-
The IRS Immigration Fraud Scandal
June 18, 2013 | 103 comments
-
The IRS Ten: The New Keating Five
June 13, 2013 | 54 comments
-
Mark Levin: The Constitution’s Churchill
June 11, 2013 | 215 comments
-
George Clooney’s Perfect Storm
June 6, 2013 | 91 comments
-
IRS Commissioner Aided Tax Cheat Congressman
June 4, 2013 | 55 comments
Political Hay
Mitt Romney and the Conservative Succession
For a GOP nominee, picking a vice president is like picking a Supreme Court Justice.
(Page 2 of 5)
Which brings us to Mitt Romney, Richard Nixon, and those two polls taken at two different conservative gatherings in Chicago and Las Vegas.
If the vice presidency itself has grown more powerful, the recognition of the importance of the job to the future — in this case — of the conservative movement has been less than insightful. The selection of Nixon in 1952 should be the beginning of that understanding.
According to the late historian Stephen Ambrose, a biographer of both Ike and Nixon, Nixon’s selection as Eisenhower’s running mate was based on four criteria, in the following order of importance:
1. He (and in 1952 the GOP was one long way from picking a she) must be a “card carrying member of the Old Guard [meaning, in that time, a Taft conservative] who nonetheless was acceptable to the moderates.”
2. He must be a “prominent leader of the anti-Communist cause.”
3. He must be “an energetic and vigorous campaigner.”
4. He must be a “relatively young man, to offset Eisenhower’s age,” a man from the West, to offset Ike’s association with the East and New Yorker Thomas E. Dewey’s moderate machine, and last but not least in the fourth criterion, the choice had to have actively helped Ike win the nomination.
California’s 39-year old Senator Richard M. Nixon met all four of these criteria. He got the job.
Stop.
Eisenhower was a moderate. More importantly, while Ike was getting this presidential nomination certainly because he was a genuine American hero from World War II, the career politicians surrounding him — men like Dewey, Massachusetts Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, lawyer and campaign manager (and later Eisenhower Attorney General) Herbert Brownell — were all moderates.
The conservative movement in the day basically consisted of Taft, who would die a year later, and a blossoming core of conservative intellectuals. But blossoming is the word. The young William F. Buckley, Jr. was a precocious 27 year old, his boat-rocking God and Man at Yale published only a year earlier, while National Review wasn’t even a gleam in its future founder’s eye. Russell Kirk was 34 in 1952, his groundbreaking book The Conservative Mind not to be published until a year later in 1953. Barry Goldwater himself was in 1952 a Phoenix City Councilman running a long-shot campaign for Senator from Arizona that very year. And actor Ronald Reagan, still a Democrat, was beginning his journey from left to right — voting for Eisenhower that fall.
The criteria for picking Nixon, then, had nothing to do with the conservative movement. In fact, as time would tell, Nixon himself was a moderate. His rise to fame as a fierce anti-Communist in the Alger Hiss affair gave him a life-long image as a “conservative” — but in reality he was never, ever that as the term is applied to Reagan.
But the picking of Nixon should be seen as Lesson One for conservatives as they rally behind Marco Rubio.
The lesson?
The 39-year old Nixon went on to be a major player in American politics until he died at the age of 81 in 1994 — some 42 years after he was named to be Eisenhower’s vice presidential running mate. Alone with Franklin D. Roosevelt, Nixon shares the record of being on a national ticket five different times. Twice for vice president in 1952 and 1956, and three times for president in 1960, 1968 and 1972. And it’s no accident that liberal champion FDR, a Woodrow Wilson progressive favorite, was the Democrats’ VP choice in 1920 — which in turn led to FDR’s being the Democrats’ presidential nominee four times — 1932, 1936, 1940, 1944.
About the Author
Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (122) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jeffrey Lord
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/06/12/mitt-romney-and-the-conservati
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
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.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
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?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 6.12.12 @ 6:37AM
This is an intresting essay and makes some good points. Just say no to Marco Rubio. He is just another pretty boy, airhead, like Quale, who will cost more votes the he will bring to the ticket. Romney needs a real articulate prolife conservative like Rand Paul or Scott Walker to get out the base vote. I don't think either of them would take the job, if offered. Which they won't be. None of the other people mentioned excite the base.
Of course most people vote for the top of the ticket. With Romney that is a real problem. He is as exciting as molasses flowing on a cold January day. The only reason he has a chance to be elected is because Obama is such a rotten president. The only good things his supporters can say about him is he isn't Obama and he will be a better manager. That isn't much with the world facing a financial meltdown and on the verge of another world war.
Mimi | 6.12.12 @ 7:34AM
Jack...you seem to favor Wisconsin Scott Walker, 0r Rand (son of RonPaul)...Both rather "NEW on the national political scene.....How about more experience ? Paul Ryan...from Wisconsin. He is experienced, and CONSERVATIVE...straight out of the Heritage Society.
Romney has a fine group of potential V.P 's...our side is loaded with talent,integrity , experience and with principle to offer...any one would make a fine potential President to lead this country with courage and vision.
Jack in Wi| 6.12.12 @ 7:44AM
Mimmi: Ryan is a nice guy and may be on Romney's list. I think he would be a disasterous candidate. His plan would be used as campaign fodder by the Democrats. It attacks the entitlements in the middle of a depression. The most loyal group supporting the Republicans are the elderly. Ryan talks about cutting Social Security and Medicare. meanwhile he funds th military industrial complex and foreign aid full bore. No thank you to that. His cuts would only scratch the surface anyhow. I read the Republicans want more money for Afganistan. Romney must be crazy if he is pushing that. The wars have to be ended, if this country is ever to return to fiscal sanity.
Mimi | 6.12.12 @ 8:16AM
Jack ....Ryan..with COURAGE , has begun to take a look at entitlements that cannot be sustained in our future without some corrections!
He has NOT and will not take anything away from current recipients. The changes will come very gradual and we will all adapt. This Must be done! He is sure genious on budget matters...and the best about him better than just about anyone...
is his ability to communicate....Some of his speeches at Heritage are stunning....so PATRIOTIC...He really is the BEST!
Von Mises Jr| 6.12.12 @ 9:09AM
Mimi, I agree that Paul Ryan is probably the best pick. But you can count on the GOP to always take the political calculation over substance and Romney will more likely choose Rubio. Both seem acceptable and quite good choices.
Obama is imploding, and unless Romney is caught having sex with furry animals, I don't see how he can lose. But the real truth comes when he picks key Cabinet positions, and if he eliminates Czars and cleans house at EPA, Interior, Justice and other corrupted Agencies. If he does not, all bets are off with the near future of America.
The TEA party, AFP and Freedomworks will not sit by idly after they delivered 700+ seats in 2010 as well as Scott Walker's win in WI to the GOP on a silver platter.
JimP| 6.12.12 @ 8:17AM
His cuts would not affect anyone 55 or over. They would only affect future recipients and these recipients would have the opportunity to provide for their own retirement.
Since when have the elderly been a loyal constituency of the GOP? They have NEVER been that. They've been in the Dem Party milieu since 1965. Get your facts straight, Jack.
JimH| 6.12.12 @ 9:49AM
'I'm old. Give me money.' - Abe Simpson (Homer's dad)
Diefledermaus| 6.12.12 @ 4:04PM
Or (by Marge), "grandpa, where did you think that money was coming from?"...(Abe) "I thought the Democrats were back in power!"
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 10:35AM
"His plan would be used as campaign fodder by the Democrats..."
Spoken like a true coward.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 4:56PM
Jack is a coward. And a bully, and a supporter of child rapists, and a supporter of church burners....he is a piece of moldy cheese.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 6:56AM
How is a legitimate political calculation cowardice? Hopefully you haven't joined Mr. Tool below in full derangement?
While controversy can't be avoided, whether that controversy is an aid to your campaign or not is a legitimate calculation to make. As pointed out in another article, Ryan's controversy may not be a good thing in this case.
The VP choice is especially hard these days, given the PC environment that has been forged by the left wing of both parties. Mitt is part of that left and now a somewhat thankless job of overcoming something in which he has had a part.
Mr. Tool, as a shrink, you have an obvious problem. Have you considered analysis? You really could use professional help.
Derek Leaberry| 6.12.12 @ 12:58PM
Pretty solid analysis, Jack. Now that Obama's class warfare and Bain Capital tactics have failed, the Obama campaign would love to make the election a referendum on the Ryan Plan and Medicare cuts. Barack Obama wants Paul Ryan as Romney's running mate.
Romney will likely make the safe pick of colorless Governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia or the equally dull Senator Rob Portman of Ohio. I believe it more likely that McDonnell will help Romney carry Virginia than Portman helping Romney carry Ohio. The undecided Ohio voters are at odds with Portman's stance on absolute free trade.
Rubio will help in Florida and nowhere else. But it would appear that Romney does not need Rubio to win Florida.
Doctor Right| 6.12.12 @ 9:35AM
It will be Marco Rubio.
And he will help to deliver Florida into the Romney column on election day.
Case closed, Jack.
And your assertion that Rubio is an "airhead" is based on...what, exactly??
I guess we can add Hispanics to the list of people you don't like? Hispanics, Jews...anybody else?
fmm| 6.12.12 @ 9:57AM
himself
William R| 6.12.12 @ 10:55AM
Rubio is a big government NeoCon hack who wants to go around the world searching for monsters to destroy. In other words little Marco is a liberal internationalist.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 6:58AM
Yeppers. He's had his coming out party now, and his version of the Dream Act pretty much solidifies that.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 4:57PM
As usual, Doctor Right, from your mouth to G-d's ears....
(Have you seen the latest Poll on New York State Jews? Only 51% of them are in favor of Obama...)
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 6:17PM
51%? Why so many?
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 6:29PM
You've got to be kidding.
He's a MORON.
I'm just saying, as a friend.
Drummer| 6.12.12 @ 10:15AM
Marco Rubio is not qualified (just like Obama) he's not a natural born citizen. If you want to give the Democrats election fodder, go ahead, but if he's on the ticket, I simply will not vote! He doesn't meet the qualifications, because should something happen to Romney, he would be president! He's as disqualified as Obama! End of statement.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 10:26AM
Somehow, the notion that Democrats want to draw a lot of attention to the "natural born" issue seems a bit counter-intuitive to me.
Doctor Right| 6.12.12 @ 12:06PM
Yeah, exactly.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 10:38AM
True, Rubio is NOT a "natural born citizen" (yes, it matters) and furthermore, he is not very conservative. He's for amnesty for illegal aliens, after all. Rubio is conservative only in comparison to Charlie Crist.
Al Adab| 6.12.12 @ 11:22AM
Please define natural born citizen for me.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 11:26AM
A child born of two US citizen parents.
George S| 6.12.12 @ 11:47AM
A child born to parents who are under the jurisdiction of the United States and owe no allegiance to any other government or sovereignty.
Rubio's parents emigrated from Cuba and were naturalized as US Citizens (if the story Rubio tells is correct). Since Rubio was born to naturalized citizens on US soil, he meets the natural born criteria. Case Closed.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 1:26PM
His parents were not US citizens at the time of Marco's birth.
