Searching For Reagan

Before you read too much into the title of this post, let me assure you all that I am well aware Reagan is dead. I know he's not coming back, and I promise I am not going to compare everyone to Reagan when this next presidential election cycle kicks in. I don't sit around in my underwear watching Fox News moaning, "what would Reagan do?" That's not what this is about. Really, the idea of "Searching for Reagan" goes back to my very first post. I've been asked by liberals why conservatives always seem to be looking for "the next Reagan," and I've been berated by conservatives who tell me to stop talking about him, that we need to find a new leader. Well, there you go again. To be honest, nostalgia plays a big part. After all, he was our leader when I was between the ages of six and fourteen, he was what I knew for eight years, and frankly, those were eight good years for me, but there's more to it than that. When I look at President Obama's response to the insurrection in Libya, I can't help but remember that Reagan dropped bombs on that little twerp's house. Everyone knew that Gaddafi was a sponsor of Islamic terrorists, that he was training suicide squads, that he talked about assassinating Reagan. Reagan's response? A bomb in your lap, buddy. It may not have killed him, but he hasn't messed with us since, has he? When I think about President Obama's response to the voter protests in Iran, I remember Operation Praying Mantis. When Iran damaged an American vessel, Reagan sunk their navy. While Obama was telling the Russians where all of our nukes are and promising not to make any more, I thought back to Reykjavik. Gorbachev said, "we'll reduce our nukes if you stop working on defenses against them." What Reagan said? "No." Obama is yoga. Reagan is kickboxing. He also had a way with the press. He knew who these people are and how to talk to them. When asked by Sam Donaldson if Reagan would accept any of the blame for the recession, Reagan quipped, "yes, because for years, I was a democrat." He understood liberals, how liberals use language to frame the debate, and he redefined the debates on his terms. He rejected class warfare in favor of prosperity for everybody. There was no right or left, there was up or down. Because of his two landslide victories, people still refer to the "Reagan Democrats." He knew how to get his message out. Just think back to the 1980s for a second. We finally welcomed our Viet Nam veterans home. We restored the statue of liberty. People were singing "Born in the USA" not because of whatever point Bruce Springsteen was trying to get across, but because they were proud to be Americans. G.I. Joe was a real American Hero. Tell me you didn't watch Red Dawn and cheer Patrick Swayze on. Tell me Mary Lou Retton didn't make you proud. Lie to me and say you weren't stoked to hear Rambo was coming back for blood. America was just...different under Ronald Reagan. Some of you will try to remind me about Iran-Contra and Ollie North. Let me just say that even though there was nothing illegal about it, it bothered me, too...and I believe it bothered and saddened Reagan, too. Leadership is tough. But Reagan did lead. Reagan made me feel good about my country, which I think was important for everyone after Viet Nam, After Nixon, After Carter. That's what I'm searching for. Not just Reagan. I don't want Reagan back, I don't want to relive the 1980s...I want to feel good about America again. I want to feel that optimism, that-dare I say it? Hope.

Joe Lieberman: Recovering Democrat

Is Joe Lieberman the only liberal thinker out there who understands how foolish it is to put partisan politics before national security? In an interview with The Hill,

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/lieberman-escalates-attack-on-iraq-critics-2007-07-31.html, he blasts his former liberal allies on their continued criticism of the president and the war. “I fear that some people take this position also because anything President Bush is for, they’ll be against, and that’s wrong,” said Lieberman, a staunch advocate of the war. “There’s a great tradition in our history of partisanship generally receding when it comes to foreign policy. But for the moment we’ve lost that.” That little quote, folks, explains it all. Liberal Democrats hate George Bush so much that they will blame him for anything, even a natural disaster, and anything he is for the will automatically be against. Hurricane Katrina? George Bush's fault. 9/11? George Bush's fault. Global warming? George Bush's fault. The sinking of Titanic? They're not sure they can prove it, but they know George Bush sank it. Liberals hate him so much that, even in the middle of a war against an evil enemy that wants all Christians and Jews dead, they can't bring themselves to admit that sometimes fighting is the only option. Because Joe Lieberman doesn't subscribe to the point of view that anything George Bush says or does is wrong, they hung him out to dry in the last election, even though he was the Democrat Party's choice for Vice President in 2000. Yet, as American voters seem to like a guy who has the courage to stand by his beliefs, he won his Senate seat as an independent. “I think either [Democrats] are, in my opinion, respectfully, naïve in thinking we can somehow defeat this enemy with talk, or they’re simply hesitant to use American power, including military power,” Lieberman was quoted as saying by The Hill. Well, maybe, but it's more likely that no Democrat wants to be caught siding with the president. Lieberman is so put off by this that he hasn't ruled out jumping ship entirely and becoming a Republican. Keep in mind, by the way, that Joe Lieberman is in no way, shape, or form a conservative. That has to say something for the direction the Democrat party is going, don't you think? Could he become the first nationally recognized liberal Republican? I wonder if there's a support group for that.....