Comments for Reagan Was Wrong | Newsweek Politics | Newsweek.com »
Posted By AnteUp 6 months ago in NewsTo conservative Cassandra Henry Fairlie, Republicans sowed their present-day destruction from the start.
Read Full Story at newsweek.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 51
-
-
100%
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually some of the viewpoints expressed by Fairlie were pretty common amongst conservatives. In its now usual role of constructing "propaganda lines" that support the government whatever it does, our media simply don't tell us about that.
Reply
FTA:
...Fairlie's critique of American conservatism began with a GOP heresy: that by embracing the free market so completely, the party had gone calamitously awry. "The conservative can all too easily drift into a morally bankrupt and intellectually shallow defense of those who have it made and those who are on the make," he wrote. Without a humanizing tory influence, conservatives were apt to forget "the ugly face of capitalism"—the way that the market tends to coarsen and destabilize society, making the gross national product fodder for our "gross national appetite." Republicans, he argued, could never succeed in uniting the country as long as they supported business interests so completely with both their policy choices and their rhetoric: "The nation cannot be brought to you, as if it were Masterpiece Theatre, by a grant from Mobil Oil," he wrote.
... Tax-cutting regulation-haters weren't the only false conservatives in the Reagan coalition, Fairlie argued: the bedroom-snooping, morality--legislating social conservatives were just as misguided. He was no libertarian, but he thought that much of the social agenda of the American political right (then and now) consisted of things that were nobody's business: "Let one homosexual, coke-snorting student bum get hold of two food stamps, and the whole apparatus of government is brought into play," he wrote.
************************
That said, Fairlie himself seems to have been a pretty odd character that only the strongly entrenched "class elitism" of the British could produce.-
LonesomeLoserComment removed: Spam
-
-
91%
jordan116 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Curious if others were aware of Henry Fairlie?>>>>
Reply
I read his stuff more years ago than I care to admit, lol. Coming from a family of "Narrow minded, book banning, truth censoring, mean spirited; ungenerous, envious, intolerant, afraid; chicken, bullying; trivially moral, falsely patriotic; family cheapening, flag cheapening, God cheapening; the common man, shallow, small, sanctimonious" folks, it helped to know I wasn't the only one who noticed. -
-
-
94%
Charlson6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
During the 1980 Republican convention, he wrote a column for The Washington Post describing the delegates as members of the "booboisie" once mocked by H. L. Mencken, by which Fairlie meant they were: "Narrow minded, book banning, truth censoring, mean spirited; ungenerous, envious, intolerant, afraid; chicken, bullying; trivially moral, falsely patriotic; family cheapening, flag cheapening, God cheapening; the common man, shallow, small, sanctimonious."
Reply
"Republicans need to try once again to "civilize and broaden" conservatism. It means finding a way to uphold our best traditions while ceasing to profess "a conservatism that is just one long grouch at the twentieth century." It means bringing a genuine compassion to government, as opposed to the sloganeering kind. And it means learning to love America in all its messy kaleidoscopic glory, as Fairlie did. "
Republican base today are the "Booboisie" of Fairlie's era. And his recipe for Republican resurrection is still applicable.-
93%
Will13136 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Narrow minded, book banning, truth censoring, mean spirited; ungenerous, envious, intolerant, afraid; chicken, bullying; trivially moral, falsely patriotic; family cheapening, flag cheapening, God cheapening; the common man, shallow, small, sanctimonious."
Reply
---------
described several Propeller members to a T.. -
95%
vor6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"When I first read Fairlie's column about the convention, it seemed overheated. Then I watched Sarah Palin speak. Fairlie's disgust at the GOP's impulse toward small-minded demagoguery anticipated the day when it would reach its fullest expression—when the movement would have no farther to fall."
Reply
Apparently there is still some space yet to fall. This fall I often thought of what an America of Limabaughesque/ Palin thinking would look like? Truly a horrifying proposition. There would be no tolerance for but one line of thinking.
You say that is happening now? I challenge that by saying we would love to hear some responsible talk from Republicans about now. It just isn't out there. Attacks and slander are not policies. Jindal, the wonder boy witthe new ideas is already dead as a candidate in '12. And the rest of the field is full of stale, old, moldy thought. Especially Sarah Palin. Her new ideas involve using simplistic thinking for complicated problems. Something akin to asking a first grader to lead a statistics class.
Blame Reagan? I blame Reagan for a lot of this mess. He wanted a deregulated market, he dropped tax rates on the wealthiest Americans to levels previously unthought. He waged an extremely expensive arms race with the Soviets. Which expedited their collapse and assisted in our own eventual economic mess. But we still have the Russian Bear, more compact and just as dangerous as before. We have spent around a trillion dollars on Star Wars only to end up with a system that may stop a single warhead but has no capability against multiple launches. His deficits were also deceiving because they don't include the cuts in social programs that occurred for which we will long pay a price. And don't forget Iran-Contra where a portion of the country basically argued that ethics do not matter in the pursuit of national security. A precursor to todays torture debate.
But Reagan made many feel good. He had immense persuasive power. They usually were not his own words but he could certainly deliver them to maximum effect. He was the re-birth of GOP delusion post-Watergate. Sometimes we forget to which party that scandal belonged. And Reagan would be a key reason. He was romantic figure that needs to be de-romanticized in retrospect. Yes, despite the beliefs of many Republicans we must look back to see the roots of our failures. And do so honestly.-
88%
cleare6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i detested ronnie ( we can also thank him for imposing federal taxes on unemployment benefits) and thought it couldn't get any worse, and then george the Ist came along and again i thought it couldn't get any worse...and then there was george the 2nd and it was as bad as i was willing to let it get. thank heavens many other americans felt the same.
Reply
this was a great article about an insightful commentator and reminds me of the truly conservative elements in my nature.
i remember when ronnie died, the slightest whisper of criticism was swept aside with the comment that there would be plenty of time for criticism after a period of mourning...i knew that time wouldn't come. it's good to see someone finally bring me vindication and some gratification. and someone who also supports my contention that it's been the onslaught of 30 years of republican autocracy, not just the final 8 years that have brought on the many crisis' we're faced with now.
-
-
-
-
79%
crespi6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
AND some sizable droppings...
Reply
As a radical friend of mine said a couple of years ago (well after Reagan's death,) "Die Reagan, Die!"
Instead, the ultra-cons turned his image into some sort of zombie, which infected the entire Conservative movement with soul-death.-
80%
cleare6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i was even worse than your friend, crespi...
Reply
after the reagan assassination attempt, my comment was "i wouldn't have missed".
how i hated that man, but you are right...we also have to blame him for every "reagan republican" that he spawned. -
-
-
33%
rouge-leader6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Trickle down does'nt work? really? well then tell me when the last time a bum on the street offered you a job,Realizer.
Reply
i am so sick and tired of your little punks on this site crying about how bad Capitalism is and that we "NEED" socialism or it will all go to hell.
does history as it really happend mean anything to anyone anymore? oh that's right history as it really happend stopped being taught in the class room long before this current crop of spoiled brats were born.
I mean really it is not as if this all has'nt been tried before in such lovely places like Russia, China,N. Korea,Cuba and yet one hundred years of failure means nothing to to a bunch of sissy a$$ed mamma's boys who profess to want equality of outcome as if such a thing could ever be achieved.-
67%
AnteUp6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Corporate WELFARE - the distribution of all of our tax dollars to the "CHOSEN" few -
Reply
is NOT Capitalism. It did nothing for those who provided the actual funding -
it made the corporations wealthier and they were NOT GRATEFUL.
It should be very apparent - they took the money and RAN to offshore banks
to protect their ill-gotten gain from....ta-dum! .......our tax system.
Did they produce more jobs? Did they add to the the coffers of our country to
maintain the nation? Not on your life!
With executive earnings at 400% times the that of the average worker, and middle
class Americans showing negative savings..............WHAT, rouge, is it
that they were supposed to do for us? Maybe since you seem to believe
their spin - maybe you could SHOW me where it has worked beneficially for the
country?
-
-
-
-
15%
lloydm656 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let me see Reagan twenty million,plus jobs,Obama minus two million jobs gone,and counting.Reagan rescued the Country from a president,almost as stupid as the one who won.Who would have thought that Marxism could reared it ugly head in America.I don't know why we are not in the streets of D C screaming get out,get out now,and take comrades with you.Your stench is moving across America like an evil darkness.
Reply-
87%
bubba26 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You really are F .... ed up in your "thinking".
Reply
Over 20 million jobs were created during the Clinton years.
During W's reign, about 6-7 million jobs were created. However, starting in mid-2007, the layoffs came tumbling in and the economy reeled toward the crash that "hit the fan" in the fall of 2008.
The current situation with unemployment and the economy are in large part a result of "Reaganomics" and the policies of the Bush administration.
The continual attempts by people like you to blame Obama for all of the economic mess that was ALREADY in full throttle by January 2009 is total hogwash and comes from nothing more than HATE for anyone not "Republican". -
82%
crespi6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Reagan RAISED taxes. You're old, lloyd, you should REMEMBER.
Reply
Your "communist/Marxist" boogeyman threats are WAY outdated and make you look ridiculous and paranoid, especially to young people.
Your question about screaming in the streets shows that only YOU (and your quickly disappearing ilk) feel this false outrage, while the overwhelming majority of Americans realize the need for SOME kind of drastic measures to undo the damning Neocon malfeasance that nearly wrecked this country and a good part of the world...-
-
-
50%
AnteUp6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
REALLY? When did we first start to notice the people sleeping in the streets?
Reply
During what years did the Leader of the Free World begin to have a homeless
problem? God knows, that doesn't eat into the use of our taxes, does it?
So, taxes were lowered on those already wealthy - and ten a hidden
tax was levied on all the rest of us to keep the whole nation going.
I think that's rather unjust - but maybe you like that system.
What ever happened to "working together"? How can you revere
"special favors for special people" above working together?
-
-
-
-
75%
djn3nunez36 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah he resucued us from that President who wanted to get us off foriegn oil. All it took to steal the election was a little bit of treason. Then of course his administration was the most corrupt in modern history. Thank him for the rise of hate radio. Thank him for Iraq WMD program, you know the one he really had. Thank him for trading Arms for hostages with Iran. Thank him for illegally supporting Costra-Rican terrorist and their cross border raid to destablise the duely elected government next door. Thank him for his non-action on the AIDs problem. And don't forget to thank him for the waive of crack hitting the streets and of couse the drop in cocaine prices. Thank him for the Savings and Loan scandal too.
Reply
But none of that was really ever Rayguns' fault. Blame it on Carter, or Clinton...... -
-
78%
FrankHummel6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The WORST DISaccomplishment of Ronnie Ray-gun was NOT the things that he DID, but rather the many things that he UNdid.
Reply
Jimmy Carter, having ben a nuclear submarine tekkie in his Navy career, had some actual savvy regarding the sorts of alternative energy technology that was (obviously) going to be needed in the not-very-far-distant future as we moved into the "post-easy-oil" era. And during his brief tenure, CONSTRUCTIVE initiatives were undertaken --- that his erstwhile "successor" (surely an oxymoronic characterization) promptly SQUELCHED, instead diverting "high-tech" off into "playing Star Wars".
Now THAT was probably the GREATEST BLUNDER in this nation's entire HISTORY --- and in reality it SET THE STAGE (but I guess that was APPROPRIATE, really, for a mere B-Movie ACTOR!) for all that has come after.
He DID, however, no doubt "resonate" with all those would be "cowboys" out there, who actually "bought into" his bullbleep. And so "we" did NOT do all the things that we COULD and SHOULD have been doing all those years.
Ah,'twas ever thus: we get too soon OLD and too late SMART! -
67%
AnteUp6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Carter had his faults - but not near as many as you guys like to proclaim.
Reply
When Carter made good on his promise to get rid of the "cowboys" in the
CIA - the agency divided into camps. You had those who did their jobs as
expected - for the NATION and it's leader. There were others who decided
quite deliberately to scuttle the Commander in Chief. They were fairly successful
in their efforts and it will be for history to sort out a story that hasn't exactly been
big in the news cycle. It would have been a glimpse, however, (if we had cared
to look) at what would come next in deceiving the American public AND our
Legislative bodies. Re: Iran-Contra, the same players that worked diligently AGAINST our President Carter, were to LIE to congress and start a campaign of seeking
PRIVATE donors to carry our our foreign policy - Richard Secord and so many
others never carried out their missions without making a tidy profit either.
So, did they serve themselves - the agency - or the country first?
I've made my opinion on that quite clear - what's yours?
other infamous names.
-
-
88%
cleare6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
reaganomics has finally been proven a failure.
Reply
reagan was credited with a more than fair share of responsibility for the downfall of the ussr, internal coups and pressure from the various republics wanting independence has consistantly been down played to help bolster the "superman reagan" image.
he was called "the great communicator", but i never saw it. i saw a b grade actor mouthing inanities.
i can't think of enough bad things to say about reagan and every republican who's deified him.-
71%
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, all the presidents since Reagan have essentially been actors hired by the "elite" to serve their interests. Clinton, with his connections to the zionist "Democratic Leadership Council" and the "financial oligarchs" was no exception. Since Reagan, the "rhetoric" used by presidents has changed with administrations, but not much more.
Reply
As we remember that Obama was hired by much the same "elite" (political party doesn't matter), it remains to be seen whether he also anything more than an actor. Unfortunately, the signs are not good.
Obama a very smooth liar
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/06/18/obama-a-...
Broadly speaking, Obama has been lying on a pretty impressive scale. You just have to get past his grandiloquent rhetoric — usually empty of substance — to get a handle on it. I offer a short, incomplete list, which I’m sure others could easily enlarge.
•?Obama portrayed himself as the peace candidate, or at least the anti-war candidate. He is not a peace president, nor is he stopping any wars. True, he promised military escalation in Afghanistan (to blunt John McCain’s accusations of wimpishness), but well-meaning folks believed their new hero would genuinely move to end the occupation of Iraq and seriously try to negotiate with the Taliban. Instead, he has not only increased the number of troops and attacks against the Afghan insurgency, he has also expanded on George Bush’s cross-border raids into Pakistan, which have killed many civilians. The way things are going, Pakistan could become the new Cambodia and Obama the new Nixon.
•?Obama said he wanted to reform Washington and “fix” its “broken” system of corrupt lobbying. But Obama is neither a reformer nor a skilled legislative mechanic. Hatched from the Daley Machine in one-party Chicago, Obama wouldn’t be president today if he rocked boats. Witness the appointment of Roland Burris by the corrupt former Gov. Rod Blagojevich to fill Obama’s Senate seat: not a word of public protest from the new administration because Burris is a made man in the Chicago Democratic organization. So what if “Tombstone Roland” can be heard on the U.S. attorney’s wiretaps of Blagojevich, dancing around the delicate question of how to raise money for Blago without appearing to be buying his seat.
As for pork-barrel politics, Obama named one of its greatest champions, Chicago’s own Rahm Emanuel, as his chief of staff, and the new budget (as well as the “stimulus” package) is loaded with pork. ....Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn III .... Lou Susman, a Chicagoan and former Citigroup executive .... Charles Rivkin.-
100%
hyperbola6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
•?Obama, with his Arabic middle name and his big Cairo speech, wants people to think that he is the Muslim world’s new best friend. Well, the photograph of a cheery Obama with Saudi King Abdullah and a smiling Emanuel with Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal, proves the contrary. The Saudi royal family hates the idea of representative government for ordinary Muslims and is cruelly indifferent to the fate of the Palestinians. A democratic, independent, partly secular Palestine could only make the Saudi oligarchy look bad. Thus, the House of Saud is perfectly happy with the status quo, and so, evidently, is Obama. ....
Reply
•?Obama makes like he’s a friend of organized labor, at least he did during the Ohio primary when he needed to beat Hillary Clinton.....
Yes, of course it’s nice to have a president who speaks in complete sentences. But that they’re coherent doesn’t make them honest.
-
-
-
63%
antibrainwasher6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is what is left of the principles of the party of cons: Baby jesus was a capatilist, as was the floating invisible head of Charleton Heston, baby jesus's jealous torturing daddy, both capatilists, directing massive capital to flow to those white men who are vituous and work hard, and to the generations of drug sotted children they spawn, the chosen superclass. If your just a working class or poverty welfare child, you are a lazy good for nothing, since you weren't born with a silver spoon up your arse, which the inbred bible thumping masses eat up like grits and gravy.
Reply
Make the rich richer, and while you kiss the rich's arse, open your gaping maw, and hope for some warm trickel down, that's the only principle of the cons, and they get stupid white southern racist trash to vote con by selling them daddy identity politics. -
-
25%
mjnyeopc6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Trickle down economics didn't work so well, but trickle down financial collapse sure is! What do you call giving trillions of dollars to banks and automakers, if not another form of Trickle Down Economics? And none of that is tricklng down, either.
Reply
Wake up people. Socialism has NEVER worked. Capitalism may not be perfect, but it is still the best system. Unfortunately, the False God is doing his damndest to destroy that which has kept our country great for over 200 years. -
-
spartafullthrottleComment removed: Abusive
-
LonesomeLoserComment removed: Spam
-
LonesomeLoserComment removed: Spam
-
50%
rouge-leader6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WORK? Spartafullthrottle surely you jest?!
Reply
These RE-WRITERS of history as learned at the feet of their "teachers" do not work. they leech and suck the life blood from those who do.
How else can you explain the anger and bitterness,the vile abuse of the language and their contempt for those that go opon the earth on two feet supporting their empty meaningless little lives?
I know all of this to be true,because if they did work for a living they would not think this way and they most certainly would not have voted for a two bit Chicago thug who wants to enslave them. -
50%
AnteUp6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's a ltitle tidbit from Joseph Trento's book,"Prelude to Terror":
Reply
For Carter, the realization that he had been cheated out of his presidency came with the publication on April 1,1991, of former Iranian president Bani-Sadr's book, "My Turn To Speak:Iran,The Revolution & Secret Deals with the U.S." He wrote: "I have proof of contacts between Khomeini and the supporters of Ronald Reagan as early as the Spring of 1980...the sole purpose of which was to handicap Carter's re-election bid by preventing the hostages' release before the American elections in November 1980. Rafsanjani,Beheshti,and Ahmed Khomeini[the Ayatollah's son]played key roles in proposing this agreement to the Reagan team."
Kind of makes you want to ask the HOSTAGES how they felt
about Reagan. Think they might have minded sticking around
just a little longer so that Reagan/Bush could get elected?
This is the faux patriotism that the Great Communicator, and
his spin doctors, fed the public then - and it has continued
as a steady diet to this very day. Because it WAS patriotic?
Not even close! Because it worked for them....they learned
to WIN with spin. The state of our union comes in WAY down
on the list of priorities - WINNING trumps all!
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.