U.S. Issues Palin, "the new Ronald Reagan?" - Page 3

Taco John · 10-27-2008, 11:49 PM

Aides to George W.Bush, former Reagan White House staff and friends of John McCain have all told The Sunday Telegraph that they not only expect to lose on November 4, but also believe that Mr Obama is poised to win a crushing mandate.

They believe he will be powerful enough to remake the American political landscape with even more ease than Ronald Reagan did in 1980.

The prospect of an electoral rout has unleashed a bitter bout of recriminations both within the McCain campaign and the wider conservative movement, over who is to blame and what should be done to salvage the party's future.

Mr McCain is now facing calls for him to sacrifice his own dwindling White House hopes and focus on saving vulnerable Republican Senate seats which are up for grabs on the same day.

Their fear is that Democrat candidates riding on Mr Obama's popularity may win the nine extra seats they need in the Senate to give them unfettered power in Congress.

If the Democrat majority in the Senate is big enough - at least 60 seats to 40 - the Republicans will be unable to block legislation by use of a traditional filibuster - talking until legislation runs out of time. No president has had the support of such a majority since Jimmy Carter won the 1976 election. President Reagan achieved his political transformation partly through the power of his personality.

David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter, told The Sunday Telegraph that Republicans should now concentrate all their fire on "the need for balanced government".

"It's hard to see a turnaround in the White House race," he said. "This could look like an ideological as well as a party victory if we're not careful. It could be 1980 in reverse.

"With this huge new role for federal government in the economy, the possibility for mischief making is very, very great. One man should not have a monopoly of political and financial power. That's very dangerous."

In North Carolina, where Senator Elizabeth Dole seems set to loose, Republicans are running adverts that appear to take an Obama victory for granted, warning that the Democrat will have a "blank cheque" if her rival Kay Hagen wins. "These liberals want complete control of government in a time of crisis," the narrator says. "All branches of Government. No checks and balances."

Democrats lead in eight of the 12 competitive Senate races and need just nine gains to reach their target of 60. Even Mitch McConnell, the leader of Senate Republicans, is at risk in Kentucky, normally a rock solid red state.

A private memo on the likely result of the congressional elections, leaked to Politico, has the Republicans losing 37 seats.

Ed Rollins, who masterminded Ronald Reagan's second victory in 1984, said the election is already over and predicted: "This is going to turn into a landslide."

A former White House official who still advises President Bush told The Sunday Telegraph: "McCain hasn't won independents, nor has he inspired the base. It's the worst of all worlds. He is dragging everyone else down with him. He needs to deploy people and money to salvage what we can in Congress."

The prospect of defeat has unleashed what insiders describe as an "every man for himself" culture within the McCain campaign, with aides in a "circular firing squad" as blame is assigned.

More profoundly, it sparked the first salvoes in a Republican civil war with echoes of Tory infighting during their years in the political wilderness.

One wing believes the party has to emulate David Cameron, by adapting the issues to fight on and the positions they hold, while the other believes that a back to basics approach will reconnect with heartland voters and ensure success. Modernisers fear that would leave Republicans marginalised, like the Tories were during the Iain Duncan Smith years, condemning them to opposition for a decade.

Mr Frum argues that just as America is changing, so the Republican Party must adapt its economic message and find more to say about healthcare and the environment if it is to survive.

He said: "I don't know that there's a lot of realism in the Republican Party. We have an economic message that is largely irrelevant to most people.

"Cutting personal tax rates is not the answer to everything. The Bush years were largely prosperous but while national income was up the numbers for most individuals were not. Republicans find that a hard fact to process."

Other Republicans have jumped ship completely. Ken Adelman, a Pentagon adviser on the Iraq war, Matthew Dowd, who was Mr Bush's chief re-election strategist, and Scott McClellan, Mr Bush's former press secretary, have all endorsed Mr Obama.

But the real bile has been saved for those conservatives who have balked at the selection of Sarah Palin.

In addition to Mr Frum, who thinks her not ready to be president, Peggy Noonan, Ronald Reagan's greatest speechwriter and a columnist with the Wall Street Journal, condemned Mr McCain's running mate as a "symptom and expression of a new vulgarisation of American politics." Conservative columnist David Brooks called her a "fatal cancer to the Republican Party".

The backlash that ensued last week revealed the fault lines of the coming civil war.

