Is Palin failin' ? or OMG McCain wins with Palin !! pt. 2 - Page 19 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-06-2008, 07:50 PM   #361
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 05:54 AM
One of my more favorite editorial writers, whom I wish was more widely published.

He pretty much says exactly what I've wanted to say over the last week, if I had had the time to write it!

Corvino: Palin, pregnancy and principles | 365 Gay News

Quote:
Corvino: Palin, pregnancy and principles

By John Corvino

I admit it: I was fascinated by the announcement that Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.

It’s no surprise that teenagers have sex—even evangelical Christian teenagers, and especially very good looking ones, in Alaska, where there’s not much to do but hunting and fishing and…well, you know.

And it’s certainly no surprise that sex makes babies.

But when a conservative politician who advocates abstinence education has a very public failure of abstinence in her own family, revealed just a few days after she’s announced as the Republican vice-presidential nominee, it’s bound to get people talking.

If nothing else, the social and political contours are interesting. Right-wingers admire Palin’s principles, but some wish she would put aside her political ambitions to tend to her family. Left-wingers reject this idea as anti-feminist, but they also reject Palin’s politics.

Let me make two things very clear.

First, Bristol Palin is not running for office; Sarah Palin is. Bristol Palin, like all expectant mothers, should be wished well—especially since she finds herself pregnant during the frenzy and scrutiny of her mother’s vice-presidential campaign. She deserves our compassion, as does her new fiancé.

Second, Sarah Palin is no hypocrite—as some uncharitable commentators have suggested—for embracing her yet-unwed pregnant daughter.

There’s no inconsistency in believing both that we should teach abstinence until marriage and that we should support those children who become pregnant anyway. There’s no hypocrisy in striving for an ideal that you and your loved ones occasionally fall short of. You don’t stop endorsing speed limits just because you (or your kids) sometimes lose track of the speedometer.

The fact is, Sarah Palin’s rejection of comprehensive sex education deserves criticism on its own merits. Her family’s behavior has nothing to do with it, aside from adding anecdotes to the statistics suggesting that “abstinence only” doesn’t achieve what its proponents hope and claim.

For example, abstinence advocates are fond of citing studies by Yale’s Hannah Brückner and Columbia’s Peter Bearman, who show that adolescents who take abstinence pledges generally delay sex about eighteen months longer than those who don’t. What the advocates don’t mention is the researchers’ finding that only 12% of these adolescents keep their pledges, and that when they do have sex, they are far less likely to use protection.

In other words, the failure rate of condoms pales by comparison to the failure rate of abstinence pledges—88%, if you believe Brückner and Bearman.

But it’s not Sarah Palin’s rejection of comprehensive sex education that’s bugging me here. What’s bugging me is the right-wing reaction, which for the most part boils down to “Nobody’s perfect, life happens, but you love and support your children and grandchildren.”

That, of course, is the proper reaction.

But it stands in sharp contrast to their usual reaction to gay kids, their rhetoric about “Love in Action” and “Love Win[ning] Out” notwithstanding.

For example, contrast the right-wing reaction to Palin’s grandchild with their reaction to Dick Cheney’s grandchild Samuel—son of his lesbian daughter Mary. At the time, Janice Crouse of Concerned Women for America announced that Mary’s pregnancy “repudiates traditional values and sets an appalling example for young people at a time when father absence is the most pressing social problem facing the nation.” She was hardly alone in such denunciations.

Now here’s the same Crouse on Palin: “We are confident that she and her family will handle this unexpected situation with grace and love. We appreciate the fact that the Palins…are providing loving support to the teenager and her boyfriend.”

There are differences in the two cases to be sure. Bristol plans to marry the father, and thus will provide the baby with a “traditional” family (in one sense); Mary won’t. Bristol’s pregnancy was probably accidental, whereas Mary’s was certainly deliberate.

On the other hand, Mary’s child arrives in the home of a mature and stable couple; Bristol’s in the home of a young and hastily formed one.

But the sharpest difference in the cases is the contrast in right-wingers’ compassion. It’s the difference in empathy, a trait that’s at the core of the Golden Rule.

They tell heterosexuals: abstinence until marriage—and if you fail, we forgive you. For gays, it’s abstinence forever—and if you fail, we denounce you.

For heterosexuals, “Nobody’s perfect, life happens, but you love and support your children and grandchildren.”

