I still pine for the Hoot-Smalley era.

with many trashing Jeb Bush, some personally, for raising such an idea.

This is fantastic. The Wingnuts keep shooting at each other because they're not "conservative" enough. Eventually, the GOP will be down to a group so small you can drown them in a bathtub!

In this case nostalgia for the good old days means to keep on using the same old poisonous garbage that doesn't work anymore because they can't think of anything else and don't want to change anyway.

Good luck with that, Jeb-boy.

While were at it, let's leave the entire Bush clan behind, too.

Thing is that the "Ronald Reagan" the wingnuts revere doesn't have a whole lot in common with the guy who was president from 1980 to 1988.

See Tear Down This Myth

these guys are determined to be the oakland raiders of political parties...out of touch, out of tune, out of power.

the reagan era is about the only bright shiny moment conservatives have, so i can understand their nostalgia.

*grabs popcorn, pulls up a comfy chair*

This oughtta be good.

Nastalgia | looking past all that | good old days.

What else ya selling GOP?

What's striking is how thoughtful and reasonable Jeb is compared to his brother. And I'm not alone in this thought, even Barbara thought it. So how'd we end up with George?

Yes, the GOP is leaving Reaganism, but in which direction?

Reality: Reagan would be a Democrat (or Libertarian) were he alive today.

Oh man, my tummy hurts. I have had WAY too much popcorn, of late, and it looks as if this is not going to let up. (THANK GOODNESS!)

Train wreck politics brought to us by the GOP. You guys keep kicking the shit out of each other. I can't think of a better group of collective assholes more deserving.

I may never eat popcorn again, but for right now, PASS. THE. POPCORN!

Of course, the worst part about their Reagan idolization is that the Reagan they're worshipping never existed. Nor could he exist, as Reagan could never have become president based upon their imbecilic platform. So they're driving full-speed in efforts to find the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and attacking anyone who dares to suggest that you can't find the end of a rainbow.

But this all fits into the bigger pattern of conservatives pining for a prior golden age that never existed. The entire basis of conservativism is fantasy.

Reagan's rhetoric is haunting the Republican party in 2009!

For all who get it here in the early 21st century, Government is NOT the problem. Yet, Reagan's famous "Gov't. is the problem" sustains itself in the narrow intellects of today's Republican leadership. Until they get past such a mantra, Republican leaders will have nothing to offer their constituencies save empty and angry epithets hurled at their political opposition - not a winning strategy now that we've made it past the 1990s!

So, Jeb's advice seems pertinent - "They said Jeb move away from there, so they moved to Beverly Hills - the Republican Hillbillies!" -Kevo

What's striking is how thoughtful and reasonable Jeb is compared to his brother. And I'm not alone in this thought, even Barbara thought it. So how'd we end up with George?

In 1994, the brothers Bush ran for governor of their home states. George beat Ann Richards in Texas. Jeb lost to Lawton Chiles in Florida. George moved to the front of the line, as it were.

They'll be touting "Reagan's tax cuts" for years no matter what - well, it's debatable how "good" they were, and "he" reversed them a lot anyway etc. But conservatives get confused over who really offers revenue bills, depending on whether they want to praise or complain. They'll refer to "Reagan's" tax cuts", but in other cases (such as not wanting to give any credit to a Democrat) will say, Presidents don't give tax cuts or increases, Congress does (Randian flackonomist Walter Williams is bad at this.) Well, they have to actually pass the bills but Presidents do "offer legislation". For the sake of our edification, could anyone give a succinct, clear brief on how Presidents put up legislation, must they have a sponsor (someone will), is it still really strictly by the COTUS book, etc? tx

"Oh Ronnie, I just can't quit you..."

Jeb: "I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days..."

Yes, who wouldn't be nostalgic for the rising inequality, the falling Standard of Living, ketchup as a nutritious vegetable, the exploding federal deficits, and the political, military, and financial support for RightWing Death Squads in Latin America.

We were livin' the dream...

Despite his last name, Jeb will be formidable in a 2016 Repub primary. Their party will be more desperate than ever for a unifying figure....

Problem is, they'll likely be up against an HRC or a Schweitzer...

Gosh and gee whiz. Why would a politician with national aspirations -WHO HAPPENS TO CALL THE LEAST POPULAR PRESIDENT OF ALL TIME BROTHER - want the GOP to stop looking towards the past?

Jeb casts himself in role of Khrushchev.

Those old days weren't so bad after all it seems, if you take into account some treaties we signed. I'm repeating most of a previous comment elsewhere because it does relate to Ronald Reagan as per our signing the UNCAT in 1988. The UNCAT must have been OK with his State Dept. - anyone have any scoop?

Today I read Krauthammer's 5/1 column about torture. We've heard, how he started with "Torture is an impermissible evil." and then added the exceptions. But his most disingenuous tack was to refer to "personal distaste" in rejecting torture. He says, "Some people, however, believe you never torture. Ever. They are akin to conscientious objectors who will never fight in any war under any circumstances, and for whom we correctly show respect by exempting them from war duty. ... Private principles are fine, but ..." etc.

The idiot writes as if we never signed any treaties (like UN Convention Against Torture in 1988) and it was just a matter of what we are willing to do ("the moral injunction against torture.") Completely misleading editorial, write letters to WaPo and complain pls - even if just to show your two bits.

Mad props, Frank C, for mentioning Schweitzer. He's going to kick the arse of whomever the GOP fields in 2016.

And, yes, Jeb will be formidable. He has mad political skills. But he will have been out of office for over a decade by the time 2016 rolls around. Can he really jump into the fray ahead of immediate officeholders?

AHHHH my eyes are burning I clicked one of the links on a Repub site about dissing Jeb... www.conservatives4palin.com Yoiks! they be some serious batshit crazy people. You want a divorce from reality , I'll show you a divorce from reality.

What's striking is how thoughtful and reasonable Jeb is compared to his brother. And I'm not alone in this thought, even Barbara thought it. So how'd we end up with George?

Posted by: fostert on May 4, 2009 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

He was easily manipulated by Big Bidness Jeb not so much. Before 911 they probably figured next in the Bush dynasty would be Jeb

Ronald Reagan? It's Joe McCarthy they ought to leave behind.

When I think of the major characteristics of the past 8 years, the ones that posed the greatest threat to our freedom were reminiscent not of the 80's but of the 1950s.

It's important to remember this, since the GOPers are liable to pull a '50s' once again in the future.

We didn't really expect something new to come from their latest circle jerk, did we?

Ronald Reagan? It's Joe McCarthy they ought to leave behind. When I think of the major characteristics of the past 8 years, the ones that posed the greatest threat to our freedom were reminiscent not of the 80's but of the 1950s.

The GOP revival of good old-fashioned McCarthyism, while it probably never went entirely away, got going again in the 1988 disgusting campaign by Poppy/Atwater vs Duke being a "card-carrying member of the ACLU." Libruls were so much on the defensive by the 90s that they refused to call themselves libruls.

Though, overall, the 80s did more resemble the greedy no-regulation '20s. The 50s were something of a throwback to the witchhunting anti-left hysteria of the 1919-20 Red Scare period.

As for St Ronnie, about the only positive thing I can say about him is that he reacted well to a special screening of the anti-nuke movie-for-tv, The Day After. By early in his 2d term, and thanks plenty to the aggressive reform mindedness of Gorbachev, he was eager to talk serious arms reduction.

Zombie Reagan need braiiiiins!

Since the whole point of the Republican Party is to bring the "good ol' days" (the 19th Century) back, overcoming their nostalgia would leave them without a purpose.

Some speculated that Bush, Sr. was a little disappointed that George got potus instead of Jeb. Smart father.

Also, I've heard a lot of bitching about Jeb, but he really seems relatively moderate. I haven't heard much crazy about him. People have policies they disagree with, but they seem like reasonable differences...

With that in mind, if Jeb can win the primary, it probably means the Republican party will be back in the hands of corporate interests and out of the hands of yokel culture warriors.

Jeb!

Is anything but moderate. He eviscerated workers compensation in Florida. Workers have no rights and no ability to hire an attorney to represent them, while at the same time employers and their carriers can pay whatever they desire.

He was crappy for just about every civil justice issue you can imagine, and many more you never hear about. But he's just a symptom of much deeper cultural rot in Florida. We have a legislature that passes legislation favoring insurance companies and industry lobbies before they even ask for the changes (due to term limits they are often fully-funded and elected by the same special interests...so they don't need to wait to hear what bills should be written).

Don't confuse Jeb with being either moderate or intelligent.

Let it be proclaimed loud and clear. The 'mantra' for the republican party is:

WAITING FOR AMERICANS TO CHANGE

because republicans refuse to change anything but how they present themselves, ignoring completely that their ways have been tried and failed miserably. A minority of greedy wealthy people can't stand giving up their profiteering at the people's expense. Eric Cantor is a joke without a punch line.

btw...Reagan expanded the government more than any other president, Raised taxes on the working class more than any other president, Lowered taxes on the wealthy more than any other president, plus borrowed and spent more than any other president leaving us with a huge deficit well above all the others even during war time.

Reagan talked good but was a scam artist and a horrible president. His policies led directly to our current economic disaster.

We will remember Reagan alright for destroying the middle class and trying to turn the nation into a corporatocracy with a ruling elite. Can't forget Reagan (though conservatives are trying to rewrite his history).

"...What's striking is how thoughtful and reasonable Jeb is compared to his brother. And I'm not alone in this thought, even Barbara thought it. So how'd we end up with George?
Posted by: fostert on May 4, 2009 at 1:50 PM | PERMALINK

Just wait till the full moon. Remember when 'daddy' was head of the CIA? No such animal as a thoughtful reasonable Bush.

a nickel says Jeb's the next Republican nominee.

Where did the Republicans go wrong?

1. A belief in small, efficient government is a conservative philosophy. An obsession with tax breaks for the rich is simple greed.

2. Borrow-and-spend turned off all the traditional Republicans who believe in fiscal responsibility. Might as well elect Democrats.

3. Bush. How can we count the ways? Aggressive war mongering, assaults on our freedoms, torture, blurring of separation of church and state, neocon/Israeli influence. Even the Democrats look better.

4. Corruption on enforcement of immigration laws. No difference between the parties.