Posted on 05/08/2011 9:31:49 PM PDT by 6ft2inhighheelshoes
Earth to Rep. Ron Paul and former Gov. Gary Johnson – you are running for the Republican nomination for president, not the Libertarian or Democrat nomination. At various times throughout the Republican primary debate last evening, I had to remind myself I was actually watching a Republican debate. Without the interludes of Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Sen. Rick Santorum, and CEO Herman Cain, you would think that Ron Paul and Gary Johnson were participating in a Democrat presidential primary debate, siding with Democrats on major social and defense policy initiatives.
Why do Republicans let people like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson participate in Republican presidential debates? They are obviously trying to win the “Who’s more Libertarian?” or “Who’s the least Republican” debate as opposed to the actual Republican debate taking place.
For the record, I do not disparage Paul or Johnson from running for president as they have served their country honorably nor do I fundamentally disagree with them that our country is in deep budgetary and economic peril. Nor do I for one minute pretend the Republican Party is a homogenous entity where everyone agrees with everyone. Republicans have always had internal disputes over philosophical emphases and the occasional policy difference.
The Republican Party as a whole though is based on five fundamental principles – individual freedom, limited government, free markets, a strong national defense, and preserving our traditional values and heritage. The modern Republican Party is based on the foundation of the conservative movement.
The conservative movement is a coalition made up of three disparate, yet amenable groups – classical liberals or libertarians, traditionalists, and anti-communists – or modernly referred to as fiscal, social, and defense conservatives. While each entity emphasizes different issues, they all work together in a political compact of sorts with a shared sense of reason operating within tradition. They also understand that together, as a fusionist coalition, they have the best chance of winning elections and actually legislating their conservative principles.
In order for any modern candidate to win the GOP nomination, they must embody these conservative principles, or at least appeal to these constituencies. With the exception of primary fiscal issues, Paul and Johnson consistently deviated and at various points were even hostile to the social and defense conservative branches.
Throughout the debate, Ron Paul stated positions that were contrary to mainstream Republicans. Nearly every response oozed of antipathy towards successfully concluding our military missions in Iraq and Afghanistan and utilizing enhanced interrogation techniques, even for the likes of Khalid Sheik Mohammed – the mastermind of 9/11.
He is against the use of prisons for enemy combatants, humanitarian and foreign aid, the reorganization and consolidation of our homeland security, traditional marriage, the AZ illegal immigration act, wants to get rid of the federal reserve, intonated a return to the gold standard and at one point stated he was for legalizing drugs such as heroin and cocaine – I’m not kidding.
The debate moderators at one point had to ask Paul and Johnson how they expected to win the Republican nomination with anti-Republican viewpoints such as these.
Politically though, no modern presidential candidate has won the Republican nomination being fiscally imprudent, negligent on social issues, and anti-defense. Look at the most recent Republican presidential nominees and how they were able to appeal politically to the three main constituencies.
While prickly with the conservative base, John McCain knew he had to win over enough people from each of the three main groups to win the Republican nomination. His position of strength was national security having served in the US Navy and was the leading proponent in congress for the Iraqi surge. He was consistently pro-life and appealed to economic voters using the line that government spending like drunken sailors was an insult to drunken sailors.
George W. Bush unabashedly was a social conservative referring to his reaffirmation of Jesus Christ in his adult life during the 2000 campaign. He appealed to fiscal conservatives touting his plans for tax cuts and appealed to defense conservatives supporting a missile defense shield and a non-nation building approach to foreign policy.
Like McCain, Bob Dole had a thorny relationship with conservatives but appealed to defense conservatives having served in combat. He was pro-life and appealed to fiscal voters by promising a 10% across-the-board federal budget cut and selected the tax cut icon, Jack Kemp, as his running mate.
You can see a consistent theme among these candidates that allowed them to appeal not only to the Republican base but to the national electorate as well. Republicans should reassess their standards of participation in nationally televised debates or risk losing or hurting their brand further.
Again, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson have every right to run for president, but they are not Republican or traditionally conservative. While Donald Trump may have questionable political discrepancies of his own, he recently summed it up best that Ron Paul has zero chance of winning. The Libertarian Party is still looking for their nominee, gentlemen.
Christopher N. Malagisi is the President of the Young Conservatives Coalition, a National Review Institute Washington Fellow, and an Adjunct Professor at American University teaching “The History of the Conservative Movement: 1945-Present" and "Campaigns & Political Activism."
No doubt there are the “conservatives” that supported Bush in 1980 versus Reagan who don’t believe in Limited Constitutional Government. Those “conservatives” don’t like Ron Paul. Those are the same “conservatives” that worked for the Democrat Scoop Jackson in the 1960s and/or 1970s, and joined the Republican Party in the 1970s and 1980s. They support Big Government and they call their policies “conservative”. See: Bush.
Well... by your answer? You don’t know. You don’t know nothing about nothing about anything government...nor do you care to know. YOU are the reason why we have a one party government.
Regagan’s been dead awhile...and he ain’t coming back. I doubt if you remember anything he did anyway. He sure enough wasn’t God and did nothing even to compare to God.
He got the budget going in the right direction and made some good speeches(that’s probably what you remember). But I remember 21% interest on the money too. If he were alive today ...he’d be the first one to tell YOU...don’t worship me!....I’m just a man.
I am so glad you mentioned Cindy Sheehan’s name. You are sure throwing some POWERFUL,POWERFUL names out there for credibility sake on endorsements.
tlb???...why don’t you put a toad sack over your head and stick a corn cob up your butt...so you can appear a little more respectable....i’m laughing my butt off at you......
The Great Thinker!
LOL - despite your attempts to paint anyone who doesn't support Ron Paul as a Bush supporter or some kind of big-government RINO, most people with any sense know what a real conservative is.
And it sure isn't Ron Paul.
Are you denying that it was Reagan vs Ford in 1976 and Reagan vs Bush in 1980?
And very very few were with Reagan in 1976. But Ron Paul was.
Are you denying all that?
What in the hell are you talking about?
You Paultards do too many drugs.
Find where I denied any such thing.
And put the bong down for a while.
Ok, fine, you aren’t denying that Ron Paul was one of the few Conservative politicians who stood with Reagan in 1976.
(You Paulestinians are just bizarre....)
I don't really care what your demigod was doing in 1976.
More recently, he has endorsed people like Adam Kokesh, Cynthia McKinney, Bob Barr...
No thanks.
Hey, that’s fine. I presume we both like Palin. I do.
Someone, perhaps it was you, I don’t want to go back and check this thread, pointed out that Ron Paul wanted to take away too much federal government. That he’s too conservative.
Maybe Ron Paul is too conservative.
Ron Paul refused to endorse McCain, yes that’s true. Ron Paul didn’t say “No More RINOs”, but Ron Pauls arguments added up to “No More RINOs”.
‘I doubt if you remember anything he did anyway’
Since I started campaigning for Reagan in 1966 (for the 1968 election), and worked out of his Miami convention headquarters, and continued campaigning for him in 1976, 1980, and 1984, I disagree,
OOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooo-—Kay!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.