Patterico's Pontifications

9/25/2009

Overdosed on Obama? Here’s the Antidote.

Filed under: General,Government,Politics — Jack Dunphy @ 7:56 am



[Guest post by Jack Dunphy]

We have lately been subjected to a great deal of presidential oratory, most of which the typical visitor to this site has found repugnant. Presented below is what I hope will serve as an antidote. It is a speech, perhaps familiar to some of you, delivered by Ronald Reagan in October 1964 as he campaigned for Barry Goldwater. I have the audio downloaded to my iPod, and I sometimes listen to it on those occasions, sadly frequent these days, when I’ve simply heard too much of President Obama.

–Jack Dunphy

P.S. You can find the text to the speech here.

59 Responses to “Overdosed on Obama? Here’s the Antidote.”

  1. Here is another good example of oratory:

    http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/multimedia/video/2008/wallace/eban_abba.html

    Chants (d41c86)

  2. Danke schoen.

    I needed that. I never thought of Reagan as a prophet before, but he sure sounded like he was talking about our current president when he described the radical lib values of 1964.

    Gesundheit (254807)

  3. One thing I’ve noticed about conservatives, especially ultra-conservatives, is they like to invoke Ronald Reagan.

    First of all, I voted for Reagan. Twice.

    The problem is that the conservative movement, especially on the far right, is absolutely nothing like Reagan’s conservatism.

    The first major difference between Reagan and today’s conservatives was he was a pragmatist over an idealist. Modern conservatives are exactly the opposite. They will die before conceding, believing even 80% is no conservative victory – it’s all or nothing. Last year’s vilification of John McCain is proof – a Senator who voted their way over 80% of the time.

    Ron knew better. Reagan thought it necessary to defeat the Soviet Union and had no problem running up big deficits in order to do so, despite proclaiming himself a fiscal conservative.

    The next thing about him was he carefully honed a public persona of likeability. Whether it was an act or not, I can only relate what I’ve read from others who met him; they invariably say what a great guy he was. I don’t know of anyone, even those opposed to all of his policies, who hated him as a person.

    Nowadays conservatives go out of their way to not only be as unpleasant as possible, but literally revel in their opponents hating their guts.

    JEA (dffa7e)

  4. JEA, projection still, I see.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  5. Isn’t JEA the one that whined about the hyperbolic statements, and the overly partisan nature of discourse?

    JD (c48dbe)

  6. Thanks for including the link. I could hear the applause and the laughter, as well as the utter stillness during the pauses.

    Imagine, no teleprompter? no ‘Are You Ready!’ chants? Just Ronald and a microphone.

    Corwin (ea9428)

  7. As I watched that speech in 1964 I was transfixed. Here was not only a great conservative, but one the greatest orators of all time. He spoke form a depth of conviction, not a well parsed speechwriter prepared speech.

    I asked myself why Republicans chose Goldwater, not this giant of a man. Fortunately 16 years later we were rewarded with one of the greatest Presidents ever.

    Corky Boyd (4e8f68)

  8. Bob Novak’s book is enlightening about Goldwater. He said he was lazy and often gave up quickly on issues that he had emphasized as important. Goldwater was an attractive figure until he was successfully demonized by Johnson. He was not, however, a really good candidate. Of course, you have to consider Allan Greenspan’s comment that Ford was the only normal person he met who was president. The rest have all been driven and tend to be narcissists. Reagan was a great president and, as an actor who had seen the ups and downs of that career, he was probably far more prepared to deal with the emotional aspects of fame.

    JEA, as usual, gets the facts about 10% right. There was an excessive amount of complaining about McCain but McCain is an odd politician. He gets most things right but is spectacularly wrong on immigration. The staff member he had handling that topic for him is a Mexican citizen. Talk about divided loyalties.

    I supported him over Bush in 2000.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  9. Isn’t that cloning machine ready yet?

    Suburban Scarecrow (463faa)

  10. Thanks for that.

    jodetoad (059c35)

  11. Thanks for a look back at “Mr. Amnesty.”

    I’d love to see us try his solution to illegal immigration today 🙂 The people at this very site would call anyone who dared “every thing but a child of God.” I.e., what they called McCain.

    And Reagan’s propensity for pragmatism, as JEA points out — watch out. His actions as Cali governor and president would class him as a dirty RINO today, among some right-wingers.

    Basically, modern conservatives have little connection to Reagan. About as much connection as modern Republicans have to Lincoln.

    This contemporary bunch of hard-liners are the sons and daughters of Newt, a capable politician to be sure, but one who is roughly one-tenth of the man of at least two of the aforementioned individuals — and that’s being generous.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  12. Last year’s vilification of John McCain is proof – a Senator who voted their way over 80% of the time.

    Any villification of McCain has generally been the result of his rather cynical public bashing of conservatives when he felt it would garner him media praise as a “maverick,” not his voting record. McCain’s biggest weakness is that he has NEVER at any time realized that the media only portrays him in a positive light when they can use him as a cat’s paw against conservatives. He’s never figured out that he’s been used like a dishrag the last 10 years.

    McCain’s 2000 run gained the steam that it did because the celebrity-worshipping media were looking for a “rock star” candidate to drool over in contrast to the boring Gore, Bradley, and Bush. It’s also, incidentally, how Obama came to be seen as a viable Presidential candidate–it didn’t have anything to do with his actual record, it had to do with the fact he gave the media leg tingles.

    The next thing about him was he carefully honed a public persona of likeability. Whether it was an act or not, I can only relate what I’ve read from others who met him; they invariably say what a great guy he was. I don’t know of anyone, even those opposed to all of his policies, who hated him as a person.

    You’re kidding, right? The left despised Reagan, they just didn’t ramp up the hate to 11 like they did for Bush. Part of what made his press conferences so amusing is the media would try anything to get him to lose his cool, and he’d turn their questions around on them by using humor. That’s something they absolutely hated, and why the meme of him being an “amiable dunce” became conventional wisdom among nitwit journalists and the academic set.

    Another Chris (2d8013)

  13. Basically, modern conservatives have little connection to Reagan. About as much connection as modern Republicans have to Lincoln.

    One thing that hasn’t changed is that modern leftists still have the same connection to Lenin, Stalin, and Mao.

    Another Chris (2d8013)

  14. Another Chris: Thanks for proving my point in No. 13. Classic, GOP bomb-throwing devoid of any real content. Mindless name-calling. Reagan was bigger than that.

    And you’re right, the left despised him for his policies. The reason it wasn’t raised up to 11 is that first, there was not as much media. And second, Reagan did not run the country into the ground and won both his races fair and square.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  15. There was a lot of BS in that speech, but this struck me as rather prescient:

    “Those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course [to the “ant heap of totalitarianism”].”

    Leviticus (30ac20)

  16. Leviticus:

    Or as Jon Stewart said in response to Bill O’Reilly and other “conservatives” who advocate torture:

    “If you don’t stick to your values when they’re being tested, they’re not values, they’re hobbies.”

    Myron (6a93dd)

  17. Bush won both his elections fair and square too, you partisan hack.

    JD (7e3655)

  18. JD: More name-calling. He won in 2004. We’ll never know what happened in 2000. The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 decision, stopped the count.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  19. Thus proving you are a partisan hack.

    JD (7e3655)

  20. Unintentional irony alert:

    “…Nowadays conservatives go out of their way to not only be as unpleasant as possible, but literally revel in their opponents hating their guts…”

    Hmmm. I don’t need to say it, right?

    Eric Blair (0b61b2)

  21. No, Myron, the Supreme Court of the United States stopped a process which was an illegal, selective count of Gore areas. Unconsitutional also means illegal. According to contemporary accounts, the high Court did not just stop the selective counting attempt by 7-2 but invalidated any and all of the selective counting done thus far, and then decided there would be no further remedy by 5-4. The only count that really counted was the one that had been re-counted by machine and then certified by the Florida Secretary of State, Katherine Harris.

    If it’s any consolation, this is really too complex for you to ever understand, so it’s completely reasonable and proper that you remain angry about it. 🙂

    Official Internet Data Office (918234)

  22. Also remember that the newspapers paid for and completed their own counts. By their reckonings, Bush won all possible legal recounts EXCEPT the one in which Buchanan votes were construed to be Gore votes.

    The problem is that you can’t construe votes. Butterfly ballot or no, once you construe votes like that, well, I’ll just construe all of your votes to be votes for me and we are done.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  23. Another Chris: Thanks for proving my point in No. 13. Classic, GOP bomb-throwing devoid of any real content. Mindless name-calling. Reagan was bigger than that.

    Hey Myron, I directly quoted your slam against Republicans in #13, and you have the gall to say that your point was proven? Thanks for demonstrating once again why you shouldn’t be given the benefit of the doubt in any debate.

    Don’t complain about mindless name-calling when your mindless name-calling was on display for all to see in your previous post.

    You are right that Reagan was bigger than mindless name calling. Saying that liberals know so much that isn’t so was a spot-on criticism.

    Another Chris (2d8013)

  24. Myron is one of those staunch conservatives who supported Reagan, but has turned Democrat because the GOP is controlled by ultra-right-wing nutbags.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (e11adb)

  25. Actually, Myron, the Supreme Court held by 7 to 2 that the Florida count was unconstitutional. It held 5 to 4 that it was too late to correct that fact.

    But then, Myron, you never have gotten anything right.

    SPQR (8475fc)

  26. Official Internet Data Office. You sped over, “then decided there would be no further remedy …”

    That’s kind of important. Five libs, it’d have gone the other way. That shouldn’t be the way you elect a president.

    And this is to say nothing of the voting irregularities — the people improperly denied their right to vote, the screwy ballots, etc.

    If every vote had been counted in Florida, Gore would have won.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  27. your slam against Republicans

    Another Chris: That’s not a slam. Reagan’s stance on many issues would be anathema to many modern-day Republicans. For instance, his being more pro-Amnesty than McCain. He’d be run out of the party on a buckboard.

    Same deal with Lincoln. His supporting the federal government vs. states rights comes to mind. Not exactly a warm and fuzzy concept for modern Republicans.

    It’s not a slam to point out the obvious: The modern GOP does not match up with these figures. That’s not an insult in and of itself.

    You don’t automatically assume the qualities of everyone you idolize, worship or whatever you do with Reagan.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  28. That wasn’t the way we elect a President, Myron. That was the way algore’s attorneys tried to end run Florida election law. But, now that you are arguing that black is white and up is down, you have gone and proven beyond a shadow of a doubt what I noted above. Bush has been out of office almost a year, and you are still trying to delegitimize his Presidency. Rather pathetic of you.

    JD (c48dbe)

  29. At this point, its delusional to the point of 9/11 Truther and Birther.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  30. Brother Bradley: I assume you’re joking. 🙂

    Couldn’t stand Reagan. Didn’t like Bush. But they were competent. I just didn’t like their take on things.

    Dub did not know what he was doing. That’s different.

    You guys have to learn how to rank leaders.

    I’ve even heard Palin compared to Reagan. Much as I disliked the Gipper, even I felt insulted at that one! 🙂

    Myron (6a93dd)

  31. JD: You’re the one tying up on one part of one sentence of mine in No. 14.

    While, predictably, missing my larger point: The noise was raised to 11 on Bush b/c he mostly deserved it.

    I guess in some respects he made Obama possible. Maybe we had to be at the very bottom to take such a giant step into the future.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  32. What an imbecile.

    JD (c48dbe)

  33. As a faux staunch conservative and Reagan admirer, Myron doubtless not only voted for the Gipper, he worked in Reagan’s campaign. So he is totally clueless about an expert on conservative thought.

    No way Myron is just another easily-detected left-wing troll faking respect for Reagan to gain himself some bogus credibility. That would be dishonest and deceitful, and Myron has been the model of the polar opposite of honesty and transparency.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  34. The noise was raised to 11+ before he ever took the Oath of Office. 9 years later, you are still trying to delegitimize him.

    JD (c48dbe)

  35. I do find it telling how you guys have to continue to reach back 30 years to find a leader on your side you admire. And the young folks don’t even know him.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  36. you are still trying to delegitimize him.

    Sorry, JD. You may love him, but he did that all by himself.

    Myron (6a93dd)

  37. Yes, Bradley my “fake respect” is all over my posts:

    “the left despised him for his policies …”

    “Couldn’t stand Reagan …”

    “Much as I disliked the Gipper …”

    I know you’re supposed to be some kind of writer. But how about being some kind of reader, too?

    Myron (6a93dd)

  38. See, that is a perfect example of why you are such an asshat. Bush drove me nuts, yet you snarkily throw out there that I love him. But, that is about all we should expect from a dishonest partisan hack like you.

    JD (c48dbe)

  39. Myron,
    Yes, the fakeness of your “respect” for Reagan is obvious. We’ve had a lot of experience with such trolls here, and can easily spot imposters like you.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  40. Myron – GWB liberated 50 million people from tyranny. Obama has only liberated millions of Americans from their jobs.

    Care to compare deficits, employment rates, oil prices or DOW Jones levels before and after Jan. 2007 when the Democrats took over Congress. I didn’t think so.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  41. Bradley, you keep suggesting that I’m pretending to be conservative merely b/c I acknowledged the obvious — Reagan was competent.

    Since I’m actually not a hack — despite JD’s shrill and repeated accusations to the contrary — I have no problem acknowledging that a conservative can actually do a few things right. For instance, even the ne’er-do-well Bush came up with the best immigration reform plan I have seen before or since.

    Now.

    Don’t think I didn’t notice the non-response to No. 35. The non-response is also telling. It points to a problem you guys cannot address by simply re-litigating Bush 43’s awful legacy.

    At some point, you need to return to that “shining city on the hill” or wherever Reagan wanted to drag us.

    “No-No-No” will only carry you so far, as I’ve said on another thread.

    To paraphrase the California assemblyman who beat Harvey Milk in Milk’s first race:

    Your whole rap’s a downer. You gotta tell them what you’re for, not just what you’re against.

    You gotta give ’em hope.

    And on that note, I metaphorically clap you on the back as I exit this thread. Think on what I said.

    Peace.

    Myron (e63c20)

  42. So as soon as Myron is asked to defend the shameful record of Democrats since Jan. 2007 he runs off and hides.

    Price of oil triples, DOW crashes to half it’s former value, unemployment doubles, deficit doubled in one year and now quadrupled.

    But its GWB who is incompetent.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  43. Myron says what he really thinks about Reagan (emphasis mine):

    At some point, you need to return to that “shining city on the hill” or wherever Reagan wanted to drag us.

    What an unadulterated phony.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  44. I work here is done, it seems.

    Eric Blair (b93fb4)

  45. Don’t think that we didn’t notice that you have yet to explain how the control you seek over everyone’s healthcare will be paid for, how much it will cost, how it will increase efficiency, quality, and access.

    JD (c48dbe)

  46. So as soon as Myron is asked to defend the shameful record of Democrats since Jan. 2007 he runs off and hides.

    Well, that’s our little boy’s MO, every time. Never sticks around when challenged on his claims that are always unsubstantiated, then comes back a few days later to wash, rinse and repeat. Always claims nothing but decency and fairness on his part, while sticking the metaphorical shiv in everyone else’s back on every post. Nothing but a silly prat.

    Dmac (b905fa)

  47. …who never gets laid.

    Dmac (b905fa)

  48. His supporting the federal government vs. states rights comes to mind. Not exactly a warm and fuzzy concept for modern Republicans.

    Myron, you couldn’t be more ignorant if you tried.

    Another Chris (f29ad3)

  49. Never sticks around when challenged on his claims that are always unsubstantiated, then comes back a few days later to wash, rinse and repeat. Always claims nothing but decency and fairness on his part, while sticking the metaphorical shiv in everyone else’s back on every post.

    As I mentioned earlier, people like Myron should never be given the benefit of the doubt in a debate. For someone like Myron, who lies as naturally as he breathes, nothing but utter contempt is appropriate.

    Another Chris (f29ad3)

  50. Tangential and self-serving but my daughter gave liberals, especially blubonnet, the beat-down on a thread I created. It was enrapturing to watch and take part.

    If you start at that point of the thread and continue on, you’ll see the major beat-down a 21-year-old US soldier who’s “been there” can give to a liberal who hasn’t.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  51. Myron reminds me of some of the snotty, rich trust – fund white suburban boys who pose as ganstas with the baggy shorts replete with headgear, then when questioned on their asshattery reply “hey, whatever, dude – peace out.”

    Your whole rap’s a downer. You gotta tell them what you’re for, not just what you’re against.

    Yeah, you stick it to the MAN! Speak troof to plower!

    You gotta give ‘em hope.

    And make sure that they understand that with your help, they’ll soon be able to fart cinnamon buns.

    And on that note, I metaphorically clap you on the back as I exit this thread.

    “…as I run away as fast as my porcine legs can carry me.”

    Think on what I said.

    “…then please swallow some cyanide.”

    Peace.

    (classic passive – aggressive behavior)

    Children really sometimes need to be only seen and not heard. Myron’s infantilism is always his chief quality of character.

    Dmac (b905fa)

  52. The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 decision, stopped the count.

    Oh, and the state Supreme Court of Florida, by contrast, was so impartial and non-partisan. Yea, right.

    As for Reagan, the release of personal writings of his a few years ago has revealed him to be a more dignified, decent, considerate and thoughtful person than I was previously aware of. Just the opposite of what I imagine will be evident when the history books are being written about the current occupant of the White House, or in line with the generally observed difference between people of the left and people of the right…

    Spectator.org:

    NOR IS THIS liberal tightfistedness anything new. The greatest liberal icon of the 20th Century is Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He is regarded by many on the left as the personification of charity and compassion, but FDR actually has a slim record when it comes to giving to charity.

    Roosevelt had an average income of $93,000 ($1.3 million in today’s dollars) but gave away about 3 percent of his income to charity. In 1935, during the height of the Great Depression, when people really could have used it, he donated just 2 percent.

    This evidence of liberal hypocrisy is damning enough, but what really amazes is how poorly these liberals do in comparison to so-called “heartless conservatives.” President Ronald Reagan, for instance, was often called heartless and callous by liberals. Unlike Roosevelt or JFK, Reagan was not a wealthy man when he became president. He had no family trust or investment portfolio to fall back on.

    And yet, according to his tax returns, Reagan donated more than four times more to charity — both in terms of actual money and on a percentage basis — than Senator Ted Kennedy. And he gave more to charities with less income than FDR did. In 1985, for example, he gave away 6 percent of his income.

    George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have continued this Reagan record. During the early 1990s, George W. Bush regularly gave away more than 10 percent of his income. In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney gave away 77 percent of his income to charity. He was actually criticized by some liberal bloggers for this, who claimed he was getting too much of a tax deduction.

    Mark (411533)

  53. Mark at 52 – Clinton donated to charity. His tax records reveal that before he became President he claimed he and Hillary donated used clothing, including underwear, and claimed inflated writeoffs for it.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  54. I’ve been having Heavenly Conference Room Meetings since I was 16 yrs old & everything that The Holy Family has told us is Correct! We were told during last year’s Presidential Run for Office Not To Vote For Obama!
    “He will refuse to show his Birth Certificate, will promise great things to happen, doesn’t care if He uses Taxpayers Money for Sinful Things and most Importantly Obama WIll Be Proven to Be A Liar!” – The Holy Family Was Right!!!
    Right after my 42nd Birthday in January, They told us Obama Wanted something dealing w/ Healthcare that’d include Euthinasia!! Hurt Private Doctors! And Fund Abortions No Matter What the Mom’s Health was Like! Everyone in 1 of the largest Heavenly Conference Rooms ever was not only shocked but scared… Thank Heavens we sent emails about that because it’s Proven to be True!
    And now the most Sinful thing ever said by a President- “I am your God”!!! He will not be going to Heaven for saying that & his Wife was privately interviewed… “I think my Husband needs to see a Mental Doctor because he did not create Heaven & Earth!”.

    God Bless you all for such a Great WebSite!

    Hepatic Coma Survivior (c32dbe)

  55. “Nowadays conservatives go out of their way to not only be as unpleasant as possible, but literally revel in their opponents hating their guts.”

    The liberals today are good haters, for sure. They hate on a wide basis. Personal hatred of conservatives has become a core creed of the left.

    Travis Monitor (e991bc)

  56. Since I’m actually not a hack

    When I look in the dictionary, there’s your mug for the definition.

    EW1(SG) (edc268)

  57. Myron was using the Obama playbook of diverting attention from his left-wing views by saying nice things about Reagan, as a means of disparaging today’s conservatives.

    That’s typical of the far left’s misunderstanding of the right: Ultraleftists think conservatives blindly respond to a few keywords and don’t think through to the deeper meaning.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  58. Basically, modern conservatives have little connection to Reagan. About as much connection as modern Republicans have to Lincoln.

    Spoken like a man who knows nothing about Lincoln. Aside from slavery, what were Lincoln’s policies, Myron ?

    He was a Whig. What were Whigs concerned about, Myron ?

    Did they support roads, canals and banks, Myron ? What about railroads ?

    Did Democrats oppose all banks, wanting to have branch offices of the Treasury Department all over ?

    I don’t think Myron has a clue. Give us a 100 word discussion of Lincoln’s economic policies, Myron, and prove me wrong.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  59. C’mon, Dr. K. Myron knows things.

    Of course, they all fit onto a bumper sticker.

    That is the problem with a LOT of political discussion on both sides (you did see me write “both”): folks who spout off without knowing any history.

    But then, the status quo likes us all to know very little history and to squabble with each other.

    Why, it might even be a conspiracy—just so they get to tell citizens what to do and how to live. Hmmm….

    Eric Blair (184ac1)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1609 secs.