And I believe that if he were alive today, he would’ve been appalled to see what the GOP is today.

He would’ve been appalled to see the GOP slavishly agree to unfavorable, unilateral disarmament treaties (such as New START) and to massive defense cuts, including the sequester, which most Republicans voted for in August 2011 even though the sequester was Obama’s idea. By foolishly agreeing to it, they gave Obama and the Democrats a weapon with which to blackmail them and have forced themselves into choosing between two very bad options: either allowing Obama to execute the hostage (i.e. gut defense) or agreeing to tax hikes as a condition of sparing defense from draconian, salami-slicing budget cuts.

He would’ve been appalled to hear some Republicans advocate this (or a similar) course of action and agree with the disastrous, treasonous proposals of leftist, anti-defense think-tanks such as the “Project on Defense Alternatives”, the Cato Institute, POGO, TCS, and the Center for American Progress (three of these groups, namely Cato, POGO, and the CAP, take money from George Soros).

He would’ve been appalled to hear Ron Paul badmouth America and its troops everyday, call for isolationism and unilaterald disarmament, and call for a “hear no evil, see no evil, everything bad is America’s fault” foreign policy. He would’ve called on the GOP’s leaders to expel such politicians from the Party. He would’ve also deeply regretted ever endorsing Ron Paul for Congress, especially considering the fact that during his time, Ron Paul and his sidekick Lew Rockwell fought against him every step of the way.

He would’ve been appalled to see and hear pseudo-conservative, anti-defense, leftist libertarians such as Justin Amash (a Ron Paul clone), Tim Huelskamp, and Raul Castro Labrador be hailed as “Constitutional conservatives” and heroes.

He would’ve been appalled to see these people vote against a passable, fully workable, fiscally conservative budget plan, such as the Ryan Plan, simply because it wasn’t as good as they wished and to see the better become the enemy of the good.

He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans lose faith in supply-side, pro-growth economics and claim that the Ryan Plan would not jumpstart economic growth and balance the budget within 10 years under dynamic scoring. He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans reject dynamic instead of static scoring (a classic liberal method).

He would’ve been terrified to see that Republicans can’t prioritize federal spending and make cuts where they can be made safely – in domestic discretionary spending – even cut an Energy and Water Approps’ bill’s price tag by 1%!

He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans failing to understand the Constitution, let alone commit themselves to abolish unconstitutional federal agencies and programs.

He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans unable to commit themselves to abolishing the Departments of Education and Energy – a cause he fought for – even long after George W. Bush has left the White House.

He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans attrite and weaken each other in nasty primary battles, thus helping them lose the general election.

He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans prioritize abortion and gay marriage above all other issues, while America’s defenses are atrophying, China and Russia are on the march, and the US is sinking deeper and deeper into debt.

He would’ve been horrified to know that Republicans prioritize – and are dividing the party over – such divisive issues instead of uniting the party and the people around common-sense bread-and-butter issues like deficits, debt, taxes, spending, defense, and so forth.

He would’ve been horrified to see Republicans not only accept, but even embrace and advocate, the use of police-state-like measures to fight “terrorism” but in fact to expand the federal government’s power over American citizens through the cynically-named PATRIOT Act (AKA the Ermaechtigungsgesetz), Know Your Customer provisions, warrantless wiretaps, indefinite detention, and so forth.

And he would’ve been horrified to see Republicans repeat his own mistake from 1986 – accept and even advocate amnesty for illegal aliens, thus rewarding criminals who have broken the law and also committing suicide as a party.

He would’ve been horrified to see that, thanks to unlimited legal and illegal immigration, California has become a majority-minority state and such a liberal one that it’s incapable of electing any Republicans statewide anymore, with the consequence that state taxes and spending are rising and there’s no one left to pay the bill as most productive Californians leave the state in droves.

Come to think of it, maybe it’s better for Ronald Reagan not to be here today. He would’ve been horrified to see the state of the party and the country.

