As we celebrate the centennial of a great man who was both graceful and gallant, I’ve been watching some of the memorial tributes offered on the DVD, Ronald Reagan: An American President, I had the chance to watch once again former Vice President Cheney’s tribute to the Gipper.
That fine man truly got the essence of the nation’s fortieth president:
“From my mother,” said President Reagan, “I learned the value of prayer. My mother told me that everything in life happened for a purpose. She said all things were part of God’s plan, even the most disheartening setbacks. And, in the end, everything worked out for the best.”
This was the Ronald Reagan who had faith, not just in his own gifts and his own future, but in the possibilities of every life. The cheerful spirit that carried him forward was more than a disposition; it was the optimism of a faithful soul who trusted in God’s purposes and knew those purposes to be right and true.
He once said “There’s no question, I am an idealist,” which is another way of saying, “I am an American.”
We usually associate that quality with youth, and yet one of the most idealistic men ever to become president was also the oldest. He excelled in professions that have left many others jaded and self- satisfied, and yet somehow remained untouched by the worst influences of fame or power.
If Ronald Reagan ever uttered a cynical or a cruel or a selfish word, the moment went unrecorded. Those who knew him in his youth and those who knew him a lifetime later all remember his largeness of spirit, his gentle instincts and a quiet rectitude that drew others to him. . . .
For decades, American had waged a Cold War and few believed it could possibly end in our own lifetimes. The president was one of those few. And it was the vision and the will of Ronald Reagan that gave hope to the oppressed, shamed the oppressors and ended an evil empire.
How does “raised taxes eleven times” always manage to be ignored by the Republicans? CBS News:
But following his party’s losses in the 1982 election, Reagan largely backed off his efforts at spending cuts even as he continued to offer the small-government rhetoric that helped get him elected. In fact, he went in the opposite direction: His creation of the department of veterans affairs contributed to an increase in the federal workforce of more than 60,000 people during his presidency.
And while Reagan somewhat slowed the marginal rate of growth in the budget, it continued to increase during his time in office. So did the debt, skyrocketing from $700 billion to $3 trillion. Then there’s the fact that after first pushing to cut Social Security benefits – and being stymied by Congress – Reagan in 1983 agreed to a $165 billion bailout of the program. He also massively expanded the Pentagon budget.
Meanwhile, following that initial tax cut, Reagan actually ended up raising taxes – eleven times. That’s according to former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Reagan friend who co-chaired President Obama’s fiscal commission that last year offered a deficit reduction proposal.
[Simpson, longtime Reagan friend?!? Better check your facts. The Wyoming Senator was close to his successor George H.W. Bush. Recall as well that for all eight years of his term, the Gipper had to deal with a Democratic House and Republican legislators stil not convinced about the merits of free-market principles.
Oh, and this post is about Reagan’s ideals, his vision not about fiscal issues. Your comment suggests some kind of “need” to attack this good and great man. Wonder what that is. — Dan]
I don’t recall anyone ever claiming Reagan was perfect; he certainly made some mistakes. But he was far above every president since in vision and character.
Also, Reagan effective set back the march of socialism for a generation. Maybe people like little Stevie would like to have an America in permanent decline with 70% tax rates…. but most Americans (outside the current progressive ruling class) don’t.
What drives the left nuts is the stark contrast between Reagan and the dim-witted, empty suit, triumph of affirmative action currently occupying the Oval Office.
Racist much, V the K?
Nope Granny Goodness, just factual
Yeah, as if an ultra-liberal dimwitted white senator who had served half a term and spent his youth palling around with terrorists would ever have been elevated to be his party’s nominee.
Vice President Dick Cheney: “Reagan taught us deficits don’t matter.
The deficit at the end of Jimmy Carter’s term was $74 million. It ballooned up to $155 billion under St Ronnie.
Molly Ivins: “Ronald Reagan came into office in 1980 on the mantra that he would rid the nation of Waste, Fraud and Abuse. He proceeded to raise the national deficit by $2 trillion with tax cuts and spending on the military in the face of a collapsing Soviet Union.”
Miss Dogma, using Molly Ivins for a source on Ronald Reagan is like using Pat Buchanan for a source on gay people.
As to the deficit, please recall that for the Gipper’s 8 years, he had to deal with a Democratic House dominated by those raised in the tradition of FDR & LBJ, i.e., a belief in big spending.
How come Democrats don’t call on Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry to help handle big issues? If they were good enough to be President, certainly they would be first rate helpers in solving the big problems.
Democrats just seem to leave their also-rans under the bus like so much road kill. Especially when they are driving the bus.
Anyway, Reagan worship really grinds at the core of their moral relativity and rent-a-principle-for-momentary-convenience ideology.
Progressive Dogma might be slightly more convincing did she display any concern at all over Dear Reader’s 1 year deficit being greater than Ronaldus Magnus’s combined eight years of deficit.
But, as with all lefty trolls, deficits are fine as long as Democrats are running them up.
What is it about Steve that he has to be first on all the Reagan threads, crapping on the carpet.
Seriously Steve…what’s your deal? Do you really think it’s your duty to try and change everyone’s mind on Reagan? Does it pain you so much to see what a truly great President was like?
Does the contrast between the greatness and effectiveness of Reagan and the utter failure, impotence and mistake of Obama really hurt you that much?
Never mind. I think we know the answer already.
#7: “As to the deficit, please recall that for the Gipper’s 8 yeas, he had to deal with a Democratic House dominated by those raised in the tradition of FDR & LBJ, i.e., a belief in big spending.”
Dan,
I think your response to Auntie Hogma gets to the heart of the issue. The fact that the Left always focuses on government spending to both trash Reagan’s legacy, and alternatively bolster Obama’s standing by comparison, just reveals how hollow and morally bankrupt their “ideals” are when compared to Reagan’s.
It’s true that spending levels during the Reagan years reflect the fact that the House (where all spending originates) was controlled by Democrats. But even if that had not been the case, the spending does not burden Reagan’s legacy because it was incidental to Reagan’s pursuit of his ideals. For example, increased defense spending based on the ideal of “peace through strength” gave us the strong military and large nuclear arsenal that deterred our enemies, contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union, and ended the Cold War. In that case, the spending was expressly authorized by the Constitution and Americans saw a huge return on the “investment.”
In stark contrast, for Obama, huge government spending IS THE IDEAL. That’s why liberals believe it’s the solution to every problem, including a sluggish economy. Obama and the Democrats just spent almost a trillion dollars on the idea and (as predicted by conservatives) the economy is in even worse shape, unemployment is at a higher level than the Democrats promised it would be even without the “Stimulus,” and the taxpayers are a trillion dollars more in debt. And still the liberals want to spend (“invest”) MORE.
That’s why the liberals can’t use high spending to tear down Reagan’s legacy or bolster Obama’s approval rating. It’s incidental to his accomplishments. Obama believes getting massive, wasteful spending proposals through a Congress controlled by his own party IS an accomplishment.
And also, I thought it was hilarious that Dogma was calling V the K racist for having the temerity to compare Obama to white presidents.
Looks like Dogma is admitting that black liberals like Obama are ignorant and inferior and could never be expected to meet the same standards as a white president.
#12 – Well, NDT, the one thing that libtards are good at is projection.
After all, it was Bill Clinton who said of MuBarack Obama: “Five years ago, he would have been bringing us coffee.”
Regards,
Peter H.