10 Reasons why Reagan is closer to Bill Clinton than he is to Bush!

[kaiso]

I know I risk being flamed for this but I'll present my case. Please correct any inaccuracies as I am no history buff.

I am not suggesting that Reagan was on the same level with Clinton. Reagan could never hold a candle to Clinton IMNSHO.

I am simply devising a strategy where we Democrats could use this Reagan media love fest and turn it against and force it to backfire on the Neocons. There is nothing that pisses the Republicans off more than comparing the man they love to hate, Bill Clinton to Reagan.

1) Reagan raised taxes after cutting them in his 1st year in an attempt to help balance the budget. He did not balance the budget the way Clinton did but he was concerned with it unlike Bush. When Reagan took office, the top tax bracket 70%, unemployment 11%, inflation 10%, interest rates 15%. Even a liberal like me believe a top bracket of 70% was too high and considering the economic situation, I think he was correct to cut taxes. When Reagan took office, the national debt was approx 1 trillion, he left office 8 years later with a 2.6 trillion dollar deficit. In four years, Papa Bush increased the national debt from 2.6 trillion to almost 4 trillion without any of the severe economic conditions of his predecessor. Under Clinton it increased from 4 trillion to 5.6 trillion with a surplus bringing down the debt in his final 2 years. Baby Bush has already increased that debt to 7.2 trillion in less than 4 years. The BUSHS', both Papa and Baby Bush IMO were the ones who ran up the debt enormously, putting the future of this nation at risk.

2) Clinton and Reagan great communicators, Bush is not a communicator.

3) Clinton, small government "the era of big government is over" and he actually cut the government pay roll by over 300,000. Reagan also believed in small government, Baby Bush is a fiscally irresponsible big government hog.

4) Reagan believed in opening gates and pulling down walls, he initiated free trade agreements, all along Clinton's lines. When Reagan said "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall", Baby Bush reverses that open strategy and tells Sharon to go ahead and Build that Wall separating the Palestinians.

5) Reagan was not so pro-Israel/anti-Palestine as Bush. In fact, isn't it true that while Reagan was supplying weapons to Iraq, Israel was feeding Iran weapons? Baby Bush on the other hand has our country in a case of the 'tail wagging the dog' with his pro-Israel stance. Israel now tells us to jump and Bush asks Sharon 'when can we come down?'.

6) Reagan from California, Bush from Texas.

7) Clinton and Reagan did not force religion down our throats, Bush is a Christian right wing radical. From Yesterday's service:
"Dad was also a deeply, unabashedly religious man. But he never made the fatal mistake of so many politicians wearing his faith on his sleeve to gain political advantage. True, after he was shot and nearly killed early in his presidency, he came to believe that God had spared him in order that he might do good. But he accepted that as a responsibility, not a mandate. And there is a profound difference." - Ron Reagan Jr's service remarks, June 11th, 2004

8) Clinton and Reagan restored hope, Bush is currently destroying the moral fabric of the country and he appeals to his followers weakest fears, not their hopes!

9) Clinton and Reagan built respect around the globe for America, Bush has destroyed our moral standing throughout the world. The respect around the world we once commanded is now gone, and might take a generation to rebuild.

10) The manner in which Bush deals with his adversaries is opposite to the Clinton like engagement of Reagan. Bush would never have met and engaged Gorbachev in debates.

Instead of singing Reagan's sins like his actions in Central America, and his approach to the working poor and minorities, I say lets use a reverse strategy and turn it on Bush!

We Democrats could use Reagan's strengths against Bush but some are too sensitive to fight that winning battle. Ron Jr opened the gates with his service address attacking Bush yesterday. Even Nancy is now calling for Stem Cell research, another anti-Bush message. Bush is no Reagan, in fact he is the antithesis of Clinton/Reagan. I say lets shout the mantra that "Bush is no Reagan", we will win more votes with that message than the message of "Reagan and Bush are evil, Iran/Contra". We might even win over the so-called 'Reagan Democrats', if they ever existed.

[Political_Junkie]

1. I would say after reading your post

that the "Reagan Democrats" do exist. There is plenty of evidence available to refute most of your points here. Your repeating rw talking points. Do your homework, and until then, give it a break. Reagan was no hero.

[LTR]

2. If only RWers opened their eyes to this

I've been saying the same thing for years, yet freepers won't buy it. They simply live in a state of denial.

Good post, and welcome aboard!