Ronald Reagan’s Vision and Policies DVD

By Lew Uhler, NATIONAL TAX LIMITATION COMMITTEE | December 30th, 2011 | 2

Don’t miss this opportunity to have RONALD REAGAN’s VISION & POLICIES in your private collection.

Our founder, Lew Uhler, worked with the Reagan administration during his Governorship in California, then followed him onto the White House. Uhler continues the historic fight led by Ronald Reagan and his groundbreaking role in limited government and expanded personal liberties.

Order Here Limited availability.

Follow Lew Uhler and the National Tax Limitation Committee on Twitter
@limittaxesorg

2 comments to Ronald Reagan’s Vision and Policies DVD

Amanda Smith

February 26, 2012 at 10:46 am · Reply

Ronald Reagan has been an inspiration to countless millions the world over. Nicknamed the Great Communicator, he had the ability to deliver moving speeches that touched the hearts of the masses with their direct style, humor and sincerity. During his long career in politics, he gave a great many speeches – some of which rose to the level of greatness. Perhaps the most memorable phrase one recalls when thinking of Ronald Reagan comes from his speech of 6/12/87. Here in an address at the Brandenburg Gate (Berlin Wall) in Berlin, he uttered the phrase “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” to the thundering applause of all people who were free or sought to be free of tyranny.
Amanda Smith
http://www.visionwithoutlenses.com
- FurKan
  
  March 28, 2012 at 1:27 pm · Reply
  
  Heh, funny things took a sharp dip in the period bfoere the change candidate was elected. When, presumably, the change candidate was campaigning. [..] Look how high things were in 1991, and then blam.Hmm I think the sharp drop in Bush Sr’s ratings took place, or largely took place, bfoere the Clinton and Perot campaigns took off. I remember it or at least think I do how drastic a phenomenon it was. One of the biggest roller coasters in a president’s fate in recent history I think. First Bush’s popularity was pumped up to record high levels during and directly after the first Gulf war. Then the economic crisis kicked in and the mood of the country just turned on a dime (if that’s the right expression), and crashed. I think it was very much the crisis-fuelled mood turn that made Clinton (and Perot especially!) possible, rather than the other way round.In general, but that may be my background, I’m firmly on the side that believes the systemic changes and long-term undercurrents produce the candidates, or at least the opportunities the candidates get to take advantage of, rather than that individual candidates, no matter how charismatic, shape or create these big turn-arounds.So that’s also very much the way I would have taken your post, and chart like, hmm, well: we tend to view everything through the person- and event-focused prism of political journalism etc. Explain changes in general public opinion by referring to this or that political event or the power of this or that candidate. And obviously those play a role. But to a large extent it’s also us looking at all the exciting glittery reflections on the water’s surface, when those only appear because of the currents far underneath. As in: at a time when there was no sense of impending economic doom, when there was no massively impopular President and little more confidence in Congress, when there was no such near-anonymous view of the country being off-track, a candidate like Obama would either not have gotten the chance to break through (and storm past Hillary, for example) in the first place, or not have had the chance to come out winning as he is now doing. No matter how admittedly brilliant or skilled or charismatic he is.Like, this year the Republicans’ culture war attacks are floundering. And part of that of course is that Obama is simply very skilled in deflecting them. But a larger part, I think, is the sheer predominance of economic anxiety and the yearning for change. Those now some of them are leaning to voting for Obama in spite of their racism. Or planning on staying home. But if the economy had been middling rather than bad, and if Bush and co had not thoroughly destroyed the Republican brand the way they did, things would have been different. No matter how good Obama is (and I agree he is something of a once-in-a-generation political talent), I dont think he would have survived the Wright and Ayers stuff, the militant-black-stranger-in-our-midst attacks, eight years ago. Or four years ago, even. Hell, he barely squeaked through the primaries now, and much of the closeness was rooted in that identity stuff. This year, the yearning for change and the existential concern about the economy are overriding the Rove-type politics of identity. And Obama’s justly getting kudos for his own mad skillz in deflecting those as well. But I think we shouldnt kid ourselves that this kind of politics is suddenly impotent, and might not well have proven sufficiently successful to block Obama in another, less perfect storm’ type year.