George S| 6.12.12 @ 2:01PM
Doesn't matter. The Naturalization Law of 1802 provides for aliens to register their time of arrival into the US to be used as proof to apply for naturalization. When that happens today, their offspring fall under jurisdiction of the United States per the 14th Amendment. Rubio's parents were under US jurisdiction shortly after their arrival; when they were naturalized does not affect Rubio being natural born. His parents were not tourists, on work visas, or illegal. If they received drivers licenses, social security numbers and IRS forms, they were under US jurisdiction and the time of their naturalization does not affect Rubio's status as NB citizen.
The NB clause of the Constitution was to prevent any English ruling class traveling to the newly created United States and getting involved in elections, thereby extending the influence of the English Crown. What's the point of fighting a revolution only to have George III's agents come in and take over politically. That's what the founders were afraid of -- not a husband and wife fleeing for political asylum and giving birth on US Soil. A lot of people born in the US in 1789 were offspring of parents who arrived from foreign shores. They, too, were eligible for the presidency.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:05AM
The fact that Rubio's parents came for political asylum puts his status into a grey area. I think, however, that you make good points, but you still don't completely overcome the base problem with either Obama or Rubio.
Most Cuban immigrants hoped to return. In many that hope still lives, and I truly hope they get their wish. The Castro era is about over and Cuban communism is already in the first stage of collapse. Some, but I doubt a lot, will go back and take their kids with them. Most of Rubio's generation, however, is very likely to remain.
JayDick| 6.12.12 @ 2:02PM
Doesn't matter to anyone except you. No one in any authority agrees with your viewpoint, so it is irrelevant to the election.
George S| 6.12.12 @ 3:13PM
JD, I was responding to loulou... not myself.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 6:30PM
You're losing me, loulou.
CJW| 6.12.12 @ 12:32PM
Al Adab
There is no accepted definition. There is one old Supreme Court case that mentions this but that was not the issue presented to the Court, and therefore there is no Supreme Court decision on point.
Rubio was born in the USA. He is eligible.
Al Adab| 6.12.12 @ 3:31PM
W:
Under the current state of the law, I believe you are correct. Any person born on US soil or born to a US citizen anywhere in the world qualifies as a "natural born Citizen". This may not be to our liking as evidenced by some of the above posts, but I believe that is the current status of the matter. That then includes not only Rubio, but Obama as well his having been born to a US citizen.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:09AM
Simply being born to a US citizen is not sufficient. Substantive law deals with that issue. If both parents are US citizens, then no matter where you were born then you are a citizen. Military kids born when stationed abroad to US citizens are citizens. That was McCain's status, and, if memory serves, the hospital he was born at was not part of the canal zone when he was born. That issues was deal with in 2008.
If only one of the parents is a citizen, then other criteria enter the calculation, and those criteria are in substantive law.
Doctor Right| 6.12.12 @ 12:07PM
Rubio IS a US Citizen.
Protestations to the contrary are idiotic.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 1:10PM
Right, exactly.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 1:28PM
Of course he's a US citizen but not a "natural born US citizen''.
Disregarding a portion of the US Constitution that YOU don't particularly like is idiotic.
JayDick| 6.12.12 @ 2:04PM
He was a citizen upon his birth and he was not born of aliens; his birth was therefor natural. That would seem to meet the requirements. It is you who doesn't like part of the constitution.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 2:09PM
loulou, show me where in the Constitition your view is upheld and I will accept your argument. Trouble is, it isn't in there.
TrueBlue | 6.12.12 @ 6:35PM
Rubio's parents became U.S. residents in 1956, he was born in 1971. They were here a LONG time before he was born and full citizens by then. He IS natural born.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:11AM
As I recall, they did come before Castro took over, so they were not refugees. If they were naturalized prior to Rubio's birth, then is natural born without question.
Brooksifier | 6.12.12 @ 10:28AM
If Rand is as honest as his Dad, it wont work; only liars work well as president. who is on the obverse of the dime?: FDR, whom Truman while he was still veep told people around him he was.
Remember Stan Laurel telling Oliver Hardy "honesty is the best politics"? Well, Laurel's character was a 'tard.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 6.12.12 @ 6:58AM
I am suspending my coffee break to make the following observations:
The Bush men may have been honorable men but as conversatives they were akin to political linguini.
There is no depth to any real conservatism within the Republican Part, therfore you can create Sarah Palin type conservative myths so easily. As an elected representative she was no conversative.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 9:17AM
Why is this so difficult? In fact, why is this even a Story.
Can Rubio deliver Florida, and can he deliver some Hispanics who are eager NOT to become, "The Next Black Community" on the Left's Plantation?
I can't think of anyone better. Sott Walker HAS A JOB. Paul Ryan HAS A JOB. We need the Republican Governors right where they are. And, Crispy Cream Christie is too Fat.
We don't need Bob Portman. We have Governor Kasich. We don't need Nikki Haley. We have Obama's NLRB, and its Crusade against Jobs in South Carolina, to go along with his "Brave New World" defeat in North Carolina.
And, let's face it. The Veep is like Miss Congeniality, in its stature, compared to being Queen of the Prom. (Isn't that right, Brooksified?)
And, anyone who thought that having The Village Idiot - Joe Biden - on their ticket, was a Good Idea?
Has no Credibility to speak of, on the subject of Vice Presidential Nominees.
Let'em talk.
We're way past Talking Time.
Brooksifier | 6.12.12 @ 10:30AM
"Sott Walker HAS A JOB. Paul Ryan HAS A JOB."
Being a politician is a job? As in running a plantation?
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 10:39AM
Are you being purposely dense?
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:12AM
Obtuse is the word you are looking for. And, yes, Brooksifier is intentionally obtuse. That's what makes political morons what they are.
Truth to Power| 6.12.12 @ 10:43AM
The juxtaposition of being a Democratic politician and running a plantation is right on.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 10:51AM
One of the truly insightful posts this morning. Thank you.