But we can finish his work and make him proud if we commit ourselves to doing the right thing and do it.

So today, on Ronald Reagan’s 102nd birthday, let us, as conservatives, pledge to each other that:

• We will identify and work on issues that unite us, not divide us.
• We will adhere to Reagan’s principles of fiscal and defense conservatism.
• We will work to elect the most electable conservative/Republican candidate in each district and state.
• We will work to make the entire GOP adhere to the Constitution’s strict limits on the federal government.
• We will work to recommit the GOP to abolishing the Departments of Education, Energy, and Housing & Urban Development as a start.
• We will stop pretending that the federal budget can be balanced by simply eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse (as important as that is).
• We will work to commit the GOP to fundamental tax reform – either a flat tax or the FairTax.
• We will not tolerate within the Party or the conservative movement those who have slandered America, its honorable military, or Ronald Reagan, nor will we tolerate those who, like Amash, Labrador, Huelskamp, and Mulvaney, advocate gutting the military and are collaborating with the House’s most strident liberals towards that goal.
• We will commit ourselves and the Party to a commonsense, Reaganesque foreign policy: building the world’s strongest military while intervening militarily only where and when crucial American interests are at stake – and even then, only with clearly defined goals, a clear strategy to achieve them, an exit strategy to avoid endless entanglements.
• We will never advocate anything that would infringe US citizens’ civil liberties and will commit ourselves and the Party to repealing all of the existing such measures, including the cynically-named PATRIOT Act, KYC provisions, warrantless wiretapping programs, and indefinite detention. And we will not tolerate within the GOP those who, like John McCain, Lindsay Graham, and Kelly Ayotte, advocate such police state measures.
• We will wholeheartedly support the Ryan Budget Plan (at least until someone devises a better plan that can pass the Congress instead of being voted down by huge bipartisan margins) and work to secure its passage.
• We will work towards the repeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments and the abolition of the Federal Reserve.
• We will leave divisive social issues, such as abortion, gay marriage, and euthanasia, to the states to decide. We will support the 10th Amendment all of the time, not selectively when it suits us.

Let’s win this one for the Gipper.

PS: A record 40 states, including even liberal states like California, Illinois, and New York, have issued proclamations designating today as Ronald Reagan Day. Only 8 states run by liberal Democrats have refused to do so, and 2 states run by Democrats are sitting on the fence.

Republicans, for decades, have been sucked in by the Democrat Party’s last-minute engineered emergencies like the “fiscal cliff”. This crisis is manufactured under the transparent drive to increase taxes. Republicans walk into negotiations demanding spending cuts and come out with tails between their legs and higher taxes. Frankly, it’s as ancient a story as The Three Little Pigs.

Almost everyone knows the story of Ronald Reagan. He thought he went for a deal that raised one dollar in taxes for every three dollars in spending cuts. Unfortunately, the majority of those cuts never came. While the Washington Post refutes the claim, there is still strong evidence to suggest that this is what Reagan believed when signing the deal.

Continuing on, let’s not forget President George H.W. Bush who, in 1990, was promised two dollars in spending cuts for every one dollar in tax hikes. Sadly the story ended with a 137 billion dollar tax increase and an additional 22 billion dollars in spending.

Following suit yet again, Boehner and a host of Republicans believed that they could negotiate their way to a compromise with a party who simply wasn’t interested in a win-win scenario.

These examples aren’t meant to make Republicans out as martyrs. We are all big boys and girls with our own separate philosophies and motivations. The Democrat’s strategy works every time because Republicans refuse to learn their lesson every time.

But here is where the ball game changes: After all these years of misled Republicans, Speaker Boehner has made it clear that he will no longer negotiate with President Obama. Boehner has learned the lesson Republicans should have learned decades ago: Negotiating reasonably with Democrats is the way one loses to Democrats. Which is exactly why, moving forward, we need John Boehner as Speaker.

