I need some help explaining why being a "Reagan Republican" is no badge of honor

Zero Tolerance
Asset Confiscation
Social Security Number tied to everything
Banking 'Secrecy' Law (an Orwellian designation if there ever was one)
Sandra Day O'Connor
William H. Rehnquist, whom Reagan elevated to Chief Justice
Antonin Scalia
Anthony M. Kennedy
Jingoism and the banishment of 'The Vietnam Syndrome'
...and last but not least, treason (arranging for the hostages in Iran to be held until the election).

1. Iran Contra
2. Drug War

Just go with Goldwater Republican he never got the chance to be a hypocrite.

Reagan is not lauded because he was a staunch constitutionalist; it is because he was an anomaly---a popular bright spot on a dull backdrop. The personality and substance of his presidency were unlike the Republican Party beforehand and afterward. He was unlike them, and they would never emulate him afterward.

Had he not been so keenly affectionate and firm---had he not been grandfatherly and resolute in his persona, we would certainly not hear so much praise for him today---even if his policies were exactly the same. America LIKED Ronald Reagan. That is the source of his popularity. It was not primarily because of his political prowess or his philosophy about the Constitution.

Remember, this is the same America that, even today, does not read its own Constitution, and that pretty much doesn't care that we are a nation that does not follow its own laws. So what bragging rights are there in being merely likable? (When you're the President, that is---not that being likable in itself is not a laudable thing.)

I imagine that America would quite enjoy having Dumbledore be President, too---even though he's not a real person, not an American, and doesn't know the Constitution, either.

Now that I've said all that----Reagan DID wow self-identified "conservatives" with some great one-liners, calling for (and even achieving) reform in various ways. And in those one-liners were curiously born the "conservative roots" of the Republican Party! They were "roots" that didn't seem to exist much BEFORE Reagan took office, and they certainly didn't exist one minute AFTER H.W. was sworn in. (Bush 41 began immediately to disassemble much of what Reagan accomplished. And in so doing, 41 was clearly following the official direction of the Republican Party.)

This is why I say Reagan was an anomaly. He was NOT the Republican Party; he was just a nice guy that the Republican Party let be president once upon a time.

Since then, we often hear the self-proclaimed spokespersons for the Republican Party saying, "I miss Reagan". Yet they cannot, for the life of them, seem to replicate the man? Nobody can be found to be like Reagan? No one? The fact of the matter is that the real Republican Party leadership does not at this time WANT anyone like Reagan with regard to his philosophy that "government is the problem". Yes, they'd like someone as popular, but not someone as resolute on that particular issue.

With Reagan, people see what they want to see. Those who like his "conservative values" remember those with enthusiasm. And those who simply like the fact that he won the White House for the Republican Party are enthusiastic about that.

Actually, Ron Paul is more like Reagan than Reagan was when it comes to small government! So why don't all the people who "miss Reagan" cling to Ron Paul? It's because for many, missing Reagan is not a thoroughly defined position. If Ron Paul had some more "John Wayne" in his persona, like Reagan did, he'd probably be more popular still. (Don't get me wrong: I don't think that Ron Paul needs to be like John Wayne, but the American people like that sort of thing, it seems, and were be apt to vote for it.)

Now, as to people claiming to be "Reagan Republicans", just what are they really claiming? Are they claiming that they, too, are anomalies---afloat in a sea of "non-Reagan Republicans"? Are they claiming to be "real" Republicans in a sea of "RINOs"? Are they somehow attesting to the hopelessness of meaningful party reform? (That is, that 8 years of Reagan did NOT reform the character of the Republican Party, and that many of his improvements were immediately reversed by Bush 41.)

I think the appeal to Reagan's name is not a definitive tactic, but an emotional one. People who claim to be "Reagan Republicans" may not necessarily be any more willing to take a firm stand on obedience to the Constitution than people who claim to be a "Carter Democrat" (OK, bad example, because I don't think anybody claims that---but you get the idea.)

It's just talk. It says "I remember the warm feelings". It does not say, "I'm ready to reform the Republican Party and the nation, too."

But even so, what better time than now to say, "I'm a Reagan Republican", since government is bigger and causing more trouble than ever. It will just as surely be said as there are sure to be plenty of unthinking people to find it a compelling sentiment.

What it will yield (at best), however, is a Republican sweep of the Congress in 2010. And then it will be the Republican Party's chance, once again, to lead the way down the slippery slope of constitutional disobedience---which is exactly where the Party wanted to go before, during, and after Reagan.

Jack Pelham
Rule of Law Revolution
www.ruleoflawrevolution.com