger and more involved government.

    Then along came Ronald Reagan. Media talking heads labelled him "Bonzo", after the lead character in one of his B movies, "Bedtime for Bonzo". I believe Bonzo was a monkey, today that would be a racist thing to say. The media was never kind to conservatives. During the primaries the country club republicans labeled Reaganomics "Voodoo Economics!" The party was split, as usual. Somehow Reagan prevailed in the primaries, then mopped the floor with Carter by offering hope for a better tomorrow and a cool confidence that gained the return of the hostages from Iran on inauguration day. Freely offered on the very first day of a new era of American Exceptionalism.

    He brought a couple of youngsters along with him to engineer the economy. John Rutledge, a recent college graduate with a very short resume and different ideas about capital formation. And Art Laffer, the inventor/discoverer of the Laffer curve. They say he first drew the graph on a cocktail napkin. How American is that? Together with the help of a bi-partisan Congress they laid the cornerstone of Reaganomics and the largest post war expansion of the American economy in history. The momentum carried through Reagan's 2 terms, G.H.W. Bush's 1 term, Bill Clinton's 2 terms, and the first term of G.W. Bush. That's about 24 years of momentum. While this was going on, Reagan, "The Gipper", was rallying the citizens of this great Nation. He caused us to believe in our own ability to do better, be better, and create a better lifestyle than the progressive Utopia could ever afford. It was right there, for the grabbing. All we need do is look up at the possibilities instead of down to all the problems. Work together to solve our own problems rather than wait for a government man to "help" us. Progressives will say Bush, the younger, screwed it up. In my opinion I believe it was Usama Bin Laden. He caused us to divert trillions of dollars, at all levels of government and business, on security and other measures we had not planned on spending. That took a lot of steam out of the forward expansion

    Why do I create this short synopsis for those that weren't here to remember? To try, in my feeble writing style, to communicate to the generations that follow me, there is a better way. The last great hope of mankind still lives. To all the 99%ers I would say, you have more ability to solve your own problems, rise above the obstacles before you, and become the people you were meant to be, than any EBT card and monthly gov't entitlement can commute. All you need is leadership, an idea, motivation, and a path cleared of government red tape. That may seem impossible, but it can happen over night. It already did in November of 1980.

    And to the elders I would say it is our responsibility to provide the generations to come with these four simple tools listed above. Progressives win elections by offering equal success to all. That is a lie! Success is a do it yourself proposition. I can't give my daughter success. I can give her money, but that is not success. Success is creating your own personal magnificent obsession, then each day working to fulfill that dream. It's the step by step journey to something worthwhile. In making that journey the money, marbles, and chalk come along with it, naturally. I can't give her or any younger a dream. If we as elders can give them leadership, motivation, and remove the regulation nightmare, I believe they will supply their own ideas. That's the way I see America, and that's why I am a follower of AS.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by teri-amborn 7 years, 11 months ago
      1) Reagan led at the height of the "baby boom" generation.
      2) We baby-boomers didn't bother having babies.
      3) 50 years of supporting a dependent, violent reproductive sub-culture has bred jealousy unheard of in prior times.
      4) Bush didn't have to get into conventional wars. We aren't fighting another nation ... we are at war with an idea. Assassination is surgical and relatively inexpensive.
      5) With this President we are also engaged in a "civil war of ideas". Our youth has been indoctrinated into thinking that there is something intrinsically wrong with the American Way. If we lose this generation, all will be lost.
      6) Currently, there is a popular mindset that "WASP-types" need to be extinct in order for the world to function under the NWO. Since farmers are currently "WASP-types" and they are disappearing at an alarming rate, no food = mass chaos.

      I don't see much hope for our future.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
        The WASP observation is demonstrative of all progressive plans. They would like to eliminate the WASP population, but starvation would be the unintended consequence. I say this because I don't expect the 99%rs to jumb up and suddenly become farmers. That would require work, risk, and profit if they are lucky.