Al Adab| 6.12.12 @ 11:27AM
Thanks TLP it is about electoral votes. If Rubio can deliver FL then go with it. Who might deliver Ohio or VA or maybe WI (?) if possible.
As stated Romney has no Conservative credentials, but since we have no choice in November it would be good to see a solid Conservative on the ticket. It would be better to think that Romney would fill his cabinet and make court appointments from the Conservative Movement, but alas that is simply wishful thinking. His administration would only reflect the old line acomodationist GOP not begin a retrenchment of the administrative social-welfare state.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:10PM
McDonald will win us Virginia, and Kasich will win us Ohio.
The Domestic Enemy will soon be no more.
Doctor Right| 6.12.12 @ 4:44PM
Gosh, you're insightful (he said, sarcastically)...
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:14AM
IT would be nice if he were right. But, alas, such statements are sentiments, not reality.
Doctor Right| 6.12.12 @ 4:44PM
Do YOU have "A JOB"?
Or do you spend all day running-down pedestrians on your l'il Rascal Scooter??
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 6:32PM
Can you believe this Douche Bag?
Obviously, it sucks to be him.
Zbigniew Mazurak | 6.12.12 @ 7:17AM
A great article (though that doesn't say much, because Mr Lord is one of the best conservative columnists on the Web), but I disagree with the premise that Marco Rubio is a staunch conservative.
On domestic issues, he doesn't see any difference between free market capitalism on one hand and socialism/plundering private property/wealth redistribution on the other hand. He says that Republicans' size-of-the-government and economic policies are no more patriotic and no more moral than the Dems' policies.
If Republicans' policies are no better than what the Dems are offering, what reason is there to implement them?
On foreign issues, Rubio is a neocon just like Bush and Rice. He wants the US to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely and to wage wars against Iran and Syria. He approves of indefinite detention and the PATRIOT Act.
Rubio WAS a rising star in the conservative firmament. But he has already burned out. Romney doesn't need another neocon as his Vice President.
JimP| 6.12.12 @ 8:19AM
Thanks for this info, Zbig. I missed these things about Marco. Now I know Rubio is a phony conservative.
Fast and Curious| 6.12.12 @ 8:52AM
These are all legitimate things to consider about Rubio. But with each candidate we have a list of characteristics that we like and dislike. I suspect Rubio is not the Tea Party champion that many of us would like to see as VP, but that doesn't mean he is not an intelligent, decent man who will fight for traditional free market capitalism and individual liberty. The Patriot Act is not safe in the hands of liberals, but then again our country is not either. The author is pointing out that we have to avoid centrists. Rubio may not support every one of my causes, but he is not a centrist. He may not be my first choice, but we could do much worse.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 10:32AM
And to add to that; it is not the easiest thing in the world to sell the Cuban expatriate community (and their descendants) on the glories of Socialism. I think Rubio is both the correct political and philosophical choice. Obviously, he will have more moderate views on immigration than the conservative core but that seems to me to be an instinctive reaction on his part more than a deeply held ideaology. On the other hand, your observation relative to his commitment to free market capitalism and individual liberty do, I believe, reflect deeply held idealogy.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 10:44AM
Why should he have more moderate views on immigration?? Because he's Cuban? That makes no sense to me. Unless he's in favor of balkanized identity politics.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 10:53AM
loulou, it's called empathy.
JimP| 6.12.12 @ 1:23PM
Sorry folks, Marco doesn't pass my gut reaction test anymore. I understand your arguments in his favor but his positions and statements are just too much of a red flag for me. I guess because we've been burned too many times over the last 50 years. My gutometer is reading "Compassionate Conservative Wanna Be" on him. I'll reamain open to changing my mind based on hard evidence however.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:16PM
Vice President.
He's running for Vice President.
Please tell me what Important Legislation has come out of Joe Biden, Al Gore, Dick Cheney, George H.W. Bush, Walter Mondale, Nelson Rockefeller, or Spiro Agnew.
Rubio can deliver Florida, and a lot of Hispanic enthusiasm.
Last I heard, ImmigrationPolicy is the preview of The President.
Relax.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 3:59PM
As usual, TLP. You get it.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:20AM
Really? Ask people like Theodore Roosevelt, or LBJ, just two examples, if a VP selection is important. It would be nice if the running mate selection were not important, but it is from two perspectives.
First, it gives something of an idea what kind of adminstration you will be getting. Reagan's selection of Daddy Bush was quite educational in that regard. The conservative flag was waved a few times in the 80s and little else. Daddy Bush came in and saw to what little Reagan accomplished got wiped away.
Second, he may just end up in the Oval office on his own as did LBJ.
Ponder these facts.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 1:29PM
Like "compassionate conservatism"?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 6.12.12 @ 7:26AM
Here is Jeb Bush claiming the Republicans are too conservative:
http://bostonglobe.com/news/na.....story.html
Mimi | 6.12.12 @ 8:00AM
Thanks for the link....Jeb is so wrong, he has been captured by his personal circumstances and not strong enough to overcome his experiences to see ahead what will really help this nation NOW!
He lived too long near the Mexican border, married an Hispanic and is naturally pro-immigration and sympathic and fail to realize the REAL problem now is ILLEGAL immigration that is destroying budgets.
Any politician who cannot rise above his own personal preferences lacks the qualities to serve ALL THE PEOPLE. Obama and his idealogy is a
prime example of failure to lead or even respect the major numbers of people who he cannot serve to do thier will as he gave an oath to do.
Poor Jeb he has a lot to learn...the United States is dry and thoroughly THIRSTY for the Constitutional return to the Founders Conservative principles!
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 10:45AM
Can't Jeb Bush please, please go and retire somewhere?
Al Adab| 6.12.12 @ 11:31AM
We can only wish the republicans WERE Conservative. When they turn from promising to better manage the welfare state to taking action to "reduce its size" I will believe.
