Patti Davis: “My dad would be appalled by current Republican candidates”

Patti Davis: My dad would be appalled by current Republican candidates

Patti Davis, the daughter of former President Ronald Reagan, said her father would be “appalled” by today’s Republican presidential candidates, and that today’s Republican party would not accept her father.

In a recent interview with the Huffington Post’s Michelangelo Signorile on SiriusXM Progress, Reagan’s daughter put the current overabundance of potential Republican presidential candidates on proper blast for continuing to invoke her father’s name despite the fact that he would probably have nothing to do with those imbeciles.

“It may be this week [Ted Cruz is] doing it more than the others,” Patti Davis says, “but they all kind of do it. But yet, they are so not like him. My father would be so appalled at what’s going on. He would be so appalled at these candidates. I don’t think he would be a Republican.” Davis had a similar theory regarding the current gun control debate that continues to rage across the nation, revealing that her father likely wouldn’t even be able to fathom the GOP’s rhetoric. “I don’t think he’d ever be able to conceive what’s going on now,” Davis says, “the amount of gun violence or weaponry.”

Of course, Republicans hate (loudly, publicly, and without restraint) a lot of other things too. Following the Supreme Court’s historic ruling on marriage equality earlier this year, many Republicans decided to wallow in the lowest-common-denominator publicity of Kim Davis and similar doofuses instead of acting like progressive human beings. According to Davis, Nancy Reagan isn’t interested in joining that nonsense.

“She was very happy about that decision,” Davis reveals. “I don’t talk to her too much about politics currently. She’s 94 and I think she has the right to live out the rest of life with a little bit of peace, which cannot be found in the current political scene. But you know, I don’t think she’s too happy about anybody on the current roster right now. I mean, there’s nobody presidential. Not in that group anyway.”

Sportact Editors and Wire Services

  • J_Tavernier

    He’d also be even more appalled by the Democrats.

  • beingstill

    This shill OBVIOUSLY doesn’t remember what her dad stood-up against/for, like LIBERTY/FREEDOM! She may remember “daddy” a lot different than the rest of us do; I remember him for all the wonderful aspects of his personality and what he did legitimately FOR the U.S.A. …and the world as a result! To be sure, not many “LIKE” a lot of what is going on now in politics, but suffice it to say I don’t like it that so many have a voice against the ORIGINAL intention of what this country was about: LIBERTY/FREEDOM! The ONLY group of people – according to John Adams (among others) – that could properly “handle” the type of freedom this country attempted to provide was a CHRISTIAN people, “…it is wholly unsuitable for any other.” We need to understand who we WERE, who we ARE, and who we want to BE in the future. Presuming that “freedom of religion” was about muslims is to completely “not get it,” and further proof of someone who has been indoctrinated by the “public screwl” system… another thing which Reagan hated and tried to get rid of!!!

  • carlosperdue

    Your dad would also be appalled by you.

    In any case, I don’t give a crap what Reagan would say. He sold out the country on immigration. WWRS? I’m sick of the Reagan worshipers.

    • Jane Doe

      Reagan only agreed to amnesty because Congress SWORE that they’d overhaul immigration and cracked down on illegal immigration. It was the DNC’S demi-God Ted Kennedy who stated ON RECORD that amnesty should never be done again.
      Do some research and stop listening to all the liberal lies.

      • West Winds

        The only ones who lie around here are the rotten Right-wing crazies who promised this country good paying jobs. And they did create jobs… in India, in China, in the Marianas, in the Philippines, etc. This country has lost its manufacturing base thanks to all of the ditto-head RW constituents that insist on supporting a coup d’etat that took away our democratic republic and gave us a banana republic oligarchy of special interest, investment class billionaires who are looting the country with “austerity”. YOU do some research and stop listening to the likes of El Rushbo, the Oxycontin, multiple felon, King. Fool!

        • carlosperdue

          Even with 125 million Americans unemployed, underemployed, or on some form of welfare, business still whines that they need to import “cheap labor because of the “labor shortage”.

          More than 100% of the net jobs created in the USA since the year 2000 went to immigrants legal and illegal.

