A part of Reagan that some have blindly forgotten.

[William769]

We'll just add this to all the other horrible thing he did to our Country.

Snip

“We keep looking for some good to come out of this. Maybe it might help in putting race relations on the front burner, after they’ve been subjugated for so long as a result of the Reagan years.”
— Bryant Gumbel on the Los Angeles riots, April 30, 1992 Today.

“The Republicans, for 25 years, have seldom avoided the temptation to play the race card politically in this country....In the ‘70s, Ronald Reagan, and the late ‘70s, he ran for President in 1980 talking about welfare queens, associating the Great Society programs with minorities, and with waste, and with crime in the streets. There has been a consistent impulse, Willie Horton was just a continuation of that, to use this issue to divide people.”
— U.S. News & World Report Senior Writer Steven Roberts on Washington Week in Review, May 8, 1992.

“Emboldened by a sea change during the Reagan-Bush era, conservatives scolded, ‘it’s all your fault.’ Dismissively this camp insisted that what blacks need are mainstream American values — read white values. Go to school, get a job, get married, they exhorted, and the family will be just fine.”
— Newsweek General Editor Michele Ingrassia, August 30, 1993.

“In the wake of the somewhat new hostilities bred in the Reagan ‘80s, how do you assess the state of race relations in this country today?”
— Bryant Gumbel to National Urban League President Hugh Price, July 28, 1994 Today.

“The sad truth is that many Republican leaders remain in a massive state of denial about the party’s four-decade-long addiction to race-baiting. They won’t make any headway with blacks by bashing Lott if they persist in giving Ronald Reagan a pass for his racial policies....It’s with Reagan, who set a standard for exploiting white anger and resentment rarely seen since George Wallace stood in the schoolhouse door, that the Republican ’s selective memory about its race-baiting habit really stands out.”
— Time’s Jack E. White in a column posted on Time.com on December 14, 2002.

http://www.mediaresearch.org/specialreports/2004/report0604_p4.asp

Google is your friend, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

[Big Blue Marble]

1. Actually Nixon used the race card first in 68.

He used the now famous southern strategy to capture the backlash to the civil rights legislation under Johnson.
He did very effectively and won the presidency with it. The only reason we had a Dem prez after Nixon was
because of Watergate. Reagan just tapped deeper into the cesspool and successfully continued the ugly tradition.

For the most part this tradition has held, that is why the Republicans can still count on the south.

[hertopos]

2. What is your problem?

It is not about Obama. It is about Reagan.
Nixson did many aweful things; however, he did not touch LBS's social policy much.
In effect, he did not harm working class people and minority as much as Reagan did.

Hertopos

[Big Blue Marble]

3. It is not just about either Nixon or Reagan.

It is about the Republicans and how they win elections, by splitting the voters into groups with animosity toward each other.
The harm on to working class and minority citizens has been the under story of the last 40 years of Republican domination of
the American government. Nixon started it. Reagan continued it. And Bush completed it.

[LittleClarkie]

10. So what was Obama's point then, do you think

From the point of view of several people, Nixon started it, Reagan continued it, Bush completed it, and now Obama's admiring it?

What exactly is Obama admiring about how Reagan won elections?

I haven't read his book yet, and so I'm assuming there's some context missing.

[Big Blue Marble]

15. Obama is talking about seismic shifts in voting patterns.

Voters tend to align themselves with one party or other. They then will repeatedly and habitually vote for the candidates of that party.
They have a party identity. This happened in mid-century American politics. The majority of Americans identified themselves as Democrats.
FDR had dramatically shifted the political dynamic in this country in a way that left the Republicans seriously marginalized.

As the New Deal political base began to lose steam in the late sixties, the Republicans began to capitalize on the opportunity.
A big setback for the Dems, was ironically in retrospect, civil rights legislation under Johnson. It gave Nixon the wedge issue to claim
the South. It helped the Republicans start to move this country to the right.

Enter Reagan in 1980, the New Deal coalition was in enough trouble and with the Republicans effectively owning the south,
he was able to convince those who were self-identified Democrats to vote against there self-interests and vote Republican.
He used this support to begin destroying the New Deal legislation and culture that dominated this country for 50 years.

Now it is our turn. Obama recognizes that the opportunity is present to do to the Republican coalition what they did to us in 1980.
Moderate Republicans and large numbers of independents are signaling that they are ready to make the switch. They are exhausted
with Republicanism in its current form. They are ready to re-align with Dems.

