First, full disclosure. I am a Conservative Reagan Republican woman. I find it a bit sad, and even a bit comical, that I feel the need to disclose my gender. But it seems that a small group of males on Redstate have turned gender into an issue in comments they have made on two recent posts. I rarely post and seldom comment on Redstate. But, I do read posts and comments here, on a daily basis. High quality of writing and standards on Redstate is what I found so attractive about this site in the first place. An ugly gender war waged in Redstate comments is not attractive. It is offensive to me as a Redstate woman and, I believe, it is offensive to the vast majority of males on Redstate.

I think it’s prudent to get a couple of issues out in the open, the issues which lurk beneath derogatory comments on Redstate that are the subject of this diary. Did Sarah Palin damage her political future by agreeing to speak at a “Tea Party Convention” in Nashville? Nobody knows the answer to that question, yet.  Moreover, Erick Erickson did not say she had damaged her political future with her decision to speak in Nashville, he merely posed a legitimate question about it. Is the ”Tea Party Convention” a bad idea? Well, it is definitely a controversial idea, simply because of the name chosen for the convention. It conjures up nightmarish images of a third party movement breaking out in Nashville and Palin leading it. I am of the strong opinion that Palin is standing on her Reagan-Republican roots. Nobody in their right mind wants a third party movement launched in this pivotal election year.

I agree wholeheartedly with opinions expressed by Erick Erickson, that not everyone involved with the tea party movement is in it for pristine patriotic reasons. It doesn’t take the wisdom of Solomon to spot the infiltrators who see it as a means to their own ulterior (personal, political and/or financial) ends. The tea party movement is the biggest thing to hit the American political spectrum in many decades. 0pportunists are coming out of the woodwork to cash in on it. So, it’s Buyer Beware time.

I’m aware that this site is owned by a sponsor of the CPAC convention and that Palin’s decision to skip the CPAC convention, while agreeing to speak elsewhere, probably spawned hard feelings among Republican Party stalwarts.  I believe that Erick Erickson’s question, about whether Palin had unintentionally damaged her political future by agreeing to speak in Nashville, was an honest question that needed to be asked and not a product of sour grapes because she is skipping CPAC. 

My impression of Redstate was and is, that this is a site for Republicans who are not happy with business as usual in the Republican Party. So, when the old Republican political machine sputters into life in comments on Redstate, and attacks Palin’s recent decisions, it’s back to ”business as usual.” The very fact that Palin was not a Republican political machine insider in Alaska is what makes her so appealing to supporters of the grassroots tea party movement.  When attacks are made against Republicans who distance themselves from “business as usual”–through the avenue of comments on Redstate–it is not a pretty sight, not here or anywhere else.

What did New Gingrich intend to accomplish this morning? Did he merely cross swords with Sarah Palin, his potential rival for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012? Or, did he cross the Rubicon, making conflict with Reagan-Conservative Republicans in all fifty states inevitable? This morning, on a Fox morning talk-show, Gingrich arrogantly scolded Conservative Republicans for contributing money and moral support to Hoffman, NY-23, conservative candidate for Congress.

Gingrich–a Hamiltonian nationalist if there ever was one–suddenly morphed, before my very eyes, into a Tenth Amendment states’ righter, demanding that conservatives around the country keep their noses out of the business of a New York congressional election. According to Gingrich, New Yorkers chose Dede, the progressive-liberal Republican, as their candidate, the clear implication of his words being: Reagan-Conservative Republicans in American can just shut up and take a hike.

But, wait a minute, was it just New Yorkers who chose Dede? Not quite. The National Republican Party annointed Dede as its candidate of choice for NY-23 and opened up its hard little progressive heart and big money bag to Dede, an infamously liberal Republican.  

My take on Gingrich is that he is good with words and doesn’t toss them around casually. I think he deliberately chose the words he used this morning on the Fox talk-show. But what I haven’t decided yet is, what was his real objective? Was he attempting to drive Sarah Palin the Maverick Republican from the Republican herd for endorsing Hoffman? If so, that would limit his “fighting words” this morning to a battle between him and Palin for the hearts, the minds, and votes of Republicans.

Or, did Gingrich intentionally challenge Republican Party unity? Did he cross the Rubicon? Did he declare war on the conservative base of the Republican Party which is showing gritty determination to endorse true conservative Republicans running for office in all fifty states?

I don’t know how the majority of conservatives come down on Gingrich’s position on Dede, on Hoffman, and on Palin. But I do know this. I don’t know take kindly to being lectured to by a man who has just endorsed a flaming-liberal candidate, precisely the kind of Republican I don’t give a damn for and would not give a dime to support. I don’t know if Gingrich crossed the Rubicon as far as most conservatives are concerned. But he crossed the Rubicon, cast the die, as far as this Reagan-Conservative Republican is concerned.

