Monthly Archives: August 2012

“A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.”- William F. Buckley Jr., “Our Mission Statement” National Review

Conservatives probably never thought they would hear these names together, but here is the possible new template: Goldwater.  Reagan.  Romney.  If this lineup was announced during the republican primaries it would have been laughed off the stage.  But Romney, in the vein of a true reformer, has now thrown this still uncertain election for a loop, while simultaneously performing a vital service to his party – and, more importantly, his country.

The current polling data showing such a close election is an indicator of the problems facing the country, and the public’s lack of faith in both parties’ abilities to solve these problems.  In such times of trouble, a leader shows his true commitment and resolve by taking a stance simply saying “no more.”  Both Reagan and Goldwater ran for President and lost, Reagan in his primary challenge against sitting President Gerald Ford, and Goldwater in his loss to President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.  Although Goldwater’s loss was on a much larger scale in a gruesome general election blowout, their defeats set the stage for a conservative revolution that changed the country for the better.  With Romney’s selection of Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate, that stage is set again, win or lose.

In 1964, Senator Barry Goldwater was nominated as the Republican candidate for President.  Goldwater served as the Conservative standard bearer in elected office during the revival of Burkean Conservatism led by Russell Kirk and William Buckley, Jr. in the late 1950s.  Senator Goldwater’s strong opposition to the welfare state being crafted by President Johnson and a stronger stance against the Soviets gave the media cannon fodder to paint Goldwater as a radical and served up the blue print for President Johnson’s campaign.  His defeat was massive, which in turn lead to huge losses for Republicans in the House and the Senate.  But clearing out these older Republican stalwarts helped pave the way for those who believed in the conservatism Goldwater preached, a mantle soon taken up by Ronald Reagan with his election as governor of California in 1967.

Reagan made it no secret he held presidential aspirations, which soon came to a head in his primary challenge of President Gerald Ford in 1976.  Challenging a sitting president within the same party was not a new idea, but certainly abnormal.  Reagan felt the party had diverted from the conservative ideology emphasizing the importance of the individual, personal responsibility and smaller government.  Republican presidents Nixon and Ford were certainly more in line with these expressions than McGovern or Carter, but Reagan did not see the same commitment that was needed in a world facing an epidemic of socialism.  Reagan of course conceded to President Ford, who then lost to Carter.  But the table was set for 1980, when a grueling primary took place between the establishment candidate George H.W. Bush and the conservative Reagan, who like Goldwater was painted as a radical war monger, not to mention stupid.  Reagan’s victory over Bush and then President Carter led to a first term presidency that ushered in a plan implementing broad tax cuts, a return to self-government, and a defense buildup that yielded a decade of prosperity and global dominance for the United States it has not matched since.

President Reagan and Barry Goldwater at the White House. Perhaps Messrs. Romney and Ryan will stand at the same podium. (Image: Washington Post)

Which brings us to the selection of Congressman Paul Ryan as the #2 on the Romney ticket.  Instead of taking the cautious route that has so far defined the Romney Campaign, Mr. Romney recognized the “vanilla” option of Governor Pawlenty or Senator Portman would do the country no good in such an intense and important election.  To fight fire with gasoline, he chose the ideological leader of his party to help lead the charge against an increasingly progressive Democratic party.  Mr. Ryan’s presence on the ticket instantly brought the campaign back to the important issues that face the country- massive debt, entitlement reform, a loss of individualism- and brought us back from such nonsensical sound bites as “Romney Hood” and “Obamaloney.”  Paul Ryan enters the race as the most serious and mature of the four men on the ticket.  His ability to vocalize the conservative argument for remedies to put the country back on the right track put the Obama campaign on its heels; rightly so, considering Mr. Ryan’s acute argumentative skills.

Representative Ryan’s placement on the ticket is the first of a true conservative Republican since Reagan in 1980.  As Joe Scarborough noted, it will truly excite conservatives in a presidential race that looks increasingly more like it will be decided by whose base shows up in larger numbers.  The choice of Ryan has Democrats and the liberal wing of the party salivating over the chance to go after conservatism and its supposed “cruelty”.  But what they call cruelty, I call realism.  This is the very argument conservatives want as well, and everybody in the country is a winner for it.

The distortion of Ryan’s plan specifically regarding Medicare is par for the course given the Obama campaign’s tactics this season.  Despite the indignation and collective outcry from conservatives, whining won’t get you anywhere.  To borrow from Brian De Palma, the party can complain all they want about how they do now approve of the Obama campaign’s methods, and the Obama campaign rightly would reply “Well you’re not from Chicago.”    

The current line, collectively embraced by not only the Obama campaign but the mainstream media, is that the election of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will destroy Medicare “as we know it.”  But that’s the point so many miss- if nothing is done, Medicare – with its $39 trillion (a conservative estimate) in unfunded liabilities over the next two decades – will not exist as “we know it”, because anyone under 40 will never be able to benefit from it unless changes are actually made.  But if they do succeed in their attacks and get President Obama reelected, there will be nowhere for the progressive ideology to hide.  Another four years would continue without serious reform proposed for our exploding entitlement programs- Medicare alone this year ran a deficit of $288 Billion.  This uncertainty, along with the ominously looming implementation of Obamacare and the effect it will have on small businesses, will ensure the continuations of our flat line economy.  The debt will grow, and the people of the United States will be left behind for the whims of an ideologue whose master plan going forward is to raise taxes on two percent of the country.  If this is the case, Ryan will arise as the new leader of the Republican Party, plan in hand for a conservative revival of his country’s founding principles.

The Romney-Ryan ticket will make its appeal to the American people over the next three months.  As opposed to 2008, Republicans are now the reformers.  The days of President Bush are behind the party, never more so represented by the selection of the fiscal conservative Ryan as Vice-President.  They will make an appeal for smaller government and fiscal prudence, and emphasize the importance of personal responsibility for Americans; these tenets have served as the basis for the American idea since its creation.  All of this will be done to prevent in Mr. Ryan’s words “the most predictable crisis in U.S. history.”  If the ticket is elected, Mr. Romney will have his shot at doing so.  If not, Governor Mitt Romney and his campaign will be remembered for their attempt to put forward drastic solutions to solve our monumental problems, only to have these solutions buried in thick mud of divisive campaign politics.  Governor Romney will have done his part putting conservatism back in the mainstream, but Mr. Ryan will march on, like Reagan before him, with plans for the country awaiting the embrace of the American people.  Let’s hope that wait is a short one.

– John P. Burns

“It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth. I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth. I didn’t feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.”– Neil Armstrong, First Man to walk on the Moon

The NASA rover Curiosity, currently conducting the exploration of our neighboring Mars, will receive diminishing coverage as we move farther away in time (and space!) from its landing on the planet’s surface.  Though this is understandable considering the troubled times in our country and the length and extensive scope of the mission, the greater good represented by Curiosity far supersedes the effect of the scientific readings it transmits home- barring shocking evidence of extra-terrestrial life.

Aside from the nasty, brutish and repugnant course our current presidential election campaign has taken, there is still the occasional mention of the American people and their capacity to achieve greatness.  While this can be viewed as pandering to the electorate, there is still truth behind such words no matter who makes the claim.  Curiosity and NASA as a whole represent this optimism- so long as the space program exists in an environment that will advance our knowledge of the galaxy.

Currently, we do not live in such a country.  The mismanagement of our federal and local governments’ fiscal state has led our elected officials down a path of chaos, infighting and drastic budget measures that no one can agree on.  NASA budget reductions have been so extensive that the United States has shut down its shuttle program on the order of the president.  Two months ago, a DRUDGEREPORT headline read Outsourced in Space, reporting accurately that a member of the best and brightest in our space program looked to Russia for a boost to the moon, as opposed to racing them to it on our own rockets.

Despite the abundant evidence in which humanity has been aided throughout its existence by the progression of exploration- from the advancements made in ship building and navigation in 15^th century Europe through the Apollo missions of the mid twentieth century- our Federal government has tightened the reins on our chariots of fire.  The Curiosity rover cost $2.5B to build, mere pittance compared to the Federal government budget of $3.8 Trillion.  This sounds like a mighty big bargain for a 1 ton space explorer that will travel a Martian desert never before seen by man, nor occupied by a carbon based life form.  Its main purpose is to send back readings and information to our scientists to uncover if in fact Mars could have ever been populated by a living being.  This is important, as our NASA scientists view Mars as we all should: what’s next. 

NASA scientists celebrate after the successful landing of the Mars rover Curiosity. These men and women acknowledge the endless possibilities of space exploration. (ABC NEWS)

Mars is what’s next on the map, and that map is incredibly large.  Cynics often refer to space as “the endless void”, but it is truly endless in possibility.  Endless in the benefits it can yield for the human race.  Endless in the worlds we can discover, and what that discovery can mean for our safety and happiness.  Endless in what we can accomplish together as a people, giving humanity something to strive for; a common cause that can bring all countries and people alike together.  Our generation will most likely never reach these high minded goals, but the advancement in technology yielded by such research will accelerate humanity’s progression.  And ultimately, our own selfish need for accomplishment cannot be what drives our thirst for knowledge.  The responsibility to lead in this pursuit falls on each succeeding generation, to then ensure its extension for the next.

There are matters our federal government must turn their attention to financially, and with some hard work and a lot of luck we will actually elect officials that will face those issues.  There are changes that can be made that modify our entitlement programs that can make them solvent, defense modifications (not across the board cuts) that can help strengthen our security while simultaneously tightening its belt, and ultimately revamp our government so it is not weighed down by bureaucracy and expose our politicians to a dreaded epidemic of efficiency.  NASA must not be stifled, as this attempt will then suffocate the progression of mankind.  China hopes to be on the moon by 2020.  The United States could be there in a year, if we so choose.

The image of jubilation in the Curiosity control room when it safely landed on Mars was not just an overreaction from underpaid NASA scientists.  It was a signal that humanity’s thinkers still care about what it can achieve in our never ending quest for knowledge.  The United States still leads the world in technology; it is our solemn duty to use that technology for the good of the planet.  The best way to do so would be to reach the next closest one.

– John P. Burns

“I and others consider the United States ‘the sanctuary’ for the future of the world.  It is a big responsibility for a President, but you should know the world relies on your good judgment and wisdom.” – message from Pope John Paul II to President Ronald Reagan, December 15, 1981.

With Mitt Romney leaving the domestic camping trail for the high seas of international diplomacy last week, an underlying feeling of unease follows in his wake.  Despite what the Obama campaign would have you believe if the Governor were suddenly to disappear from our shores, things did not get better for the American economy.  GDP growth this last quarter was at 1.5%, the lowest it has been in the “Great Recovery” of the Obama presidency.  This number presents little evidence that our economic outlook will be any brighter in November than it is right now, plagued with a continual unemployment rate over 8% and another downturn in consumer activity. 

While this dismal outlook seems par for the course since the financial collapse of 08-09, “adjustments” made in last year’s congressional budget deal to combat our self-imposed fiscal calamity threatens the future of the United States far more than a high unemployment rate.   The guillotine of sequestration that currently hangs over the figurative head of the Defense Department will slash the department’s budget by almost $500 billion over the next ten years, and severely change the way in which the American military will function.  If we fail to elect a responsible executive this November, and even more so a competent congress, then the United States’ ability to lead in an increasingly dangerous world will be diminished beyond recognition – leaving our own shores and those of our allies in danger of threats we cannot deter.

