Jackson Free Press

AP is reporting: "Days after Ronald Reagan was laid to rest, a conservative interest group on Tuesday unveiled a campaign ad that aligns him with President Bush and criticizes Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. The Club for Growth's ad, which is to begin airing Wednesday, portrays both Republican presidents as leaders - Reagan on communism and Bush on terrorism, while claiming Kerry was 'wrong then, wrong now' on national security. The ad shows Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, testifying to Congress in 1971 that 'we cannot fight communism all over the world and I think we should have learned that lesson by now.'

"Former President Reagan is then seen at the Berlin Wall in 1987, saying 'Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.' That's followed by Bush telling rescue workers at the World Trade Center after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks: 'I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.'

Previous Comments

ID

137035

Comment

Not surprising at all.

Author

kaust

Date

2004-06-16T11:01:21-06:00

ID

137036

Comment

According to Salon (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html), "But a Reagan family's spokeswoman said no one requested the permission to use Reagan's image in an ad, nor would permission be granted because it would imply that he endorsed one candidate over another. "

Author

kate

Date

2004-06-16T12:28:39-06:00

ID

137037

Comment

Without taking it too far out of context, Kate, I think it's fairly safe to state Reagan would have endored a Republican presidential candidate over a Democratic presidential candidate. heh

Author

Fielding

Date

2004-06-16T13:38:25-06:00

ID

137038

Comment

Reagan might have... Unfortunately, his estate is no longer controlled by him. But I'm sure Nancy would be traumatized by a phone call days after the funeral asking for permission to use Reagan's face in Republican propoganda. I'm curious how long they've had this sitting on the cooker?!? I still am shocked that NO TIME was wasted... Could they not have simply waited a month or so? Hell, why not wait until closer to November? You know, strategically bringing up "good" memories of the past administration and associating them with, er, "good" memories of the recent administration? All in bad taste in my opinion.

Author

kaust

Date

2004-06-16T14:32:32-06:00

ID

137039

Comment

Perhaps, not Fielding. Not everyone is beholden to a party no matter what it does or morphs into--and the current Republican Party isn't exactly upholding ideals that many, if not most, conservatives hold near and dear. It's also interesting to note that Barry Goldwater--the father of the current-day Republican Party--had turned against it by the end of his life. And, the fact is, if Reagan would have wanted to endorse Bush in an ad, it seems to me that the family would be able to communicate that -- had they been asked.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-06-16T14:35:38-06:00

ID

137040

Comment

I will certainly agree that it is in terribly bad taste to use an image of Reagan so soon after his passing. I was just expressing my thought that I believe Reagan would have endorsed Bush over Kerry or any other party's candidate. Reagan is a perfect example of a person not being beholden to party labels - after all, wasn't it he who coined the phrase "I didn't leave the Democratic Party - they left me..." I would further submit that the passing of former President Reagan will not make any serious impact on the upcoming election.

Author

Fielding

Date

2004-06-16T16:10:01-06:00

ID

137041

Comment

Sounds like we're not making a similar point, Fielding: Like him or not, Reagan was his own man. I don't think his passing will have much impact on the election, either. Although, I'm not as convinced as you that he would have endorsed either candidate.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-06-16T16:13:51-06:00

ID

137042

Comment

Fielding, you may want to read the interview with Ron Reagan that's over on Salon, from April 2003, http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2003/04/14/ron_reagan/ For example, it starts out: The Bush inner circle would like to think of George W.'s presidency as more of an extension of Ronald Reagan's than of his one-term father's. Reagan himself, who has long suffered from Alzheimer's disease, is unable to comment on those who lay claim to his political legacy. But his son, Ron, is -- and he's not pleased with the association. "The Bush people have no right to speak for my father, particularly because of the position he's in now," he said during a recent interview with Salon. "Yes, some of the current policies are an extension of the '80s. But the overall thrust of this administration is not my father's -- these people are overly reaching, overly aggressive, overly secretive, and just plain corrupt. I don't trust these people." and: "Reagan took a swipe at Bush during the 2000 GOP convention in Philadelphia, which featured a tribute to his father, telling the Washington Post's Lloyd Grove, "The big elephant sitting in the corner is that George W. Bush is simply unqualified for the job... What's his accomplishment? That he's no longer an obnoxious drunk?" " So, you may want to do a little bit of reading before you say that Reagan (or his family) would be endorsing Bush.

Author

kate

Date

2004-06-16T16:33:26-06:00

ID

137043

Comment

So Ron Reagan doesn't like Bush(43)? That isn't exactly news to me; but, I will stand by my statement earlier that Ronald Reagan, the former President would have endorsed the current President for re-election - certainly preferring him over John Kerry, or heaven forbid Ralph Nader. I would add that Micheal Reagan is continuing to support the GOP and Republican candidates. Perhaps Ron Jr. wouldn't endorse Bush and Michael would? We'll see...

Author

Fielding

Date

2004-06-21T12:00:44-06:00

ID

137044

Comment

That's your opinion, Fielding, and of course you should stand by it. But the larger points being made are that (a) it is tasteless and inappropriate for a radical-right group to co-opt Reagan's face and "endorsement" for their own political gain and (b) the record shows that Reagan and Bush, although they have some views in common, are radically different people and politicians, and it is not nearly as clear as you first presented it (remember "heh") that Reagan would have endorsed anyone in this election had he had the chance. He may well have been one of the growing body of Americans who don't like any of the choices. Or, like Barry Goldwater, he might have changed his mind radically over time, even as people kept honoring his older ideas. There really is no way to know for sure, so it shows the most class and respect not to make flip assumptions. And, one would think that his family might know him perhaps better than anyone else. But obviously they, too, will be colored by their own viewpoints.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-06-21T12:10:35-06:00

ID

137045

Comment

I hope you'll notice that I also stated it was tacky and bad taste to use Reagan's image so soon after his passing. There is a debate going on in conservative circles about the similarities and differences between Reagan and Bush(43) which is very interesting. You might even enjoy it...

Author

Fielding

Date

2004-06-21T12:20:05-06:00

ID

137046

Comment

I hope you'll notice that I also stated it was tacky and bad taste to use Reagan's image so soon after his passing. There is a debate going on in conservative circles about the similarities and differences between Reagan and Bush(43) which is very interesting. You might even enjoy it... You did say that. But I'd also say that your comments seemed rather hasty as well, and flippantly jumped to a conclusion that doesn't follow from the record. I'm well aware of that conservative debate you mention. I read widely. I posted a link from Reason magazine last week that was very interesting about Reagan-Bush, and have read many others in the conservative press that go far beyond the glowing and simplistic rhetoric put out that by corporate cable channels to sell drug ads. Clearly, many conservatives aren't happy with Bush's policies. Why would they be? He is violating most true conservative ideals.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-06-21T12:38:53-06:00