        It seems to me what George Bernard Shaw and his followers all want is the productivity of capitalism, without the freedom. That will never work. I submit, this is the core reason, after hundreds of years of working to accomplish OWO, it will never work. The desire for freedom and sovereignty is too deep.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by teri-amborn 7 years, 11 months ago
          Yes.
          A friend of ours farms in his spare time and would LOVE to be a full-time farmer.
          He told us that even if he was given a farm he couldn't afford to be a full-time farmer because it is too costly and you can't make enough of a profit to justify the pursuit.
          He works for a major fire apparatus manufacturer full-time.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
          Even if this regime accomplishes all it's goals, there will be something that follows it. I believe there will be people walking around in places like Ohio, Indiana, Montana, Utah, etc in freedom. Because Washington really doesn't care about the center of the country as long as the taxes are paid, and the elections are counted in favor of the winner.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 11 months ago
      Well said.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 11 months ago
        Hello Ron C.
        Holy smoke! I could have posted an almost exact copy of your post, but you beat me to it. Feels good to know people such as those who contribute to the Gulch are out there.
        Thanks.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
          There are a lot of nice folks here in the gulch. We have differing opinions on many things, pretty unanimous regarding producers v moochers. There's lots of room for everyone's opinion. I figured out when I was in the barber business, if everyone liked the same thing, there would just be one thing. That's just not how I want to approach life.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by barwick11 7 years, 11 months ago
    The guy was hopeful, and he made us feel good about being Americans again, after the shame of Carter, after Watergate, after the RINO Nixon (whom Reagan ran against previously), etc...

    How couldn't you like the guy?

    Read Dinesh D'Souza's book "Ronald Reagan - How an Ordinary Man Became an Extraordinary Leader", and Peggy Noonan's "When Character was King" to get some background on the man. Just a great guy.

    I mean, there's tons of stories about him, but one, when he was Governor, there was some random hippie protest, and it was either a sit-in or a "die-in" where the students would just act like they were dead (they did lots of stupid stuff). I think this one was a sit-in, and he's walking about of the auditorium building through campus, and they're all just sitting there silently "protesting". He walks past them and starts to tip-toe, and goes "shhh..." and even the protesters start to chuckle.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 7 years, 11 months ago
    Back then, I was an Alex P. Keaton, the character from Family Ties that idolized Reagan. I was a dork that acted two to three times my age, and was proud to do so. Reagan was smart enough to realize that his job was putting people in place to succeed and letting them do what they were good at.

    He was REVILED by all in Washington and one of the few who has been there in my lifetime that I actually supported.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 11 months ago
      And despite that, he was still one of the most effective Presidents - on all fronts - in promoting America and its interests. He saw the value in a strong economy and strong military and saw the dangers of communism/fascism and statism.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 7 years, 11 months ago
        Agreed completely, blarman. On a scale of 0 to 10, he was an 8.5, with no other president since 1960 getting more than a 5, with 5 being average.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
          I saw an interesting piece on Reagan last night. The reporter said Reagan had figured out the 80% rule. Today, the President wants it his way or the highway; after all, he did win 2 elections. Reagan was different. He realized when he approached 75-80% of what he wanted it was time to strike the deal. 80% is great progress, and excepting less than total surrender gives the other guy something to take home. It also make a less contentious negotiation next time around. It's like beating someone, but giving them room to save face. Maybe his years in the actor's guild taught him about that.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 7 years, 11 months ago
            Reagan did almost as much as he could. I am not going to blame him for not keeping the budget under control. He did reasonably well on that (80% in RonC's terms). Iran-Contra, the 86 amnesty, and the '86 Dole tax increase are the only problems I had with Reagan.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 7 years, 11 months ago
    He took an America which was sliding rapidly into the Mr. Thompson paradigm... combined with Carter's bad habit of not being a strong leader (Diplomat? Sure. Bring opposite sides together? You bet. Powerful leader that made America look strong and proud? Um... not.) and turned it, and the national view of itself, around and made us once again proud to be Americans. Damned proud.

    Of course, he did have his down sides... in more than one issue he was the "face" behind other politician's mechanizations... I remember hearing more than once (from both sides) that he was an actor, playing a part, in essence a Puppet President... but not unlike what Putin did in Russia recently (maybe this is where Vlad got his idea from???) he gave something to his country that had been devastatingly missing for years - national pride. Took us from a nation of self-hating wimps to a national superpower that could - and did - stand up to our enemies,, foreign, and would not have allowed the current horsepucky of enemies, domestic we are so rampantly stuffed with.

    I can see... in a nation where, electing Empress Klinton to replace King Obama, a return to the America we despised and detested in the Carter era... a weak willed, soft nation begging our enemies to please break down our gates and pseudo-"forcing" us into islamo-communism. Look at how we've already thrown that gate wide open... and just wait for 8 more years...

    God, how I miss that man. When I think of what did him in, not unlike his counterpart in Britain, it makes me sad. Lost a great generation, we did.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ straightlinelogic 7 years, 11 months ago
    I also posted this on the other Reagan post:

    I was recently in Southern California and visited the Reagan Library in Simi Valley. If you are ever in the area I can't recommend it too highly. There are great exhibits about every aspect of his career, and the actual Air Force One that he and six other presidents used. I watched the videotape of his speech concerning the Iran-Contra affair. He made a straightforward admission of what had happened, took full responsibility, said he had made mistakes, pledged to take action against those responsible, and then vowed to move on. What a contrast to our current weasel in chief!

