The Reagan-Dubya Gipper Graft? [UPDATED]

The prolonged funeral games of Ronald Reagan continue stretching through this week as if Old Dutch was, in reality, Princess Diana. But you knew that already. The electronic media continues its non-stop beatification. The print media, predictably, is giving a generally more balanced picture. But not completely. The L.A. Times today went right into the tank for the Gipper, allowing itself editorial liberties that under different circumstances would earn an editor’s reprimand. Today’s above-the-fold screamer headline reads better as a caption in museum exhibit of Stalin’s funeral than as the masthead of what claims to be a world-class newspaper: “Adoring Public Says Goodbye.” Roll over, Uncle Joe!

The editors allowed the lead of this newsprint treacle to suggest that God Himself was forlorn over Reagan’s passing and had appropriately shrouded the Simi Valley horizon:

Under mournful skies, a motorcade carried former President Reagan along miles of cleared freeways from a Santa Monica funeral home to his presidential library near Simi Valley on Monday, the first step in a weeklong journey to the nation's Capitol and back.

On the hilltop campus where he eventually will be buried, a grieving Nancy Reagan pressed a cheek to her husband's flag-draped coffin, and thousands of other mourners arrived by the busload to shuffle past the bier.

Oh, give me a break! What’s next? “The aggrieved masses demanded that the authorities maintain vigilant defense of the free-enterprise regime so wisely and resolutely constructed by our Fallen Leader?” I mean, can grown-up editors handle this sort of copy with a straight face? I teach some basic journalism courses every year and I struggle to impart a simple maxim to my young students raised on a steady diet of tabloid TV: “Just the facts, ma’am.” If you want to say anymore, get a column – or start a blog!

Fortunately, the L.A. Times mixed some real news into its Tuesday edition. This piece outlines how G.W. Bush’s advisors hope to cash in on Reagan’s death. Gosh, can you imagine? Nattering nabobs like Ed Meese and Peggy Noonan were all over the cable nets today blatantly whoring for the Prez, solemnly suggesting that Reagan’s soul has, indeed, already passed into Dubya’s body.

I think it’s a tall order for a mediocrity like Bush to successfully pull off the incarnation stunt. So does Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly who has the best analysis of the attempt to graft the Gipper. An excerpt:

The problem with comparing Bush to Reagan is that Bush comes off as a mediocre painter trying to emulate Picasso. He sees the brushstrokes on the surface and knows how to copy them, but because he doesn't understand their underlying purpose he ends up being only a clumsy and ultimately damaging imitation when he tries to craft a painting of his own.

No analogy is perfect, but in a lot of ways Bush strikes me as being to Reagan what LBJ was to Roosevelt. It's true that LBJ made some powerful and original contributions to the country, particularly in the area of civil rights, but in the end his legacy has been overshadowed by a pair of signature failures. The Great Society and the Vietnam War, consciously modeled on FDR's New Deal and his leadership during World War II, adopted the surface characteristics of FDR's great achievements but ended up as failures because LBJ didn't have Roosevelt's instinctive feel for public opinion or his grasp of why some things worked and some didn't.

Much the same can be said of George Bush. He learned Reagan's lesson that tax cuts could be powerful political symbols, but then turned that lesson into a blind rule that tax cuts are the answer to every economic problem. Likewise, on foreign policy he saw that Reagan was admired for his steadfast anticommunism, but failed to learn when and where to turn down the volume. As a result, he's a man with only one gear, overreliant on military solutions whether they're appropriate or not.

Like LBJ, Bush is a man who knows the notes but not the song. He learned the surface lessons of Reagan's presidency — tax cuts, hawkishness, unyielding rhetoric — but because he doesn't have the political sensitivity to understand what to do with them he has no choice except to simply offer more tax cuts and more hawkishness, whatever the problem. As a result, he overreaches in a way Reagan never did and will likely be the prime cause of the one thing he most fears: a liberal backlash. Welcome to the club.

Let me know when this spectacle is over. I’m going fishing until normal broadcasting resumes.

UPDATE: "Operation Incarnation" is now officially underway. The Boston Globe reports:

WASHINGTON -- After three days of suspended political activity, the Bush campaign began openly incorporating Ronald Reagan's death into its reelection message yesterday, revamping its website to give Reagan a dominant role and distributing official campaign letters that invoke the former president.

Since Reagan's death Saturday, Bush has repeatedly offered glowing praise of the 40th president in ways that echo his own reelection efforts, but were not overtly political.

Yesterday, his campaign took the refrain into the political realm. Bush officials sent an e-mail inviting supporters to add to a "living memorial" on the campaign website -- one click away from the page that solicits campaign donations and recruits volunteers. Visitors to the official campaign site were automatically redirected to the Reagan tribute, paid for by the Bush/Cheney committee. It replaced the spot usually occupied by the campaign home page...

Shocked, just shocked to learn this. As I said above: ain't gonna work,

Comments

[Ray Gun]

There's a big brush fire dangerously close to Reagan's Ranch in Santa Barbara. I wonder if Gods trying to burn his place down. I wish God wouldn't send mixed messages. I'm gonna have to take a trip to Yorba Linda to figure all this out.

[steve]

just a short bit from Paul Krugman's fine column yesterday, the remainder is worth reading too:

ver the course of this week we'll be hearing a lot about Ronald Reagan, much of it false. A number of news sources have already proclaimed Mr. Reagan the most popular president of modern times. In fact, though Mr. Reagan was very popular in 1984 and 1985, he spent the latter part of his presidency under the shadow of the Iran-Contra scandal. Bill Clinton had a slightly higher average Gallup approval rating, and a much higher rating during his last two years in office.

