We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PastimesRonald Reagan 1911-2004

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: calgal who wrote (213)6/24/2004 12:27:13 AM
From: calgal
   of 264
Ronald Reagan From the People’s Perspective: A Gallup Poll Review
Reagan’s image improved substantially in the years after he left office

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: calgal who wrote (214)6/25/2004 11:05:08 AM
From: calgal
   of 264
God and Politics
David Limbaugh (archive)

June 25, 2004


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: calgal who wrote (215)7/1/2004 3:58:24 AM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 264
Before Ronald Reagan, there was William F. Buckley Jr.

June 29, 2004

National Review Founder to Leave Stage


Correction Appended

In 1954, when Ronald Reagan was still a registered Democrat and host of "General Electric Theater," the 28-year-old William Frank Buckley Jr. decided to start a magazine as a standard-bearer for the fledgling conservative movement. In the 50-year ascent of the American right since then, his publication, National Review, has been its most influential journal and Mr. Buckley has been the magazine's guiding spirit and, until today, controlling shareholder.

Tonight, however, Mr. Buckley, 78, is giving up control. In an interview, he said he planned to relinquish his shares today to a board of trustees he had selected. Among them are his son, the humorist Christopher Buckley; the magazine's president, Thomas L. Rhodes; and Austin Bramwell, a 2000 graduate of Yale and one of the magazine's youngest current contributors.

Mr. Buckley's "divestiture," as he calls it, represents the exit of one of the forefathers of modern conservatism. It is also the latest step in the gradual quieting of one of the most distinctive voices in the business of cultural and political commentary, the writer and editor who founded his magazine on a promise to stand "athwart history, yelling 'Stop,' at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who urge it."

In explaining his decision, Mr. Buckley said he had taken some satisfaction in the triumph of conservatism since then, though he expressed some complaints about President Bush's unconservative spending and some retrospective doubts about the wisdom of invading Iraq. But his decision, Mr. Buckley said, had more to do with his own mortality.

"The question is choose some point to quit or die onstage, and there wouldn't be any point in that," Mr. Buckley said, recalling his retirement from his television program "Firing Line" a few years ago. "Thought was given and plans were made to proceed with divestiture."

With characteristic playfulness, Mr. Buckley said that he had not disclosed the timing of the hand-over. He plans to give the trustees his shares at a private party tonight at an Italian restaurant near the magazine's East 34th Street office. "It is kind of a big event in my life," he said, sipping a glass of wine over lunch at the same restaurant last week. "I thought I might as well put a little bit of theater in it. When I leave this building a week from now, I will probably feel a little bit different."

Mr. Buckley, whose syndicated column will continue to appear in the magazine, said he did not expect changes in the contents of the magazine. Richard Lowry, the editor, will continue in that job. Mr. Rhodes, president of National Review, will become chairman of the newly formed board of trustees. The trustees will include Evan Galbraith, an executive of Morgan Stanley who was ambassador to France under Mr. Reagan, and Daniel Oliver, who was chairman of the Federal Trade Commission under Mr. Reagan and whose son, Drew Oliver, was an assistant editor at the magazine.

By virtue of his relative youth, Mr. Bramwell is the most notable of the five trustees. "I wanted somebody who is very young and very talented," Mr. Buckley said. "One likes to think in the long term."

A former officer of the Conservative Party of the Yale Political Union, Mr. Bramwell began writing for National Review two years ago as a Harvard law student. At a recent ceremony at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, he presented Mr. Buckley an award for contributions to the conservative movement along with an admiring, perhaps even Buckleyesque, appraisal of Mr. Buckley's literary style.

"By ironic periphrasis, arch understatement and surprising deployment of familiar and of course unfamiliar words, Buckley convinced his opponents that he knew something they did not, and what's more, that he intended to keep the secret from them," Mr. Bramwell said as he presented the award. "Thus did he waken their minds to the possibility that liberalism is not the philosophia ultima but just another item in the baleful catalogue of modern ideologies."