For gays, not so much.
__________________

melon is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 07:54 PM   #362
ONE
love, blood, life
 
U2isthebest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vision over visibility....
Posts: 12,332
Local Time: 05:54 AM
^. It's one of the hypocrisies that angers me most about the church. We're loving and tolerant as Jesus was, unless you're different than us. It's appalling, and it needs to stop. Thanks melon.
__________________

U2isthebest is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 08:24 PM   #363
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Welcome Back, Dad
by Michael Reagan
Posted 09/04/2008 ET


I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we’d never see his like again because he was one of a kind.

I was wrong!

Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.

And what a she!

In one blockbuster of a speech, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin resurrected my Dad’s indomitable spirit and sent it soaring above the convention center, shooting shock waves through the cynical media’s assigned spaces and electrifying the huge audience with the kind of inspiring rhetoric we haven’t heard since my Dad left the scene.

This was Ronald Reagan at his best -- the same Ronald Reagan who made the address known now solely as “The Speech,” which during the Goldwater campaign set the tone and the agenda for the rebirth of the traditional conservative movement that later sent him to the White House for eight years and revived the moribund GOP.

Last night was an extraordinary event. Widely seen beforehand as a make-or-break effort -- either an opportunity for Sarah Palin to show that she was the happy warrior that John McCain assured us she was, or a disaster that would dash McCain’s presidential hopes and send her back to Alaska, sadder but wiser.

Obviously un-intimidated by either the savage onslaught to which the left-leaning media had subjected her, or the incredible challenge she faced -- and oozing with confidence -- she strode defiantly to the podium and proved she was everything and even more than John McCain told us.

Much has been made of the fact that she is a woman. What we saw last night, however, was something much more than a just a woman accomplishing something no Republican woman has ever achieved. What we saw was a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them -- and all her fellow Americans -- on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation’s real destination.

In a few words she managed to rip the mask from the faces of her Democratic rivals and reveal them for what they are -- a pair of old-fashioned liberals making promises that cannot be kept without bankrupting the nation and reducing most Americans to the status of mendicants begging for their daily bread at the feet of an all-powerful government.

Most important, by comparing her own stunning record of achievement with his, she showed Barack Obama for the sham that he is, a man without any solid accomplishments beyond conspicuous self-aggrandizement.

Like Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin is one of us. She knows how most of us live because that’s the way she lives. She shares our homespun values and our beliefs, and she glories in her status as a small-town woman who put her shoulder to the wheel and made life better for her neighbors.

Her astonishing rise up from the grass-roots, her total lack of self-importance, and her ordinary American values and modest lifestyle reveal her to be the kind of hard-working, optimistic, ordinary American who made this country the greatest, most powerful nation on the face of the earth.

As hard as you might try, you won’t find that kind of plain-spoken, down-to-earth, self-reliant American in the upper ranks of the liberal-infested, elitist Democratic Party, or in the Obama campaign.

Sarah Palin didn’t go to Harvard, or fiddle around in urban neighborhood leftist activism while engaging in opportunism within the ranks of one of the nation’s most corrupt political machines, never challenging it and going along to get along, like Barack Obama.

Instead she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska and beat it, rising to the governorship while bringing reforms to every level of government she served in on her way up the ladder.

Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.
.
deep is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 08:32 PM   #364
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Michael isn't a Reagan, however.

Ron jr is, and I doubt if he'd agree with the above.
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 08:50 PM   #365
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,738
Local Time: 04:54 AM
Ooh, opposing views from the Reagan brothers. Who'd have thought?

Quote:
Ron Reagan: I doubt my father would back Palin
But when brother Michael looks at Alaska governor he sees his dad 'reborn'
Posted: September 06, 2008
4:48 am Eastern

By Art Moore
© 2008 WorldNetDaily


SEATTLE – When Michael Reagan watched Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin thrill the Republican Party faithful Wednesday night, he saw his father "reborn."

But Ronald Prescott Reagan told WND yesterday he knew Ronald Reagan, too, and Sarah Palin, he insisted, is no Ronald Reagan.

The two brothers – talk radio hosts who live at opposite ends of the political spectrum – reflect the sharp divide across the nation over John McCain's running mate. Echoing the polarized reactions to President Reagan during his two terms in the 1980s, it's hard to remain indifferent to the hockey mom from Wasilla, whose meteoric political rise has taken her from the PTA to the governorship to a national ticket at the age of 44. Either you love her, it seems, or she epitomizes what's wrong with America.

WND met the youngest son of President Reagan, a self-described political "progressive," awaiting a flight to Seattle following the GOP convention in St. Paul, Minn.