    For me, perhaps the most rewarding part of the visit were the countless reminders of Reagan's irrepressible optimism. As the article notes, he took office at a time when the economy was a wreck and the nation was mired in a deep "malaise," (Jimmy Carter's term). Reagan knew that if the government got out of the way and people were allowed to pursue their ambitions and dreams, the economy would take care of itself. He did his best to get the government out of the way (he had to work around a Democratic congress) and lo and behold, the economy took care of itself!

    Reagan also knew that communism was a dead end and would collapse of its own weight. He stood up to the Soviets, refused to back away from the Strategic Defense Initiative (and even offered to share it with them), challenged Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall (there was a tape of that speech at the Reagan library--fabulous), and lo and behold, the Soviet Union crumbled!

    Reagan made mistakes and I didn't agree with him on everything, but I think he was the 20th Century's best president. The man had not only substance but style, and the many "beautiful people" and intelligensia of the time who ridiculed him as an idiot now stand revealed, in the light of history, as the true idiots. The Reagan library is a fitting tribute to the man.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
      As related to your first paragraph, I have noticed over my experiences there are some "tells" for winners and losers. When everything has fallen apart, a winner will step up to the microphone and take the responsibility and blame for all that has gone wrong, make a list of the actions he plans to correct the situation, fire people if he has to, and work to never let this happen again. In the same situation a loser will deflect and defer, find someone down the food chain to blame, refuse to admit that his actions had anything to do with the outcome, and so on. In observing the present constellation of progressive problem solvers we now have, I would say we have elected the wrong team.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 7 years, 11 months ago
    Hello RonC,
    Great thread. Good comments, particularly your synopsis. Those were the days. I do not expect perfection, but I am repulsed by malfeasance.
    Respectfully,
    O.A.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
      When your ideology dictates equal outcomes, then performance doesn't matter. In a capitalist business model the CEO and CFO (sometimes the same guy!) decide what objectives are to be reached, in what order, and what metrics will be used to measure progress. They will, on purpose, plot out waypoints to determine if the company is on course and reaching it's goals. Results matter, they really matter in a new start. With the equal outcome model, results really don't matter since given enough time it will all even out to a mediocrity somewhere slightly lower than average.

      In this administration results don't matter at all. Not in jobs, not in the VA, not in ObamaCare, not in foreign policy, not in the justice department,...you name a few, I'm tired. The only place where results matter in this administration is quickly finding someone to blame for the next crisis. Ambassador Rice must have a Michelin tread pattern tattooed on her back...she's been under the bus since it left Benghazi.

      Mr. Reagan, the guy who wore a jacket and tie in the oval office out of respect, allowed people to work their own problems, but he measured and checked for progress, clarified directions, measured again. He did this because he knew 1. people need to find their own solutions, that gives them ownership of their work. and 2. Measuring and adjusting is how you bring in a winner.

      Reagan would have never signed the affordable care act into law, but on any project do you think he would leave Sibeleus on her own until the program kicked off? Not a chance, IMHO.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Maphesdus 7 years, 11 months ago
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 11 months ago
      And your point is? No one ever claimed Reagan was perfect, but I'd take him over any other President in the past 60 years. Other than "Silent Cal", Reagan was one of the few Presidents in history (and especially the last 100 years) who actually tried to help the economy by getting government out of the picture.

      "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." --Ronald Reagan

      The other one I really like is:

      "Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
      I support the 2nd amendment. Having said that, I don't think we need RPGs and SAMs on the street. I have an AR-15. For the uniformed it is not an assault rifle. The AR indicates the first designer, Armalite Rifle. The term assault rifle was coined by the media. Ronald Reagan's good friend Jim Brady took a bullet in the head the day his own assassination was attempted. He did usher in the Brady bill and was in favor of the assault weapons ban. We should take note, the assassination was attempted with a 22lr caliber handgun by a nut job. The attempts on Gerald Ford were with a small hand gun and a nut job. It would be politically incorrect to separate the nut jobs from society and lock them away (treat them). So, progressive minded government officials sometimes thing taking the guns away will do just as well. I think there is an obvious break in logic there.

