The 3-16 issue of TIME has on its cover an pic of Reagan shedding an ersatz tear at the fate of conservatism under Bush. The cover blurb states, "What would Ronnie do? And why the Republican candidates needs to reclaim the Reagan legacy."
Writer Karen Tumulty sees 21st Century conservatism as part of a tradition dating from the days of the Founding Fathers, "who believed that people should do things for themselves and who shook off a monarchy in their conviction that Big Government is more to be feared than encouraged." The remainder of the article is no better.
It has been my belief since long before 1980 that Ronald Reagan was first, foremost, and always remained, an anti-intellectual. From his remarks about "bloodbaths" as governor of California, to his Pete-Rose-like dissemblances as President, he has always been about the cheap distraction, the gut reaction, the snap judgment, the easy laugh, the greasepaint, the propagandistic lie, and never about analysis, never about the long-term good, never about enabling the kind of politics which enable thoughtful people to draw thoughtful political conclusions, and thoughtful elected officials to make good political decisions.
I won't say he didn't love his country, but neither can I say the people who keep their dog chained 24-7 out back don't love their dog.
What really twists me off about Tumulty's article is that today's 'conservatism' is the Reagan legacy. Can you name a conservative politician today who could get anywhere with people who call themselves 'conservatives' by being honest and thoughtful? The only national name that comes to my mind is Colin Powell, and I don't think he is interested.
Electing Bill Clinton didn't dilute Reagan-style politics, it just made them look like respectable opposition. Similarly, electing a Democrat in 2008 won't lead to any long-term corrections unless Democrats and independents can return depth to political discourse, criticize the media when it is too shallow, and explain to the public in meaningful terms what the Republicans are doing when they revert to type. It is the Big Picture that drives people to vote one way or another. Democrats have to make it theirs. God knows they have had enough help from the Republicans lately.
Who could do this? Gore could. Obama could. Clark could. Edwards could. Finegold could, but he says he's not running. Clinton couldn't. Biden couldn't. Who have I left out?