I Missed a Day: Why Is Obama The Second Coming of Reagan?

[DrFunkenstein]

I am assuming that he praised the revered idol of half the nation in order to win them over in order to further progressive policies. I have seen him do similar things on several occasions and not only have no problem with it, I actively support it.

As someone who has:

A)Read "What's The Matter With Kansas?" and "Don't Think of an Elephant"
B)Actually read Obama's impressively progressive policy positions

I don't have a big problem with Obama using rhetoric to enact real change, even if he invokes Reagan (with whom I have a big problem). As much as I love a good culture war, I would much rather see major health care and environmental/energy reform pass through Congress than get some good licks in.

Although I am an avowed political junkie, I try not to lose sight of what matters in the end - helping people, making the world a better place, etc.

I think Obama's rhetoric is very different than, say, someone who wants to seem as "tough" as a Republican through militarism and sabre-rattling, let alone providing a legacy of triangulating policies to seem "moderate."

Obviously, I have a big problem with the way the media applies the terms "tough" (suggesting determination when they mean harsh, repressive, draconian, militaristic) and "moderate" (which suggests being reasonable when they mean centrist).

All of that said, I am honestly open to what people have to say about Obama's crimes against the 80's. I have seen him linked to Reagan in a weird way around here, and must assume that something jaw-dropping came to light in the short time I was away from this lovely discussion board.

Thanks, everybody! :hi:

[Unsane]

1. Holy crap, a post with critical thinking in it!

be gone!

[Barack_America]

2. Because he had the audacity to say that Reagan was an influential President...

Which is a fact, but never mind that....let's prepare the tar and feathers!!

[MrCoffee]

6. Does influential = good, or something to be emulated?

If Obama was simply stating "Ray-gun was an influential President", fine. Piss-poor choice (wasn't FDR influential?), but whatever.

If, on the other hand, Obama was saying "Ray-gun was an influential President and I want to be an influential President in that way", then I have a huge problem with that.

Ray-gun's influence was created by media handlers and by extreme power-grabbing. These are not characteristics to be copied.

[doc03]

10. It sounded to me he thought it was good

he said he gave Americans what they wanted clarity, optimism and an entrepreneur spirit.

[MrCoffee]

11. but why choose St. Ronnie the Bastard as your example?

either he was going for California Democrats or he thinks highly enough of Ray-gun to make that analogy...


IMO, it was a terrible thing to say.

[THUNDER HANDS]

3. Obama isn't the second coming of Reagan

in any policy sense. Just in the sense that if he were elected, it would signal a sea-change in American politics not seen since Reagan swept into office and moved the country radically to the right.

The point he was making as that the late 70s and very early 80s were a time when America was depressed, the president looked ineffective, and the country wanted something new.

Kinda like now.

Andrew Sullivan, who is a conservative blogger (excellent writer, btw), saw Obama at a campaign rally LAST YEAR and said the guy could do for liberalism what Reagan did for conservatism.

If that happens, a lot of people on this board will be very happy.

But other people on here hear the name REAGAN and don't get past the name, because in their minds, even mentioning his name is a sin. Which is really mature way of approaching politics.

[DesertFlower]

5. thank you. you just said

almost everything i was going to say.

[DJ13]

4. Just ignore it

The Hillary and (some) Edwards supporters ran out of meaningful criticisms of Obama, so this fake outrage is their current Swiftboat tactic of choice.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. Just watch this youtube video to see the offending remarks.

If you don't get the vapors from watching this, then I don't know what's wrong with you.

[stillcool]

8. here's a link to the interview..

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080115/VIDEO/80115026&oaso=news.rgj.com/breakingnews
But it may not help very much. It's just listening. But there seems to be some 'issues' with hearing.

[DrFunkenstein]

14. Thank You, The Sound Wasn't So Good So I Went to YouTube

I couldn't make the sound louder.

Edited to add the smiley!
:toast:

[stillcool]

21. that's odd.

but it all makes sense now! No wonder every one is torturing his words!

[Vinca]

9. Hasn't it occurred to anyone that Obama is preparing to go into

California and make nice with the Reagan Democrats and a few Republicans and that might be the reason he dropped the "R" word? The only kind of comparison made to Reagan was that Reagan came along at a point in history that was ready for change and now one of those times has come again. Much ado about nothing . . . again.

[flpoljunkie]

22. Yes, Lawrence O'Donnell mentioned this last night on MSNBC. I agree with your assessment.

[NoBorders]

12. Ack! You just said Reagan! You must love his policies! n/t

[Clinton Crusader]

13. Hang on, I thought he was the second RFK, then JFK. Now he's Reagan? Lots of hats to wear!

[robbedvoter]

15. You forgot MLK. he was also MLK! Who said this about his other model:

"When a Hollywood performer, lacking distinction even as an actor, can become a leading war hawk candidate for the presidency, only the irrationalities induced by war psychosis can explain such a turn of events."

[DrFunkenstein]

18. That's Why I Support Someone Who Wants Nukes Eliminated, Not "On The Table"

“Presidents since the Cold War have used nuclear deterrents to keep the peace, and I don’t believe any president should make blanket statements with the regard to use or nonuse of nuclear weapons.”

I believe one of the Senators from New York said that.

-----------

Democrat Barack Obama called for ridding the world of nuclear weapons Tuesday and offered his early opposition to the Iraq war as evidence of sound judgment that trumps his lack of Washington experience.

Here's what I'll say as president: 'America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons.'"

"The best way to keep America safe is not to threaten terrorists with nuclear weapons—it's to keep nuclear weapons and nuclear materials away from terrorists."

The Republican National Committee criticized the proposal as unsafe and an example of Obama "playing to the fringe elements of his party." But the concept has the backing of at least two former Republican secretaries of state, Henry Kissinger and George Shultz.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8S1ALCO0&show_article=1&cat=0

[Bodhi BloodWave]

16. Very true, i just wish people would let him be himself rather then

try to to make/compare him to different people o.O

[robbedvoter]

19. it was Obama who invited those comparisons, not others...

[DrFunkenstein]

17. Ok...I Watched Obama, Edwards and Dan Abrams

Maybe I drank too much kool-aid (or not enough), but I still stand by what I thought earlier. Although my immediate emotional reaction is with Edwards 100%, a 3 second pause allows me to see it as an obviously misleading attack.

Nowhere did Obama concede any ground to Reagan's policy legacy, and he managed to soften the hearts of many a conservative for giving some ground to their hero. One of the reasons I like Obama best is his ability to soften the hardened hearts of people on both sides of the fence (and some perched on top) in order to inspire them towards civil service and to help them understand that the government can play a positive role in their lives.

As a hardcore, Nation-reading liberal, I completely agree with Obama that Reagan was able to change the trajectory of the country and lift up peoples spirits.

Of course, Obama speaks of hope, whereas Reagan was merely optimistic. Cornel West has pointed out that there is a magnificent distinction between the two. Hope inspires people to action, optimism inspires lethargy (since everything will work out, one way or another).

[robbedvoter]

20. "liberal rhetoric did seem to value rights and entitlements over duties and responsibilities

"by promising to side with those who worked hard, obeyed the law, cared for their families, loved their country, Reagan offered Americans a sense of common purpose that liberals seemed no longer able to muster."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4087189&mesg_id=4087491

[stillcool]

23. ain't it the truth?

what gains have the democratic party made towards helping the people, rather than the corporations? 35 year of Reaganesque policy that has transformed this nation. You would think ordinary people would get it.

[flpoljunkie]

24. Insightful post, Dr. Funkenstein!