      I have several semi automatic handguns as well, because I like to do shoot. The layperson will probably not see the fun in that, but it is fun to master the skills required to throw a playing card in the air and shoot it, or spit a card edgewise on a target stand. It's a personal challenge just like running a marathon or running the table in billiards. Am I going to war, no. Too old to fight, too fat to run.

      As a libertarian I don't long to tell other folks what to do. I just like to ease into my truck and drive up to the conservation club and practice really hard shots with a pistol in a safe environment using the NRA rules for firearm safety. I've noticed people from the two major political parties seem to want to tell everybody what to do. Every time out lawmakers do their thing (make laws) someone out in flyover country loses the right to do something
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ winterwind 7 years, 11 months ago
        RonC, don't get caught by the "need" trap. We can't let them make the argument about what we "need"; it has to be an argument about inalienable rights, period.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
          Thank you, they have beaten us with the "need" whip. I apologize for the loose writing style, it's not my forte. I am just thinking and hitting the keys. I would say this about need. When I was 18 years old, I was flat broke. I had 15 cents in my pocket and the decision of the day was, 3 nickel packs of Kool-Aid or 1 fifteen cent McDonald's hamburger.

          I needed a job. I was fortunate enough to find one. In my paradigm it never occurred to me that I needed a handout. That was 1970, so there were safety nets. If we argue needs, we need to own the definition.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ winterwind 7 years, 11 months ago
            I thought that might be the case, and you've put your last sentence very well.
            I'm a pistol-loving person, myself. Now that the weather is warming up, I'm going to take some friends to the range and do our every-so-often testing of various calibres against water-filled plastic jugs. Not only is it a good comparison of hydrostatic shock, it's WAY fun on a warm day!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ straightlinelogic 7 years, 11 months ago
      I don't know why anyone would vote Maphesdus down for citing Ronald Reagan's own words on an issue, but I voted Maphesdus back up to zero. Come on Gulchers, this isn't talking head TV, where they shout down speakers and ideas they don't agree with. We've all had too much of that. The flag on the down button says: "This is SPAM," and this link was not spam.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
        I don't understand the vote anyways. I like to debate. There is a slim chance an old dog like me may learn something in an exchange of ideas. If somebody gives me a thumbs up or down, it's kind of like instant gratification with a polyunsaturated reward. It feels good, but it's not real.

        Then again, some forums become so polluted with raging opinions and seminar postings there is no debate there either. I would welcome debate with any. My daughter went to the College of Wooster, in Ohio. She studied "Women's Studies". Through debate and verification of results, and growth on her part and disenchantment with Utopia...she has become as libertarian as I am. It's one thing to parade the poor out in front of the Nation, air out all the misfortune and unfairness the rich have rained upon them, and cook up a scheme to throw billions to trillions of dollars at the poor. (I doubt anyone can accurately measure the money since LBJ's war on poverty.) It is quite another to give a young person the tools and knowledge to make their own life better. 16 years after her graduation, my Daughter understands that difference. She went back to school and became an RN, a position where she can actually, substantially, help someone. I would offer the same debate and idea exchange to Maph or anyone else interested. So far, that's what I like about AS people.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by johnpe1 7 years, 11 months ago
      hey, Maph; we didn't say that he was perfect --
      just better than any others in the past 113 years
      or so. -- j
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 7 years, 11 months ago
        It would be a close call between Reagan and Coolidge. Even Reagan said that Coolidge was his role model. It is unfortunate that they are so rare.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
          I think we have ego-maniacs running for public office today. It is reasonably argued the founders didn't intend for a representative to serve 14 terms. Mark Levin says they envisioned a term or two then go back home to your farm or business. Now their congressional seat and the next election is their business. Then consider the President's job. Take a well qualified guy like maybe a Jack Welch or Lee Iacocca. Would they take the cut in pay and the wheel spinning mudslide of working a change through congress? I doubt it. Those people make decisions and expect something to happen. In Washington, the President makes a decision and the Senate forms a committee. Industry leaders wouldn't do well with that scenario, IMO.

          But someone with a face for TV, a gentle way with words, maybe sings a cool Al Greene, and his ego demands he be center stage. I think those are the most important factors today. If you didn't need the adoration to complete your psyche, why would you take the punishment of an election cycle? Maybe 1 in a billion would do it for love of country. So what we get is a guy that can't make a timely decision, but has been on TV everyday since the summer of 2008. Worse yet, he's still running for something, that's what he really know how to do.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by teri-amborn 7 years, 11 months ago
      If the "bad guys" have assault rifles, then the "good guys" must have even better means of defense against evil.
      This is another example of government not understanding the big picture.
      Thanks for this post.
      ---T
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo