In yesterday's post (in which I maintained that "conservatism can be effectively communicated in a Moveon-esque, 20-second sound clip"), I cited the example of Ronald Reagan's "Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem."

I forgot about a complicating factor, and that is the recent GOP movement (criticized here by Rush Limbaugh) to "get beyond" Reagan.

I think this may be grounded in the recognition that Republicans are seen as having had control of the government for so long that the cry of "Government is the problem!" sounds a bit disingenuous.

In fairness, there is a seeming contradiction in having an anti-government stance while simultaneously seeking to run the government you're against. It's as if you're saying, "Government is the problem, so let me be the problem," and after eight years in power, the Republicans arguably became the very problem that they appear to be philosophically against.

Little wonder there is a movement to get beyond Reagan.

The tragedy is that the anti-government message is more resonant now than ever. Just months into Obama's first term, the Tea Party movement (which I'm sure Reagan would have supported) has appeared out of nowhere. There are huge numbers of people who think government is the problem, and their numbers are certain to grow. Whether the Republican Party will be able to get past the apparent contradiction of seeking to be what it historically condemns, who knows?

It's a bit like hating cops so much that you want to be one.

Or as in my case, hating activists so much that I'm tempted to become one.

Sigh.

It's tough having to live up to self-canceling standards.

MORE: Fortunately, the "be what you hate" mechanism does not seem to be limited to Republicans.

As DISSENTING JUSTICE shows in graphic detail, "

the Obama administration has embraced many of the same positions that liberals and Obama himself criticized during the Bush administration."

Hmmm.....

I'm reminded of Bill Clinton's famous "THE ERA OF BIG GOVERNMENT IS OVER!."

Whoa.

Obviously, this means that "the Clinton administration embraced many of the same positions that liberals and Clinton himself criticized during the Reagan administration."

And while I'd hate to think that the Bush administration embraced many of the same positions that conservatives and Bush himself criticized during the Clinton administration, I wouldn't be surprised if political historians could find a few examples.

Does this mean we will soon get beyond hope and change?