My fellow Conservatives, the time has come. Barring a supernatural occurence, Mitt Romney is going to be the Republican nominee, our standard bearer to face the failed President, Barack Obama, in the fall. The time has come to rally behind him, if we want to, as Reagan put it, “make America great again”. Because, in the general election, only one candidate has promised to repeal Obamacare. Only one candidate has promised to cut government spending. Only one candidate believes in the American constitution and the American way. And only one candidate has the record to back that all up. And that candidate, is Mitt Romney.

When Mitt Romney entered government as the Governor of the ultra-blue state of Massachusets, his state was facing a $3 billion shortfall. Mitt Romney balanced the budget without raising a single tax. To do this in a red state is considered a feat; in a blue state, it is nigh on impossible; in Massachussets, it must be a miracle.

When Mitt Romney was Governor of Massachusets, he signed into law one of the most Conservative health care reform acts in the Country. No, the mandate is not good policy, and is morally and Constitutionally wrong, but otherwise the bill bears little resemblence to the infamous Obamacare. There is not a single tax increase in the bill, and unlike Obamacare, it is completely funded. Furthermore, it used government funds already provided to the states in a more-cost effective manner, exemplifying the beauty of block-granting and federalism.

When Mitt Romney was the Governor of Massachusets, he finally ‘came out of the closet’ as pro-life. It is my belief that he had been all along, but knew he could not get elected in Massachusets running as such. His record on the matter is exemplary. He vetoed bills allowing Embryonic stem cell reaserch and human cloning, and fought to protect life, almost harder than any other Governor in the Country, against impossible political odds.

As Governor, Mitt Romney testified before Congress in favor of a federal amendment to the Constitution protecting traditional-marriage, eloquently defending the sanctity and importance of marriage in our Society. On Social and fiscal issues, he shines, unlike many other governors and candidates in the party. Furthermore, in the words of John Bolton, Romney is best positioned to put into place a ‘Reaganaut foreign policy’.

No, Romney’s record is not perfect, and there is much that is lacking there. But the same could have been said about Reagan’s record. Romney is uniquely qualified to bring this Country in a rightward direction and return America to a nation of greatness. He will balance the budget, repeal Obamacare, protect life and liberty, cut taxes, and appoint Conservative justices. It is time to rally behind the next President of the United States, Mitt Romney.

To join the Romney twitter army use the hashtags #Romney2012 and #ConservativesForMitt

The left enjoys calling out Conservatives as
“racists” or “philistines” who supposedly “don’t care
about the plight of the poor and working men and women of America”, all
the while disregarding the truth about what Conservatives really believe. The
left has won the battle over public opinion simply by demonizing the values of
the hardworking men and women of which America is mad of, convincing Americans
that those values and beliefs are products of a bygone era, are antiquated
beliefs predicated on a medieval system of values, and that those Americans
should abandon these beliefs which have been the basis of Western society since
its conception.

The moment has come, Conservatives, to stand up to the left
and tell the American people what we really stand for, and they will find that
they stand with us in all the major fights of this political era. We cannot
continue to allow our opponents to define us, because the definition will never
be friendly. We must stand up for what we believe in, or our party, our
movement, and most of all, our country will fall apart. For our beliefs in
family, free men and markets, limited government, the culture of life,
inalienable rights, and the power of the individual is the way out of these
economic and cultural woes we find ourselves in today.

We Conservatives believe it is a moral imperative to create
an economic system of empowerment, not entitlement, creating a culture in which
the poorest among us can find the same success that the rest of us have. We
believe that this cannot be done by punishing the successful, but rather by
promoting the wealth that they have accumulated as the standard for all
Americans, regardless of birth status, race, or creed. We believe that the
Government should not take from those who have achieved the American dream to
“spread” it around to those who have not, because doing so will trap
the poor in their own poverty. We believe that we should not allow those who
are poor to remain permanently on Government handouts, because we teach them
and their offspring to not be productive citizens of a free society, thus exacerbating
their poverty and extending their own personal economic malaise. We believe
that capitalism is the only moral economic system, for it gives the individual
the power to craft their own future.

As Conservatives, we understand that the nuclear family of a
single man and a single wife, bonded in holy matrimony in order to rear the
next generation, is the cornerstone of a healthy society, a healthy economy,
and ordered liberty. Without a strong family, the next generation will cease to
be contributing members of society, and our nation will descend into the same
abyss that most of the rest of the world finds itself in today. We recognize
that without a culture that places a strong emphasis on life, we cannot have a
healthy republic predicated on the idea that liberty is a condition of life. We
recognize the moral imperative to cease the punishment of the family through
the tax code, the welfare system, and the economic system of redistribution,
which will forever corrupt the moral bonds of the family. Thus, Conservatives
need to explain to the American people that this is not simply a battle over abortion,
a battle over homosexuality, or a battle over economics, but rather a battle
over the moral fiber of this country.

