RSS

Reagan With Carson

12 Nov

Many of you wondered why I posted the video of Cruz with Leno the other day and part of it was to dispel the misconceptions many of you have of him. I also want to dispel the myth that Reagan would not be welcome amongst many current conservatives. Reagan was actually a Tea Partier before there was a Tea Party. Reagan challenged the status quo of the day, and an incumbent Republican President. I think you will notice many similarities with current conservative positions from this video of Reagan with Carson:

Advertisements
 
28 Comments

Posted by on November 12, 2013 in Conservative Thought

 

28 responses to “Reagan With Carson

  1. mitchethekid

    November 12, 2013 at 11:03 am

    You are correct. Reagan would be welcome amongst many current conservatives.
    But he would not be welcome in the Tea Party. He would not pass the purity test on either fiscal issues (raised the debt, increased the deficit, tax increases, debt ceiling issues, etc) social issues (stance on guns, women’s rights, immigration) or foreign policy (Israel. Cut and ran from Beirut) Not to mention honesty and scandal.( Iran Contra). Issa would have a field day with that happenstance!
    In a fantasy, I’d like to see a fist fight between Ron and Ted with Ron bludgeoning Ted with a miniature Statue of Liberty while Ted whined incoherently something about Canada, Cuba, god, Texas and birth certificates. And on the sidelines, Ron jr would pummel Palin, Bachman and their wimp husbands. He’d make them watch a puppet show with gay Jesus marionettes pantomiming the effects of global warming. He’d make Boehner cry and use his tears to recreate the parting of the Red Sea. Red for communists. And after a glorious win for truth, justice and the American Way, Ron would publicly humiliate Roger Alies and all of the talk radio misleadotainment personalities by having a traveling confined to the stock show, take over leadership of the Tea Party and rename it the Black Raspberry Iced Tea Party, give everyone free health care and declare every Sunday a national holiday.
    Then I would wake up.

     
  2. rustybrown2012

    November 12, 2013 at 11:33 am

    Reagan would be despised by the tea party as the worst kind of rino – a charismatic, effective rino with power. Here’s a partial list of reasons the tea party would reject him:

    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/02/05/142288/reagan-centennial/

    Do you really think Reagan would have approved of the government shutdown? My guess is he would have been appalled by it. Cluster, you seem to be very naive to the difference between what a stumping politician SAYS and what he actually DOES. It explains why Obama talked favorably of single payer then refused to include even the public option when the rubber hit the road, a decision which flummoxed you. That’s why late night talk show appearances fail to impress me as much as they do you.

     
    • mitchethekid

      November 12, 2013 at 12:51 pm

      He certainly would have been appalled. Repulsed more like it. Hence my fantasy.

       
    • Cluster

      November 12, 2013 at 12:52 pm

      The government was shut down over 14 times during Reagan’s term.

       
      • rustybrown2012

        November 12, 2013 at 1:31 pm

        Cluster,

        That would be a good point if one were completely blind to circumstance and severity. This latest shutdown was fundamentally different in tone and purpose from the ones that happened under Reagan.

        http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-10-02/opinions/42616198_1_house-republicans-government-shutdown-affordable-care-act

        Mitch,

        Any leads on the great censorship caper?

         
      • Cluster

        November 12, 2013 at 1:37 pm

        I am the one that deleted your posts dick wad and still will when I feel like it. You add nothing to the blog and have little value as a human being.