Rush Limbaugh, the doyen of right wing talk radio hosts, denounced Noonan, Brooks and Frum. Neconservative writer Charles Krauthammer condemned "the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama", while fellow columnist Tony Blankley said that instead of collaborating in heralding Mr Obama's arrival they should be fighting "in a struggle to the political death for the soul of the country".

During the primaries the Democratic Party was bitterly divided between Barack Obama's "latte liberals" and Hillary Clinton's heartland supporters, but now the same cultural division threatens to tear the Republican Party apart.

Jim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, dismissed Mrs Palin's critics as "cocktail party conservatives" who "give aid and comfort to the enemy".

He told The Sunday Telegraph: "There's going to be a bloodbath. A lot of people are going to be excommunicated. David Brooks and David Frum and Peggy Noonan are dead people in the Republican Party. The litmus test will be: where did you stand on Palin?"

Mr Frum thinks that Mrs Palin's brand of cultural conservatism appeals only to a dwindling number of voters.

He said: "She emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination. Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency."

Mr Nuzzo, who believes this election is not a re-run of the 1980 Reagan revolution but of 1976, when an ageing Gerald Ford lost a close contest and then ceded the leadership of the Republican Party to Mr Reagan.

He said: "Win or lose, there is a ready made conservative candidate waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is the new Ronald Reagan." On the accuracy of that judgment, perhaps, rests the future of the Republican Party.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...the-party.html

ROYC75 · 10-28-2008, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomahawk kid

Can anyone else not see this woman is a f#cking moron?

I'm not talking about dim (Bush), I'm talking about borderline f#cking retarded.

As an independent voter, I'm getting awful tired of the GOP pissing on me and then trying to tell me it's raining........

When / if the true fiscal conservative Republicans re-emerge and kick out the religious right and hate mongers - I'll be MUCH more comfortable with their positions and I don't think I'm alone in that regard......

You sound as though you are a liberal democrat....... just say'n.

There is a very large religious conservative base out there. But the ever growing atheist is growing at an alarming rate that one day will dominate the elections. We are seeing the beginning of this now ...

We are about to give the dems full control of the " BIG GOVERNMENT " they so desire to have for at least the next 4 - 16 years.

I can only say , God Help us all !

KCJohnny · 10-28-2008, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonesCrusher

I put Reagan and Clinton in the same boat. Speaking about all the great things they have done is their strong point. Reagan started a war that will probably never end in my lifetime and is costing billions of dollars a year. Clinton just happened to be president when the internet boomed and he gets all the credit for the economic prosperity during that period.

Ridiculous. Reagan was one of our nation's top 7 presidents. Clinton was impeached.

Ultra Peanut · 10-28-2008, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

You sound as though you are a liberal democrat....... just say'n.

So sayeth "undecided voter" ROYC75!

Jenson71 · 10-28-2008, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

There is a very large religious conservative base out there. But the ever growing atheist is growing at an alarming rate that one day will dominate the elections. We are seeing the beginning of this now ...

The atheists are coming! They're coming with their telescopes and PhDs, Lord help us the atheists are coming and taking over.

ROYC75 · 10-28-2008, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

The atheists are coming! They're coming with their telescopes and PhDs, Lord help us the atheists are coming and taking over.

( word ) ..... they are .

ROYC75 · 10-28-2008, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ultra Peanut

So sayeth "undecided voter" ROYC75!

Was at one time..... You, you have wanted to mettle in his cum for some time, would that be the man side of you or the female side of you, we are confused.

Jenson71 · 10-28-2008, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

( word ) ..... they are .

Do you really believe atheism is growing at an alarming rate? And do you have the statistics to back that claim up? (Much less hold hostage our country.)

BucEyedPea · 10-28-2008, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

You sound as though you are a liberal democrat....... just say'n.

There is a very large religious conservative base out there. But the ever growing atheist is growing at an alarming rate that one day will dominate the elections. We are seeing the beginning of this now ...

We are about to give the dems full control of the " BIG GOVERNMENT " they so desire to have for at least the next 4 - 16 years.

I can only say , God Help us all !

For some reason big govt seems to go with atheism. It's like it replaces a church...something to have faith in and build a paradise on earth. I say getting values out of schools, another reason to go private, is a factor in creating this. Afterall, Marx said it was the opiate of the people. It isn't all atheists though. Just seems to be more pronounced in big govt types.

