|Huck's Army Forum :: Faith, Family & Freedom
|Forbes: argues Huck was best for 2012!
|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||Southern Doc [ Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:23 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Forbes: argues Huck was best for 2012!|
Well...by implication of recognizing what "real Reaganism" is and how the faux Reaganism of the Bush wing of the party lead by Rove has set the party on a path to decline.
Real conservatives saw Reaganomics as a way of creating broad-based opportunity, not as catering to the rich. It worked out exactly that way … in America and throughout the world. The blossoming of free market principles — especially low tax rates and good money — brought billions of souls out of poverty, from subsistence to affluence.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/ ... naissance/
But, despite the fact that the argument tilts fiscal/libertarian it does not abandon the obvious strengths of the movement and blames the "Bush Mandarins" (though not really "W") for forgetting how the GOP under Reagan built a winning coalition in the past and can do so again in the future
Economic growth and the equally important cultural, values, and civil liberties issues such as life, marriage, and religious liberty, are issues that were marginalized by the Bush Mandarins. Yes, the Mandarins were kind of mostly against tax increases and kind of for some tax cuts and sometimes for spending restraint, except when they weren’t. But the Mandarins were not obsessed with generating economic opportunity as was Reagan and his Revolutionaries. And the Mandarins proved far too squeamish to engage with the values issues which are both principled conservative and vote rich. But the elitist Mandarins, not the populist Revolutionaries, seized control of the party apparatus. And it was all down hill from there.
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]|
|Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group