Ron Reagan, 50, told WND he cannot speak for his father, who died in 2004, but doubts the 40th president would approve of Palin if he were alive and well today.

"Sarah Palin," he said, "has nothing in common with my father, a two-term governor of the largest state in the union, a man who had been in public life for decades, someone who had written, thought and spoke for decades about foreign policy issues, domestic policy issues, and on and on and on."

But many introduced to Palin this week say she excites them like Ronald Reagan did.

"I think they ought to start using their brain, instead of viscera," Ron Jr. said in reaction.

Isn't the excitement, however, simply over a charismatic candidate for national office who espouses conservative values and ideas without apology and already has successfully put them into practice?

"That may excite them," Ron Jr. said. "But many of those values are hypocritical and dishonest, and, frankly, scary."

Creationism is one of the scary beliefs Palin advocates, he said.

"It doesn't bother some people, I know, but, frankly, somebody like that has no idea what kind of planet we live on – literally has no idea what the planet is all about," Ron Jr. said.

"It's such a profoundly anti-intellectual, anti-science stance," he asserted. "I don't see how you can hold high office and believe something like that."

Some critics have charged Palin opposes the teaching of evolution in public schools and would mandate teaching creationism. But she has kept a pledge from her 2006 campaign for governor to not press for creation-based alternatives or seek creation advocates for the school board.

Asked what his mother, Nancy Reagan, thinks about Palin, Ron Jr. said he cannot speak on her behalf. But he related that when he briefly discussed Palin with her this past week on the phone, "she was a bit mystified by the choice." She previously announced her endorsement of McCain.


Michael Reagan, in his commentary piece, praises Palin as "a red-blooded American with that rare, God-given ability to rally her dispirited fellow Republicans and take up the daunting task of leading them – and all her fellow Americans – on a pilgrimage to that shining city on the hill my father envisioned as our nation's real destination."

The elder brother, whose adoptive mother was the late actress Jane Wyman, says he's been trying to convince his fellow conservatives they have been wasting their time looking for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge. But no more.

"I insisted that we'd never see his like again because he was one of a kind. I was wrong. Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she. And what a she!"

Two Americas

Ron Jr., who debuts a show Monday on the left-leaning Air America talk radio network, was asked his overall impression of the GOP convention.

"It's a little depressing to me, because I think, you know, John Edwards was right in the sense about the two Americas," he said. "But, you know, it's not just liberal and conservative, rich and poor, it's rational, and as Rachel Maddow, my colleague on Air America, put it, post-rational."

McCain's selection of Palin was "post-rational," he said, "one of the most irresponsible choices I have ever seen a presidential candidate make."

"It's clearly a tactical, political decision," he said. "It has absolutely nothing to do with governance. The woman is clearly unqualified to be where she is right now."

Ron Jr. said it was "right around puberty" when he began to realize he didn't agree with his father on many issues.

"There were some issues we did (agree on), of course," he said. "I thought standing up to the Soviet Union was a good idea. A totalitarian government, and who likes that? Tell them the truth. You know, want to call them an evil empire? Go ahead, stick it to 'em, get up in their grill a little bit. You don't want to take it to a military level, but speak the truth, speak the truth at heart."

On the other hand, he said, there was "vehement" disagreement over the environment and some social issues.

"We'd discuss it all the time over dinner," he said. "We'd have some good old arguments about it – always civil, but, nevertheless, spirited."

Meanwhile, in the "other America," brother Michael suggests elitism is blinding many critics to Palin's "stunning record of achievement," taking on and beating Alaska's corrupt establishment and bringing reform to "every level of government she served on her way up the ladder."


"Like Ronald Reagan, Sarah Palin is one of us," he writes. "She knows how most of us live because that’s the way she lives. She shares our homespun values and our beliefs, and she glories in her status as a small-town woman who put her shoulder to the wheel and made life better for her neighbors."

Palin is obviously "unintimidated by the savage onslaught to which the left-leaning media had subjected her," says Michael Reagan.

In a few words, Wednesday night, he says, "she managed to rip the mask from the faces of her Democratic rivals and reveal them for what they are — a pair of old-fashioned liberals making promises that cannot be kept without bankrupting the nation and reducing most Americans to the status of mendicants begging for their daily bread at the feet of an all-powerful government."