Quartermaster| 6.13.12 @ 7:21AM
The GOP was founded as a leftist party, and nothing has changed.
Crassus| 6.12.12 @ 9:22AM
Jebber is right that Reagan couldn't get nominated today but he's right for the wrong reasons. Reagan was able to get the nod in 1980 because the Ford-Nixon wing of the party (then the establishment) had been discredited by Watergate and the 1976 election and was split between George H. W. Bush, Howard Baker, and Bob Dole. Reagan had the entire conservative wing of the party to himself and was able to parlay it into the nomination.
Since Reagan left office that hasn't been the case. In particular, the current election and in 2008. There have been more than one candidates running who have managed to split the conservative vote in th Republican primaries. In 2008 you had Huckabee with the evangelicals, RuPaul with the libertarians, and Romney with the economic/business wing. They split the vote allowing RINO John McCain to claim the nomination. This year you had RuPaul again doing his thing with the Libertarians, Santorum with the evangelicals, and Newt with everyone remaining on the conservative side of the aisle thus allowing newly moderate Romney to walk away with the prize.
If Reagan was still alive and running my guess is that the same thing would happen to him. The conservative wing of the GOP would still be split among several candidates thus allowing a moderate to gain the nomination. It was only through a unique set of circumstances that he was able to garner the nod in 1980.
Mimi | 6.12.12 @ 11:11AM
You are ON to something! In the future ...we need to Narrow down on the Conservative most likely to succeed . Unless we have a better stragedy we will never get a Conservative nominated. We actually had the votes this time and blew it...the last two should have been one!
Boar Hunter| 6.12.12 @ 11:34AM
Crassus;
Your argument was well reasoned...but I believe wrong for one reason.
Reagan had one thing none of the current hopefuls had. He had charisma.
If you recall, one of the things Reagan possessed was the strength of character to stand up for his conservative beliefs and the ability to communicate them in a manner that made the media apoplectic.
The media still hates Reagan to this very day because he made fools of these liars and lovers of lies.
Liberals today, strangely some on this very site, still feel compelled to lie about Reagan.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:21PM
He also had a Clear and Precise Vision for the Country.
A Strong National Defence, Lower Taxes, and Getting the Government OUT OF THE WAY, so the American People can do, what they do best.
CREATE JOBS AND WEALTH.
He kept it Simple.
He kept it REAL.
Al Adab| 6.12.12 @ 11:36AM
Don't overlook 1976. Remember how the establishment GOP, the Ford, Rockefeller, Romney wing opposed Reagan with everything they had as he contested the nomination. Notably that wing included Dick Cheny and Don Rumsfeld who stayed loyal to Ford. When Ford rejected Goldwater and named Rockefeller as VP, well the true colors of the GOP came out. The problem with the Bush 43 administration was the Ford administration and the problem with the GOP is the accomodationist wing these people represent.
nathan| 6.12.12 @ 7:48AM
I would like to pose a serious question to all of you. And I will preface the question with the seminal statement from Dr. King. He wanted some day for his children to be judged by the content of their character not by color of their skin.
If Rubio were white, and looking at his resume to date, would he be the number one pick of conservatives? Or is a lot of the enthusiasm a "color of skin" issue? And if so, haven't we seen enough of that with the incumbent?
At Mazurak: All the things you say are true, but Romney supports every one of those positions including the NDAA language (recently found unconstitutional by one federal judge). But while the public as whole wants out of Afghanistan and is more in tune with Ron Paul than Romney/Rubio/McCain on these issues, you see far too many "conservatives" who supported the reauthorization of horribly misnamed Patriot Act, who are calling for action against Syria, who support pre-emptive strikes against Iran and have no particular problems with the Fifth Amendment destroying NDAA language. In USA Today last week, one congressman said Americans had nothing to fear from the indefinite detention provisions in the bill. After all they could always file a writ of hebeus corpus. The first thing that he should have been asked was, "oh like the Japanese Americans did during WWII?" A lot of them were native born Americans too and that writ didn't keep them out of the camps. And it won't keep any of us out of the camps either.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 10:41AM
Nathan, for openers, he is white. Last time I checked, Spain is in Europe, almost the entire population is Caucasian and he is of Spanish descent. Hispanic is an ethnicity, not a race so no, I don't think this is a "color of his skin" issue. Do Hispanics self-identify ethnically? Yes, and to that extent he will help rid the nation of the scourge of Obamarx. Nothing wrong with that, in my view. Politics is politics and all that. It just so happens, in this case, that the politically astute thing to do is not in conflict with what's good for the country. As to your other points, I really can't argue in opposition to any of them, with the possible exception of Iran. But that's for another thread.
Derek Leaberry| 6.12.12 @ 11:09AM
The Spanish wiped out the Indian population in the 1500s so Cubans are either white, black or mulatto. This ethnic mix makes Cuba an anomaly in Latin America. Almost all Cubans living in the United States are white. Senator Rubio is white.
Most of Central and South America have an ethnic breakdown of white, Indian and mestizo with Brazil having a large element of blacks and mulattoes. Many more African slaves were sent to Brazil than North America and Brazil did not end slavery until the 1880s. Each Latin American has their own ethnic stew. For instance, Mexico is about 60 % mestizo, 25 % pure Indian and 15 % white. Bolivia and Peru have ethnically dominant Indian populations while Chile is majority white.
Doctor Right| 6.12.12 @ 12:11PM
"If Rubio were white, and looking at his resume to date, would he be the number one pick of conservatives?"
Who cares?
He'll deliver Florida and lots of Hispanic votes.
Regarding the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII...Most of them were American citizens, but a lot of them were NOT. And of these, many had been in the country for several years and had never initiated the citizenship process. WHY????
FDR made a difficult decision, but I'm not sure it was 100% wrong.