         
      • mitchethekid

        November 12, 2013 at 4:45 pm

        Yes. And I was wrong in my assumption. But I think both of you need to take a timeout. I value your opinions Rusty but (and I understand this is a blog with all of the inherent problems blogs have) your interpersonal skills could use a bit of tweaking. I’m not trying to be offensive nor is it my intent but sometimes constructive criticism can be productive. Especially if you understand that it is given in order to help, not to hurt. Cluster and I started this blog for many reasons, one being to offer an alternative to the kind of censorship that occurs on B4V. Not to mention the outrageous lunacy, theological absolutism and a gentrified view of the Constitution.
        It’s important for you to keep in mind that Cluster is the lone conservative voice here and as much as our politics are as opposite as opposite can be, I empathize with how he feels and like you, I become enraged with people who spout right wing insanity. I felt the exact same when the expression of my opinions and POV were mocked, scorned and ridiculed by those whom I consider to be my intellectual inferiors and to add insult to injury, they intentionally said things about me personally just to piss me off.
        I agree that deleting comments is generally a defense against having to engage in substantiating ones argument but in the case of this blog, it is a last resort. In fact, (and I hope you can find some humor in the absurdity of this) you are the first person to have comments deleted.
        And speaking of deletion, it is no secret that I harbor hard feelings because of my treatment at B4V; 9 yrs worth of frustration at being smugly dismissed, called a liar, etc. It is for these reasons that before we went forward with this blog, both Cluster and I made a decision to not allow 3 specific people to have responses published. That alone should give you some faith in him as being a reasonable person. With that said, I want to elaborate by saying this decision was the result of a pattern of behavior exhibited by these 3. We didn’t want to give them an opportunity to be disruptive, argumentative and generally fucking things up. I have, however reconsidered my position in an effort to be fair to everyone. It bothers me that you think we have become as intolerant and biased as B4V. That truly is not the intent and I think that (at least my) attitude is representative of that. I try to be inclusive and a good host. I said months ago that this should be like a party. I guess we have had our first fight. Below is a link to a site that I admire. I think he can offer some insight into this situation.
        http://www.stonekettle.com/2008/08/trolls-free-speech-and-me.html

         
      • rustybrown2012

        November 12, 2013 at 2:00 pm

        Of course we all knew that, Cluster, just good of you to admit your your impotence. When you have no response to somebody’s argument, you simply delete the argument. And to think you try to tar others with terms like “fascist”, “brownshirt” and the like – very revealing.

        You can take the boy out of bfv, but you can’t take bfv out of the boy. Again, thanks for confirming what I’ve always said about you.

         
      • rustybrown2012

        November 12, 2013 at 7:54 pm

        Mitch,

        If one of your goals in starting this blog was to offer an alternative to the kind of censorship at bfv, that’s exactly why I’m sending a shout-out. In the end, I don’t give a shit about any of this, but in my opinion you shouldn’t be fooling yourself.

        “I agree that deleting comments is generally a defense against having to engage in substantiating ones argument but in the case of this blog, it is a last resort.”

        …can you honestly show me how Cluster’s deletions were a “last resort” as opposed to an insecure inability to engage with the argument I was presenting? Last resort? Really?

        Sorry Mitch, but it seems to me that you are fairly deluded in regards to Cluster and his intentions. It almost reminds me of the movie “Mars Attacks”, where everyone is bending over backwards to give the martians the benefit of the doubt when they are so clearly evil fucks.

        Just show me where I have been unreasonably disruptive, abusive or off-track to the conversation. You can’t, because I haven’t. Show me, please, were is my transgression? Cluster deleted me because I routinely eat his lunch in the debates we have. Hey, sorry, but I don’t think that winning a debate and challenging somebody on their stats should result in having your posts deleted. But that’s what’s happening here.

         
      • tiredoflibbs

        November 13, 2013 at 10:24 am

        “…both Cluster and I made a decision to not allow 3 specific people to have responses published.”

        Well, according to Cluster I am not one of them. Why do you delete my posts, if not for censorship?

        I know you won’t allow this one as well. But it is hilarious that you consider my posts disruptive and rusty’s posts (who has 95% of the time disrupt, insult, distract and attack other posters not towing the pRegressive line) are not.

        Cluster is correct in his assessment. His deleting of rusty’s posts are not censorship, but you deleting mine is censorship and rather cowardly.