"Her astonishing rise up from the grass-roots, her total lack of self-importance, and her ordinary American values and modest lifestyle reveal her to be the kind of hard-working, optimistic, ordinary American who made this country the greatest, most powerful nation on the face of the earth," he writes.

Michael Reagan concludes: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around."
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 08:57 PM   #366
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VintagePunk View Post
Ooh, opposing views from the Reagan brothers. Who'd have thought?

The biggest difference between the two
is that during the 1980's when Reagan was President, Michael supported his step-father

and Ron Jr. did not.

I think Michael is a more legitimate judge on what Ronald Reagan would think about a politician.
deep is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 08:59 PM   #367
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,738
Local Time: 04:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
The biggest difference between the two
is that during the 1980's when Reagan was President, Michael supported his step-father

and Ron Jr. did not.

I think Michael is a more legitimate judge on what Ronald Reagan would think about a politician.
Really? My mom and my brother are closer together on political views than she and I are, but I can state with certainty that I could more accurately express her thoughts on various subjects than he could.

VintagePunk is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:04 PM   #368
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
The biggest difference between the two
is that during the 1980's when Reagan was President, Michael supported his step-father

and Ron Jr. did not.

I think Michael is a more legitimate judge on what Ronald Reagan would think about a politician.
I think that's bullshit, to be honest.
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:07 PM   #369
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Quote:
"That may excite them," Ron Jr. said. "But many of those values are hypocritical and dishonest, and, frankly, scary."
Quoted for truth....
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:07 PM   #370
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 02:54 AM
in the states ron reagan jr. is considered a joke by most consevatives.
diamond is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:09 PM   #371
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,738
Local Time: 04:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
in the states ron reagan jr. is considered a joke by most consevatives.
And that's supposed to prove...?
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:09 PM   #372
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I think that's bullshit, to be honest.
since I lived through it, it is my recollection


you could look into it

there should be some information available

or,
just go with the fym standard
go with your bias or leaning
and argue like your life depended on it.
deep is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:14 PM   #373
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 05:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
in the states ron reagan jr. is considered a joke by most consevatives.
in the states, most conservatives are considered a joke by most liberals.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:15 PM   #374
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
since I live through it, it is my recollection

you could look into it

there should be some information available
And so we have the implication, once again - last week I got it from Irvine, and now from you - that foreign posters really haven't a clue what they're talking about with regard to US politics.

Unfortunately, this seems to be coming more commonplace on FYM

Discussion of the Presidential election seems to be viewed as a private party

to which furrners are not invited and their views are not welcome

FYI, the British and Irish media report a lot on US politics and I, also, lived through the 80's.

(you could look into it

there should be some information available)
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:28 PM   #375
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,663
Local Time: 04:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I think Michael is a more legitimate judge on what Ronald Reagan would think about a politician.
To be honest I think it's incredibly presumptuous of you to even claim you have the vaguest idea which son knew his father best.
Diemen is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:33 PM   #376
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
And so we have the implication, once again - last week I got it from Irvine, and now from you - that foreign posters really haven't a clue what they're talking about with regard to US politics.

Unfortunately, this seems to be coming more commonplace on FYM

Discussion of the Presidential election seems to be viewed as a private party

to which furrners are not invited and their views are not welcome

FYI, the British and Irish media report a lot on US politics and I, also, lived through the 80's.

(you could look into it

there should be some information available)


I usually do not even consider replying to these types of posts.



Quote:
or,
just go with the fym standard
go with your bias or leaning
and argue like your life depended on it
no where did I say anything about 'foreign posters', I don't believe I ever have.


So you recall that Ron Jr. is a liberal and had an estrangement from his father during the time Reagan was in office. That Ron Jr is a favorite and darling of the left? He may even be an atheist, which is fine. But his father was someone that did get along and work with the religious right.

And Michael, Reagan's adopted son has always been a conservative like his father and a religious man.

So of the two sons, which one is more credible to you for giving an opinion of whether or not their father would like Palin.

If you could share your reasoning with me, I might learn something.
deep is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 09:59 PM   #377
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I usually do not even consider replying to these types of posts.

no where did I say anything about 'foreign posters', I don't believe I ever have.
I may have been incorrect in intrepreting your post as implying that I don't know anything about US politics because I am a non-US person, but you surely know that I am considerably over thirty, so implying that I don't remember the '80's and ought to educate myself about the decade before expressing an opinion is rather silly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
So you recall that Ron Jr. is a liberal and had an estrangement from his father during the time Reagan was in office. That Ron Jr is a favorite and darling of the left? He may even be an atheist, which is fine. But his father was someone that did get along and work with the religious right.

