Jeb Bush: Reagan and George H.W. Bush Would Have 'Hard Time' In Modern GOP

I couldn't agree more.  Would also like to add George W. Bush to the list because he doesn't fit the mold of today's selfish Republicans.

Now I am beginning to wonder if Bush 41 saw Romney as someone who would work across the aisle and that is why he supported him so hard originally in 2008 because it never made sense.  Romney was an independent during the Reagan/Bush years starting in 1976 and ending in 1994.  During the 12 years of Reagan/Bush, Romney was not even a member of the Republican Party.  No wonder today's Republican Party is so different with Romney people in charge.  Did Romney play up to Bush 41 getting him on his side initially with pandering and telling him what he wanted to hear?  We will never know but Romney will say and do anything to get elected as evidenced with trying to buy this election with his friends from Wall Street and K Street not to mention his Mormon church who happens to be building a large mall.  Wonder if they have their money offshore in the Cayman's like Romney and Bain Capital?

If Romney treating this election like a hostile takeover he orchestrated with companies when he was head of Bain Capital?  It sure looks like it from the perspective of a lot of Republicans.  If you don't agree with Romney, you are supposed to sit down, shut up, and vote for him in November no matter what.

While I was outside this morning tackling my grass, I was trying to figure out why today's Republican Party is so different and so anti when the word compromise arises even if it is for the good of the whole Country.  Then I come in the house for a break and read this statement from Jeb and all a sudden it makes sense.

I am flabbergasted at times the words that come out of the House and now you can add Romney to that list. Even Scott Walker threw Romney under the bus about Wisconsin as Romney didn't have a clue what the Wisconsin deal was all about.  It wasn't about not hiring teachers, firemen, and police officers, it was about public service unions and their overreach:

“The answer’s not more big government. I know in my state, our reforms allowed us to protect firefighters, police officers and teachers. That’s not what I think of when I think of big government.”

Is George W Bush going to be the last nominee of the Republican Party who is a compassionate person which doesn't fly in today's Republican Party which is turning into the party of greed as evidenced by the protection of wealthy taxpayers and their low tax rates for starters. When I saw House Republicans want to cut food stamps in this economy but keep the low tax rates for the wealthy, I just shook my head.  That same group has also cut the budget of the US Forest Service who is facing wildfires once again this year.  Is this group about just let the West burn -- nothing there.  Looks like we are back to being flyover country except when Romney wants money from donors.

Then we have the logjam of the transportation budget to fund roads and bridges in our states.  Know some say it is not necessary but when you live in a state that is 49th and you have unsafe bridges, that doesn't fly.  Is the real reason that the House knows that road and bridge money equals shovel ready jobs that contractors are waiting to start filling?  Would House Republicans be that insensitive to real jobs being created for work on our Nation's highways in order to make Obama look bad and get Romney elected.  I cannot even believe I typed that statement but that is the way it is looking.

Federal highways should be fully funded but the Republicans in the House are stonewalling.  The way some Republicans including House members acted when the poor job numbers came in with the high fiving and being so happy, it dawned on my that just maybe this logjam is on purpose to make Obama's reelection harder while the American people in many instances continue to struggle.  Do I think they would really do that?  If you read my email from all these so-called 'conservative' groups that have sprung up, you wouldn't consider it a far fetched idea.  I am literally appalled at some of what I am reading.

I am so disgusted with this group of Republicans and have been saying that for sometime.  Finally looks like I have my answer -- this is not the party of Reagan but the part of greed and a party that could care less about regular people and their struggles as evidenced from some of their comments.  Now the GOP nominee goes after teachers, police and firemen saying we have enough and for good measure throws in the federal civil service employees as the reason for the economic disaster.  He plans to cut over 150,000 when he takes office no matter the number of new mandates which caused a lot of the hiring.

Republicans went after Perry with a vengeance on immigration and what was done to Bush 43 on immigration I still cannot believe.  We cannot deport all those people as our economy would collapse.  Are we supposed to deport parents of children born here or are they going to take away the citizenship of those children as some Republicans have suggested?

I don't know this Republican Party and frankly think they have lost all 'common sense' but then I know Democrats who are saying the same thing about the  Democrat Party.  We have a group of House members on both sides that are part of the 'my way or no way' class and if they don't get their way, they take the ball and go home.  To them their agenda is more important then the good for all America and the word 'compromise' is a dirty word even if it is the right thing to do. Neither party has all the right answers.  Some have turned into pretzels to match Romney and his agenda just like some Democrats have done with Obama.  WHY? They forget they don't just represent their Party in the House but represent every last person in their district be they Republican, Democrat, Independent, Libertarian, Reform, or no party affiliation.    

Jeb Bush: Reagan, George H.W. Bush Would Have 'Hard Time' In Modern GOP
By Jonathan Miller Updated: June 11, 2012 | 10:23 a.m.
June 11, 2012 | 10:03 a.m. 

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said on Monday that both his father, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan would have a “hard time” finding a place in today’s GOP, according to BuzzFeed.

"They would have a hard time if you define the Republican party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn't allow for disagreement, doesn't allow for finding some common ground," Bush said, according to the website.  

