45 Years Later – It’s Still “A Time For Choosing”

Originally broadcast 45 years ago, Reagan’s words are as true today as they were then.  Sure, the Soviet Union has fallen (thanks to him).  Sure, tax rates are a little lower (again, thanks to him).  However, the ideas that an ex-Democrat spoke of 45 years still hold true.

With Barack Obama and a leftist-controlled Congress attempting to control every little part of our lives, NOW truly is “A Time for Choosing”.

Sphere: Related Content

Margaret Thatcher’s Birthday

Today is the birthday of the Right Honourable Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, PC, FRS; first woman Prime Minister of HM United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; co-architect of the renewal of the UK and British conservatism; hero of the Cold War.

Sphere: Related Content

The Reagan Myth???

Whether at Q&O or The Next Right, we at Delmarva Dealings have always been a fan of Jon Henke.  Unfortunately, today’s piece over at The Next Right forces us to examine several factors in evaluating future Henke commentary on the future direction of the GOP and the conservative movement.  Perhaps:

• I’m simply too old (I was born in 1960).

• Henke is too young to adequately grasp the history of the modern conservative movement (Jon was in kindergarten when I was knocking on doors for Reagan in 1976).

• Henke has swallowed the foolishness of political “branding” and abandoned his (former?) libertarian philosophy.

I always considered Henke to be a better student of history:

The conservative movement that arose in the 60′s and 70′s reached maturity in the 1980′s.  That period became the conservative movement’s frame of reference; the experiences, lessons and skills learned up to that point became the Republican Party’s hammer, and when all you have is a hammer…

Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Ronald Reagan’s Birthday

Today is the 98th birthday of Ronald Reagan, 40th President of the United States and winner of the Cold War.

A few weeks before the 1964 Presidential election, private citizen Ronald Reagan spoke to the nation about “A Time for Choosing”.

[googlevideo:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1777069922535499977]

Powered by ScribeFire.

Sphere: Related Content

Sarah Palin and Margaret Thatcher

The media, along with some nominally conservative elitists, want Sarah Palin’s head on a plate.  Why?  Simply because a politically and intellectually more mature Sarah Palin could ring the death knell of both the new faux moderate left AND so many Reagan wannabes.  They believe it’s better to murder her now.

John O’Sullivan provides an interesting comparison between Palin and a true conservative giant – Margaret Thatcher.  O’Sullivan is dead on.  However, if Palin is to emerge as “the next Ronald Reagan” she needs to start working NOW.  She can start by reading a few books.

I realize that anti-intellectual populism is in vogue right now among many on the fringes of the conservative movement.  Unfortunately, these people tend to forget one very important fact – we are about core principles and the IDEAS to apply those principles to our current state of affairs.

The George W. Bush’s and the Tom DeLay’s of the world have put us in our current position by pandering, looking for short cuts, and outright abandonment of those core conservative principles.  Neither Ronald Reagan, nor Margaret Thatcher, did that.  Reagan not only adhered to core principles, he knew WHY he believed in those principles.  Reagan was a voracious reader.  Reagan had Heritage.  Thatcher had Keith Joseph and was one of the founders of the Centre for Policy Studies.  Thatcher had actually read Hayek’s Constitution of Liberty, and understood it.

Palin needs to prepare herself intellectually for the fight ahead.  Do not misinterpret what I am saying.  I am not claiming that Palin is stupid.  Quite the opposite.  Palin has almost the entire package.  She’s bright, charasmatic, and attractive.  Her public speaking and debating skills could stand some polish; but not at  the expense of her inherent charm.  There is no doubt that she is conservative.  However, until she develops her own intellectual framework for WHY she believes what she does Palin will be unable to defend her ideas.  This could make her look foolish.  It could also allow her to wind up taking the dark path of “big government conservatism”, an oxymoron if ever there was one.

Thatcher not only knew what she believed, but why.  This was why she was considered such a threat by the Tory wet’s (a British euphemism for squishes or RINO’s if you prefer).  A Sarah Palin who depends on “advisers” rather than her own intellectual discovery may one day be elected President; but would be a disasterous leader.  A Sarah Palin who continues to take her own path, by developing her own intellectual framework, may one day be worthy of legitimate comparison to Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

Sphere: Related Content

Margaret Thatcher’s Birthday

Today is the 87th birthday of the Right Honourable Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher, LG, OM, PC, FRS; first woman Prime Minister of HM United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; co-architect of the renewal of the UK and British conservatism; hero of the Cold War.

