« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Is Romney, Gingrich or Perry more willing to Destroy the Federal Leviathan?

A walk down Memory Lane with Jeffrey Lords and his excellant June 14th article in the American Spectator:

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/06/14/is-mitt-romney-the-new-nelson/5

“…Rockefeller Republicanism is Mitt Romney’s political core, his every political instinct, and it expresses itself and will continue to express itself as Romney moves through this campaign. Asking him to stop is like demanding the Pope not sound so, well, Catholic. All of which poses an interesting dilemma for Republicans. Here’s a great candidate for president. He’s got the looks, the charm, the energy, the brains and, if not Rockefeller-style money, at least enough plus the ability to raise more. The problem: He tries hard to sound like Ronald Reagan. But he thinks like Nelson Rockefeller.”

Believe me, I’ve had my fill of, and feel for, Romney/Milliken Republicans. Growing up physically and politically in Michigan as a Goldwater supporter and then a Reagan Delegate from Gerry Ford’s homestate at the ‘76 GOP National Convention in Kansas City, Jeffrey Lord nails this one on the head!

Now that the complete GOP candidate field has been defined, and last summer and fall have proved to be more fun than any political junkie could EVER imagine. The GOP needs a candidate that will present a positive AmeriCAN message that there is a difference between Statism and Liberty! Romney just is NOT that candidate.

Is Gingrinch that candidate? Is Gingrich making the case for Liberty over Statism? When Newt became Speaker in 1996 I was in “Man Love” with every word spoken about what Newt and the GOP Congress was going to do to make government smaller and more responsive to “we the people”. After Newt left Congress I saw that even though Newt had good ideas about how to make government “more responsive” is was still “Government” that was making the decisions and choices on how we were best able to live our lives. Was Newt a Statist with a capital “S” or a small “s”? Would his government just be more of the same with a softer tyranny? Would we still spend the same, or maybe a little less, money at the Federal level but on “Smarter” Federal programs? Who would define ‘Smarter”?

Is Rick Perry That candidate? Is Perry making the case for Liberty over Statism? Will Perry take a scalpel to the Federal Budget or a meat axe? Will he eliminate whole Federal Departments like Education, Energy, HUD, Commerce, Transportation, EPA, OSHA, etc and turn their functions back to the States to decide wether their taxpayers can even afford such things, or even want state government involved? Perry’s book “Fed Up” and consistent anti Federal Government, pro 10th Amendment campign helps answer those questions well.

If you aren’t already, become a Precinct Delegate and be where the action is the week of August 27th 2012 in Tampa Florida! Help Rick Perry destroy the Federal Leviathan!

COMMENTS

  • greyeagle

    Perry without a doubt will make the biggest changes. He is after Energy, Education and EPA. He would combine Departments and eliminate others. He wants to take government out of our lives as much as possible. He is certainly the main for the job.

    • votemout2012

      It is so hard to watch conservatives go for the bling instead of substance when it comes to candidates. Perry has the record. Why can’t ppl see that?

  • andystone

    You also need “capable”. Washington is full of Democrats, bureaucrats and treacherous sands.

    • audax

      …and Rick Perry is just the guy for the job! I have “no heart” for the slime that feed from the Federal Trough!

  • saulpaulson

    You are dead-on about Romney, and his interview with Fox News Sunday yesterday shows it.

    He would not advocate getting rid of a single gov. agency and his reduction in government spending was weak (realize that even Obama has called for spending cuts). Granted Romney said he believes everyone should pay less taxes, but he adamantly says the rich should not be getting tax breaks.

    Elect Romney and the government will be even bigger in 4 years time.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    I’ve met the former Governor on a (smallish) number of occasions, (and even again in the last couple of years, and he’s definitely getting on in years, although still hale), and he is a most charming gentleman…

    And in that is the crux of the problem of the “Good Government” republicans: They are gentlemen, and in their core they view the government ultimately as an instrument of benign nurturance, rather than for the force for violent coercion that it truly is. This is the problem with the Lowell Weicker-Nelson Rockefeller-George H.W. Bush-Gerald Ford types…

    Essentially, they are Lions Club republicans: Government, if it can build and distribute bombs, surely it can distribute eyeglasses. Except, ultimately, benign charity begins with the assumption that it is commenced through a charitable heart, not a coerced mind. But, Good Government Lions Club republicans refuse to acknowledge this core fact. Government FORCES, and it therefore cannot, by definition, nurture. The two are incompatible, no matter how hard Good Intentions try.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    and I think he could still win this thing

  • http://thethinkingvoter.blogspot.com abierubin

    audax i really tried 43 times to recommend this spending …I will try again later

  • Common_Cents

    Isn’t that the point? LOL.

    It seems conservative candidates tax overhaul plans (Gingrich and Perry) that flatten taxes are getting a big push-back from the establishment.

    The problem: Everyone only focuses only half of the equation and ignore the spending cuts, they focus on tax rates and redistributing current revenue levels, class warfare. Giving no credit for renewed optimism from a Pro business President and actually growing the economy. We are letting them define the argument making the assumption that raising and lowering revenue is a function simply of raising or lowering tax rates. What hogwash. We all know that growing the economy is how we get the maximum revenue generation.

    It is like a business owner wanting more revenue so he/she just raises prices! Pretty much insane unless you have some sort of rare niche w/ pricing power. Most businesses have a sale to generate revenue. Yet, DEMS want to raise taxes in hopes to have higher revenue, short term can work via their forced collection monopoly but longer term disastrous.

    Cain missed a great analogy. While everyone is fighting over smaller slices of a small economic pizza which is nothing but class warfare, we should be focusing on policy that promotes the creation of an extra extra large deep dish pizza where there is more for everyone.

  • Common_Cents

    sorry bout that.

  • Common_Cents

    DUH!??? Isn’t that the point?

    The DC establishment is coming out hard to defend big government spending.

  • Michael Dugas

    Perry is the ONLY one of those three who wouldn’t be a Big Government Republican. No question about it.

  • audax

    keeps it in the Recommended Diaries longer…LOL

  • audax

    ….In 1976 I moved into the precinct of MI GOP Naional Commiteeman Peter Fletcher and lost by 6 votes. When Reagan appointed me an At-Large Delegate from MI to the GOP National Convention in Kansas City, the Milliken gang started to contest my appointment. State Senator Jack Wellborn made me the first Reagan Delegate so they would have to contest all 29 Reagan Alternates and 28 Reagan Delegates before they got to me. Milliken and Fletcher blinked, I was never contested and was the first vote cast for Reagan from MI in ’76. At the convention I was asked by a Texas Delegate “what is a good conservative boy like you doing in Michigan?” I started wonderin’ ’bout that myself and shortly after, moved to Texas! They told me”yep, you weren’t born here but ya go here as fast as ya could!” LOL