We Conservatives recognize that our government’s first role
is to protect the people from the forces of evil. We recognize the difference
between good and evil, and that America must stand for the former. We recognize
that we cannot back down when faced by an enemy who stands for evil, and that
we should not attempt to appease them because they will strengthen rather than
weaken through that process. We Conservatives recognize that if America ceases
to stand up for freedom, then the cause of liberty will be lost worldwide.
Above all, we recognize that while war is one of the vilest things known to
mankind, there are things that are worse, such as genocide, oppression, and
slavery.

The name of Conservatism has been dragged through the mud by
the left and the elite, who look down on these values that define our movement
and our country. We need to redefine the name and reintroduce these concepts to
the American people so that they know what Conservatives really believe. If we
do not redefine the debate based on our beliefs and our conviction that our
policies will decrease poverty, increase liberty, strengthen our family and our
society, and protect our innocents and children. And that is what we must tell
the American people in the upcoming election.

We Conservatives recognize the need to remove the radical-in-chief Obama as soon as possible. We must replace him with a Conservative who can push our values and our agenda as President, so that we can restore our Liberty, our Security, and our Prosperity. But to be effective, this agenda cannot just be sound bites and campaign applause lines. It must be clearly articulated and described in a ten point old fashioned way, so as to prove that we are not anti-poor but rather, we are pro-prosperity, for everyone not just the uber-wealthy. The following must be enacted by our next President if we are to put this nation on a better path.

Point 1. Fundamental Tax Reform

If we are to see prosperity and true equality of opportunity we must, I repeat, must, enact tax reform that stops punishing investments, savings, job creation, and success. The only possible tax that would do that would be the Family flat tax, as proposed by Steve Forbes, with some modest adjustments. This flat tax is a proposal that involves an exemption of a certain amount per year per individual ($16,000 for a single adult, $32,000 for a married couple, with increasing exemptions per child, all indexed for inflation), and then proceeds to tax all income beyond that point at a maximum of 12.5%. If we were to implement this type of tax, we would cease to punish economic growth without sacrificing revenues. It has been implemented in many different formerly third-world nations, and has resulted in a dramatic increase in prosperity for their nations inhabitants. It has resulted in far less tax evasion by the wealthy because of its simplicity, but has also created wealth in every nation where it has been enacted. Its enactment would abolish the death tax and the AMT. I would also, in this economic climate, temporarily decrease the corporate tax rate to 0% for two years, before gradually raising it to a maximum of 15% over several years, while also permanently eliminating the capital-gains tax and payroll tax. All of these tax proposals would result in a growing economy and faster job creation, ultimately helping everyone rich or poor.

Good explanations of the Flat Tax and its success can be found here and here.

Point 2: Balanced Budgets

Our culture of debt is injecting uncertainty into the economy and ultimately discouraging investment and job creation, while also robbing our children of their inheritance and putting our future into the hands of foreign creditors, many of whom would seek to have us destroyed. This culture of debt must be stopped and it is being encouraged by our government. It is encouraging to see people in Washington who understand that the key to a strong economy is to allow more of the money to naturally “redistribute” itself in the economy without government intervention, and that the first step of that is too have a balanced budget. That means we must cut everything, and will result in the cutting of entire agencies, departments and programs. This will not be electorally popular, but in reality, in the long term it will promote prosperity and liberty. There is already a plan out there that would do this, called the Cut, Cap, and Balance plan, which passed the house earlier this year. Our next president should push hard for this plan if he/she is going to secure the blessings of liberty and prosperity.

The Cut, Cap and Balance Pledge can be found here.

Pont 3: Entitlement Reform

If we are going to balance our budget and allow more money to stay in the economy, we must reform the entitlement system. The current way that it is set up, we are on a path to complete and utter bankruptcy within the next 25 years. The problems with our entitlement system are not purely fiscal, but social as well. It is immoral to rely on the government for your main source of income, and we should not allow it to happen, otherwise, we will face the problems that Greece does now. We cannot allow non-working people to rely on those who do, and so we must have entitlement reforms.

Medicaid/Medicare

 The current system of delivering health care to the poor and elderly is broken. Not only is it on a fast track to bankruptcy, it is morally corrupting and it artificially forces up the private insurance for Americans not on the program. This problem goes far and above the fiscal problems created. We also must insure that we are promoting independence with the program, while also dealing with some of the rising costs of the health care industry created by these programs. The first reform needed is to completely abolish Medicare for those under 60. Most of the seniors on the program are still capable of working and providing health care for themselves. If we expand Medicaid to cover all poverty stricken individuals, including seniors, then not only will we reduce costs, but more people who were previously relying on the government will not be. Then we would be left with a broken Medicaid system, and the first step to fixing the long term problems with that program, we will need to privatize it, subsidizing a portion of the premiums of bare-boned policies for a restricted number of desperately poor individuals. Then, to allow competition and flexibility to the states, block grant the program under the condition that the states make it a temporary program based on work or preparation for work (for people who are able to work, which is the majority), following the principle of welfare reform which has proven so successful.

