Quite frankly, none (including my guy, Fred) had the intellectual understanding of economics and foreign policy than Reagan. I recently watched an interview that Reagan gave to Buckley on Firing Line on the publication of Reagan’s autobiography/memoir somewhere around 1990. Even though Reagan was not at the top of his game at that point, he demonstrated his great understanding of what is known as “Reaganomics”. I was also incredibly impressed with his rejection of the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). His position was peace through strength, which meant that if the Soviets wanted to start something, we would not both be destroyed–it would be the Soviets who would be destroyed and we would survive!

Incredibly, Reagan was a combination of both substance (ideology) AND charisma. I would be thrilled with someone with only the former. Having some of the latter would be a nice side benefit.

While many of the Republican nominees for president invoked Reagan in hopes of convincing voters they were there to carry on his legacy, the simple fact was that some carried a few planks, but not enough to wow the voters. And none could really come forward that packed the same charismatic punch that Reagan did.

From that standpoint, we really DO need to move past Reagan. We also need to quit looking for the “next Reagan”. That isn’t fair to either the memory of the Gipper or to whatever candidate is running. I think I can even understand wanting to move past some of Reagan’s policy proposals, though that would have to be analyzed on a policy by policy basis.

But if we are talking about the principles of lower taxes, less government regulation, strong defense, and traditional values, then we have a problem. But I really doubt that is what Mitch is talking about.