“It’s the economy, stupid.” This was Carville’s version of Reaganism. Talk jobs, talk prosperity. Talk up enterprise. Talk down “Big Government”.  Painting in this limited palette with a canvas supplied by the shallowest recession in economic history allowed Bill Clinton and Ross Perot to decisively defeat the hapless Elder Bush who may have then regretted his own tactical distancing from Reagan.

Or perhaps not. It takes great effort now to understand the despite and ridicule that met Reagan whenever he reared his Brylcreamed-head among the governing elite of whatever party. Dick Cheney, we are recently reminded, as a toddler was tasked with casting Reagan (to his detriment) as a second Goldwater. Not Goldwater the man, dedicated friend of liberty and very fine Senator, but rather Goldwater the electoral event which saw a shellacking not yet repeated until, maybe, 1984. One could wonder now how such a program could be possibly entertained, especially when the contest was a Republican Primary, but that is because we now, apparently, are officially unanimous in our respect and affection for Ronald Wilson Reagan.

As always this unanimity is not total. There are outliers. From the Left comes the song of the true die-hards. Joan Walsh of Salon is typical. She denounces the stated support for Reagan hagiography as mere lies. This bold quack from an unkinder, less gentle America may violate our newly writ rules of comity but let us still appreciate the candor. The “lies” are shopworn to those who have followed these controversies; basically they amount to declarations, more or less defined by distortions, that all those Good Times you recall were a shambolic bit of stage management. Where hard numbers indicate otherwise, that was just the natural pulsing of the economic or foreign policy tides exploited, either fortuitously or cynically, by this malign demagog. In reality this bumbling tyrant never put a foot right which is plain because he constantly went against the Conventional Wisdom of his day. Why, we were nearly vaporized, starved, tortured, raped or imprisoned every DAY of the Reagan Misadministration! Give the Walshites credit for consistency. There is far more to respect there than in the putrid political body-snatching now underway before your scandalized eyes and upwind from your sensitive nose.

It opened in earnest some months ago with a Reaganesque maneuver; while decamping for one of his rare vacations the current President displayed a Reagan biography in his hands as prominently as Bill Clinton once displayed his bible and wedding ring at a critical juncture. The groaning of the Professional Left thundered across the nation and The Nation but the majority of the pressies and pundits received the transmission and lept to toe the Party Line. The hook was bipartisanship, that universal element of Washington alchemy. Post-shellacking there would be a New Obama. One Party Rule was out. Compromise is in. This was a magnanimous concession though it would have looked far more sincere before election day but when you comprehend how thoroughly Team Obama believes its own alibis you might understand how painful and difficult this was.

Shrewdly, the Administration publicly plays (by their standards) a light hand and leaves the more slobbering acts of necrophilia to their pet Press Corpse. Andrea Mitchell is typical and she plays to win, objecting live to Republicans and conservatives (TEA folk, check your messages) for trying to “appropriate” Reagan for their own purposes! This is more twisted than the Menendez Defense, that claims the stresses of being orphaned caused one to kill his parents and brushes closer to the practice of executing rape victims for infidelity. While utterly ignoring the Democrats’ mad grasp at Reagan’s mantle she shows no hint that, perhaps, there is no need for the Righties to “appropriate” a blessed thing from Reagan. The Reagan Legacy and conventional conservatism are nearly an identity set. Can she dispute  this? Her only defense is that perhaps she does not know what the verb “to appropriate” means. The stench of this absurdity may finally adhere even at Mitchell’s elevation on the apex of the political/media complex, but don’t count on it. Though she has distinguished herself here she is far from alone in this probing attack on Fort Reagan.

The most ostentatious move yet has come unsurprisingly on the cover of TIME magazine. If you have not seen it do not seek it without fasting a bit and drawing some spirits. This employs a miracle of the Internet age and produces a classic American moment that of course never happened. It shows the avuncular Reagan (near his prime) with a kindly hand on Barack Obama’s shoulder. Giving advice? Encouragement? A caution or correction? Ah, who cares! The strategem seems to be no more complex than that Reagan was an electoral winner and we hope fervently that winning is contagious. As contagious as ebola. Heck, moreso. You can’t catch even ebola from a Photoshop.

Well we can forgive the engineers of this gambit their optimism. As it is said, you will never go broke betting on stupidity. Or nearly never. The underlying hope though should be examined and it rests on a single proposition: the economy will improve and at a Reaganesque clip. Why? Well, it just has to. Reaganism, you see, has less than nothing to do with the approbation that meets Reagan even poste mortem. Tax cuts? We can use the phrase but no, we shall cut no taxes. Cutting government? Hmmm, we can freeze it for a bit, of course this is AFTER we have grown it 25%. Yeah, we can do that. Strength abroad? Uh…. Liberty at home? Well….

The plan is to have Reagan without Reaganism. Didn’t Clinton try that? Yep. Didn’t it blow up in his face and force him to ACTUALLY reign as more-or-less a Reaganite? Yes. And Clinton did enjoy a Reaganesque outcome if by that one means he was re-elected. Which is indeed what they mean. It seems therefore that Team O makes things more difficult on themselves than necessary. If they feel they must conjure a beneficial association, why not Clinton? Why not Johnson of the New And Improved Deal? Already TIME has had Obama as FDR and that was unavailing apparently but without delving into the whys let’s just go down the list: why not Kennedy? Oh, we did that. How about Truman? Yeah, we did that too, though not forcefully. Ike? Mebbe. Lincoln? Tried that. Jefferson? Polk? Taft? Grant?

Nope. Obama as Reagan, that’s the ticket. And we will show how it is done. Not only will we have Reagan without the Reaganism, we will have Reagan with ANTI-Reaganism at full throttle!

But these Certified Genii suffer from a poor memory. We also have a recent historical example of their master plan in action. It was known as Carterism for which, as you may recall, the successful treatment was Reaganism. Can we have Reagan without the Reaganism? Can we have Carterism without Carter? That is what the gunslingers pray for, when in a praying mood. And who knows? Maybe they are right but if so will we then see Carter on TIME with a gentle word of guidance for the President? Unlike Reagan, he is available for a photo op.

Tweet  Print This Post

Tags: politics & government, trusted media & news // 1 Comment »