What do you call a forum during which two people holding different opinions argue their respective cases in an attempt to win over the audience? Conservatives rightly call this a “debate.” But according to Dana Milbank, liberals have another term: “show trial.” That’s what Milbank called a debate this week between Norm Ornstein and Steve Hayward hosted by the American Enterprise Institute. The topic was whether Ornstein was correct about the modern Republican Party’s supposed historic intransigence.
It’s telling that the free flow of ideas makes liberals so uncomfortable. That is one aspect of the larger point Milbank was making, which is that in his opinion Jeb Bush’s recent comments on the difficulty his father and Ronald Reagan would have in today’s GOP were spot-on. But what did Jeb Bush say that Milbank found so damning? Here it is, from his column:
“Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad — they would have a hard time if you define the Republican Party . . . as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground,” Bush said Monday in a meeting at Bloomberg headquarters in New York, according to the online publication Buzzfeed.
“Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time — they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support,” Bush added. Reagan today “would be criticized for doing the things that he did.”
Chilling, I know. Reagan would be criticized. Talk about Stalinism! It’s fair to say, then, that liberal reaction to Bush’s comments has been disproportionate to their content. It’s hard to imagine conservatives criticizing Reagan–unless, of course, you were alive during the Reagan administration. Here’s just one of many examples, from the L.A. Times, to which Richard Viguerie ran down a list of a few things conservatives were upset with Reagan about: “abortion, pornography, busing and economic issues, but at the core of the criticism is anti-communism. Across the board he seems to be deserting his anti-communist position he has had for the last 30 years.”
The headline on the story was “Reagan Seeks to Calm His Right-Wing Critics.” Both liberals and conservatives have taken some poetic license during the years with Reagan’s legacy. But Reagan was criticized. He responded to the criticism. The right engaged in a debate. There was plenty of disagreement, yet Reagan continues to be lionized by conservatives who, unlike Milbank and the left, aren’t terrified by the clash of ideas.
In retrospect, Reagan was a great President, but — like ordinary people — he made mistakes, in both foreign and domestic policy. Two examples:
1) He did not insist on adequately defensive rules of engagement for U.S. forces in Lebanon. The result was the death of 299 American and French servicemen. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing)
2) Although he tried, he did not succeed in killing the federal Department of Education. (Admittedly, doing so may have been politically impossible.) But every additional bureaucratic layer that interferes with talented teachers — as all educational bureaucracies do, because they are largely staffed with people who didn’t understand and love teaching and “moved up” as soon as possible — has reduced the quality of U.S. schools, and universities.
Roger Folsom
Professor Emeritus of Economics, San José State University
To find common ground with the Democrats of today would not be the same. Democrats today are the most liberal ever, and many are quite radical. People say the country is polarized. I don't think so. I think the lefties are just louder and have the media helping them. Polls always show the country center-right. If finding common ground means compromising your values, forget it. Jeb Bush would allow the Democrats to drag the country leftward, as long as he could say he had "found common ground". Please, Jeb, you are not wanted.
President Reagan, Bush, and Clinton knew how to disagree with out needing to demonize. President carter was unable to work with congress even though the Demoncratic had control of both houses; President Obama had that advantage for two years and like carter has little to show for it. Senator Biden could have helped in dealing with congress but he was window dressing.