Not everyone shares this assessment of Mr. Buckley's work. Leon Wieseltier, literary editor of The New Republic, called Mr. Buckley's sometimes baroque style "genially ridiculous."

Mr. Wieseltier added: "It is a kind of antimodern pretense, but of course he is in fact a completely modern man. His thinking and his writing have all the disadvantages of a happy man. The troubling thing about Bill Buckley's work is how singularly untroubled it is by things."

But Mr. Buckley's voice has always been singular. He was not much older than Mr. Bramwell when he founded National Review. The son of an oilman, Mr. Buckley was already famous for his first book, "God and Man at Yale" (1951). Conservatism in the United States was close to its 20th-century nadir, marked by Dwight D. Eisenhower's defeat of the conservative Robert Taft for the 1952 Republican nomination.

The first issue of National Review appeared in 1955. As Mr. Buckley tells it, he became chief editor in part because deferring to a young man was unthreatening to many venerable contributors. "It was easier to allow them to accept a 29-year-old than to select among themselves who will be boss," he said.

William J. Casey, who later became director of central intelligence under Mr. Reagan, incorporated the magazine. Mr. Buckley retained ownership of all the voting stock. National Review has never made a profit, Mr. Buckley said. It makes up any shortfalls each year with contributions from about 1,000 to 1,500 donors, and every other year it sends a solicitation to its subscribers in an effort to add names to the "A list" of regular donors. Mr. Buckley will continue to write the fund-raising letters, he said.

As for conservatism today, Mr. Buckley said there was a growing debate on the right about how the war in Iraq squared with the traditional conservative conviction that American foreign policy should seek only to protect its vital interests.

"With the benefit of minute hindsight, Saddam Hussein wasn't the kind of extra-territorial menace that was assumed by the administration one year ago," Mr. Buckley said. "If I knew then what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I would have opposed the war."

Asked whether the growth of the federal government over the last four years diminished his enthusiasm for Mr. Bush, he reluctantly acknowledged that it did. "It bothers me enormously," he said. "Should I growl?"

Still, he professed more than a little pride at the country's rightward drift during his years in control of National Review. "We thought to influence conservative thought, which we succeeded in doing," he said.

Correction: July 1, 2004, Thursday

An article on Tuesday about William F. Buckley Jr.'s decision to give up control of his magazine, National Review, misstated the location of a ceremony at which he received an award from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. It was the National Building Museum in Washington, not the Heritage Foundation.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Glenn Petersen who started this subject7/5/2004 1:47:50 AM
From: calgal
   of 264
What July Fourth Means to Me
Ronald Reagan

Editor's note: When he was president, Ronald Reagan wrote the following piece for Independence Day in 1981. Aide Michael Deaver later wrote: "This 4th of July message is the President's own words and written initially in his own hand."
For one who was born and grew up in the small towns of the Midwest, there is a special kind of nostalgia about the Fourth of July.

I remember it as a day almost as long-anticipated as Christmas. This was helped along by the appearance in store windows of all kinds of fireworks and colorful posters advertising them with vivid pictures.

No later than the third of July – sometimes earlier – Dad would bring home what he felt he could afford to see go up in smoke and flame. We'd count and recount the number of firecrackers, display pieces and other things and go to bed determined to be up with the sun so as to offer the first, thunderous notice of the Fourth of July.

I'm afraid we didn't give too much thought to the meaning of the day. And, yes, there were tragic accidents to mar it, resulting from careless handling of the fireworks. I'm sure we're better off today with fireworks largely handled by professionals. Yet there was a thrill never to be forgotten in seeing a tin can blown 30 feet in the air by a giant "cracker" – giant meaning it was about 4 inches long. But enough of nostalgia.

Somewhere in our growing up we began to be aware of the meaning of days and with that awareness came the birth of patriotism. July Fourth is the birthday of our nation. I believed as a boy, and believe even more today, that it is the birthday of the greatest nation on earth.

