Archive for the ‘Ronald Reagan’ Category

‘Free’ Bernie Sanders

February 2, 2016

It is not surprising that aging Hillary Clinton is having trouble getting the youth vote but young Democrat voters overwhelmingly supporting the even more aging Bernie Sanders has surprised many. However, when you consider what Bernie stands for, the reasons become obvious.

Bernie Sanders is strongly pushing for a “free” college education. That is, of course, attractive to anyone facing the rising cost of a college education and the ensuing burden of a student loan. It certainly speaks to today’s youth who have been thoroughly indoctrinated by a liberal education system advocating the socialistic ideal of cradle-to-grave government care. How we are to pay for that “free” education is not clear but it is also not relevant to those wanting and expecting freebies.

Sanders calls himself a “democratic socialist” but that distinction is not understood by most and it is certainly lost on today’s youth. The failure of our education system is responsible for the lack of knowledge concerning socialism’s failure throughout history and, consequently, today’s youth are gravitating towards socialism’s vacuous promise of a utopian society. The “Occupy” movement and unrealistic demands heard on college campuses are a product of this ignorance of socialism.

Sanders takes advantage of this ignorance with his socialistic promises of a “free” college education, guaranteed health care, and $15 an hour minimum wage – in other words, freebies. He demonizes corporations and the rich and rails against income inequality, an easy sell to young workers starting at low salaries. His 90% tax rate for the rich sounds fine to those far from the top but it is not enough and the middle class will have to reach further into their pockets to help pay for all the “free” stuff.

At the age of 74, Bernie Sanders is not considered too old for Democrats who expressed concern about John McCain’s age (71) in 2008 and Ronald Reagan’s age (69) in 1980. JFK was 43–yrs-old when he took office and Obama, 47-years-old in 2008, was touted as a youthful and energetic change much needed for the country. Meanwhile, Democrats accuse Marco Rubio (44) and Ted Cruz (45) of being much too young to be president.

What is most certainly getting old is the hypocrisy – along with Sanders (74) and Hillary (68).

David J. Hentosh

Reagan Was Right – Again

March 25, 2013

As a result of North Korea rattling its nuclear sword with long range missile tests and development of a mobile launcher, Obama reluctantly reversed his decision to freeze the Alaskan missile defense system and allowed ground-based missile interceptors to be deployed. By doing so, Obama inadvertently pays homage to Ronald Reagan’s SDI initiative.

Thirty years ago, Reagan was demonized and ridiculed for his “evil empire” speech against the Soviet Union and his idea of a missile defense initiative (SDI). It was sneeringly labeled “Star Wars” by Sen. Ted Kennedy who had no such ridicule when President John F. Kennedy pushed the limits of technology by calling for a man on the moon in less than a decade. Technology is only embraced by liberals when it fits their political ideology.

Both George H. and George W. Bush kept SDI alive while in the White House. Bill Clinton, supposedly a far-thinking president, pointedly ignored it as best he could. Obama is only allowing interceptors because North Korean missiles may now have the capability of hitting the west coast of the US. His foreign policy with North Korea and Iran failed to stop or limit their nuclear aggression and threats can no longer be ignored.

Obama’s distaste for SDI was evident when he cancelled the anti-missile system that was scheduled for deployment in Poland and the Czech Republic as a defense against potential Iranian missiles. Obama caved to the Russian complaint (fear?) against a system that could neutralize Russian intercontinental missiles, as if defending against them was an act of aggression. Consequently, Iran’s continued development of a nuclear missile poses a threat that could have been, but won’t be, defended against.

Obama cancelled several other missile defense programs, causing us to fall behind in that technology at a time when the threat of a rogue nuclear missile is increasing. Once again, Obama’s “fundamental transformation” is proving to be out of touch with reality and dangerous to the welfare of the country. If he finishes stripping us down to the defense level of other European countries, where will we and the free world turn for protection? Reagan instinctively understood.