BigChiefFan · 10-28-2008, 09:00 AM

Reagan is a ****ing actor-one of the best presidents is laughable. IRAN CONTRA ring any bells? Yep, St. Reagan.

ROYC75 · 10-28-2008, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

Do you really believe atheism is growing at an alarming rate? And do you have the statistics to back that claim up? (Much less hold hostage our country.)

I do believe it is growing faster than religion. Stats to back it up, no, I don't, it's just what I see compared to my life as a child growing up.

It's just my opinion.

BucEyedPea · 10-28-2008, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

Reagan is a ****ing actor-one of the best presidents is laughable. IRAN CONTRA ring any bells? Yep, St. Reagan.

You're just being a partisan here. That's in the view of most Americans.
Iran Contra was pulled off by the NCs. Besides, no govt funds were used either.
There's something like this in many presidencies too. Just because we don't hear it them all doesn't mean anything.

KCJohnny · 10-28-2008, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

You sound as though you are a liberal democrat....... just say'n.

There is a very large religious conservative base out there. But the ever growing atheist is growing at an alarming rate that one day will dominate the elections. We are seeing the beginning of this now ...

We are about to give the dems full control of the " BIG GOVERNMENT " they so desire to have for at least the next 4 - 16 years.

I can only say , God Help us all !

Roy seems to be referring to the formerly Christian Europe which is in free fall decline in birth rates and could be Muslin by 2050. While most Europeans would not see themselves as atheists by creed, their subscription to darwinism, greenism (the new paganism), statism and nanny statism amounts to practical atheism.

Jenson71 · 10-28-2008, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROYC75

I do believe it is growing faster than religion. Stats to back it up, no, I don't, it's just what I see compared to my life as a child growing up.

It's just my opinion.

Saying that atheism is growing at an alarming rate is not an opinion though. 'When you were a child, you thought like a child,' and lived a child's' sheltered life, not exposed to many ideas outside of your home and immediate community - like the neighborhood and school.

You act as if Democrat is synonymous with atheist and the Republican party the defender of Jesus and all that is good and true.

I think it's PR and marketing. That's an opinion.

PRIEST · 10-28-2008, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCJohnny

Ridiculous. Reagan was one of our nation's top 7 presidents. Clinton was impeached.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/...gan-was-a.html

KCJohnny · 10-28-2008, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenson71

You act as if Democrat is synonymous with atheist and the Republican party the defender of Jesus and all that is good and true.

Please, argue the contrary. I'm all ears.

