Elevated

2:10 pm EST December 12th, 2006 | News | 8 Comments

The far-right Human Events is shilling a new product asking “What Would Reagan Do?”, a theme suspiciously like this one.

Related Posts

  • No Related Post
«
»

8 Responses to “Elevated”

  1. SP says:
    December 12, 2006 at 2:26 pm

    It’s hard to pin down exactly what has triggered the current wave of Reagan worship. It’s prob’ly some combination of

    1. Excuse to jump off the disastrous Bush Train.
    2. a natural occurance what with the persistant 20-year National Zeitstalgia.

    What we reality-based life forms should be asking neo-Reganite, erstwhile Bushophiles is: What are the three key differences between the two “presidents.” They’re really shockingingly similar in a lot of unflattering ways, in my opinion.

  2. PD100 says:
    December 12, 2006 at 2:48 pm

    “What Would Reagan Do?”

    Forget about it?

  3. Nimrod Gently says:
    December 12, 2006 at 3:13 pm

    How should he know?

  4. Wilbur says:
    December 12, 2006 at 3:19 pm

    Give the ‘pubs a break. Who else do they have to be proud of in the last 100 years or so?

    Harding: crook
    Coolidge: nonentity
    Hoover: Mr. Depression
    Eisenhower: Do-nothing (after WWII)
    Nixon: crook
    Ford: ineffectual boob
    Bush I: ineffectual twerp
    Bush II: worst.president.ever

    Who can blame them for latching on Ronnie, who had a nice smile, could deliver his lines well, won two landslide elections, and was never indicted.

    Hell, Bush makes me nostalgic for Insane Anglo Warlord.

  5. Diamond LeGrande says:
    December 12, 2006 at 7:16 pm

    Yes. Because ultimately, the modern conservative movement is a cult. It’s no accident that its brand of patriotism smacks of state religion — after 9/11, you wore a ribbon or a flag lapel much as a Christian wears the cross.

    Personally, I don’t dump much on Hoover nor Ike. Hoover actually increased state spending in light of the Depression (Keynesianism, we must remember, was untried at the time) and Ike didn’t inflate the military budget as the Democrats advocated.

    On a more Reagan note — notice how the Republicans worship the guy who made no statements of political theory? You can find reams and reams of stuff that Clinton or Bush Sr. or Nixon or LBJ said after each was President on public policy, how Washington worked, and so on and so forth. As a kid (this is the 1980s), I can remember news hosts always having Dick Nixon on to talk about politics, and he always had something intelligent to say.

    After his presidency, Reagan was silent. It lends to the myth; you can put whatever big ideas of conservatism into Reagan’s head because he never opened his mouth to speak his mind either in agreement or in disagreement.

  6. Dugger says:
    December 13, 2006 at 7:53 am

    Well, that was a fair and well balanced discussion of conservatism.

  7. Nimrod Gently says:
    December 13, 2006 at 8:40 am

    Apart from the obviously flip comments by myself and PD100, yeah, by and large it was.

  8. Quaker in a Basement says:
    December 13, 2006 at 2:01 pm

    All this time, I thought WWJD stood for “We want Jack Daniels”. Shows you the kinda crows I hang around with.