Reagan brothers spar over dad's view of Tea Party movement

[Cal]

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Reagan brothers spar over dad’s view of Tea Party movement - Blogs from CNN.com

Washington (CNN) - Don't invite the late President Ronald Reagan's two sons over for a tea party, much less a beer.

Well, maybe a beer, kind of like President Obama's "beer summit" last summer at the White House. That might be needed.

The brothers Reagan, Ron and Michael, don't agree on how their dad – often described as the father of the modern day conservatism – would view the Tea Party movement.

Ron, a liberal, told HLN's Joy Behar that he didn't think his father would embrace the Tea Party movement and its activists.

"I think he would be unamused by the TEA partiers with their Hitler signs and all the rest of it," Ron Reagan said in the January 26 interview on CNN's sister network. "No, I don't think he'd be cottoning to that much at all. As much as we're wringing our hands about the Democratic Party though and it's all well that we do that, we have to remember that the alternative, the Republicans are a true train wreck – a train wreck. Look at Sarah Palin. Look at Scott Brown. You know."

Michael fired back at his brother on Wednesday, saying he has a better understanding of their father's political thinking, after all he holds the same conservative views.

"In 1976 and 1980, and throughout his presidency, President Reagan worked tirelessly to build the conservative movement and the Republican Party through the grassroots," Michael Reagan said in a statement. "He knew what it took to build a movement.

"Unlike my brother, I campaigned with and for my father in 1976 and in 1980 – and I feel more qualified to say what he would and would not have supported. He would be applauding the grassroots organization of this country and Sarah Palin for making herself available to elect conservative candidates."

So much for brotherly love.

..Sounds like me and my brother.

 

[Modbert]

True fact: The Tea Parties of 2010 would despise Reagan as a RINO or something similar.

 

[potter 58]

Mike has always been a blowhard, I imagine his dad would even bitch slap him today with some of his rants

 

[ihopehefails]

That is there opinion what their father would do. Perhaps we should rez the guy and ask him himself what he thinks but we can't do that so we will never know. Isn't that ashame?

 

[California Girl]

True fact: The Tea Parties of 2010 would despise Reagan as a RINO or something similar.

You really should have learned by now to be able to spot the difference between a 'true fact' (and what, I wonder is a 'false fact'?) and an opinion. Then you would realize just how stupid your post is.

 

[Gadawg73]

Reagan would never embrace the tea party movement.
Ronnie embraced evangelicals but was known as very tolerant for his time. He was often known to tell the most outrageous and nastiest jokes, avoided the gay and abortion issues like the plague and hung with the Hollywood crowd.
One of the most unusual and contradictory things in this area of religion is how high Regan is held in such high esteem and how Carter is scorned. But that is the Republican double standard. Reagan was divorced yet was held up by "conservatives" as the "family values" President while Carter, a man devoted to a Christian life from birth by actions and service, was labeled something worse than a crawling worm by "family values" associations and Republicans.
Republicans are a dysfunctional lot more so now than ever.
I am surprised the tea party movement has not started to sell mountable statues of Reagan for automobile dashes.
They have to do something to pay Sarah.

 

[midcan5]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oygDM8Zi10A]YouTube - Reagan vs. the KKK[/ame]

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah let's do something constructive like arguing over what a dead guy might think.

Stupid.

 

[Modbert]

Yeah let's do something constructive like arguing over what a dead guy might think.

Stupid.

Founding Fathers for the win in that department.

 

[Modbert]

You really should have learned by now to be able to spot the difference between a 'true fact' (and what, I wonder is a 'false fact'?) and an opinion. Then you would realize just how stupid your post is.

Reagan wouldn't be Conservative enough for today's modern "Conservative."

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah let's do something constructive like arguing over what a dead guy might think.

Stupid.

Founding Fathers for the win in that department.

So Reagan is now equal in stature to Jefferson?

And there is no need to argue about what anyone might have thought especially when a dead guy left voluminous writings as to exactly what they thought.

 

[Modbert]

So Reagan is now equal in stature to Jefferson?

And there is no need to argue about what anyone might have thought especially when a dead guy left voluminous writings as to exactly what they thought.

To some Conservatives, he's even better.

I was joking though. Especially since how often we and others in the U.S. argue over what the Founders think.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

You can't trust the word of a man who wears tights.

 

[Truthmatters]

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

Reagan had a top 1% tax rate of 50 % for most of his admin.

 

[California Girl]

You really should have learned by now to be able to spot the difference between a 'true fact' (and what, I wonder is a 'false fact'?) and an opinion. Then you would realize just how stupid your post is.

Reagan wouldn't be Conservative enough for today's modern "Conservative."

You're welcome to hold that opinion. Just try not to confuse your opinion with a fact. 'K? Cuz it makes you look stupid.






Oh... wait.... yea, carry on stating opinion as fact.

 

[ihopehefails]

So Reagan is now equal in stature to Jefferson?

And there is no need to argue about what anyone might have thought especially when a dead guy left voluminous writings as to exactly what they thought.

To some Conservatives, he's even better.

I was joking though. Especially since how often we and others in the U.S. argue over what the Founders think.

Arguing what the founder thought is an argument about the nature of our society and the government that was created in there age so it has a lot of relevance to today since that government is unchanged (with the exception of a few amendments).

 

[MarcATL]

Reagan would never embrace the tea party movement.
Ronnie embraced evangelicals but was known as very tolerant for his time. He was often known to tell the most outrageous and nastiest jokes, avoided the gay and abortion issues like the plague and hung with the Hollywood crowd.
One of the most unusual and contradictory things in this area of religion is how high Regan is held in such high esteem and how Carter is scorned. But that is the Republican double standard. Reagan was divorced yet was held up by "conservatives" as the "family values" President while Carter, a man devoted to a Christian life from birth by actions and service, was labeled something worse than a crawling worm by "family values" associations and Republicans.
Republicans are a dysfunctional lot more so now than ever.
I am surprised the tea party movement has not started to sell mountable statues of Reagan for automobile dashes.
They have to do something to pay Sarah.

Preach!!!

 

[Xenophon]

True fact: The Tea Parties of 2010 would despise Reagan as a RINO or something similar.

True fact: You don't understand the tea party movement at all.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Yeah let's do something constructive like arguing over what a dead guy might think.

Stupid.

Founding Fathers for the win in that department.

Well, what works is not one man's opinion, but actually going into the texts of what they said and wrote, and extrapolating from there.

Marshall and Madison, the two guys who did most of the scut work on writing the Constitution (The convention worked off of Madison's draft) also left a huge body of writing on what they had in mind.

Reagan also has a huge body of work on things he said, and diary entries. We can go from that.

I think Reagan would be one of the more angry tea party folks myself.

The Tea Party movement, as I see it, is collective anger that Washington won't listen to what the people are telling them back there. That was 90% of Reagan's schtick.

 

[Political Junky]

Wingnut Geller tells Ron Reagan that he didn't know his own father.

Atlas Shrugs' Geller asserts Ron Reagan can't "speak for [his] father" regarding Palin | Media Matters for America