We're also sure to hear that Mr. Reagan presided over an unmatched economic boom. Again, not true: the economy grew slightly faster under President Clinton, and, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates, the after-tax income of a typical family, adjusted for inflation, rose more than twice as much from 1992 to 2000 as it did from 1980 to 1988.

But Ronald Reagan does hold a special place in the annals of tax policy, and not just as the patron saint of tax cuts. To his credit, he was more pragmatic and responsible than that; he followed his huge 1981 tax cut with two large tax increases. In fact, no peacetime president has raised taxes so much on so many people.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?D3DB12388

[Louis]

Great link Steve, but I thought you hated Paul Krugman. Since he took Enron money.

[Susan Wilson]

Marc -- Nattering Nabobs whoring for the Prez you say?....gee why do I agree!

Your goin fishin till it's over, well as I said last night in the other article/thread, because I live in the Desert I cannot go fishing... I am just "unplugged electronicaly till at least this Friday"......content to listen to Miles.

Waiting till next week when there is some other news - vis a vis Reagan NOT -- to post some cogent thoughts... though today JayLo is pregnant and married, but that is not my type of insanity, I truly prefer political insanity...oh wait maybe this Reagan thingie this week is akin to the JayLo bit...yeah of course it is...in terms of all kinds of hype, babble...what we should all care about...

[Susan Wilson]

Steve...yes, yes in terms of Reaganomics...volumes written over the years on his "silt/sluge/downhill run".......the phrase of course that we all know..."Voodoo Economics"....

Of equal importance to me as a live LA native was Reagans tenancy as our Gov for two terms, and how he destroyed our Schools and Medical Systems........sigh....

Forgive my lack of patience to remotely address those thoughts -- I am so dam bored and so dam old that I figure this...let the young beware and informed from history, or let them and whomever stew in their ignorant sauce if they have no historical reality/reference...

And for sure I admire anyone younger than I am who is not sick to death from years of posting/writing about all of these issues, as I am beyond belief...I handily pass the torch as one tiny individual...and hope others with no real knowledge are listening to you and others...

On a personal aside, it appears if I am correct you are jazz junkie as half of my family is...yes?...will not speak music here for real as this is this the wrong blog...but yes?

[Tom Grey]

Sorry Susan, it was LBJ and the Great Society failure that destroyed the schools (with a good amount of women's lib -- better jobs for good women than merely teachers).

The Great Society failed idea is this: for every problem in YOUR life, a) it's SOMEBODY else's fault, and b) the Gov't can solve it.

The schools are destroyed because 1) the students don't learn, and 2) the students don't behave.

Letting parents choose which schools to send their kids, among many choices, should be the obvious solution. Taking choice away from parents means the parents have little or no incentive to improve. Vouchers!

[Susan Wilson]

Hey Tom...

Let me give you some leeway in terms of your answer to me...are we sure we are on the same page here?.......

I was talking about Reagan as Gov of Calif and you did a seque into LBJ which is National vs Regional...meaning my post about California got lost...I was being totally specific to my State and alluding to Reagan in those times and funding for California and the consequences that followed.

Are you speaking to me from a historical frame of reference that you have based your beliefs on from reading or from being old enough to have lived through those times...and I am asking that to you because you made your statement so clearly to me that I felt you had more reason than you stated and had a personal agenda that you experienced because of LBJ...

.......and perhaps more clearly overall are wanting to state your opinion about school vouchers...an entirely separate and larger issue than my blurb...if so...go for it...set it out more clearly to me, perhaps your experience because of your own children made you post what you said...

btw...your feelings overall are in the mainstream as you know full well and have been discussed over and over again...but I am willing to have a dialoque with you about it...just surprised that your post came up that was a true seque from what I was trying to say about Reagan and those times in California....

[steve]

but I thought you hated Paul Krugman. Since he took Enron money.

--hate is boring. krugman's a neoliberal economist with whom I'd disagree on quite a bit. On Bush he's right on the money though.
----------------------------
Susan asked:
On a personal aside, it appears if I am correct you are jazz junkie as half of my family is...yes?...will not speak music here for real as this is this the wrong blog...but yes?

--you betcha. i wasn't kidding at all, i listened to branford Marsalis after turning off neal conan's fawning rewrite of reagan's presidency...never turned the radio on the rest of the day, except to listen to kbem, mpls' great jazz station.

[Susan]

Steve.........OK!!! thought so...lived in New Orleans for 5 years, in fact am going back the start of August, as I am now in Vegas, but moving back to New Orleans, just yesterday bought a new house there, and there is where my heart is for many reasons....looooong way to say...I saw almost the entire Marsalis over the years there...what a family, not a single person in their family is without "giant talent!"......

To address the Reagan issue once again...agh!...me too in my honest avoidance of it this entire week till Friday...not a joke with me...it would make ill, I had enough after the first 24 hours of his death...just chilling till this coming Saturday.

Be good now, talk atcha tomorrow, going to crash, had no sleep now for 2 days at all because of the house thing, offers, counter offers and the usual...so we got the house for what we wanted and now I can drop dead for at least 12 hours max...maybe, as I am hyper...smiling.....ps...Marc is a jazz junkie too!

[wil]

Catch a big one!

But, c'mon Marc - you saw Slate's universal panning of Reagan. And don't blogs count as electronic media?

[Marc Cooper]

Wil.. good question. But NO. By electronic media I mean broadcast media, specifically TV. Web sites are text-based and are in fact print journalism tyhat has been digitalized. Web blogs rely on words. TV on images. A world of difference.

[Clare Quilty]

Darkness at Noonan, or
A Thousand Points of Fright.

[steve]

Max Sawicky has a good post on Robert Pollin's dissecting the myth of great economic performance under Reagan:

http://maxspeak.org/mt/archives/000539.html