10-27-2008, 11:49 PM
Taco John 12on Paul Join Date: Jun 2001 Casino cash: $10084482	Palin, "the new Ronald Reagan?" Aides to George W.Bush, former Reagan White House staff and friends of John McCain have all told The Sunday Telegraph that they not only expect to lose on November 4, but also believe that Mr Obama is poised to win a crushing mandate. They believe he will be powerful enough to remake the American political landscape with even more ease than Ronald Reagan did in 1980. The prospect of an electoral rout has unleashed a bitter bout of recriminations both within the McCain campaign and the wider conservative movement, over who is to blame and what should be done to salvage the party's future. Mr McCain is now facing calls for him to sacrifice his own dwindling White House hopes and focus on saving vulnerable Republican Senate seats which are up for grabs on the same day. Their fear is that Democrat candidates riding on Mr Obama's popularity may win the nine extra seats they need in the Senate to give them unfettered power in Congress. If the Democrat majority in the Senate is big enough - at least 60 seats to 40 - the Republicans will be unable to block legislation by use of a traditional filibuster - talking until legislation runs out of time. No president has had the support of such a majority since Jimmy Carter won the 1976 election. President Reagan achieved his political transformation partly through the power of his personality. David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter, told The Sunday Telegraph that Republicans should now concentrate all their fire on "the need for balanced government". "It's hard to see a turnaround in the White House race," he said. "This could look like an ideological as well as a party victory if we're not careful. It could be 1980 in reverse. "With this huge new role for federal government in the economy, the possibility for mischief making is very, very great. One man should not have a monopoly of political and financial power. That's very dangerous." In North Carolina, where Senator Elizabeth Dole seems set to loose, Republicans are running adverts that appear to take an Obama victory for granted, warning that the Democrat will have a "blank cheque" if her rival Kay Hagen wins. "These liberals want complete control of government in a time of crisis," the narrator says. "All branches of Government. No checks and balances." Democrats lead in eight of the 12 competitive Senate races and need just nine gains to reach their target of 60. Even Mitch McConnell, the leader of Senate Republicans, is at risk in Kentucky, normally a rock solid red state. A private memo on the likely result of the congressional elections, leaked to Politico, has the Republicans losing 37 seats. Ed Rollins, who masterminded Ronald Reagan's second victory in 1984, said the election is already over and predicted: "This is going to turn into a landslide." A former White House official who still advises President Bush told The Sunday Telegraph: "McCain hasn't won independents, nor has he inspired the base. It's the worst of all worlds. He is dragging everyone else down with him. He needs to deploy people and money to salvage what we can in Congress." The prospect of defeat has unleashed what insiders describe as an "every man for himself" culture within the McCain campaign, with aides in a "circular firing squad" as blame is assigned. More profoundly, it sparked the first salvoes in a Republican civil war with echoes of Tory infighting during their years in the political wilderness. One wing believes the party has to emulate David Cameron, by adapting the issues to fight on and the positions they hold, while the other believes that a back to basics approach will reconnect with heartland voters and ensure success. Modernisers fear that would leave Republicans marginalised, like the Tories were during the Iain Duncan Smith years, condemning them to opposition for a decade. Mr Frum argues that just as America is changing, so the Republican Party must adapt its economic message and find more to say about healthcare and the environment if it is to survive. He said: "I don't know that there's a lot of realism in the Republican Party. We have an economic message that is largely irrelevant to most people. "Cutting personal tax rates is not the answer to everything. The Bush years were largely prosperous but while national income was up the numbers for most individuals were not. Republicans find that a hard fact to process." Other Republicans have jumped ship completely. Ken Adelman, a Pentagon adviser on the Iraq war, Matthew Dowd, who was Mr Bush's chief re-election strategist, and Scott McClellan, Mr Bush's former press secretary, have all endorsed Mr Obama. But the real bile has been saved for those conservatives who have balked at the selection of Sarah Palin. In addition to Mr Frum, who thinks her not ready to be president, Peggy Noonan, Ronald Reagan's greatest speechwriter and a columnist with the Wall Street Journal, condemned Mr McCain's running mate as a "symptom and expression of a new vulgarisation of American politics." Conservative columnist David Brooks called her a "fatal cancer to the Republican Party". The backlash that ensued last week revealed the fault lines of the coming civil war. Rush Limbaugh, the doyen of right wing talk radio hosts, denounced Noonan, Brooks and Frum. Neconservative writer Charles Krauthammer condemned "the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama", while fellow columnist Tony Blankley said that instead of collaborating in heralding Mr Obama's arrival they should be fighting "in a struggle to the political death for the soul of the country". During the primaries the Democratic Party was bitterly divided between Barack Obama's "latte liberals" and Hillary Clinton's heartland supporters, but now the same cultural division threatens to tear the Republican Party apart. Jim Nuzzo, a White House aide to the first President Bush, dismissed Mrs Palin's critics as "cocktail party conservatives" who "give aid and comfort to the enemy". He told The Sunday Telegraph: "There's going to be a bloodbath. A lot of people are going to be excommunicated. David Brooks and David Frum and Peggy Noonan are dead people in the Republican Party. The litmus test will be: where did you stand on Palin?" Mr Frum thinks that Mrs Palin's brand of cultural conservatism appeals only to a dwindling number of voters. He said: "She emerges from this election as the probable frontrunner for the 2012 nomination. Her supporters vastly outnumber her critics. But it will be extremely difficult for her to win the presidency." Mr Nuzzo, who believes this election is not a re-run of the 1980 Reagan revolution but of 1976, when an ageing Gerald Ford lost a close contest and then ceded the leadership of the Republican Party to Mr Reagan. He said: "Win or lose, there is a ready made conservative candidate waiting in the wings. Sarah Palin is not the new Iain Duncan Smith, she is the new Ronald Reagan." On the accuracy of that judgment, perhaps, rests the future of the Republican Party. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...the-party.html
Posts: 49,357

10-28-2008, 09:00 AM	#39
BigChiefFan MVP Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: In the Top 10 Casino cash: $107112	Reagan is a ****ing actor-one of the best presidents is laughable. IRAN CONTRA ring any bells? Yep, St. Reagan. __________________ A 35 year drought can make you thirsty.
Posts: 14,219

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode