Enough about Ronald Reagan

I am just so tired of this drivel. Enough already. If I have to hear one more person in the Republican Party discuss Ronald Reagan as some sort of Saint, I think I am going to scream.

It reminds me of the scene towards the end of Blazing Saddles, when Sheriff Bart is trying to convince the town to stand up to the cretins of the Governor's Assistant, Hedley Lamarr. The townspeople, unconvinced to stay and defend their town, are moved only by the Sheriff's line, "you'd do it for Randolf Scott..." Suddenly, the town gasps, the heavens sing his name, and Howard Johnson says to the Sheriff, "okay, you have 24 hours..."

The reverence for this man in the movie (a master stroke on the part of Mel Brooks, since Randolf Scott was not a legend of the old west, but in fact, an early actor in Western films, once again playing on the absurdity of the situation of a film about the filming of a Western) is one of the people who would do just about anything for the memory of a man who wasn't even one of them, and were willing to put their lives in jeopardy for someone as obscure as a forgotten Hollywood Western actor.

The irony is ripe here, considering that Reagan himself was a "b-list" Hollywood actor, who had also starred in Westerns.

But unlike Randolf Scott, who is revered in a spoof on the film genre, Reagan is held in reverence by people who cannot communicate new ideas, fresh thinking, or any way of relating to the people or problems of today. Why they do this is puzzling to me.

After all, Reagan was first elected in 1980, which was 29 years ago, for those of you keeping score at home. People of voting age have never been alive during his Presidency. People below the age of 43 were not even of voting age the last time he ran for the office. We have had two Republican Presidents in the interim, and a Legislative branch dominated by Republicans for the better part of 12 years since Reagan left office. Yet this man is still held up by any serious Republican contender as the only model (perhaps there are a few who would consider themselves "Goldwater Republicans", but that's their way of saying, "I'm not as Conservative as all THAT") with which they want the public to think of them.

But what is it that people who unfailingly speak of Reagan in reverence, point to as his crowning achievements? Making the Supreme Court a bastion of Conservative Reactionary policy? Being fiscally irresponsible, as he cuts taxes on the wealthy? "Beating the Commies?" I may even concede the point that Reagan did a lot to hasten the demise of the Soviet Union--in part by TALKING to the enemy. Certainly, Dick Cheney wasn't running around in 1984, trying to convince people that if we talk to the Soviets, we will all be less safe (or was he? I don't seem to have much Youtube video from that point in time...)

Enough with the endless references, and deference to the altar of Reagan. It's been over 20 years since he left office. 25 years since he won an election. Half this country's population have little to no recollection of him, his policies, or understood them well enough to even have formulated an opinion on them.

All of the reverence for this man seems to be just the fact that he was a culmination of an electoral victory that denounced the FDR Democratic philosophy, and ushered in a new time of...what? Moral, Social and Religious superiority? Deficits don't matter? Defense spending is necessary, despite being reckless and mismanaged? Covertly sending arms to the Contras via Iran makes long term sense?

Reagan was a great communicator, I won't deny that. And he is a hero for the Right, much like Clinton, Kennedy, FDR, or Obama may become for the Left. The Conservatives have been looking for that kind of positive communicator since 1988, but have never found the man for the job. In the end, they have been trying to evoke Reagan, but have instead copied the other great Conservative voice, Rush Limbaugh. In the process, all of the positive, sunny messages from Reagan, coming out in a bitter, nasty diatribe of division and condescention, sounds confusing, mean-spirited, and in the end, unelectable.


Yet Mike Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal (etc, etc) would do anything for the memory of Ronald Reagan, and they try to make America remember again how good it was during the Reagan days. Unfortunately, its time for Republicans to learn what the Dems had to in the 30 years after Kennedy. Camelot is gone. People don't remember. They vote in the here and now. And if you can't give people a vision for the future, rather than a memory of the past, you can look forward to watching the other party seize the mantle of leadership for years to come.