Derek Leaberry| 6.12.12 @ 1:30PM
Rubio will help in Florida and nowhere else. Mexicans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans and the rest couldn't give a hoot about the ethnicity of Rubio.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 1:32PM
Hispanics are not a homogeneous group. Big difference between Cuban achievers and Mexican illegal farmworkers.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 5:02PM
My father-in-law was in intelligence in Hawaii in WWII, working under Nimitz---there was a lot of Japanese spying going on.
But there was also the 442nd, The Niseis, the most decorated unit in WWII...so one can see, as usual, shades of gray.
The problem was in not using a fine enough sifter to go after the bad guys. But what can you expect from a Democrat?
CJW| 6.12.12 @ 6:19PM
FDR also interred, but not as many, Germans and Italians. The governor of California who approved the interment was Earl Warren, who later became the Supreme Court chief justice. I think he had a guilty conscience and spent his supreme court years atoning at the expense of the constitution.
JimP| 6.12.12 @ 8:11AM
I'm not a Rubio supporter for VP. His support of Obama's Libya adventure turned me off to the idea of him as a genuine conservative. He seems to be too readily influenced by the inside the beltway GOP crowd, too ignorant on foreign policy to know his head from a hole in the ground, or maybe he's not as conservative as we all think. Whatever the explanation, his support of the Libyan adventure was a giant red flag in my estimation.
RJ| 6.12.12 @ 10:43AM
I didn't know about his support on Libya. Thank-you. I was an early contributor to Rubio's senate campaign, but, he has not been in office long enough to prove himself yet. Perhaps in time, but not now. I also expect the VP nominee to have executive or significant federal budget experience. On these counts, Rubio does not qualify.
JimP| 6.12.12 @ 1:24PM
My thoughts too. Thank you for adding this, RJ.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:26PM
Vice President.
He's running for Vice President.
Please tell me what Important Legislation has come out of Joe Biden, Al Gore, Dick Cheney, George H.W. Bush, Walter Mondale, Nelson Rockefeller, or Spiro Agnew.
Rubio can deliver Florida, and a lot of Hispanic enthusiasm.
Last I heard, ImmigrationPolicy is the preview of The President.
Relax.
Al Adab| 6.12.12 @ 3:37PM
TLP:
Wrong standard. It is not a good measurement how many pieces of legislation one has his name on. I would posit that activist government is contrary to the standard we desire. What has person "A" done to reduce spending, control regulation and reduce the size and scope of the Federal government while person "B" has done much to increase its reach? Using such a standard who might we find to our liking?
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 6:39PM
VICE President, Al.
I love ya, but like I said, before.
He will deliver Florida, and a huge swath of the Hispanic Vote.
Nobody else can bring more to the ticket.
VICE President.
RJ| 6.12.12 @ 11:25PM
Unfortunately, all too often in our history, the Vice President becomes the President. I remember being told years ago that someone questioned LBJ's selection to JFK. JFK said (words to the effect) don't worry, he is not going to outlive me.
ggoblue| 6.12.12 @ 9:00AM
looking that far into the future is a luxury reagan, and romney, just didn't [don't] have. romney has to balance the ticket or make the pick that gains the most votes.
i'm not saying marco rubio should be that pick but...he is from florida and HE IS HISPANIC. if we ever get into the position where hispanics vote like blacks [i.e. 98% democrat] then the country is lost. rubio has shown the ability to enunciate the conservative way of life to hispanics.
is rubio a team player? will he act as spokesperson and frontman for mitt romney? is he fullly vetted? i don't know, but if so, you'd better take him. jmo.
147 days to go...21 weeks from today, the fate of the world in the balance. no matter the choice we must all be motivated.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:27PM
Indeed.
PCC| 6.12.12 @ 9:16AM
An excellent and insightful piece by Mr. Lord.
Big Easy Conservative| 6.12.12 @ 9:48AM
While I like Rubio, he is NOT Qualified to be President, just like Obama he is not a Natural Born Citizen as his parents were not citizens when he was born.
I don't think we need to finally kill the constitution to try and get a conservative as Pres or VP.
Let's go with a young Paul Ryan. The country needs to listen to his changes, hear him explain them (which he does very well) and realize these medicare/SS changes are needed to save them.
I'm on medicare and LIKE his Med changes so what's the problem?
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:29PM
He's not running for President.
Please explain how JFK was qualified to be President?
Or, the Muslim Boy, named after Mohammed's Horse.
JimW9| 6.12.12 @ 10:23AM
The amazing thing is I had to read through 22 comments before coming to one that addressed the rather large elephant in the room - Big Easy Conservative's stating of the obvious.
What this desert of integrity and intellectual honesty reveals is the curse of our natures - most of us do not want to admit to the implications of Obama's (and Rubio's as well as any other non natural born citizen's) ineligibility, so we just pretend it does not exist.
But we pay a price for this self-deceit. Integrity is the only glue that holds us together - in the long run. Once we abandon it, we abandon the bonds that are prerequisites to a free, open society where the rule of law is actually respected and followed rather than given cynical lip service, silence or denial.
I happen to feel that upholding our fundamental rules regarding eligibility are important safeguards and my hope is that there are sufficient numbers who agree and who will oppose an ineligible Marco Rubio ever bit as much as the felonious Barack Obama.
