Comments on: Ronald Reagan’s Journey: Democrat to Republican

By: thunderbird

thunderbird — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 15:22:28 +0000

Reagan went from DEMACRAT to REPULICAN is becuase he saw the demacrats as the tax and spend party of wealthy left-wing special interests

By: Kent G. Budge

Kent G. Budge — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:57:06 +0000

In my opinion, being a ferocious autodidact is an important qualification for office. Not the only or the most important, but important. Reagan clearly fit this mold. So did Lincoln and most of the Founders, if only because formal aducation was less available then. Clinton v1.0, for all his other faults, appears to be something of an autodidact.

Neither Bushes nor Kerry nor Carter appear to have this quality. Neither do any of the present front runners except possibly Clinton v2.0 and Romney. I don't know about Obama. But I could be mistaken down the line, because the only time the press pay attention to this quality is when they loudly (and probably correctly) announce that it is lacking in Bush v2.0.

By: dbt

dbt — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 16:43:19 +0000

yaj: How is Hillary's thoughtful journey from Ike Republican to New Democrat any less impressive than Reagan's?

By: McGehee

McGehee — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:30:46 +0000

Reagan was a much deeper thinker then he is generally given credit for…

Okay, that's ours for 2007. Stop it. ;-)

By: anjin-san

anjin-san — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 01:41:42 +0000

Reagan was a much deeper thinker then he is generally given credit for...

By: floyd

floyd — Tue, 19 Dec 2006 23:55:38 +0000

James, Again I am resigned to the role of sycophant! good job!

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:35:38 +0000

If you can determine what is right through rigorous debate and stick with what you know is right, it certainly makes it easier to articulate that vision later. I think that is the big difference with Hillary. She may have her version of what is right, but she didn't arrive at it after the sort of rigorous debate that would sort out the rough spot and she isn't as consistent on her position. A good example is health care. You can make the case for nationalized health care, but only if you acknowledge the fundamental problems of the nationalized health care as it has been implemented elsewhere and that many of those problems are inherent in the system.