An approach to this problem for Mr. Romney can be found in Martin and Allantine Anderson’s Reagan’s Secret War.  The book describes President Reagan’s acknowledgement of the inherently dangerous affect a weakened U.S. economy has on our ability to lead in the world, and what he did to take that challenge head on.

Upon entering office in 1981, President Reagan was faced with double digit inflation, a diminished military, and an incredibly powerful Soviet Union whose war machine grew stronger every day.  Despite the phony representation of his policies by the liberal media and Carter administration, Reagan was in no way a radical or war monger.  In fact, he felt the urgent need to decrease the number of, and one day eliminate, nuclear weapons between the two superpowers.  But he realized this task could not be achieved if the U.S.S.R. held the advantage militarily, as there would be no need for its leaders to come to the table to negotiate any concession to the United States.  President Reagan knew a military buildup was the only way to even the playing field; to have the ability to strengthen the country’s defense, however, he first had to restore America’s path to prosperity.  To do so, he set in a motion a strong plan to reignite the struggling economy with the free market principles catered to enable its growth. 

If Governor Romney were to formulate an overarching argument of the urgency to enact his own policies to restore America’s promise, the example set by President Reagan early in his first term should serve as a blueprint.  As William Kristol noted months ago, it is incredibly hard to defeat an incumbent president with a micro argument of “small government vs. big government.”  After his trip abroad, Mr. Romney can return to the campaign trail connecting a healthy U.S economy and stabilized government to the fortunes of the free people of the world.

Former Polish President and Solidarity movement leader Lech Walesa meets with Governor Romney on his visit. The Nobel Peace Prize winner endorsed Mr. Romney’s candidacy for President of the United States. (ABC News)

Governor Romney’s trip was far from the “disaster” spun by the Obama administration and the increasingly embarrassing main stream media shucking for the President’s re-election.  In fact his speeches in Israel, and specifically Poland, reminds our citizenry and our allies how close our futures are tied to one another. 

In Israel, he correctly cited the difference of culture between the Israelis and Palestinians as the reason for the disparity in fortune between the two groups of people.  Israel is a country heavily influenced by western culture; it boasts a free government and free market economy, which serves as a stark contrast not only to Palestine, but the Islamist theocracies that occupy the savage Middle East desert.  In Warsaw, he delivered a powerful speech recounting Poland’s position on the front lines of World War II and more importantly the Cold War, when Poland broke free from the Iron Curtain and continues to exist today as a thriving free society.  “In an oppressive world, Poland stands as an example and defender of freedom.”  As he further stated in Warsaw:

“After that stay in England, I visited the State of Israel- a friend of your country and mine.  It’s been a trip to three places far apart on the map.  But for an American, you can’t get much closer to the ideals and convictions of my own country.  Our nations belong to the great fellowship of democracies.  We speak the same language of freedom and justice.  We uphold the right of every person to live in peace.”

These two democracies are bordered by oppressive regimes in their part of the world.  It is the responsibility the United States to help ensure their safety, and that of other countries like them. 

In the face of the defense sequester, the next president and congress would be well served to remember the old Latin adage si vi pacem para bellum: if you wish for peace, prepare for war.  Any measures that can be taken to strengthen our military to deter conflict abroad are inconceivable given the current state of our economy and further engrossing federal debt.  If our economy continues to muddle along as it has under President Obama, the revenue of the federal government will be severely limited, while welfare programs are expanded and entitlement programs remain insolvent.  As a result, our military advantage would soon be erased, and render our leadership role in the world ineffective, if not non-existent. 

The people certainly want better job opportunities and smaller government, but restoring such promises in our country serve a much greater purpose.  Our economic engine must again be revived through free market principles so we may lead the free societies of the world, and preserve the cause of human liberty that has defined this nation over the last three centuries.  That should be Mr. Romney’s grand argument for change.  He has less than 100 days to make it.           

– John P. Burns