Social Security

Many of the problems that we are facing due to structural problems in our health care program; we are also facing in our retirement system. The fact of the matter is, we are consistently investing taxpayer dollars into a ponzi scheme, proving, yet again, that government is irresponsible and inefficient with our money. Again, far too many people who have been duped into believing that they should rely on government for their retirement, when they could otherwise provide a better retirement for themselves. And yet again, the government is promoting an entitlement society where too many people who could still work are not. To fix these problems will require strong structural changes to the system. In the past, localities have opted out of the program, creating a vastly more efficient program for their citizens than the federal government has, and it has been wildly successful. And so, we should allow any states, localities, and individuals who choose to opt out of this broken program to do so, so that we uphold federalism, and return much of the power to individuals. For those that do remain on the program, it will be necessary to raise the retirement age slowly to 75, and means test the program heavily, so that people who could provide for themselves are not stealing the money of the working population. Finally, for the few who remain on the program, we need to transfer their tax payments into a private account system run by the government, which would be able to vastly increase the wealth of an individual by investing solely in bonds.

The Case for SS Privatization

Point 4: Health Care Reform Done Right

One of the things that have long angered me about my fellow Conservatives is that many of us find it impossible to talk rationally about health care reform. We, unfortunately, have yet to convince the American public that free market health care is far more efficient and effective in providing quality care to all working individuals than a socialized, one-size-fits-all program. To do this, we must first shift the debate from how to provide universal coverage, which will never happen without a mandate or government program of some sorts, to universal accessibility, so that everyone who wishes to get health care insurance, and is willing to work to do it, will be able to purchase the insurance plan of their choice. The first step in doing this is repealing ObamaCare, which will result in higher health care costs, reduced freedom of choice, and rationing of care as already witnessed in the failed RomneyCare experiment. Second, the entitlement reforms as listed above will go a long way to reducing insurance costs in this country. These first two steps are not the only steps to keep costs under control, because this is one of the greatest challenges facing modern day America.

•  Reform (not repeal)  EMTALA- EMTALA requires doctors to provide care for all who come in to the ER. While ultimately a good idea, it is being abused and we must give doctors the ability to turn away a patient who does not need emergency treatment, but is simply trying to escape paying for the non-essential treatment that they do need.
• Repeal many Mandated Benefits- The government is causing people to pay more than they need or want to through many of the mandated benefits that are required of insurance companies, many of which the individual does not want. These mandated benefits are squeezing small insurance providers out of the market and reducing competition which would control costs
• Repeal Community Rating laws-These laws demand that all insurers provide the same amount of coverage for the same amount of price to every individual, stopping the insurers from creating a tiered-system of payments and unnaturally forcing costs to rice for the healthy.
• Cut the State Boundaries- Due to a decades old law, individuals cannot buy health insurance across state lines due to state regulations, which are supposedly adding as much as 15% to the overall cost of health insurance.
• Move the tax credit- As of now, businesses receive a tax credit to provide benefits to their employees, which is causing problems with the issue of mobility, and the costs of which economists say come directly from the employees’ salaries. To promote mobility, and also to increase the amount of choice that an individual has with their salary, we should move this tax credit to promote individuals to buy health insurance, rather than receiving it from their employer.
• Cut down on FDA power- Currently, the FDA has the ability to over regulate the prescription drug industry, and it is forcing up the costs of making prescription drugs, and it is also preventing the consumption of drugs which could save lives. We should repeal much of the regulatory power and leave those sorts of decisions to the patient and the doctors.
• Expand HSA’s- HSA’s have been incredibly successful in allowing individuals to afford health insurance in hard times, similar to a 401 (k) retirement plan.
• Repeal SCHIP- SCHIP is a ridiculous program that is stopping people from moving up in life and is also fueling our entitlement culture. Furthermore, it is insuring 4 children for the price of ten, proving that almost all of the  people involved in the program could afford health insurance if they wanted it. Since this is a particularly controversial program here is the case against it by a health care policy wonk.
• Aggressive Tort Reform-This one is pretty self explanatory, but it should mostly be left to the states, who, as Texas has proven, can do tort reform well.

Point 5: Education Reform

There is a commonly cited myth out there that states that if you invest more taxpayer dollars into public education, the education standards improve. This is simply not true, as can be seen through the facts. Over the past thirty years, education spending has been tripled, and there was a cabinet level department created for it. Since then, educational outcomes have declined. This is proof yet again that feral government interference is wreaking havoc with our children’s lives and future. The way our system is set up, there is very little responsibility given to the parents, but instead, all the power lies with bureaucrats in Washington D.C. The first step to fixing this problem is abolishing the department of education. Secondly, we must repeal many of the programs which give federal dollars to the states with strings attached to diminish the flexibility the states have to create their own education policy. Then the states will make the needed reforms to fix many of the problems that face our broken education system. Many ideas have been widely supported among Conservative circles, but one idea that I believe will solve many of the educational policies is still regarded as taboo: Privatization. If we were to completely privatize the system, the money would be used more wisely, and the costs for private education, which is so expensive due to the fact that it competes with the public option, will plummet. Whenever I say this, people say that I wish to deny education to the poor. This is simply not true. In this plan, the state would subsidize large portions of the cost of education for the children who need help the most. Children who were formerly placed in failing schools due to their poverty, will have a chance at a much brighter future. Furthermore, there will be market differentiation and fairer pay for teachers, actually based on their worth and success, without many of the problem that are imposed due to government and union interference.

