Republicans need to stop looking back at Ronald Reagan and instead seek out a new leader who can build forward-moving coalitions and be a “cheerleader for America” if they want to win back the White House, says Michael Reagan, the late president's son.
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, Reagan didn't hesitate when asked what role he would like for his father's legacy to play in the upcoming election.
“I think it is wrong for us to look for Ronald Reagan,” he said. “We were lucky to have him during our lifetimes. But if there is a role, look at who he truly was. … And you know, he was a man who cared about this country. He was a man who loved this country. It was always 'morning in America' for him. I want to find somebody who starts putting out positive messages about America like Ronald Reagan did. Somebody who is a cheerleader for America. Remember him for who he was. Don't try to redefine him in your image and likeness, define him in what and who he was.
“Remember, he was a man who changed the world and he changed it by building coalitions. Pope John Paul ... Margaret Thatcher, Mikhail Gorbachev, Tip O'Neill. To do these things he had to find areas of agreement and move forward. And you also have to remember, you always don't get everything you want right off the bat. You have to work towards an end. Look at politics as a football field. You have to go a 100 yards to score a touchdown. Ten yards at a time is OK as long as you score. I'm getting tired of hearing people throwing touchdown passes and when nobody catches it, they go home.
“If we don't hang together in the next election, we won't take back the Senate nor the White House. And we'll have four more years of our rights being taken away by this administration. We need to find areas where we work together, not apart.”
Reagan, who spoke at the National Rifle Association’s annual conference in Pittsburgh recently, had harsh words for the hopefuls who are looking to win the nomination to face off against President Barack Obama in next year’s election.
In a brutally frank assessment of the potential Republican candidates, he picked them apart one by one, saying he did not believe either former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee or former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would run. Of the others, he said former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney needs to “talk to people who are at the water cooler, not the person who owns the water cooler,” and former Sen. Rick Santorum needs more than just the pro-life issue to win the presidency.
He said both Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and businessman Herman Cain have to reach out beyond their tea party base if they are to be serious candidates.
“It’s like if I’m only doing Fox [News] and I’m a candidate and everybody who watched me on Fox votes for me. I’m only going to lose by 57 million votes.” He said Bachmann could be a viable vice presidential candidate if she expanded her horizons, but was not ready for the presidency.
Reagan, the oldest of Ronald Reagan’s three surviving children, described former House Speaker Newt Gingrich as having “more baggage than bags,” adding: “That’s a problem for Newt.”
He praised Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels for showing leadership by defunding Planned Parenthood in Indiana, but says he “has to learn to command a room a little bit better,” while former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has “the least baggage of anybody,” but “needs a little shot of charisma.”
“Every one of them has work they could do and things they need to learn,” said Reagan. “First they need to learn to listen and move forward from there.
“If you could take some of these candidates to show the passion of Michelle Bachmann it would upgrade and uplift the males in the race,” he added.
“When my father passed away in 2004, we didn’t lose a former president; I didn’t lose a father; the world lost a cheerleader. Let’s find a cheerleader.”
But Reagan still believes the GOP can win in 2012. “We have a great board of directors,” he said. “But we need to find the chairman of the board. If we find the chairman of the board we’ll win.”
Despite his criticism of the potential candidates, Reagan’s harshest words were for Obama. “Jimmy Carter’s the only one happy with the Obama administration,” he said. “It means he will not go down as the worst president this country’s ever had.
Reagan, who has written a new book, “The New Reagan Revolution,” said most politicians need to take a leaf out of his father’s playbook and listen more. “We have a president now who really doesn’t listen to anybody. He listens to himself and he needs a lot of help and the help he’s put around him has no concept of what to do.
“Look at the world that we live in today. You look at the dollar against the euro, you look what’s going on in the Middle East, there’s no leadership. You can’t say America needs to take a second position to anybody and put somebody else in charge.
“My God, France is in charge of what’s going on in the Middle East? Give me a break. You need to have America strong. Right now America is not strong because the leadership is not strong.”
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Arizona Appeal to US Supreme Court re Immigration
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer wants the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a ruling that put the most controversial parts of the state's immigration enforcement law on hold.
The appeal comes after Brewer lost an initial appeal April 11, when a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reverse a lower court's order that prevented key parts of the law from being enforced.
The U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit in a bid to invalidate the law.
Brewer's lawyers have argued the federal government hasn't effectively enforced immigration law and that the state's intent in passing the law was to assist federal authorities.
The U.S. Justice Department has argued the law intrudes on its exclusive authority to regulate immigration and burdens legal immigrants.
The appeal comes after Brewer lost an initial appeal April 11, when a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reverse a lower court's order that prevented key parts of the law from being enforced.
The U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit in a bid to invalidate the law.
Brewer's lawyers have argued the federal government hasn't effectively enforced immigration law and that the state's intent in passing the law was to assist federal authorities.
The U.S. Justice Department has argued the law intrudes on its exclusive authority to regulate immigration and burdens legal immigrants.
The IPAB: How Will It Change Medicare?
The >Independent Payment Advisory Board was created by the 2010 health care law. Last month, in releasing his deficit-reduction plan, President Barack Obama called for increasing the panel's authority, saying it was critical to controlling the costs of Medicare, estimated at $524 billion in fiscal 2010. Republicans and some Democrats have denounced IPAB, saying it will be made up of unelected bureaucrats who will wind up rationing care to Medicare beneficiaries. As the spotlight turns back to the deficit, debates about IPAB are moving front and center. Here's a look at the issues:
What will IPAB >do ?
Beginning with fiscal 2015, if Medicare is projected to grow too quickly, IPAB will make binding recommendations to reduce spending. Those recommendations will be sent to Capitol Hill at the beginning of the year, and if Congress doesn't like them, it must pass alternative cuts -- of the same size -- by August. A supermajority of the Senate can also vote to amend the IPAB recommendations. If Congress fails to act, the secretary of health and human services is required to implement the cuts by default.
Who will serve on the panel?
It will have 15 full-time members, and only a minority of them can be health care providers. The president is required to get suggestions from leaders of both parties in Congress in nominating 12 of the 15 appointees. For the other three, he doesn't have to consult Congress. The members have to be confirmed by the Senate. Obama hasn't nominated anyone yet, but said last month that he hopes to fill the slots with "doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers." Board members, who will serve six-year terms, are to be paid the salary of senior executives in the federal government -- $165,300 this year -- and cannot hold any other jobs.
Why is IPAB so controversial?
Hospitals, doctors, drug companies and some patients' groups are worried IPAB will recommend reductions in Medicare payments -- which they say already are too low -- and that they won't have the time or ability to counter the cuts during accelerated congressional action. Doctors and drug companies are particularly worried that they'll bear a lot of the burden because hospitals and nursing homes aren't subject to IPAB's cost-cutting recommendations until fiscal 2020. Lawmakers -- mostly Republicans but some Democrats as well -- say that IPAB will have too much power and are pressing for repeal of the provision.
Some critics, including House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., charge that IPAB will ration needed care for seniors.
Defenders counter that the law bars it from rationing care, restricting benefits or changing eligibility criteria. And, in response to complaints from the health care industry, Sen. John Rockefeller, D-W.Va., who was one of IPAB's architects, said that the board was specifically designed to reduce the influence of "special interests" on Medicare payment policy. Those interests, he and others say, have kept Congress from making the tough decisions needed to hold down spending and reduce the deficit. ..................
For the rest of the article go to: www.aarp.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)