David J. Hentosh

Reagan’s Vision Lives on in Texas

June 29, 2011

By Michael Reagan in the Washington Times:

More than three decades ago, my father took ownership of the smoking ruins of the American economy armed with nothing more than four very basic principles: Keep taxes low, restrain government spending, minimize the amount of regulation on private enterprise and keep the money supply sound.

His approach may have appeared basic, but the results were unassailable. Over the next eight years, more than 16 million new private-sector jobs were created, a payroll expansion of 17.6 percent.

It was called the “American Miracle” and was replicated by world leaders across the globe, who met with similar success.

Looking back at it from a distance, it’s remarkable to me that the concepts that worked so amazingly well just a short time ago have fallen so far to the wayside.

Read the rest here.

Reagan Debates Obama on YouTube

February 6, 2011

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

-Ronald Reagan

Let’s see what Barack Obama says:

Reagan Debates Obama on YouTube

Ronald Reagan at 100

February 6, 2011

From the WSJ. Peggy Noonan, who was a speechwriter for Reagan:

At the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, in the foothills of the Santa Susana Mountain Range where old Hollywood directors shot Westerns, they will mark Sunday’s centenary of Reagan’s birth with events and speeches geared toward Monday’s opening of a rethought and renovated museum aimed at making his presidency more accessible to scholars and vividly available to the public. Fifty percent of the artifacts, officials note, have never been shown before—essays and short stories Reagan wrote in high school and college, the suit he wore the day he was shot, the condolence book signed by world leaders at his funeral. (Margaret Thatcher: “Well done, Thou good and faithful servant.”)

Much recently has been written about who he was—a good man who became a great president—but recent conversations about Reagan have me pondering some things he was not.

He wasn’t, for instance, sentimental, though he’s often thought of that way. His nature was marked by a characterological sweetness, and his impulse was to be kind and generous. (His daughter Patti Davis captured this last week in a beautifully remembered essay for Time.) But he wasn’t sentimental about people and events, or about history.

Read the rest here.

We Miss You, Mr. President!

“Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.”

October 8, 2010

Ronald Reagan said that, and

Reagan had it right.

Those were the Days

April 2, 2010

This sign appeared along I-94 near Albertville, Minn. It follows a

NPR:  Reagan Real Hope and Change Billboard

Fear of Palin

January 15, 2010

There is much more to the continuous Palin bashing from the far left, and the not-so-far left, than meets the eye. On a daily basis she is bashed by talk show hosts, celebrities and commentators who bring her name up derisively at every opportunity. The only thing that could drive such a compulsive hatred is fear.

Continued attacks on her intelligence are an indication of elites’ fears that their high regard for superior intellect may not be warranted. If superior intelligence does not count as they believe it must, their entire, holier-than-thou attitude unravels and they have no philosophical anchor.

Ronald Reagan was treated by the left as a buffoon, unfit for office. His eight years of success was a slap in the face to the left’s superior intelligence tenet. George W. Bush also lasted two terms in office despite being denigrated as an idiot. History is sure to treat his administration much better than the media currently does.

Jimmy Carter, hailed as brilliant by supporters, was a disaster and lasted only one term. Obama, continually praised for his superior intellect, now faces the same fate of being a one-term president. Interestingly, no proof of Obama’s high intelligence has ever surfaced, yet it is taken for granted because it must be so. Repeatedly informing us of his superior intelligence has convinced the left it is real.

The popularity and down-to-earth persona of Sarah Palin threatens the very core of liberal ideology and threatens the false sense of a mandate Obama’s election produced. As Obama’s popularity is decreasing, Palin’s is increasing and providing more proof that there is more to leadership than superior intellect. They must attack her intelligence to keep that idealistic notion alive.

Many are not yet convinced of Sarah Palin’s ability to be a successful politician at the national level. However, her ability to send the left into an irrational, fearful hissy fit is an asset that will keep her in the national spotlight. The fear she instills in the left is, simply, awesome to watch.

David J. Hentosh