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 10:49AM
Jim, I would never argue against your statement regarding giving cynical lip service, silence or denial to the rule of law but, I have to tell you, I can find nowhere in the Constitution, or in statute, a clear definintion of what a "natural born citizen" is. Example, my granddaughter, was born and lives in Germany with her American father and German mother. She has an American birth certificate, an American passport, and in a few years (she's only 2 now), will be coming to the U. S. for her schooling (if her Daddy hasn't been transferred back to the States, by then). How is she not a natural born citizen? i understand the passion of this argument. I just feel it's based on unsupported (in the Constituion or in Statue) opinion. I will gladly change my mind if proven otherwise.
nathan| 6.12.12 @ 11:43AM
Citizenship law is complicated but not horribly so. You don't have to be born IN the United States to be "naturally" born. If you were born outside the US like the the incumbent ? (the alleged Kenyan birth certificate) then one of your parents has to have been born in the US, and spent five years in country two after after the age of 15. (I may have the numbers wrong but I'm in the ball park on this.)
So in the case of the incumbent he probably met the eligibility requirements because his mother met all the requirements to convey citizenship to him where ever he was born making him "naturally" born. Remember this issue came up with McCain too. He was born in the Canal Zone and it was by no means clear that the zone was US territory for purposes of establishing citizenship.
Rubio though was born in Cuba to Cuban parents right? On that basis he absolutely can't run for president. And by inference probably can't run for VP either.
And Jim you're right, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and binds everyone on everything. I tell my wife all the time, "conservatives" love the document except when they don't, when it stops them from doing things THEY want to do. LOL (You mean I really have to Mirandize an "alleged" terrorist on American soil? Yes you do. What part of "no person" do you not understand?) (All of it obviously.)
KennesawJack| 6.12.12 @ 1:16PM
Nathan, Rubio was born in the United States, not Cuba, to Cuban immigrant non-citizens. Again, based on all I've read, I can see no impediment to his eligibility.
CJW| 6.12.12 @ 1:29PM
Rubio was born in Miami, Florida. He is an natural born citizen.
The Constitution does not include the word "Mirandize." The Supreme Court in the Miranda v. Arizona held that the Constituion requires a suspect to be informed of his rights. Another Court may limit or reduce or reverse this. As you may know the Supreme Court had also ruled that black slaves were personal property (Dred Scott), segregation of separate but equal was constitutional (Plessy v. Ferguson), and recently that abortion to the last second before birth is constitutional.
You are confusing the actual words of the Constitution with the Court's interpetation of those words.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:32PM
"The incumbent was PROBABLY ELIGIBLE to be President?
PROBABLY?
How Stupid are you, exactly?
Oldefarte| 6.12.12 @ 10:25AM
This to me is a far greater problem:
'.....Quinni Poll: Obama's Pa. Lead Shrinking Tuesday, June 12, 2012 09:32 AMPresident Barack Obama is leading Mitt Romney in the key battleground state of Pennsylvania by a margin of 46 percent to 40 percent, thanks primarily to support from women and independent voters.However, a new Quinnipiac University poll also shows his lead shrinking and Romney with strong support by a margin of 49 percent to 41 percent from voters who believe he could do better than Obama in dealing with the nation’s economic problems......
“President Barack Obama is holding his ground against Gov. Mitt Romney in Pennsylvania,” said Quinnipiac.......'
How in hades can these DUMBARSES in that state possibly NOT UNDERSTAND that this POTUS has to be defeated? Are Pennsylvanians that STUPID? Apparently so, and the comments here of some ID'd residents of that state are therefore not surprising based on same!!!!
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:35PM
He's NOT gonna win Pennsylvania, or West Virginia, or Virginia, or Florida, or North Carolina, or South Carolina, or Ohio.
Hell, he might not even win Michigan or New Jersey.
America's NIGHTMARE, is almost over.
Praise God.
Derek Leaberry| 6.12.12 @ 10:25AM
Senator Rubio is showing all the signs of wanting to be part of some sort of cabal to pass immigration amnesty. As vice-president, it seems likely that he will pull one over on conservatives and join with John McCain, Lindsey Graham and the Bush family to pass something similar to the McCain-Kennedy-Bush plan of 2006 and 2007.
TLP| 6.12.12 @ 3:37PM
Vice President.
He's running for Vice President.
Please tell me what Important Legislation has come out of Joe Biden, Al Gore, Dick Cheney, George H.W. Bush, Walter Mondale, Nelson Rockefeller, or Spiro Agnew.
Rubio can deliver Florida, and a lot of Hispanic enthusiasm.
Last I heard, ImmigrationPolicy is the preview of The President.
What is wrong with you people?
Peppermint Tea | 6.12.12 @ 10:28AM
How about somebody old and not likely to run for president later? Like the last two Veeps.
Mitch Daniels?
Orrin Hatch? He will be out of a job in 2 weeks anyway.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 10:48AM
Romney is a moderate. We don't need another moderate like Daniels. We need a true conservative like Col Allen West.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 5:06PM
West would be a masterstroke!
Petronius| 6.12.12 @ 11:49AM
A Real Conservative is necessary to put some starch in our noodle of a candidate. This person should also be someone who has no baggage of the Palin variety, have full knowledge of how the liberals play dirty, and the street smarts to kick media ass. And succession is always an issue. Zell Miller or Phil Gramm: both Conservative to the hilt crossovers who won all their elections from the other side except Congressman Gramm who won bigger after the Democrats kicked him out.
E B | 6.12.12 @ 12:52PM
Great article. Fortuneately, there are other young conservative stars than Marco Rubio, who doesn't have the cleanest or clearest record of conservatism among them.
loulou| 6.12.12 @ 1:36PM
Thank you, E B. Rubio is useful--he beat Charlie Crist but he's no conservative. Let's see how he develops. He's still wet behind the ears.
David| 6.12.12 @ 1:04PM
Mr. Lord, although you acknowledged it (paid lip service to it) I would argue that as important as picking Sup Ct justices is, it is equally important for our presidents to nominate true strict constructionists/originalists at ALL levels of the federal judiciary.
I will also suggest that had there been conservatives on the courts at the district and appellate levels, Roe v. Wade may never have reached the Sup Court. True, the plaintiff could have shopped the courts for the most sympathetic judges.