          You snarky commie-Dem pukes are as responsible for that as the “Republican” business prostitutes you hate. You want to steal elections by flooding the USA with future Democrats even though it destroys our liberty, security, culture, cost of living, open spaces, freedom of movement, quality of life, real per capita income, real per capita wealth, and both the human and natural environments.

          You don’t give a crap about your fellow citizens. You’re the party of slavery, lynching, KKK, Jim Crow, segregation, and “N*ggertown Saturday Night Special” gun control laws to keep blacks disarmed, defenseless and disenfranchised. Now you’re the party of race fluffers who kept racism alive, killing the ideal of the colorblind society. Your Welfare State Plantation managed to do what the KKK never could – reinslave and destroy the black family and community. KKKudos!

          If there was justice, you would be stripped of citizenship and deported.

          GFY.

      • carlosperdue

        That’s a nice fairy tale for a glazy-eyed Reagan worshiper who doesn’t have a clue how the Republic is supposed to work.

        Are you so ignorant you don’t know that the President is responsible for enforcing laws defending borders, not congress? Hint: “Executive Branch”, Commander In Chief. Hello? Ring a bell somewhere in that airhead of yours?

        Read the Constitution. Congress writes laws. The President executes them. Congress has no constitutional power to enforce laws. The only enforcement power it has is indirect, through oversight hearings and threat of impeachment — to hold the President accountable, force him to faithfully execute and defend, or be replaced.

        On the one hand, you worshipers paint Reagan as the tough, savvy, wary, shrewd, street-smart genius who said “trust but verify”. On the other hand, you say he was such a dope he got suckered by congress promising “enforcement later”. Indeed, you’re painting Reagan as ignorant as you are, as if he thought congress enforces laws.

        Reagan had ample power, authority and duty on day one in office to begin halting and reversing the invasion-occupation.

        Eisenhower deported millions of illegals with a tiny budget and just 1,075 border patrol agents. No wall, no e-verify, no national ID, no exit visas, no coy whining for congress to do something, no excuses. He fired the corrupt, disloyal immigration officials, hired loyal Americans to replace them, and enforced our laws and sovereignty. He did not seek permission from congress, nor did he need to.

        The difference between Reagan and Eisenhower? Eisenhower *wanted* to honor his oath to faithfully execute and defend, Reagan dishonored it and engaged in intentional gross dereliction and subversion of our most fundamental national defense – our borders and immigration controls. Eisenhower opposed amnesty for invader-occupiers, Reagan wanted amnesty. Eisenhower loyally represented the American citizenry. Reagan betrayed us to represent “cheap labor” special interests and invaders.

        There is only one G-d, and He is not Ronald Reagan.

    • West Winds

      Unless you are a First Nations Indigenous person, then you are from immigrant stock yourself, so you could always go back to wherever makes you happier.

      • carlosperdue

        I’m a native born citizen, born to native born citizens. You move.

        • West Winds

          Honey, you have me SO far wrong, you don’t know what you are talking about. And unless you are a North American Indian, you ARE of immigrant stock, so get going!

          • carlosperdue

            BS. I’ve got you dead on. You’re a cheap, evasive, PC dunce.

            Now let’s cut through your nonsense.

            I’m from part settler, part immigrant stock that came legally when there were enforced limits. But that’s irrelevant, a red herring. The American citizenry has the right to limit immigration, regardless of our ancestry, and we are idiotic if we don’t do so.

            I know a fair amount of Indian history, unlike you I’m sure. The Indians were immigrants too. Many tribes were constantly stealing each other’s land, torturing, murdering and eating each other. The Aztecs took pedophilia, rape, torture, mass murder, vivisection, and cannibalism to a science, like agronomy. The surrounding tribes were only tolerated as a meat crop. The Iroquois loved to capture as many prisoners as possible to torture and eat them to death, make the victims watch as they sliced chunks off, cooked them up and ate them. So spare us the Dancing with Wolves routine. The Indians didn’t own this land any more than the settlers and immigrants did.