And Michael, Reagan's adopted son has always been a conservative like his father and a religious man.

So of the two sons, which one is more credible to you for giving an opinion of whether or not their father would like Palin.

If you could share your reasoning with me, I might learn something.
Hmmm. See, I think this is just too simplistic for words. Just because Ron jr happened to be to the left of his father, makes his point of view less valid than his step-brother, who was more right-wing? Sorry, I don't accept that.

Ron jr always had good relations with his parents, in spite of their political disagreements. That is not necessarily the case with Michael, from what I've read. *

But in answer to your question regarding which one is more credible for giving an opinion of whether or not their father would like Palin, in my view, quite honestly, it's Ron jr. He just has more political credibility full stop than the other guy.

And ulimately, I trust Ron jr's judgement more so than Michael's, because, frankly, I think Michael is band-wagon jumping tool, and Ron jr is a nuanced and intelligent person.

Who is the real Reagan, and not just by blood?

Edit: (* Actually I could be confusing Michael with Patti Reagan , now that I think of it)
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 10:05 PM   #378
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 10:54 AM
It's probably statements like the following that lead me to my belief that Michael Reagan is a tool:-

Quote:
When he said that children named Hezbollah, after the Lebanese group designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S., would eventually become terrorists themselves and, hence, "he would like to stick grenades in their rear ends and make them explode", the religion writer for the Austin American-Statesman characterized his words as "vile", "hateful" and "outrageous".[10] The liberal media watch dog group Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting characterized statements by Reagan as "death threats" when he criticized Mark Dice and other individuals who sent letters and DVDs to U.S. troops stationed in Iraq blaming the government for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Reagan said, for instance, "We ought to find the people who are doing this, take them out and shoot them. Really. You take them out, they are traitors to this country, and shoot them.... I'll pay for the bullets."
(source:wikipedia)
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 10:21 PM   #379
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 01:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I may have been incorrect in intrepreting your post as implying that I don't know anything about US politics because I am a non-US person, but you surely know that I am considerably over thirty, so implying that I don't remember the '80's and ought to educate myself about the decade before expressing an opinion is rather silly.



Hmmm. See, I think this is just too simplistic for words. Just because Ron jr happened to be to the left of his father, makes his point of view less valid than his step-brother, who was more right-wing? Sorry, I don't accept that.

Ron jr always had good relations with his parents, in spite of their political disagreements. That is not necessarily the case with Michael, from what I've read. *

But in answer to your question regarding which one is more credible for giving an opinion of whether or not their father would like Palin, in my view, quite honestly, it's Ron jr. He just has more political credibility full stop than the other guy.

And ulimately, I trust Ron jr's judgement more so than Michael's, because, frankly, I think Michael is band-wagon jumping tool, and Ron jr is a nuanced and intelligent person.

Who is the real Reagan, and not just by blood?

Edit: (* Actually I could be confusing Michael with Patti Reagan , now that I think of it)
My initial response was a bit stronger than I prefer to write.

If you had asked me why I thought that instead of the short reply that is was bullshit,
I would have responded differently.

As for foreigners posting, it is one of the best things about fym.

and I believe most of the foreign posters have better reasoned responses than many of the casual U S posters.


The fact that I might get along better with Ron Jr than Michael
or that I also believe Ron may be his intellectual superior
does not lead me to conclude that his opinion is more correct.

Ronald Reagan Sr. was considered a tool by many.
and I could probably post some things he said that would look pretty silly, too.

Evil empire, I think he said trees cause air pollution.

Reagan electrified the base and had populace appeal.
Reagan attacked the media elites. (whatever that means)
Reagan preached against big government and for low taxes. (even on the rich)

I do see similarities with Palin
deep is offline  
Old 09-06-2008, 10:29 PM   #380
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,738
Local Time: 04:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post

Reagan electrified the base and had populace appeal.
Reagan attacked the media elites. (whatever that means)
Reagan preached against big government and for low taxes. (even on the rich)

I do see similarities with Palin
I won't pretend to know everything about the Reagan era, I was young then, and a lot less politically aware than I am now, but wasn't he very secular, politically? Jr. made a comment that he would never have agreed with the religious right turn that the party has taken, and Palin seems to be a poster child for that segment of the party, so in that way, RR Jr's comments make sense.

Or am I misremembering what RR Sr was about?
__________________

VintagePunk is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×