But it has to be a fresh candidate. Hillary is far too polarizing. Edwards has been around too long. They are saying give us a new candidate
whom we can identify and we will support him/her. It is sad that so many Democrats are willing to miss this opportunity to shift the
politics to a new direction. They are more comfortable repeating the mistakes of the past.

[LittleClarkie]

16. Thank you. I assum you've read his book?

I need to. I haven't yet.

[Big Blue Marble]

17. I actually have not read his book.

But I have lived through most of this history.

[John Q. Citizen]

7. What's your problem? Who said anything about Obama?

They called it the Reagan Revolution, because of the major way that the Reagan changed the country. It changed it for the worse.

Bush I and Clinton just continued those changes which were key to corporate power consolidation through deregulation, so called "free trade," dismantling the safety net.

[jlake]

13. Keep on worshippin' Reagan.....you obviously want another Republican in the WH.

Either GOP Lover Obama or the Repub nominee that will wipe the floor with him.

[Big Blue Marble]

18. Your response is unintelligible.

Please explain in more detail what the world you are talking about.

[jlake]

26. It is intelligible if you read it.

[formercia]

20. self delete

[desi]

4. Obama really stepped in it didn't he?

Has anybody been able to fully explain what his motive was for even injecting Raygun/BUSH into the equation? I mean other than pandering to Repigs and fucking "Raygun democrats?"

forgot: K&R

[AX10]

6. It's a preview of his "let's all get along" thing he's been doing.

Basically, he's going to put a happy face on some horrible policies that the GOP will be writing.

[LittleClarkie]

9. Oh several times

but when no one is reading it then you give up after a while.

[2rth2pwr]

5. ___

[William769]

11. I see like likeness.

[desi]

8. Oh shit...

M$NBC just ran your Obama/Raygun video. :yourock:

[William769]

12. Thanks for letting me know.

[desi]

14. Nora O'Donnell was flabbergasted...

I wonder if Tweety will run it as well. I may hold my nose and watch the spittle fly tonight. :rofl:

[smiley_glad_hands]

19. YaY! Obama/Reagan 08!

Fricking moron. What kind of dem is he again? Not my kind thats for sure.

[Laurab]

21. Having a big day, today, eh William?

You've convinced me, I'm going to rush out and vote for Hillary now :sarcasm: - keep that faux outrage going - it helps your candidate so very much.

[SIMPLYB1980]

22. The only Faux outrage comes from Obama supporters.

Do you really expect real Democrats to support anything that has to do with Raygun. Sorry no sell, this is legit. A lot of us have real problems with him.

[Laurab]

24. Yes, and so many of you have Hillary avatars. n/t

[madmom]

33. I have a big problem with it and I don't have a Hillary avatar, nor will I.

[Laurab]

34. Okay, but you support Hillary

I've seen many, many of your posts.....

[madmom]

36. no I do not support Hillary, but I do defend her when people bash her unfairly.

[William769]

23. Did I ask you to vote for Hilalry?

Is she the only one running besdies Obama? I think not. Your sarcasm has fallen on deaf ears.

[Laurab]

25. Actually, no. But you are well known as one of her biggest supporters.

And I've seen many of your OPs, I can't imagine what else you would be trying to do. Or have been trying to do, for months now. I can't imagine spending the amount of time you do on this stuff, that really isn't going to accomplish anything, but, have fun.

[William769]

27. So me being one of her biggest supporters changes this story how?

[Laurab]

28. Oh, it doesn't - it's obviously completely unbiased

and you never start threads ridiculously twisting words and meanings of other candidates. My bad.

[William769]

29. So then why did you make the comments you did?

Just trying to figure things out here.

[Laurab]

31. Because they were true.

I didn't think my response needed the sarcasm thing added, but I guess I was wrong.

I'm done playing, you have fun.

[William769]

32. Thanks for the spam, see you on your next run.

[SIMPLYB1980]

30. LOL!

[ooga booga]

35. Reagan was eager to court Southern Dixiecrats

Ronald Reagan had that "aw shucks" demeanor, but he was willing to launch his presidential campaign in the Deep South talking about "states rights" which, of course, translated to "Y'all decide how to handle race issues. I think the rest of us oughta leave you alone." He said it near where three civil rights workers were famously murdered in 1964. So, if you're a racist Southerner and Reagan asserts "states rights" nearly over the graves of those civil rights workers, you're probably going to feel that Reagan is on your side -- which is what Ronnie intended. Talk about "Slick Willie"! Seems like "Slippery Ronnie" to me.

Check this 2004 Washington Post piece about Reagan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39345-2004Jun13.html