            You want to squeeze in billions of people, pave every inch of private land, live like a rodent on a rat race banana republic? Why? To prove how PC you are? For “cheap labor”? For Democrat votes? Or just because you like living like a rodent in a sardine can? You have the right to live like that. No one’s stopping you, except perhaps health and building codes. But you have no right to inflict it on your fellow citizens.

            Now GFY

          • West Winds

            Listen, A-hat: I’m against immigration. And yes, I’m a Green Progressive. Now you GFY, moron.

          • carlosperdue

            Uh huh. Blow me.

          • West Winds

            I tried to tell you that you were wrong about my politics, but, oh no, you have all the answers and were so busy bloviating you missed it altogether. You RWs are SO arrogant and less reason for it. And you don’t know baloney about First Nations people. I was married to just such a person, know-it-all smarty pants.

          • carlosperdue

            You tried to tell me? Oh, you’re so coy! What a douche

          • West Winds

            You’re one of these RW sociopaths that trolls the blogs and picks fights so you can be abusive. You’re disgusting.

          • carlosperdue

            Uh huh. Unlike you, a LW sociopath who trolls to pick fights with snippy little hit run comments. Eat me

          • West Winds

            …. crickets chirping…

          • carlosperdue

            What a puss

  • dagnabit

    From what I remember you hated your dads politics so I can’t say I trust you now, airhead.—————> Trump 2016 if only to pi$$ off Patti Davis

  • cnnfoxbreakingnews

    This is the same woman who posed in Playboy with a Black Man grabbing her breasts !

    • West Winds

      And what does that have to do with this commentary?

  • Bill Darcy

    I suppose she would say her Dad would endorse hilary

    • West Winds

      Yes, I think you might be right. Hillary Clinton is a supply-side Neo Con and this would make sense to Reagan.

  • Jane Doe

    Oh, really? Ronnie would hate the GOP? Actually, I think he’d be more shocked at the Dems, particularly Obama and his habitual lying. Oh, and I doubt Reagan would have supported gay marriage. He referred to gays as ‘sick unfortunates’. Sounds more like Ms. Davis has become a Democrat.

  • Sean

    Wow, there are a lot of angry people in these comments. First, I think the man’s daughter knew him well enough to know what he stood for. Sure, she might fall left of him and have her own agenda, but I suspect she’s right.

    There have been a lot of people saying that current republicans fall far to the right of Ronald Reagan and it’s true; he was centrist enough to draw a lot of votes from democrats when he ran (he won in a landslide in ’80 and ’84).

    I think the Republican party would do well to shake off some of the crazy and start figuring out a way of getting more independents, and maybe some more democrats to see things their way. The farther the two parties struggle to separate themselves instead of working together, the less things get done.

    • West Winds

      I agree with most of your sentiments and think you have accurately characterized what Patti knows about her father, but I don’t agree that the Right and Left are going to come together in any kind of meaningful way.

      Just look at all of the governmental shutdowns under the Rethuglicons coming out of the Congress; temper tantrums when they don’t get their way, and absolutely NO consideration for anybody else except themselves. As John Boehner said, right out on the Senate floor, “We Republicans don’t let facts get in our way.”

      Have a look at Jeb Bush, a couple of years ago, when he was in Tampa and spat on a mother in front of her young son, and then turned around and flipped the bird at the crowd before disappearing into his hotel. This is what is just beneath the surface of these RW people and why should anyone with two live brain cells put any of them into office to make policy and war on us???

      The big and basic divide is over money. The Right believes that all of us workers exist to support their existence, while the Left believes the corporations are allowed to exist (under our governmental system) to support our existence. This is a fundamental difference in world views.

      Also, Lefties believe in a meritocracy where a good job well done deserves to be rewarded with fair pay. Whereas the Righties lie, cheat and steal to get ALL the money into their pockets, whether they have earned it or not. Their motto: “The ends justifies the means.” Another fundamental difference.

      Right-wing (and especially the so-called Christian faction) need to be subjugated to something; they need being owned. While the rest of us want a society where shops can’t deny services or goods based on a whim like color, creed or political affiliation and we can decide for ourselves what we believe without fear of reprisal or dictation.