There is a legend about the day of our nation's birth in the little hall in Philadelphia, a day on which debate had raged for hours. The men gathered there were honorable men hard-pressed by a king who had flouted the very laws they were willing to obey. Even so, to sign the Declaration of Independence was such an irretrievable act that the walls resounded with the words "treason, the gallows, the headsman's axe," and the issue remained in doubt.

The legend says that at that point a man rose and spoke. He is described as not a young man, but one who had to summon all his energy for an impassioned plea. He cited the grievances that had brought them to this moment and finally, his voice falling, he said, "They may turn every tree into a gallows, every hole into a grave, and yet the words of that parchment can never die. To the mechanic in the workshop, they will speak hope; to the slave in the mines, freedom. Sign that parchment. Sign if the next moment the noose is around your neck, for that parchment will be the textbook of freedom, the Bible of the rights of man forever."

He fell back exhausted. The 56 delegates, swept up by his eloquence, rushed forward and signed that document destined to be as immortal as a work of man can be. When they turned to thank him for his timely oratory, he was not to be found, nor could any be found who knew who he was or how he had come in or gone out through the locked and guarded doors.

Well, that is the legend. But we do know for certain that 56 men, a little band so unique we have never seen their like since, had pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. Some gave their lives in the war that followed, most gave their fortunes, and all preserved their sacred honor.

What manner of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists, 11 were merchants and tradesmen, and nine were farmers. They were soft-spoken men of means and education; they were not an unwashed rabble. They had achieved security but valued freedom more. Their stories have not been told nearly enough.

John Hart was driven from the side of his desperately ill wife. For more than a year he lived in the forest and in caves before he returned to find his wife dead, his children vanished, his property destroyed. He died of exhaustion and a broken heart.

Carter Braxton of Virginia lost all his ships, sold his home to pay his debts, and died in rags. And so it was with Ellery, Clymer, Hall, Walton, Gwinnett, Rutledge, Morris, Livingston and Middleton. Nelson personally urged Washington to fire on his home and destroy it when it became the headquarters for General Cornwallis. Nelson died bankrupt.

But they sired a nation that grew from sea to shining sea. Five million farms, quiet villages, cities that never sleep, 3 million square miles of forest, field, mountain and desert, 227 million people with a pedigree that includes the bloodlines of all the world. In recent years, however, I've come to think of that day as more than just the birthday of a nation.

It also commemorates the only true philosophical revolution in all history.

Oh, there have been revolutions before and since ours. But those revolutions simply exchanged one set of rules for another. Ours was a revolution that changed the very concept of government.

Let the Fourth of July always be a reminder that here in this land, for the first time, it was decided that man is born with certain God-given rights; that government is only a convenience created and managed by the people, with no powers of its own except those voluntarily granted to it by the people.

We sometimes forget that great truth, and we never should.

Happy Fourth of July. Ronald Reagan President of the United States


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: calgal who wrote (217)7/5/2004 1:49:52 AM
From: calgal
   of 264
Gipper's Gift
John L. Perry
Monday, June 7, 2004
By his death, Ronald Reagan has bequeathed a bountiful blessing upon George W. Bush – the inescapable comparison of their character that the leftists cannot besmirch.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Glenn Petersen who started this subject7/19/2004 12:10:07 PM
From: calgal
   of 264
Michael Reagan Reveals Ron Never Voted for Father
Recently, Ron Reagan, the son of President Reagan, argued on MSNBC how unconscionable it is that there are those in Washington "standing in the way" of stem cell research, given that so many could so quickly reap its benefits.
And young Ron's planned prime-time speech at the Democratic convention has been touted as a major coup for the Democrats.
Not so fast, President Reagan's elder son, Michael, says.
Discussing the Ron Reagan speech, Michael Reagan told his radio audience on his nationally syndicated "Michael Reagan Show" (Radio America Network) that brother Ron has no interest in continuing his father's political legacy.

In fact, Michael said that his brother so vehemently disliked his father's views he never voted for his own father when he ran twice for the presidency.

