NEWS TALK RADIO Our Hosts
Powered by: Townhall.com
Sign Up
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Austin Hill :: Townhall.com Columnist
What Would Reagan Do Now - - Now That It's Falling Apart?
by Austin Hill
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
How did you find out about WGKA?





The coalition is fractured.

Have you noticed this, like I have?

To use a cliché, it’s kind of like telling the Emperor that he has no clothes. Yet, as painful and embarrassing as that may be, it’s time that the “leaders” (whoever “they” may be today) of the “conservative movement” (whatever that may consist of today) step out of their state of denial, and come to terms with reality.

The Republican Party, having consisted of a coalition of three broad issues categories since the early 1980‘s, just isn’t what it used to be.

Historically, if your primary concerns for the country had to do with defense and national security, the Republican Party championed your issues. If you were mainly concerned about a high-functioning economy and reducing the burden of excessive taxation, you had a home within the Republican Party. And if your concerns were primarily about so-called “social issues” - - the definition of marriage and family, the rights of the unborn person, and so forth - - the Republican Party was where you belonged.

And as this three-pronged coalition has been meshing together over the past twenty-five years or so, the Democratic Party has often presented itself as a polar-opposite on key policy issues.

You don’t like increased federal spending on the military? You think our foreign policy is a little too “pro-America?” The Democratic Party is replete with rhetoric about “ending the war” and being more “collaborative” with entities like the United Nations.

If free-market enterprise makes you uncomfortable, the Democratic Party envisions a more collectivist-oriented economy that takes away from “the wealthy,” and gives back to the “poor” and the “middle class.”

And while some Americans might be alienated by the Republican Party’s concern about the rights of the unborn person and the definition of marriage, the Democratic Party has provided clear alternatives to such policies - - “progressive” ideas like partial birth abortion, and same-sex civil unions.

Under the leadership and vision of President Reagan, the Republican Party managed to hold these three categories of voters together pretty well. During the 1990’s the coalition seemed to become more galvanized, especially in the face of the far-left leaning policies that emerged from the early days of the Clinton Presidency. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Austin Hill is a Talk Show Host for the Fox Newstalk Radio Network, and a frequent guest host for 630 WMAL / Washington D.C. and 1080 KRLD/Dallas. He is the author of "White House Confidential: The Little Book Of Weird Presidential History," and is a local columnist for Arizona's East Valley Tribune Newspaper.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: Romney does NOT have the 3 legs
Someone earlier stated that Romney had all 3 of the legs of the conservative "stool" or coalition.

Actually, he is credible only on perhaps the economic leg. Social conservatives largely do NOT trust his recent "conversions" on abortion and marriage. They were timed far too conveniently to be genuine; moreover, he's been seen to have more than one "conversion" according to the political situation.

Even his record on economic issues in Massachusetts was not that stellar. Northeastern University economist Andrew Sum, who has researched Romney's record, said the state lagged the U.S. average during that period in job creation, economic growth and wage increases.

"As a strict labor market economist looking at the record, Massachusetts did very poorly during the Romney years," Sum said. "On every measure you've got, the state was a substantial under-performer."

I haven't heard his foreign policy positions. I suppose they are suitably and blandly-enough in line with Bush's so as not to raise any noise, otherwise I would have heard about them.

BG
I don't see Huckabee's stated immigration policies as any type of reversal or flip-flop even though you and Rush seem to.

Advocating eligibility for a scholarship for the CHILDREN of illegal aliens and then stating a position of closing the border and deporting illegal aliens is not in conflict.

Gov Huckabee knows that nobody can deport 12 million people at once.

There are lots of things to not like Huckabee about - immigration is not one of them.

Fiscal conservatism is not one of them either - he inherited a 220 million dollar deficit, raised taxes 500 million and left an 850 million dollar surplus. That's a 100% return over his 10 years as governor.

Romney inherited a deficit, managed balanced budgets, raised fees by about 500 million dollars, but left with a deficit - that' not very responsible governing.

Romney's job growth record isn't all that hot either - 0.5% compared to the 5.5% nationally (source - Boston Globe). Everybody says what a great business man he is - that may be true, but in his actual governing experience he wasn't able to generate jobs very well or erase an inherited deficit.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Ni