I have posted the following before, and do so again, in case some readers on this site aren't aware of it.
The Sup Ct reviews/hears fewer than 100 of the approx 10,000 cases that are filed with it every year. That means what was decided at the appellate level is the law for the remaining cases.
There are 13 districts/sections/geographical areas at the appellate level that have 179 judges. Those judges are appointed by the prez.
There are 677 district court judges. They are appointed by the prez. For each district court there is a corresponding bankruptcy court - so another 677 bankruptcy judges. Those judges are chosen by the appellate court judges within their respective district/section/geographical area.
All of those judges serve for LIFE.
As an aside, recall the big bankruptcy a couple of years ago where the secured creditors were screwed and Bam Bam's unions made out like bandits.
David| 6.12.12 @ 1:04PM
con't.
We should insist that our repub senators place the same importance on the 179 judges at the appellate level that they feign to do at the Sup Ct level. We need to insist that our senators fight like crazy to keep people Sonya Sotomayor off the appellate courts.
Who Knows?| 6.12.12 @ 1:05PM
If Romney “follows his gut”, as Reagan should have done, maybe we’re in heap big trouble---isn’t Mitt a moderate, a businessman, not an ideologue?
Maybe that’s why Bob Portman is the highest vote getter at Intrade.
Hope and pray for the best, expect and plan for the worst-- and given the fact that Mitt Romney is all too human, one can see why betting people would go for Portman.
The Stupid Party can be counted on acting up to its name!
Daring is not a word describing Romney.
IMHO, Rubio or Ryan would be incredible picks.
Ah, what might have been!
Just imagine how different America would be TODAY if Reagan had put Kemp on the ticket, and “young” Jack, instead of that doofus Bush I, had followed him. Picture ANOTHER eight years of Reagan, that was even MORE conservative, in actions and results!
There would have been NO Clinton, including all the detritus in his wake---Whitewater, trailer park trash, Jennifer Flowers, Monica, Hillary, Paula, the myriad scandals, etc etc.
And, would the voters want to “change horses in midstream”, after 8 years of a successful Kemp era?
Hell no!
The country IS center right, so it’s very possible the Kemp pick would have been the pivotal choice that would have led the federal government to more closely reflect this.
Imagine stable and in-check government!
Today feels like what happened in that sequel to “Back to the Future”, after the rotten fork in the road was taken!
Come on, Romney, do the RIGHT thing.
Casey Abell| 6.12.12 @ 2:12PM
Well, Jeff, thanks for the history lesson, however slanted it may be toward your personal POV. But I still don't know who you prefer for the veep nod. Is Rubio acceptable to you? If not, why not? Who else is on your short list?
After a while, you have to be a little less coy and state your preference. I'm for Rubio myself. Young, charismatic, articulate, ethnic, acceptable to all wings of the party, big state, swing state. What's not to like? Unless there's some horrible skeleton in some horrible closet - and I'm sure Romney's people are searching diligently right now - I see the choice as pretty obvious.
cicero| 6.12.12 @ 4:31PM
What is this penchant to try to elevate every young, atractive Republican that wins an election? Why not leave Rubio and Ryan, to say nothing of Walker, right where they are so that they can exert their influence in the Congress, or governor's office? Give them a chance to build a record, and get some seasoning. The vice-presidency was never intended to by as powerful as we seem to want to make it. It is meant to be a stand bye position in case something tragic happens to the President. The fact that th VP can be useful on the campaign trail, and during an administration to flack policy is incidental. If that is what we want, why not use one of the old guard for the job? Otherwise, we waste our young talent, when we need them most in the fight.
David| 6.12.12 @ 4:47PM
Many think Rubio is the obvious choice, but he does not have a record at the national level. And we do not know his position on illegal immigrants.
It is nice to think that repubs could and would nominate a black or Hispanic or Indian, but it is wrong to say out loud that we are nominating him/her BECAUSE he/she is black or hispanic or Indian.
I am all for Santorum. He will get Romney the blue collar types (including many union voters) conservative democrats, and conservative Catholics, all of whom may never vote for Romney without someone like Santorum on the ticket.
Occam's Tool| 6.12.12 @ 5:04PM
If Rubio was born to legal aliens in America, then he is an American Citizen from birth. End of story. This happened to my boss in New Zealand, who was born to legal aliens in San Francisco.
ReaganConservative4ever| 6.13.12 @ 12:08AM
Mitt Romney is NO Conservative !
Romney is a Harvard Grad Mass. Progressive GOP establishment RINO, who implemented Romneycare, precursor of Obamacare, forced mandated substandard inferior State Socialized Medicine that bankrupts the residents, citizens, and Independent businesses and companies in the Free Market Capitalist Free Enterprise system in Mass ,which Romney refuses to refute, but says he will repeal Obamacare, which has all but destroyed private healthcare in Mass, that have all but crippled and bankrupted his State's govt, the resident tax payers, and especially the economy in Mass..
Romney's past as Gov of Mass., reflects what Romney will be in the future as President, as he has never veered away from what he was and what he is now. Romney has never shown any ability, willingness, or propensity whatsoever to be either conservative in thought, policy, or action, ever.
As a conservative, how does one defend a Ted Kennedy collaborated forced mandated substandard inferior State Socialized Medicine program that bankrupts the residents, citizens, and Independent businesses and companies in the Free Market Capitalist Free Enterprise system of a State, then turns around and argues that he must repeal Obamacare, the very same thing he implemented and refuses to refute and repeal in his own State called Romneycare, then has the nerve to call himself a Conservative.
Tonyzhao | 6.13.12 @ 4:02AM
I hate everyone of the Republican Party, there never represented my interests. Perhaps Obama is now doing is not good, but he at least gives us hope.