He added: "Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time – they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support," he said. Reagan "would be criticized for doing the things that he did."

In February, Bush said he found the tone of the GOP nomination process “a little troubling.”

Source:  National Journal

Fred Barnes: Reagan and Boehner, Two Peas in a Pod

This article by Fred Barnes is so true and matches my memories of Ronald Reagan as President -- always thought of him as the President who was willing to take his gains in increments and then all of a sudden the Democrats would realize he had won the day and got most of what he wanted.

That should be a lesson to some conservative ideologues who want it all now or nothing.  They probably should not play poker -- Reagan was the master of the winning poker hand against the Democrats.  Smile on his face, good natured, not threatening and all of a sudden he had what he wanted when he started off.  He gave a little to get a lot eventually.  He was in no hurry and willing to take his time because he knew with a Democrat Congress he would have to play it smart.

These two paragraphs by Fred Barnes sum up President Reagan and why he was able to get so much accomplished because he didn't just say NO!

Lots of politicians are smart. Reagan was wise. He knew that, in politics, you never get everything you want in one swoop. You take what you can get now and, if all goes well, come back for the rest later.  

It’s fine to stand on principle. You’d be hard pressed to name a Republican leader who was more principled, as a conservative, than Reagan. But Reagan applied his principles over the long run, and that’s why he achieved so much.

This should be a lesson to those Republicans who are against raising the debt ceiling under any circumstance.  If they asked themselves what would Reagan do, they wouldn't like the answer.  It is also why when some of them use Reagan to bolster their side, they are not being honest.  He was a man that put Country first, Party way second, and re-election at the end.   That's how it should be so when Obama tries to channel Reagan he fails miserably as well.

Reagan was his own man who loved America and always did what was best for all Americans and our Country.  His upbeat personality made him likable because he didn't go around threatening fellow Republicans in public if they didn't do what he said.  He would be appalled at what he would see from some Republicans today who call themselves conservative Republicans when they are more Libertarian than Republican.

Fred Thompson is correct -- GOP got what it wanted -- Don't Push It!  Paul Ryan Backs Boehner Plan!  John Bolton: Former ambassador John Bolton has just released a statement of support for John Boehner’s debt ceiling plan, arguing that the speaker of the House’s plan is good for “all conservatives, especially those concerned with American national security.”  

Those are just a few of conservatives with their comments on the Boehner plan.  Are they going to be called names and RINO's by the Tea Party and some members of Congress now?  That seems to be the mantra of some so-called conservatives who put themselves and their ideology first.

President Reagan was right in the 80's and his philosophy is right today.  When you don't control the Congress and the White House, you take your wins and live to fight another day which the House Republican Leadership understands well.  Shame on the ones who are more beholden to the Tea Party for their reelection then they are at putting America first.  We didn't get in this hole overnight and we are not going to get out of it overnight.  We cannot afford to lose the credit rating and default?  Those members who put the wishes of the Tea Party first don't have a clue about how Ronald Reagan governed and most likely don't care.

Reagan and Boehner, Two Peas in a Pod

5:34 PM, Jul 27, 2011 • By FRED BARNES 

What would President Reagan do in the debt limit battle? That’s unknowable, but we do know what his goal would be: get the best deal possible under the circumstances. Reagan never let the perfect or the unattainable keep him from achieving the good.

Reagan spent the 1980 campaign promoting a 30 percent, across the board tax cut on individual income. It would be phased in over three years, starting in 1982.

Since Democrats controlled the House by a sizeable margin, Reagan couldn’t get exactly what he wanted. True, he could have held out for a 30 percent cut – and probably gotten nothing. Instead, he trimmed his tax proposal to 25 percent over three years, starting in 1983, and Congress passed it in 1981.

Reagan’s tax cuts weren’t the only reason the economy soared, but they were a big one. And those cuts turned out to be a down payment on a further reduction in tax rates in sweeping tax reform in 1986. If he hadn’t compromised five years earlier on tax cuts that lowered the top rate to 50 percent, it’s unlikely he’d have succeeded in cutting it to 28 percent in 1986. 

Reagan faced a similar situation on national security. In the campaign against Jimmy Carter, he’d advocated a tough stance against the Soviet Union that included an expensive military buildup. Most Democrats were opposed. 

He made a deal, if only a tacit one. Democrats would go along with a surge in defense spending and Reagan would accede, to some extent anyway, to higher domestic spending. Deficits grew, but the groundwork was laid for winning the Cold War. 

Now, back to the debt limit fight. Would Reagan support the Boehner plan for cutting spending while agreeing to a hike in the debt ceiling? I think so. He would see it as the best deal that’s attainable at the moment. Sure, he would favor deeper cuts, lower spending caps, and a balanced budget amendment, too, but he would recognize those can’t pass now. He wouldn’t let his pursuit of them keep him from achieving something substantial now. 

By first grabbing what he could, Reagan opened the way to driving tax rates down later to the level he wanted all along. The result: an economic boom that lasted for a quarter century. He accepted a tradeoff between military and domestic spending. The result: we won the Cold War.

... 

Source:  Weekly Standard