         
      • mitchethekid

        November 13, 2013 at 1:39 pm

        I am going to make things crystal clear to you. You are one of the 3. In an effort to provide an example that this blog is the antithesis of the selective exclusion and nasty attitude that is one of the hallmarks of whence you came, it was my decision to allow you to respond. In light of the contention yesterday and hoping to provide a calm and reasonable voice of diplomacy I stated to my partner that if he wanted to conduct this experiment with you, I would no longer object.
        You may rationalize the purgatory that your previous comments ended up in as censorship, but let me assure you that “censorship” or “fear” or “cowardliness” has nothing to do with it. It’s you. I don’t like you and it’s not because of your politics or your religious opinions or anything else issue oriented. It’s how you treat people who think differently, who have other values and opinions that I find to be a portal into your character and exposes the sort of person you are. Do you really think it’s cute or a sign of intelligence to mock others by intentionally misspelling the word progressive? Or the Presidents name? Do you think making blanket statements about groups of people, based on misinformation and innuendo shows how studied you are? Do you think it’s admirable to call people liars and ridicule things they have revealed about themselves?
        The removal of Rusty’s comments is censorship. They were removed after the fact and in anger. It’s a blog argument tactic. Can’t debate? Can’t retort? Can’t defend a position with facts? Hit delete! And while they can’t defend themselves because of cyber neutering, malign the person. Make enraging dispersions based on conjecture, projection and stereotypes.
        This is a communal undertaking by both Cluster and myself and neither of us judge the other. We are friends and I understand his frustrations in general and in particular what happened yesterday. And as of now, Rusty does as well. But if Cluster was so aligned with how you think and interact with others, would this blog even exist? Unlikely.
        However, with all of that said it remains to be seen how you will fare here. I will say three things in that regard. (1) Welcome. (2) If you can contribute to our conversations, fine. Although I believe you are more reactionary, misinformed and dogmatic than conservative, thus far my partner and friend has been the lone voice of his perspective on things. So he could use the company. (3) If you behave towards others the way you have towards me, if your arguments are framed with a very small list of descriptive terms, if your debate skills consist of trying to mock, taunt or ridicule instead of providing facts and reason, not only will you be excoriated by people other than me, but my doubts about you will have been proven once again. And then I won’t have to make any other suggestions.
        There is nothing to hide on this blog. It’s flaws are evident and although we wish we had more respondents, admittedly we are a small group. But we make a conscious effort to be inclusive, accomodating, tolerant and cheery. At least that’s what’s on our flag. As I said months ago, the experience here should be like a party. And because I know that you read the link I provided by Jim at Stonekettle Station in regards to blog democracy, I will leave it at that.
        But welcome again. On rare occasions, I’ve been known to be wrong.

         
      • Cluster

        November 13, 2013 at 4:37 pm

        I am probably not the only one that got a warm fuzzy feeling after reading that. The love and acceptance nearly brought a tear to my eye. All kidding aside, politics stirs emotions so to expect a completely sanitized blog is a little unrealistic, but we can discuss the issues from a position of opinions and facts. Also, not all political positions can be supported by hard data, so it’s important to acknowledge what is opinion and allow that person to have that opinion, after all it is a free country and if we all marched in lock step it would be far too North Korea ish.

         
      • mitchethekid

        November 13, 2013 at 4:49 pm

        There’s an old saying. Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining.
        March in lock step? You must mean like the Tea Party. But I’m glad you feel the love.

         
      • casper

        November 13, 2013 at 5:13 pm

        “Cluster,
        All kidding aside, politics stirs emotions so to expect a completely sanitized blog is a little unrealistic, but we can discuss the issues from a position of opinions and facts. Also, not all political positions can be supported by hard data, so it’s important to acknowledge what is opinion and allow that person to have that opinion, after all it is a free country and if we all marched in lock step it would be far too North Korea ish.”

        I agree. If everyone agreed things would get pretty boring pretty fast.

        Mitch,
        That had to be hard and believe me I understand your anger. I also know from experience that often people respond differently in different situations and different environments. If nothing else, things just got more interesting.

        Tired,
        Here is your chance to show off your A game. Name calling and insults aren’t going to get you very far here. Welcome to the blog.

         
      • mitchethekid

        November 13, 2013 at 5:41 pm

        I won’t gloat. Hard? As hard as my dick and Chinese Arithmetic.

         
      • Cluster

        November 13, 2013 at 5:42 pm

        So not all that hard then, right? LOL

         
      • mitchethekid

        November 13, 2013 at 6:08 pm

        ha ha. (unamused look) Everyone’s a comedian.

