What A Difference A Day Makes
In spite of having observed Chicago politics for most of my adult life, I am still disappointed when I witness the unprincipled actions of some of my fellow conservatives. Twenty-four hours ago (January 29) the majority of core conservatives in the public arena, on talk radio, the blogosphere and the print media were warning us about the dangers of a McCain Presidency. Today many are talking as though Florida was the final state to participate in the primaries instead of one of the first, and McCain is the hero of the hour.
Did I miss something? Did McCain have a “road to Damascus” moment? Did he denounce all his prior betrayals of the conservative movement when I wasn’t listening? No. What has changed is they now see him as a possible winning candidate in November. Why? Because of the endorsements he has received from the Republican establishment? Because twenty percent of the self-described conservative voters in Florida voted for him? Because he was able to get a large portion of those who described themselves as independent?
I even heard him described today as the successor to the legacy of Ronald Reagan. Please allow me to explain some of the differences between the successes of Ronald Reagan and John McCain. First, about the ability to attract independents and Democrat voters. The independents and Democrats who supported Reagan were supporting him because of his conservative principles. Those who are supporting McCain are supporting him because of his liberal record. Second, Ronald Reagan was up-front and open about the principles he believed in and he followed through on those principles once he got into office. McCain has betrayed those same principles time and again during his time in office as a U.S. Senator.
We have often heard lately that the Reagan era is dead. If the Reagan era is dead why then did all nine of the original Republican candidates vie for the title of “Reagan Conservative?” Why do Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney and John McCain all claim to be advocating the same principles as Ronald Reagan? Because they know those principles are still alive and well today and still represent the best chance for victory in national elections.
Even if the Reagan era were dead that does not mean the conservative principles he supported are dead. Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan were not the founders of conservatism; they were simply the guardians of it for their time. The conservative principles embraced by Goldwater and Reagan are the same ones so diligently fought for by our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and their fellow anti-federalists. (conservatives) Small government, minimum taxation, and economic liberty are the same conservative principles advocated by Thomas Jefferson, our first conservative President, in his Inaugural Address in 1801.
The only difference between the conservatism of Reagan and the conservatism of Jefferson is that Reagan added the principle of a strong military for national defense. The founders feared a standing army due to thousands of years of abuse by monarchies and despots who used their armies to rob the citizenry of its liberty. That is one of the reasons why the Constitution limit’s the power of Congress to fund the military to two-year periods. The Posse Comitias Act of 1878 further protects citizens from abuse by military forces under the direction of the federal government.
A final word to my conservative friends who think McCain is the only candidate who can beat the Democrat candidate in November. Perhaps the best way to judge the political strength of John McCain in the upcoming election is to consider who his supporters are. It is the height of naiveté to believe the New York Times or any other liberal newspaper is going to support McCain over whomever the Democrat candidate happens to be in November. A large portion of the individuals and organizations who have endorsed McCain are those with an interest in seeing a Democratic victory in 2008. One can only conclude the reason for their support is they see him as the most vulnerable at the polling booth.