Michelle Stansbury

Michelle Stansbury has nearly a decade of experience in political strategy and has recently opened a consulting firm targeted at helping businesses and campaigns flip their marketing and public relations strategies through new media. Michelle is also a weekly commentator on the Hayden Collins Radio Program and a national speaker. To book Michelle for an event or inquire about her professional consulting services click here. To get more updates, follow Michelle on Twitter or Subscribe on Facebook

The Obama administration is basking in the glow of Friday’s report from the U.S. Labor Bureau that unemployment has made the monumental leap from 8.3% down to 8.1% (still a lot higher than the 6% we were told the stimulus would bring).

And the prevailing rhetoric at the recently concluded DNC, other than the insistence that free, Constitutionally-guaranteed contraception is the only issue women care about (and as a strong, independent woman, what else am I to do but run to the federal government when the big, bad Republicans deny it to me?) was the insistence that under a Romney-Ryan administration, all the jobs would be shipped overseas and the middle class would be left to rot in the streets, and under Paul Ryan’s plan, without even Medicare or Social Security to sustain them.

Because as Bill Clinton assured us, Democrats have created twice as many jobs as Republicans since 1961. (And we all know, Bill Clinton would never lie, especially not under oath.)

Unfortunately for the folks at the DNC, Political Math put together the following chart, using statistics from the Bureau of Labor:

Obviously, Bill Clinton paints a wildly different story than the facts do. Yes, Democrats have created slightly more jobs since 1961, but much of that has to do with the state of the economy when they took office.

But, since Obama likes to whine about how much worse the economy was than he could possibly imagine, let’s take a look at his job creation compared to the man he likes to both demonize and emulate- Ronald Reagan. Despite the absolute trainwreck of an economy Reagan inherited from Jimmy Carter, he managed to create 16.7 million jobs in his two terms. In comparison, Obama created 0.1 million as of May 2012. In the first 23 months of the Reagan recovery, an average of 285,800 jobs per month were added to the economy. During the same time period under Obama, an average of 23,000 jobs per month were added.

How did Reagan do it? Tax cuts (yes, even for those evil rich people who ‘don’t need them’) and ‘trickle down fairy dust’. Not the ‘wild eyed socialism’ Obama ascribes to Reagan. Perhaps President Obama should tone down the class rhetoric and fearmongering and take a page from the Reagonomics book.

Actually, there are a few similarities between them. Both ran on the promise of economic change and both inherited economies that were in the throes of a recession, in part caused by the policies of their predecessors. However, while the state of the economy may have been similar upon their respective inaugurations, that is about as far as the similarities go. The attitudes of Obama and Reagan could not be more different.

Reagan, of course, campaigned against the ineptitude of Jimmy Carter and his spending policies, blaming him, and rightfully so, for the economic woes of the time period. Unlike Obama though, once he stepped into office, Reagan actually took action to fulfill his campaign promises. He did not merely endlessly whine about Carter’s policies and their detrimental effect on the economy, nor did he blame economic headwinds. Rather, Reagan took action- cutting taxes, increasing work incentives and deregulating the economy. As a result of this, according to the Heritage Foundation, the GDP grew a total of 35.7% between 1983 and 1990. Obama on the other hand, continues to advocate massively expensive, intrusive New Deal reminiscent policies, despite the fact that such programs were not successful for FDR. And when, unsurprisingly, they haven’t worked either this time, all he can do is complain about economic head winds, and of course, blame Bush.

Economic policies aside, the attitudes with which Reagan and Obama have approached their presidency are also polar opposites. Reagan’s personality is perhaps chiefly what makes him so memorable and endearing, even to those of us who were not alive during his presidency. He had the ability to do what most politicians cannot- make fun of himself, and even his opponents without anyone taking serious offense. But despite his lighthearted manner, he still was very much a respected figure of authority and could take charge of a situation. Unlike Reagan, who famously said, in response to a question about his own age, that he wouldn’t take advantage of Walter Mondale’s youth and inexperience, Obama lacks the ability to joke about himself and position, and he certainly doesn’t treat his opponents with the same respect Reagan did. Obama has even called the Republicans enemies in the past, and despite the media’s promise to take more responsibility in eliminating so called ‘violent rhetoric’ from the public stage, he and his administration have had no harsh words when members of his own party have called Republicans terrorists and Nazis.