This question is posed and pondered by Jonah Goldberg in his introduction to Liberal Fascism. I began reading his book a couple of days ago and soon found myself delving into French Revolution history because Benito Mussolini, Goldberg says, built his fascist policies on those the Jacobins put into operation while they ruled France during their Reign of Terror. Goldberg devotes his first chapter to the rise and fall of Mussolini who coined the term “totalitarian.” I learned from Goldberg that, while Mussolini was a fascist’s fascist, he also was first, foremost, and finally a socialist. Ah, the plot thickens: A fascist can also be a socialist. But, what does fascist-socialism have to do with contemporary American politics? Plenty, Goldberg says. I agree, because, as Goldberg points out, in a fascist society everybody belongs to the State, everyone is taken care of by the State, everything is in the State, and nothing can be against the State.

This has a familiar ring to it. This sounds like what Barack Obama might have in mind for this country, judging by the kind of Big Brother, intrusive, all-powerful government he champions. Could a fascist-socialist society be the kind of “transformation” that Obama repeatedly warns is coming down the pike for America? I fear that it could be.

The term liberal fascism seems an odd combination of words, until Goldberg explains what he means by it: For the classical liberal (think Thomas Jefferson) there can be no Utopia on Earth, only in the afterlife promised by God. To be a classical liberal in America one must believe in God, believe that God is the source of all power, authority, and rights and that ultimate sovereignty is vested in the citizens of the nation. For a liberal fascist, however, the all-powerful State (read centralized national government) is the source of all power, authority, and rights and individual rights are swallowed up by the State. That is, the State (the centralized national government) is the Golden Calf worshiped by liberal fascists who believe that ultimate sovereignty is vested in the government (the Golden Calf). If you doubt that they believe this, think about what happened at recent Town Hall meetings. Time after time, pompous elected representatives looked down their noses with contempt at Americans who dared question the policies their representatives are proposing and trying to implement. The same kind of contempt, emanting from similar sources, is heaped on Americans who attend Tea Parties and on those who marched on Washington on September 12.

Based on the argument Jonah Goldberg makes in Liberal Fascism, it seems obvious to me that America’s classical liberals are attending Tea Parties and Town Hall meetings. America’s liberal fascists are behind the effort to transform this country into a society in which everything is in the State, nothing is out of the State and, as the Town Hall meetings made clear, nobody can dare come against the State. Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism serves to expose the hyprocisy of those in America who hide behind the liberal label while pursuing a fascist-socialist agenda. Quite clearly, the exposure could not be timelier.

It’s a good rule of thumb to learn something about an author before taking what he/she says at face value. Elbert Hubbard was a Socialist and a Humanist whose belief system informed his writings, including his ode to independent action that leads to collective success, known as “A Message to Garcia”. In 1893 Hubbard stopped selling soap, left his wife and children behind in Illinois and moved to East Aurora, New York to live with his mistress, Alice Moore, a Transcendentalist and Humanist. Hubbard embraced Moore’s beliefs. In 1894 he traveled to England and sought out William Morris, a Karl Marx enthusiast and founder of the Socialist League. Hubbard was impressed with Morris’s socialist experiment known as the Arts and Crafts Movement. In 1894 Hubbard launched a socialist experiment in East Aurora, called Roycroft Arts and Crafts, and founded Roycroft Press which published The Philistine, in which “A Message to Garcia” appeared in 1899.

By the time Hubbard penned the essay that made him rich and famous, he had long since turned his back on traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs. Humanists have no need for God because they are their own gods and are responsibile for their own destinies. Hubbard lived by a code that extolled rugged independent acts and persistence. So we have Rowan, the hero of “A Message to Garcia.” Hubbard praises Rowan’s instant, uncomplaining, independent action when given a message by President McKinley to carry to a Cuban revolutionary leader whose exact location in Cuba is unknown. Rowan treks alone and on foot through mountainous terrain to find General Garcia. He soon finds him, delivers the message, and emerges without fanfare from his ordeal. The war Garcia is fighting is of little interest to Hubbard as he tells the story of Rowan. The Cuban revolutionaries were winning their war against Spain before the United States entered it, but no matter. The opportunistic nature of America’s entry into the war does not interest Hubbard, yet the war resulted in the United States acquiring three new territories, Hawaii, Guam, and the Philippines.

Hubbard’s essay attained fame as a great motivational piece. But what was Hubbard’s motivation for writing it? The answer is contained in his essay. He wanted to show how independent action and stoic determination are necessary to lift Socialism up and make it thrive–in America, presumably. Hubbard asks, rhetorically, “If men will not act for themselves, what will they do when the benefit of their effort is for all?” In “A Message to Garcia,” Hubbard’s Rowan is the ultimate Humanist who, with nothing but his own perseverance, succeeds. But, above all, Hubbard’s Rowan is the ultimate Socialist who acts obediently, unhesitatingly, and independently to further Socialism. Elbert Hubbard did not hold in high regard those who were called “conservatives” in his day. He is quoted as saying, ”A conservative is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run.” Speaking as a conservative woman, I find it instructive to bear in mind what Hubbard said about conservatives as we contemplate his essay, ”A Message for Garcia.”

The Teddy Kennedy Story:  The Story of His Life

Teddy always got what Teddy wanted.

Except for once.

The grim reaper arrived before his vote in the Senate for Obama Health Care did.  And America breathed a big sigh of relief.

The end