Mourning In America

A powerful video, produced by Citizens for the Republic, recalls Ronald Reagan's "Morning In America" ad.

I have one quarrel with it. The narrator implies that Obama undertook his grand experiment with an aim toward improving life in America, but it was never anything more than a power grab.  Let's go back to August, 2009 when Bill Clinton explained the strategy. PITTSBURGH - Former President Bill Clinton told an audience of liberal online activists Thursday evening that the nation has “entered a new era of progressive politics” that could last for decades if Democrats can pass ambitious measures such as health care reform and climate change. Health care reform was never about health care.  It is, and always has been, about control.  Since Obama took office there has not been a single thing, not one piece of legislation, that wasn't designed to give maximum political advantage to the Democratic party.  Health care reform, like everything else Obama has done, was intended to usher in an era of progressive control that would last for decades, and it may yet, if we're not vigilant and adamant.  Obama's grand experiment has not failed.  Mourning in America will be our future, for decades and beyond, if we fail to bring about regime change in America on November 2nd.

Comments

[Rob]

At least the ad mentions Ronald Reagan. Hopefully, this is an understanding that the Republican Party has not been the party of Reagan for some time.

But I doubt it. The message is confusing. A "more caring government that remembers us."

That's not the kind of language Reagan used.

It is not government’s responsibility to “care” for us. Rather, we should support ourselves and care for one another. From the perspective of small-government conservatives, one of the virtues of small government is that the government is in no position to “remember” the citizens, much less be “more caring” towards them.

One of Reagan's favorite lines, meant in complete sarcasm of course, was:

“I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.”

Many Republicans simply don't understand why the party is in the minority. They refuse to differentiate between the "compassionate conservatism" (code for big government) of the Bush years versus the push for limited government by Reagan. The confusing message in this add captures that equivicotion perfectly.

[Tom Bowler]

"...a smaller, more caring government..." is how it goes, which really isn't at odds with Reagan's message. That said, establishment Republicans did lose their way during the Bush years, and I'm not sure they've found it again. Reversal of their decision to remove Murkowski from leadership of the Senate energy committee is not a good sign.