Point 6: Regulation Reform

In this current economy, or any economy that is weak and instable, the last thing we need to do is impose more government regulations. Unfortunately, our sitting President doesn’t understand this. Our next president will need to freeze all federal regulations not made by congress for two years, and we need to cut down on the bureaucracy that creates many of those regulations. This is fairly simple in all honesty, seeing as the Constitution states that regulations must be made by congress anyway, not behind the scene bureaucrats. We then must repeal Dodd-frank and many of the other regulations that are crippling our economy. Any and every regulation must be looked at for reform and/or repeal, including such regulations as the minimum wage, which is costing thousands of jobs each year and is the reason we lost our manufacturing industry in America.

Point 7: Welfare Reform

In 1996 we were told that welfare reform would “end welfare as we know it”. It unfortunately didn’t. While it made needed reforms to one welfare program, that was only one of 77. The other 76 programs are still causing many of the social and fiscal problems that the original welfare program did. If we are going to put an end not only to rising debt, but also to rising dependence on the government, then we must put the principles of welfare reform into place on all the other 76 broke programs, paired with a freeze on all new welfare programs for the next 5-10 years at a federal level, seeing as, after the TANF reform, the liberals simply put more welfare programs into place. Many of these programs must be abolished, and others must be gutted and transformed. If liberals really wanted to help the poor, they would see the success that TANF had and apply those same principles to the other wasteful programs. The RSC has recently proposed a new bill that would, in fact, do just this, entitled the Welfare Reform Act of 2011

Point 8: Energy and Environmental Reform

Conservatives are truly the ones who support allowing the American people and free enterprise to grow in the realm of energy, and we need true energy policy reform to increase the production of oil within our own borders, and also increasing natural gas, nuclear energy, and coal, including other energy resources that will be held accountable not by government, who simply stalls production and stops real energy creation, but by the free market. And on the environment. The recent Texas-EPA lawsuit has proven that Washington and the EPA do not care about the environment, but rather, they simply hate business and believe that they should have more power. There is no other explanation for their recent actions. Despite proof that carbon emissions do not result in a warmer earth, Obama’s EPA continues to pursue a cap-and-trade plan from behind the scenes, which has been proven not to do much for the environment, but would put thousands of Americans out of work. Despite proof that for every “green job” we create, we lose two real jobs, Obama’s EPA continues to try to create misguided “green jobs” on everybody else’s dime. And despite the success of Texas’ pro-jobs environmental program, which has resulted in some of the cleanest air in the country while being flexible enough not to put any burden on businesses, the EPA is invalidating the program. We must recognize that there is not enough evidence to prove that global warming is man-made and that capitalism hurts the environment, and that if we put common sense programs like Texas, we don’t have to give the government too much power to help our environment. And we cannot give in to the environmentalists when it comes to energy, because if we are going to insure that we continue forward with our capitalist progress, we must use every energy resource available, and we must recognize that when renewable forms of energy become more inexpensive and accessible, they will overtake the market. For all the talk that liberals do about “progress’ they really are the ones who want to plunge us back in to the Middle Ages with their misguided environmental policies.

Point 9: Immigration reform and Border Security

We cannot, and must not, have amnesty of any sort in this nation. When people say that illegal immigrants just want a slice of the American dream, they overlook the fact that the American way of life involves following the law. Those who have come into this nation illegally have shown blatant disrespect for our laws and customs, and what is to say that they won’t do it again. We cannot condone people who break our laws and just make it legal for them to come here, and we obviously cannot invite the anarchy of open borders to be our policy, as it would result in widespread death and chaos, and it would invite people with very different core values from ours to destroy this great nation and our liberties. The only answer to dealing with the illegal aliens whom are here is to deport every single last one of them we find, and any single one who is found to have abused the tax code, welfare system, and/or stolen a social security number, should be placed in prison for 10 years at a minimum, before being deported. But we must also stop the flow of illegal aliens over our weakly guarded borders. This will involve building fences where it will be strategic and effective to place it, and to man the border with National Guard. The Obama administration has place a feeble amount of National Guard at the border, and it is not nearly enough. We must treat this as an invasion and send National Guard to patrol the border. On top of that, we should put in place an E-verify system to discourage the hiring of illegal aliens, taking away much of the incentives for being here.

