(Page 3 of 13)
While sitting in my den a few days ago, I was interrupted by a knock at the door by a campaign worker for Ron Paul. He gave me a brochure and departed forthwith, leaving me to read or discard it as I might choose. I read it and was surprised to note that I agree with Mr. Paul on virtually every point covered with the notable exception of his position on the war in Iraq. This was high irony for me because I had just finished reading a list (lengthy) of John McCain’s positions on the issues of the day. It appeared to me that Mr. Paul is wrong on the single most important issue and right on most of the others while Mr. McCain is right on the single most important issue (the war) and wrong on most of the others. It would appear that I am impaled on the horns of a dilemma from which there appears to be no escape. As I read Ms. Fabrizio’s letter to Mr. McCain, I could not help but wonder if she has noticed the same thing that I noticed.p>Early and often I have noticed Mr. McCain’s disdain for conservative beliefs and values, and it would seem that Ms. Fabrizio has addressed some of the most serious ones. My question would be that, instead of trying to massage Mr. McCain away from his many progressive stances, perhaps conservative commentators should attempt to massage Mr. Paul away from his one. Ms. Fabrizio seems to be quite a sensible woman with a great command of the language. I think she might be the woman for the job. br> — Joseph Baum br> Garrettsville, Ohio /p>
I am not a fan of John McCain. I’m still thinking of casting my absentee ballot in the Texas primary for Mitt Romney, but ultimately I will vote for John McCain, because he is a Republican and out “patriotic self-preservation.” While principled Rush Limbaugh will spend the election ensconced behind his famed golden Attila the Hun microphone, conservative first Sean Hannity will be safe in a Fox studio and Ann Coulter will be excoriating John McCain on behalf of Hillary Clinton I will be in Iraq with a Battalion of Marines. Because of that one word, Iraq, I don’t want this election to go as the last one did when supporters of the Democrat party influenced the 2006 election with IED’s and suicide bombers. Nor do I want the Battalion fighting its way out of Iraq, because the Muj are inspired by the election of their fellow traveler or an aging doctrinaire liberal eager to appease her resentful radical base.
It is easy to condemn John McCain for his “maverick” or more accurately incoherent politics (espousing environmental nonsense, energy stupidity, advocacy for terrorist’s rights and Constitutional waywardness), but the sage words of Ronald Reagan (America’s second greatest President after conservative George Washington) remind me that surrendering in politics, because of principles isn’t sound judgment much less good politics. For those who wrap themselves in Ronald Reagan here is how the Gipper responded to “principled conservatives” attacking his pragmatic Presidency — “Die-hard conservatives thought that if I couldn’t get everything I asked for, I should jump off the cliff with the flag flying-go down in flames. No, if I can get 70 or 80 percent of what it is I’m trying to get … I’ll take that and then continue to try to get the rest in the future.”
Reagan the politician worked with liberal Democrat Bill Bradley to double the self-employment tax in a failed attempt to “save” Social Security. Reagan the idealist granted blanket amnesty and citizenship to millions of illegal aliens, because he believed these people could be part of the American dream (sounds a lot like Bush and McCain). In an attempt to assuage the ire of fiscal conservatives he raised Federal taxes 6 times. The man with an eye to history made his first appointment to the Supreme Court a moderate female — Sandra Day O’Connor. In a conciliatory spirit with Democrats he appointed a little known moderate Justice Kennedy to the highest court in the land. In the tradition of LBJ and Nixon he even created an entire new bureaucracy (the Department of Veteran Affairs); saved 3 he promised to eliminate (Commerce, Energy and Education) and allowed a host of Democrat “sacred cows” to survive (PBS, legal aid, etc.). Reagan even ignored Iran’s involvement in the murder of hundreds of Marines and he allowed the terrorist leader who brutally tortured and murdered a Navy Seal to go free (that man has just reportedly died in Syria thanks to Israel). Reagan regularly touted his amiable working relationship with uber liberal Speaker of the House Tip O’Neil. Using the criteria many conservatives use to “judge” President Bush and John McCain the Gipper was NOT a “conservative.” He was a “RINO.” Of course, that’s BS, but ignorance regarding the history of the Reagan era shouldn’t give “conservatives” carte blanche to twist the facts to fit their personal fantasies.
How we got here is quite obvious — John McCain despite the criticism of the conservative media or maybe because of it has won the most votes in GOP primaries. Why didn’t a staunch “Reagan conservative” win? Simple, those who now invoke the name of Republican Ronald Reagan to attack his heirs and party have replaced the real Reagan with a phony caricature. If the “conservative movement” is in trouble (something that I’m now dubious about thanks to the youth at CPAC) the trouble has been one of our own making for failing to heed the “big tent” wisdom of Ronald Reagan and substituting it with a “conservative” version of MoveOn.org litmus tests and tumult.p>Before “principled conservatives” choose to stay home or cavalierly throw away another election and injure the nation by empowering Democrats they need to heed the prescient words of Ronald Reagan from October 1964 — “We are at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it has been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening.” br> —
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?