Michael said that "in the interest of accuracy, and to defend [his] father’s legacy," he must make clear the difference between embryonic stem cell research and adult stem cell research:

"Stem cell research is going forward. Embryonic stem cell research is going forward. But embryonic stem cells create tumors in rats while adult stem cells are doing quite well. The Left, including my brother, make you forget the difference."

Michael continued: "The president, and most everybody I know, is in fact on board with stem cell research. It is the creation and destruction of an embryo for those cells which conservatives have a problem with."

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: calgal who wrote (219)7/19/2004 12:11:05 PM
From: calgal
   of 264
Ron Jr. is going to give a speech at the Dem Convention. He never cast a vote for his Father, as says Michael. Read this again and tell us you can believe a word he says.

Ronald Reagan, God and Jesus Christ
Larry Elder


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: calgal who wrote (220)9/2/2004 1:41:07 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 264
Reagan: 'I've come to honor my father'

Wednesday, September 1, 2004 Posted: 10:45 PM EDT (0245 GMT)

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Michael Reagan introduced a video tribute to his late father, former President Ronald Reagan, to the Republican National Convention.

This is a transcript of his remarks.

I knew if I waited long enough, the Republican Party would rock, and it's rocking tonight. It's good to be here.

My fellow Republicans, good evening to you, each and every one of you. I am truly the luckiest man in the world. I am lucky for so many, many reasons.

First of all, I'm lucky because my mother, my father, my birth-mother and my birth-father all had something in common. You know what it was? They were all pro-life.

And they were pro-adoption.

Because they were, I stand before you tonight as Michael Edward Reagan.

I've come tonight to honor my father, not to politicize his name.

I'm here to introduce a video tribute to my father, Ronald Reagan, who was not just a great leader, but also a great dad.

But first of all, on behalf of the Reagan family, I'd like to take a moment to thank everyone here and everyone at home across America for all you did during the week that we laid my father to rest.

It was your faith, it was your love, it was your support that truly sustained each member of our family. So many of you stood in all-night vigils, stopped your cars and trucks, waved your flags or just placed your hands on your heart as our cars drove by.

One gentleman, by the name of Jorge Ponce-Rodriguez, left his passport with a message to our family there at the library in Simi Valley. He said, because of President Reagan, "my family and I were able to achieve the American dream. God bless Ronald Reagan."

Why did my father -- why did he evoke such an incredible gratitude and goodwill?

Was it his personality? His sunny optimism? His humor? That twinkle in his eye?

Was it the fact that he was a great communicator? Or was it all of that and something more?

Ronald Reagan, you see, did not break the back of Soviet tyranny and then ignite the most powerful economy in our history with just funny stories and beautiful words. He wasn't just a great communicator. You see, my father communicated great ideas. Where did these ideas come from?

Where did they come from? They came from his beliefs. He believed, as Thomas Jefferson said -- and remember Thomas and my dad played together as children -- that God who gave us life, and he did give us life, also gave us liberty at the same time. My father believed that God had a plan for his life and for every life and for the life of our nation.

He believed America was placed between the oceans to be a beacon of freedom for the whole world, the place where man was not beholden to government, but in fact government was beholden to man.

And because of him, we are that "Shining City on a Hill," and we shine a little bit brighter tonight.

He believed the founders' limitations on government helped create the freest, most prosperous nation ever known. Finally, he believed freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. With the blessings of liberty, we have responsibilities to defend it.

Today, the USS Ronald Reagan sits in a berth in San Diego, California, with 5,000 men and women for just that purpose.

Throughout his life, his belief in you and me and the American people never ever wavered.

And finally, in his farewell letter, he wrote: "As I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life, I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead."

With pride, ladies and gentleman, I present to you a video tribute of the 40th president of the United States, my dad, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (221)9/2/2004 10:13:36 PM
From: calgal
   of 264
He has class!!

Actually Michael Regan got his class from his father, a great teacher!!!

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: calgal1/2/2005 5:46:25 PM
   of 264
bought a copy of Michael Reagan's new release,for my parents, but was able to peruse it at the store.

It's a good read!!:)

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)
Previous 10 Next 10