Point 10: A National Security of Prudence and Strength

This president has been an unmitigated disaster on foreign policy. He has tried to dictate to our closest ally Israel their borders, borders that would be one mile wide if enacted. While selling out our allies, he has been willingly turning a blind eye to the nuclear proliferation of Iran, the strengthening of Syria, and Pakistan’s lack of cooperation in our security interests. On top of all this ignorance to the affairs of the world, he has plunged us headfirst into a war with Libya in which we have no interest in fighting, nor any strategy. Our next Conservative President will have to listen to our generals, and maintain troop levels in Afghanistan, while scaling down operations in Iraq. He will also have to recognize that sometimes, war is the most effective way to protect peace. And he must also be aware that rhetoric is half the battle in national security. Our enemies feared Reagan’s America, simply because he talked tough against them, ad increased our military without going to war (which we ought to be doing now). Perhaps Iran would think twice about nuclear proliferation if we had a President who admonished them for it. We also must adhere to the principle of only going to war when it is absolutely in our own national interests, and we must do so with a strategy and a purpose, or else we will be ineffective and we will waste vast amount of resources. I go more into the ideal Conservative foreign policy here.

Many Republicans have said that Conservatives need to become more moderate if we are to win elections in the future. I vehemently disagree. We must enact the agenda laid out above, or one similar to it, and prove that our values will go the farthest in restoring America’s liberty, security, and prosperity. Otherwise, we will face the collapse of our great nation.

Today, as the beginning of the real race for the nomination began, we need to look at the results of the Ames straw poll and decide what they actually mean in the context of the whole nomination battle. Just a note; I am a huge Rick Perry supporter, so some of this may come off as biased at times. So lets look at what the results mean for each candidate.

Michele Bachmann

While Michele Bachmann may have officially “won” today, I think that overall she came out proving she is weaker with the grassroots then she claims to be. Her campaign claims to have sold 6,000 tickets, and she got fewer votes. One can only assume that she lost some votes that she had brought in to Perry and his unofficial write in campaign, seeing as they are similar and Perry had the momentum today.  However, most news reports won’t focus on that, and she may be able to galvanize the base a little bit, but ultimately, Perry’s entrance is not good news for her.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul has incredible organizing skills and the Paulbots will go almost anywhere vote for him. The fact that he came in second place  is the high point of his campaign. It will be down hill from here.

Tim Pawlenty

Tim Pawlenty kind of managed to come in over the minimum of what he could do. But he was still in a distant third. Ultimately I don’t think much changed for him today. His campaign will continue in a downward spiral before he will quit the race, I’m guessing on the day after the Iowa caucus’ after a dissapointing finish behind Perry, Romney, and Bachmann.

Rick Santorum

Santorum did well enough to justify staying in the race. He may have shown that there is very minor grassroot enthusiasm. But the fact of the matter is, with his loss in 2006 and his social Conservatism, this is just not his year. Add on top of that he has a lack of enthusiasm that rivals Mitch Daniels.

Herman Cain

Herman Cain is a niche candidate. Thats all he is and thats what the straw poll results display. There are enough voters who will support him to justify him staying in the race for a little while longer and I think he will end up a little bit like Tom Tancredo. There is a chance that Huckabee could endorse Cain, seeing as there are many similarities between the two, and that could breathe some life into his campaign.

Rick Perry

Rick Perry was clearly the big winner today, along with Bachmann. But I think Perry will probably dominate the news. I think his campaign should immediately spin the fact that he beat Romney when he wasn’t even on the ballot. I think that within a few weeks Perry will turn all of that momentum into a lead in the polls, over both Romney and Bachmann. I don’t know if he’ll be able to win the nod but I think he has a very good chance.

Mitt Romney

Romney is running a very foolish campaign. He’s largely bypassing Iowa (which played into his poor straw poll results) in favor of New Hampshire and Nevada. This type of campaign has never been successful in the history of Republican party politics. Also, he is trying to play the moderate which will not work for him, but neither will running as a Conservative as that will be another flip-flop. Romney cannot and will not win.

Newt, Huntsman, and McCotter-

All three are done and, quite frankly they were DOA. I think all will stay in for a while, but in all honesty they are completely hopeless candidacies.

I have been waiting months for this day. Today, the next president of the United States entered the fray, Texas Governor Rick Perry. He is one of only two candidates actually running on the idea of Conservatism, and he is the only one with executive experience. He, unlike our Radical-In-Chief, Pres. BO, is an alpha male who will once again remind the world that they should fear us, and will make our enemies shake in their boots while emboldening our allies. He will once again put the word of God in our national debate, and he will stand resolute in the face of the liberal attack machine. aka the Mainstream media. He, as governor, has espoused Conservative values and run one of the most Conservative governments in a long time, proving that Conservatism works. I daresay that with todays announcement, Rick Perry just became the next POTUS.

His announcement, like his governance, was unmistakably Reaganesque. Reagan famously quipped “A recession is when your neighbor loses their job. A depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Jimmy Carter loses his.” Rick Perry similarly stated “Page one of any economic plan to get America working is to give a pink slip to the current resident of the White House.” Ronald Reagan repeatedly said that America’s best days didn’t have to be behind her. He proved to be correct. Rick Perry said  ”It’s time for America to believe again. It’s time to believe that the promise of our future is far greater than even our best days behind us.” Very similar. Ronald Reagan repeatedly said that America was filled with great people and that the Washington “geniuses” were the problem. Rick Perry said today “And I know something: America is not broken. Washington, D.C., is broken!” Rick Perry is incredibly Reaganesque. He will make an incredibly great president. As a side note, he will not be the “next Ronald Reagan”, just as Ronald Reagan was not the “next Calvin Coolidge”.

Addressing the Critics

 As with all Conservatives, there are two groups of critics of Governor Perry. The people to the left of him, and the other Coservatives who support other candidates. I’ll address the crtics on the left first.

Those on the the left and/or middle of the Republican Party criticize Rick Perry as looking and sounding like George W. Bush. This is a ridiculous argument. Bush never called himself a Conservative, but of course Perry has. Bush was born in New Hampshire and lived on a blue-collar gentlemans ranch. Perry was born in Paint Creek, Texas, the son of tenant farmers. The two men are quite a bit different, both in politics and in personality. They call Perry a “cowboy”. This is just proof of the left’s anti-americanism. Cowboys are the epitome of America and all she stands for. Whats wrong with our president being a Cowboy?

Now to address the concerns of Perry’s critics on the right. Most of these critics are Paulbots or Palinites, so dedicated to their candidates that anyone else must not be a real Conservative. I won’t even bother to deal with the first set of critics, seeing as their candidate is crazy as all get out. Now for the Palinites. They have been going around and around about his “weak immigration record”, the gardasil “mandate”, and the trans-texas corridor.  His immigration record, with the exception of his support for the DREAM act, has been incredibly strong. He has called on the feds to do their job and protect the border, and he even touched on the subject during his announcement speech. His views have evolved on immigration to where they are today as being fully supportive of legal immigration but firm on closing the border. And no, it was not so he could run for president. He evolved into these views over a year ago, long before he considered running for president. To quote, Rush Limbaugh “You’ll never see Rick Perry support amnesty. He used to be weak on that but now he’s not.”

The gardasil issue cannot be forgiven, but no candidate will ever be perfect. The trans-texas corridor has been blown competely out of proportion, seeing as when he first intorduced the bill, he paired it with a bill that would have protected people against abuse of eminent domain. Of course that was looked over by the paulbots when attacking Rick Perry. The fact of the matter is compared to cap and trade Pawlenty, medicaid part D/SCHIP Santorum, Green Newt, bats*#@t crazy Paul, liberal Huntsman, ObamneyCare Romney, unreliable Palin, and inexperienced Bachmann, I’d say he’s pretty close to being an ideal candidate, and honestly, more of a pure Conservative than our hero Ronald Reagan.

The VP Pick

Bachmann has been noted as a possible VP if/when Perry was nominated. However, she is fairly far right, and she could never deliver Minnesota to us anyway, so despite her principled Conservatism, I see no upside to her as the choice. Paul Ryan wouldn’t be bad if he could give us Wisconsin, and he would make a great President if Perry were to pass. Marco Rubio of course would be amazing, he would deliver us Florida and help us with hispanics. But in my opinion, the best choice politically would be the amazing new governor of New Mexico, Susanna Martinez. She would deliver us a blue state, help us with hispanics, and provide women with someone to support out of their own sex. Bob McDonnell would be a great choice as well. Any of the above and many more would make an excellent choice to round out a great Conservative ticket.

Rick Perry 2012!!! Let’s make Washington as inconsequential as possible!

With all the back and forth on the budget, there has been much talk over the entitlement spending. Conservatives have recognized that to save these programs which liberals hold so dear, we must cut the spending and reform the programs. But, in my personal opinion, none of the plans went far enough. Far too many people live off of legal plunder and other peoples money, ignoring the time tested American principle of hard work. I understand the argument that these programs are compassionate, but that is just not true, as they are making it harder for jobs to be created, they are forcing up health care costs, and they are spending future generations money. Furthermore, they actually trap entire families in welfare due to the permanent status which people can have with welfare, causing the cycle of poverty to continue, as children often are not taught hard work, as seen throught the black community. if you don’t believe me, read Thomas Sowell. There are some fairly simplistic ways to reform entitlement spending, in a way which would encourage a good work ethic while maintinaing a temporary, fiscally sustainable social safety net.

Medicaid:

For all non-disabled people, we need to turn medicaid into more of a temporary safety net based on unemployment and other mitigating factors. Remember this plan does not change anything for permanently physically or mentally disabled persons. Medicaid must be turned into a 3-5 year (depending on the state) temporary program, and within that it must be turned into a program which pays towards private insurance plans, rather than to the doctors directly, a la Paul Ryan, so as not to unnaturally inflate health care costs. This would provide for a family so as not to face death in times of dire situtations, but would also encourage them to find a new job.

Medicare:

This plan is by far the simplest. As this plan is, in my opinion, not at all necessary at a federal level, we ought to block grant it and turn that sort of power over to the states.

Social Security:

For all seniors under 55, again, a la Paul Ryan, we should allow states, municipalities, localities and individuals to opt-out of the program, and for the people who chose to stay in the program, we need to to vastly raise the retirement age, and hevaily means test the program.

These plans would solve much of our budgetary, and hopefully, social problems through encourazging work while cutting benefits.

In the run up to the 2012 nomination, real Conservatives in our party must choose who we will confer our support to. Many Conservatives look at the so called “wide open” field, and see a space that needs to be filled. They look at the candidates and nothing excites them. They see the front-runner as a RINO north-eastern republican, who wasn’t, isn’t and will never be a Conservative. They see the supposed “Conservative” candidates as either a.) not Conservative or b.) lacking seriously in bona fides and excitement factor. Conservatives such as myself seem to be looking for someone who has a proven, Conservative record in governing, and bringing jobs, liberty and security to their state, all while reigning in the expansion of governmental power and balancing the budget. The other key factor is an ability to strongly communicate our Conservative principles to the people of the United States in an innovative and politically exciting way. In short, Conservatives are looking for either Sarah Palin or “archconservative” (CNN) Rick Perry to get in the race.

These two large-state governors have proven records of standing up to the establishment, taking on the expansion of government, defending faith, family and flag, and bringing jobs and economic growth to their respective states. Both have their problems as well. As Sarah Palin’s record shows itself to the American people, many will be amazed at her forsight on budgetary matters, but many Conservatives will be less thrilled by her somewhat Liberal taxation policies, as well as appointing a Planned Parenthood official to the supreme court in AK. Furthermore, as teh media continues to advance their bogus view of her as uneducated and not serious, the American people unfortunately are beginning to buy into it. This, not her intellegince (as the establishment thinks), is why she will have a hard time getting elected President in 2012. Rick Perry has also done some things that may make some Conservatives uneasy, such as mandating HPV vaccines, and the Trans-Texas corridor, but compared to inventing ObamaCare for Romney, supporting Cap and Trade for Pawlenty, supporting the mandate for Newt, Medicare part D for Santorum, etc., his dalliances with the left are small and inconsistent.

Sarah Palin being, unfortunately for America, destroyed by the media, leaves us one true Conservative candidate, Rick Perry. Under Perry, Texas has passed widespread tort reform, cut taxes, balanced its budget without raising taxes or tapping into the “rainy-day fund”, protected against Illegal Immigrants, and become the strongest and among the freest economies in America. He has added 37% more jobs to his state, many of which are leaving the oppresive California for Texas, because of his common-sense Conservative ideals which have given power back to the people of his state. Rick Perry would also be a valuable addition to the discussions on Illegal Immigration, which he has been incredibly strong on, and Social Security, which he has suggested that the federal government should allow states to opt out of. Rick Perry, if he jumps in, would be the pro-freedom, pro-jobs, pro-security, pro-America, states rights candidate that America needs, and that Conservatives need.

Rick Perry has ignited a wildfire among Conservatives, proving his capability to dominate the debate and take our party rightward. In the words of the great El Rushbo “There’s no way you’re gonna hear Rick Perry supporting amnesty in any way, shape, manner, or form. He’s solid on that, plus pro-life. Rick Perry stands in opposition to inside the Beltway Washington elites, I don’t care what party they are.” We need Rick Perry. America needs Rick Perry.

The rallying cry for Tea Partiers ought to be: Perry/Bachmann 2012! Run, Rick, Run!

Your friend and fellow Conservative in the fight

                                                 –Toby Calvert-Lee

The potential 2012 candidates have been going back and forth over who is a true Conservative. As I find this maddening, I thought it was time to discern who is a true Conservative and who is not.

1.       Mitt Romney-Mitt Romney can talk a good game, that is clear. But his record is one that proves he never considered himself a conservative, but rather a moderate or even a liberal Republican. Anyone who believes that he is a true Conservative must soon realize that he is an Obama-light presenting no new changes and keeping government expansion on the same course.

2.       Sarah Palin- Sarah Palin is clearly more Conservative than Mitt. With that said, her commitment too many conservative values can be questioned by her mixed record as Governor of Alaska. She appointed a former Planned Parenthood member to the Supreme Court of AK, and she often promoted more burdensome regulations. If the primary comes down to Palin-Romney as many expect it too, however, Palin would absolutely be the better choice as although her record is mixed, she at least is a Conservative, whereas Romney is a statist.

3.       Newt Gingrich- Newt has promoted common sense Conservative ideas over the years, but he has also shown some dangerous tendencies towards globalism. Also, while he may be described as a Conservative, he is certainly not a conservative in his lifestyle, as seen by his long trail of ex-wives and, more importantly, his long trail of affairs. He also has shown far too many sympathies to the progressive environmental “red” movement.

4.       Jim DeMint- As one of the most committed Conservative lawmakers, he is clearly a true Constitutional Conservative. He has fought for Conservative reforms for years that will limit government and restore liberty to America. There is very little fault that I can find with him (perhaps besides his vote for the PATRIOT act), so obviously, he is a true Conservative.

5.  Mike Huckabee- Mike Huckabee is NOT a Conservative. The three legged stool of Conservatism is often referenced (the three legs being Social-Foreign Policy-Fiscal Conservatism, all being equally important), and Huckabee is liberal on the Fiscal side of things, silent on the Foreign Policy side of things, and good on MOST Social issues. This is a very, very unstable stool, leaning heavily on the shortened leg of Social Conservatism, obviously making the “stool” topple over. If we elect Mike Huckabee as president, our party, and furthermore our country, will fall apart at the seams.

6. Tim Pawlenty- A moderate who has supported pro-gay bills, and is radically green, with a fiercely pro-establishment record. Clearly not a Conservative. Nothing more needs to be said.

7. Mitch Daniels- I mentioned earlier the three-legged stool of Conservatism and Mitch Daniels seems to have overlooked one leg, the Social leg. He says we need to call a truce on Social issues. NO, no, and a gain no. As Conservatives, we must encompass all aspects of Conservatism. Ronald Reagan never called a truce on Social issues. You cannot be a Reaganite, true Conservative by looking over some aspects of it, just like you can’t claim to believe in the Bible, but choose not to believe in certain parts of it. To be a Conservative, you must believe in all aspects of our great ideology.

8. Haley Barbour- Haley has some Conservative values, and has been a successful governor, but there are certain issues I just cannot support him because of. For one, he campaigned for Ford over Reagan, and again John Connally over Reagan. He is an ex-lobbyist, and the quintessential insider, leading us to have to question his ethics and commitment to the American people.

9.  Ron Paul- Ron Paul may be enticing to many Conservatives because of his strong belief in a limited government and free-market economics. He definitely is Conservative in those areas, and indeed , I find myself believing he would make an excellent treasury secretary. But his foreign policy is weak, and based upon the Old-rights non-interventionism, which cannot be applied in the modern world. While it is a Conservative ideal to want to fight wars fiscally responsibly and constitutionally, without any foreign aid, his foreign policy would weaken our nation indefinitely. (The Neocons are even worse though)

These candidates, in my opinion are the most likely to run and/or win. They have their good qualities, but few can be characterized as Conservative. Absolutely none of them are Reagan.

Conservatives seem to go back and forth over what is the best kind of Conservative foreign policy, the Neoconservative policy or the Paleoconservative policy. One would have us intervene in everyone’s business, and the other would keep our military entirely out of all other nations. Both sides are wrong, and we don’t need a Neocon or a Paleocon foreign policy, but instead, a True Conservative one. By True Conservative, I mean one with no prefixes or suffixes, one content with just being called Conservative.

Neoconservatives have a foreign policy that traditionally would have been a phenomenon of the left. Their policy promotes intervention where it is not needed, such as in Germany, where we have a large troop presence, and in much of the rest of the world where we are not needed nor wanted. Their foreign policy would put security over liberty, a mistake that would ensure the demise of our Republic. It is, in fact, not a Conservative policy at all, and instead, a policy which many leftists would happily sign on to. We need a foreign policy that will involve liberty-oriented maneuvers, and rational deployment based on defense.

Paleoconservative are believers in the Old Rights isolationism. This cannot be exercised in today’s world of terrorists and other subversive enemies. Our military must be recognized as a force for good, not to promote our values but rather our national defense. They are wrong simply because of the fact that they say our military cannot be used at all around the world. Their heroes such as Ron Paul claim to support a foreign policy which is based on sovereignty, not the promotion of democracy. But in practice, they believe that wars such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the possible war in Iran are not beneficial to our defense. 

As you will notice, both sides of this Conservative debate have strong allies on the left, from Joe Lieberman to Russ Feingold. This would lead me to believe that neither side is sufficiently Conservative to deserve that title. Neocons abandon the old Conservative maxim “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”-Ben Franklin, and the Paleocons abandon the Conservative ideal of keeping America exceptional.

A true Conservative foreign policy would recognize the truth on both sides of this Conservative debate, and would make sure that our foreign policy promotes America, and defends American liberty. A true Conservative national defense would keep our military strong, so as to promote “Peace through strength”-Ronald Reagan, while relieving ourselves of our involvement in most of the 180 nations which we have high troop levels in. It would recognize the threat posed by radical Islam, and would seek to destroy it, through technology and military force. A true Conservative national defense would remove us from the U.N. and secure the border with a massive electronic fence. It would increase our militaries size, while keeping many of our extraneous troops stationed in pointless areas such as Germany at home. It would fight the enemy with more common sense, not going down the Obama path of more troops in Afghanistan, when an infantry war has never been successful in that terrain. It would seek to streamline the military by exploring alternative technology such as the missile deployment system in Afghanistan. Finally, it would be fiscally responsible, at all times making sure that every single last military program was able to be funded, otherwise we would see the collapse of our military.

We need to pursue a Conservative foreign policy which will serve America best. Believe it or not, both Ron Paul and Dick Cheney are wrong on foreign policy, and clearly, neither of them or their followers are true Conservatives. We need the foreign policy advocated by true Conservative heroes such as Jim DeMint, Rand Paul, and Sarah Palin. We need a real Conservative foreign policy.

This is a quick post: I would simply like to clarify a mistake I made when I was typing my last post. I am not sure how, but for some reason I said that Newt Gingrich would be the best presidential choice in 2012. This is wrong.

Also, Rand Paul would be a better VP choice than Allen West (who will be president one day)