         
      • kmgtwo

        November 13, 2013 at 5:46 pm

        Oh! Ouch! Low Blow! (Pun intended.)

         
      • mitchethekid

        November 13, 2013 at 6:09 pm

        Now that’s funny!

         
  3. rustybrown2012

    November 12, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    Also, sorry to point out what a debased model that is for a blog: a political forum of opinions that deletes challenging voices. I’ve broken no rules of decorum and in fact try to generally follow the flow of tone that’s being presented. As I said when Cluster went on his censorship rampage, this blog has come full circle, and the new model is the one you sought to escape: bfv. Very sad and ironic in my opinion.

     
    • Cluster

      November 12, 2013 at 2:35 pm

      Then leave. You won’t be missed. This blog is for informed opinion. You don’t measure up.

       
      • rustybrown2012

        November 12, 2013 at 3:00 pm

        That’s your take on it, I think others would disagree. Speaking of measuring up, did you ever discover the source for your claim that family incomes dropped by $5,000/yr. since Obama took office? That’s the question I asked right before you started deleting my posts.

         
      • Cluster

        November 12, 2013 at 3:20 pm

        This is what I mean by not measuring up. I have posted this information on more than two occasions, possibly three, and I grow very tired of repeating myself on this blog. In 2008, the average household income was $55,000:

        http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/fact-check-income-losses-under-obama/?_r=0

        It is now $50,000.

        http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/12/news/economy/median-income-poverty/

        Try and retain this information please.

         
      • watsonthethird

        November 12, 2013 at 8:46 pm

        I would prefer that Rusty not leave as I value his contributions. For one thing, he almost always backs up his assertions with source material, which lets us all judge the veracity of what he’s saying as well as the source.

        It’s not a requirement that either one of you get the last word. Readers can judge what you’re saying for themselves. We don’t need a “winner” every time. We’ll probably never get that with such divergent points of view.

        I hope we can make this place a forum for opinions that can be discussed, challenged, and opposed without calling each other names.

         
  4. casper

    November 13, 2013 at 6:01 pm

    dbschmidt posted the following yesterday

    “Fredrick Schwartz, D.S.V.J., O.Q.H. [Journ.] has to be one of the most ill-informed person(s) I have had the pleasure of trampling through the minefield of misinformation spewed on this thread by a single? poster. The apex of the low-information voter.

    As a very simple example–this one in history–the painting of Washington’s crossing of the Delaware has several folks in his boat that are not taught about in schools to include people of color and women. But I am sure you knew that. Or that it was one of the Progressive idols–Pres. Woodrow Wilson who segregated the Federal workforce. I am sure you knew that also. How about the job taken by the first slave to earn his freedom? Why, he became a slave owner. But it was whitie, whitie, white crackers. Nope.”

    There are a few problems with dbschmidt’s history.
    The painting of Washington crossing the Delaware was painted in 1851 by Emanuel Gottlieb Leutze, who was born in 1811. There is very little of it that is historically accurate, including the people that are shown with him.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Crossing_the_Delaware

    Wilson did segregate the Federal workforce, but he is hardly a Progressive idol. He was a racist and he didn’t support the 19th amendment until it was obvious that it was going to pass. I don’t remember anyone on the blog ever praising him.

    As for the part about the first slave to earn his freedom. Who knows where that came from. Slavery has been around for thousands of years, long before writing. How would we know what the first freed slave did? Since dbschmidt provided no details or links it’s hard to tell where he got that information.

    A couple of days ago Ranty posted a quotation that was suppose to have come from George Washington that probably didn’t come from him. Now dbschmidt is making up some other history.

     
    • mitchethekid

      November 13, 2013 at 6:11 pm

      I like Fred. I especially like Red Headed Sarah.

       
    • meursault1942

      November 14, 2013 at 8:28 am

      One of the biggest problems with Cloistered Conservatism, as demonstrated by the B4v Bunch, is that it makes extremely ignorant people believe themselves to be quite well informed.

       
      • mitchethekid

        November 14, 2013 at 8:46 am

        And arrogant about it as well. Pride cometh before the fall.

         
 
%d bloggers like this: