Reagan, that block of wood with hair, ushered in the neocons.

B

blackascoal

The Force is With Me
It's amazingly interesting listening to all the right-wing punditry having wet dreams about Reagan.

Reagan, Reagan, Reagan ... what would Reagan do?

At the same time they swoon over Reagan, they lament the state of the Republican Party and how Bush allowed infiltrators to take over the party.

What would Reagan do? ... probably the exact same thing Bush did and he'd be surrounded by the exact same people. It was Ronald Reagan who ushered in the neocons who took over the Republican Party.

The puppet known as Reagan was every bit as dumb and controlled as the present puppet sitting in the White House.

But what's a republican to do these days but reach back 20 plus years for re-invented glory?
 
blackascoal said:
It's amazingly interesting listening to all the right-wing punditry having wet dreams about Reagan.

Reagan, Reagan, Reagan ... what would Reagan do?

At the same time they swoon over Reagan, they lament the state of the Republican Party and how Bush allowed infiltrators to take over the party.

What would Reagan do? ... probably the exact same thing Bush did and he'd be surrounded by the exact same people. It was Ronald Reagan who ushered in the neocons who took over the Republican Party.

The puppet known as Reagan was every bit as dumb and controlled as the present puppet sitting in the White House.

But what's a republican to do these days but reach back 20 plus years for re-invented glory?
Click to expand...

Yes, Reagan brought the populists with him into the party. But as president, he served his purpose, wrecking the USSR and ushering in the Bull Market. I doubt he realized how damaging the populists would be.

And the people who advised Reagan and Bush I were men like Brent Scowcroft, who were realists and opposed taking Saddam out. Wolfowitz had no power under Bush I and Cheney and Rumsfeld still hadn't come over to his way of thinking.
 
Threedee said:
Yes, Reagan brought the populists with him into the party. But as president, he served his purpose, wrecking the USSR and ushering in the Bull Market. I doubt he realized how damaging the populists would be.

And the people who advised Reagan and Bush I were men like Brent Scowcroft, who were realists and opposed taking Saddam out. Wolfowitz had no power under Bush I and Cheney and Rumsfeld still hadn't come over to his way of thinking.
Click to expand...

Take a look at the members of the Project for a New American Century .. and you can still smell Reagan on 'em. That's who the neocons are.
 
blackascoal said:
Take a look at the members of the Project for a New American Century .. and you can still smell Reagan on 'em. That's who the neocons are.
Click to expand...

How come they didn't get their way until this administration? A: Because they were in a minority position, with people like Scowcroft, Powell, Sheldon and the realists running the departments and their presidents agreeing with them.
 
Kind of like the people who think Clinton is a god? That is, until Clinton became a liability-- now the love has dried up.

EDIt: No pun intended.
 
Threedee said:
How come they didn't get their way until this administration? A: Because they were in a minority position, with people like Scowcroft, Powell, Sheldon and the realists running the departments and their presidents agreeing with them.
Click to expand...

They did get their way, but conditions weren't as ripe for misadventure as they were when Bush came into office .. when they lusted for a "New Pearl Harbor" .. and got it.

Under Reagan, America helped the Indonesian military commit genocide in East Timor and Reagan made the situation in the ME worse as the neocons in his administration, many of the same ones in the Bush Administration, took control of the policy .. a bad policy that continues to this day.

Perhaps this says it better ...

"The Reagan era ushered in the “first real heyday” for the neoconservatives, as they secured upper-level positions in the administration and a rightful place in the Republican Party. The former liberals begin to be accepted by the Republicans. This first generation of neoconservatives was much more cautious than the second generation. The collapse of Eastern Europe and the rise of democracies in Central America seemed to this younger group—led by Robert Kagan, William Kristol and later Max Boot—a blueprint for expanding democracy into the Middle East. They took a very triumphal view of the cold war, which was most famously sounded by Francis Fukuyama in “The End of History?” in the National Interest in 1989.
http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=16652
 
blackascoal said:
They did get their way, but conditions weren't as ripe for misadventure as they were when Bush came into office .. when they lusted for a "New Pearl Harbor" .. and got it.

Under Reagan, America helped the Indonesian military commit genocide in East Timor and Reagan made the situation in the ME worse as the neocons in his administration, many of the same ones in the Bush Administration, took control of the policy .. a bad policy that continues to this day.

Perhaps this says it better ...

"The Reagan era ushered in the “first real heyday” for the neoconservatives, as they secured upper-level positions in the administration and a rightful place in the Republican Party. The former liberals begin to be accepted by the Republicans. This first generation of neoconservatives was much more cautious than the second generation. The collapse of Eastern Europe and the rise of democracies in Central America seemed to this younger group—led by Robert Kagan, William Kristol and later Max Boot—a blueprint for expanding democracy into the Middle East. They took a very triumphal view of the cold war, which was most famously sounded by Francis Fukuyama in “The End of History?” in the National Interest in 1989.
http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=16652
Click to expand...

Reagan's policies were directed at the USSR, and his MidEast policies were reactions (such as Lebanon) or contination of Cold War policy in places like Iran and Afghanistan. The only one that wasn't was his role in the Iran-Iraq War.

And the general concensus now is that America should not intervene, even in genocides, because war is killing civillians and sending our troops off to die...
 
gonzojournals said:
Please. Up until this election the Democrats were the party of "Clinton can do no wrong" just as much as the Republicans for Reagan.
Click to expand...


Dont you remember how hard you fought the idea that Reagan was not the God who ended the cold war?

I gave him credit for recognising Gorby was an honorable man but it was Gorby who ended the war not Reagan. The world agrees with that but only Reagan whorshipers think it was Ronny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top