So maybe next time Obama gets up to speak before the nation, he can take a moment to conjure up the image of the man he supposedly is emulating, and speak with a grin on his face, a joke in his heart, and the knowledge that he alone is responsible for the actions of his administration, because in the words of the great Gipper himself “There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.”

FDR created this modern political economic cant. Democrats and Progressive Republicans alike have employed it resulting in extreme unintended consequences. FDR, for example, despite evidence that his policies deepened and lengthened the Great Depression, is still exalted by liberal America. FDR’s, Social Security System, has become a fragile entitlement program that is now a political third rail issue.           

Presidential hopeful Rick Perry recently called Social Security a Ponzi scheme, and has received significant criticism for the statement. Yet in defending social security Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Samuelson wrote, “The beauty of social insurance is that it is not actuarially sound… with real incomes growing at some 3% a year… A growing nation is the biggest Ponzi game ever contrived.” Social Security not being actuarially sound makes it categorically not insurance. Relying on a growing base of investors makes it by definition a pyramid scheme, a Ponzi scheme unfortunately; this has not stopped many pundits and politicians from attacking Perry for statements of fact on the subject.

The second portion of FDR’s advice is never used, accept through memoirs like that of Progressive Republicans Richard Nixon, discussing decisions like gas price and wage restrictions. Nixon admitted in his memoirs “The piper must be paid and there was an unquestionably high price for tampering with the orthodox economic mechanisms.” It is wishful thinking to believe politicians will heed his ex post facto warning. Nixon was cheered for his economic tampering, and won a second term in a landslide. An outburst of Nixon’s to a White House Aid explains this perfectly “I don’t give a good god damn what Milton Friedman says, he’s not running for reelection.” 
           

“Do something” politics has been invariably destructive and a detailed review of economic problems of the past one hundred and fifty years seem to show that regulation caused many destructive trends. While chief executives like Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan survived deeper stock market crashes than what confronted FDR, they watched dramatic economic resurgences during their terms in office that were followed by eras of high employment and low-inflation simply because they did not intervene in the economic process. Despite both Coolidge and Reagan’s success, they have been questioned as presiding over times of “excess.” In contrast, FDR has been hailed as our greatest President despite prolonging the great depression, even being called more moral regardless of the unneeded suffering he forced on an entire population.

 Economic incompetence is a very risky business. For most people, it is easy to be sucked in by lofty rhetoric and not bother to question economic legislation being offered, blindly hoping the desired goals will be achieved. It is easy to claim, “I am right!  Those people pointing out that this economic policy won’t work only have an interest in hurting you.” The, us-versus-them theme is much more useful politically than true economic solutions which all contain trade-offs. Doing nothing so the economy can rebound simply is not palatable to citizens, neither are massive spending cuts or cuts in programs. These are political realities that will not change until people start taking their roles as voters more seriously. The “dismal science” is simply not much fun.

 This economic political trend has come to a very visible head under President Obama. His policies have failed critically. The President’s healthcare bill has raised the cost of healthcare, despite assurances that it would not. The stimulus bill met none of the presidents stated goals, but on the political left it is deemed a success simply because he attempted to fix things, much like FDR’s debacles are viewed. 

The President’s most recent “Jobs bill” is no exception. Despite showing him self to be economically ineffective, people still want him to do “something.” So he is doing “something” Much as FDR did. But America is different now; we have multiple news networks, talk radio and a resurgent pride in the things that made our country the most successful in history. Preach the “dismal science” to your friends and neighbors, for though reality is dismal, blind hope creates hell.