Sphere: Related Content

Are We Next in the Destruction of Personal Liberty?

The United Kingdom, birthplace of John Locke and Edmund Burke, mother of constitutional democracy is poised to make yet another stab at the heart of individual freedom.  According to the Times, PM Gordon Brown’s government will introduce legislation that, among other things, requires identification to purchase a cell phone.

Those of us in America may look quizzically across the Atlantic and say “So what?”.  A database of over 72 million cell phone users in the UK could well be a useful tool against terrorism.  Yes it could, but at what cost?

As I have noted multiple times since the tragic attacks of September 11, 2001 – if we are willing to give up our personal liberty in an attempt to fight terrorism, the terrorists have won.  It seems that the terrorists are fast winning in the UK.

Personally, I don’t worry myself with the network of closed circuit cameras that are present on every street corner of London and every other British urban center.  I’m not overly concerned with their growing use here in the US.  We have no expectation of privacy in public spaces.

Does our fear mean that we should give up basic privacy such as what goods we purchase and what books we choose to read at the library?  I think not.  To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, those of us willing to sacrifice liberty for the sake of security deserve neither.

Unfortunately, the Thatcherite Tory party has gone the way of the Reagan Republicans.  Because of this lamentable fact, the world’s two pillars of freedom are in jeopardy – from ourselves.

Sphere: Related Content

Is the Goldwater Legacy Dead and Buried?

No, it’s not. However, Steve Chapman raises some interesting points in his column on ReasonOnline.

Goldwater questioned most government action with – “Does it maximize freedom?”. Obviously, little does.

Chapman wants to know why the GOP of today bears so little resemblance to the GOP of 1964, or 1980 for that matter? The answer is simple. The majority of those that claim the mantle of Reagan seem to only remember that he won. Why he won, how he won, seems to be of little consequence. As for Sen. Goldwater, the fact that his wife was pro-choice, that he was fairly agnostic on the matter, and that his view of gays in the military was summed up by “I don’t care if they’re straight as long as they can shoot straight” has relegated one of the true conservative giants to a backwater in a GOP dominated by social conservatives.

While I am a social conservative, I believe that throwing out Goldwater’s ideas because I many disagree with him on a couple of items is equivalent to throwing the baby out with the bath water. Unfortunately, that is the predicament we are currently faced with.

Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Debate Over Thatcher Funeral?

82 year old former PM Baroness Thatcher shows no signs of packing it in anytime soon, but the left is actually debating that she does not deserve a state funeral. Well, I guess since Communism’s collapse they need to be for something.

The woman who was the leader of Britain’s resurgence as a world power should be honored – both in the UK and here. If the Brits totally lose their minds and refuse Baroness Thatcher this last honor, our nation should offer.

When almost every nation of the world (along with our own left-wing) was calling for the US to unilaterally disarm, who stood beside Ronald Reagan and said NO? Who showed the world that a modern, industrialized, socialist country could rebound by cutting taxes, balancing the budget, privatizing pensions and providing real education reform?

Like Reagan, Baroness Thatcher showed the world what leadership and principle mean.

Sphere: Related Content

Fusionism Re-examined

Mark Newgent’s excellent piece in the Baltimore Examiner has much to recommend it. However, my friend and Red Maryland colleague misses one leg from the current conservative stool.

Newgent references the fusionism concept pioneered by Frank Meyer when he was with William Buckley’s National Review. At the time Meyer formulated his notion of fusionism, there were basically three disparate groups in the then nascent conservative movement – libertarians, traditionalists, and anti-communists.

Meyer’s concept was basically one of pragmatism. The three groups had much in common. By emphasizing commonalities and agreeing to disagree – civilly – on other issues, the three groups stood a much greater chance of policy and electoral success than if they remained three separate and quaint intellectual groups. (For a better understanding of this history I recommend the well researched and highly readable “Upstream: The Ascendance of American Conservatism” by Al Regnery or the excellent, if somewhat dry, “The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America Since 1945” by George Nash)

During Meyer’s time there were no “social conservatives”. First of all, the hot-button issues that rile today’s social conservatives did not even exist. Roe v Wade was years away; birth control was still illegal in states like Connecticut. No one discussed being gay, much less allowing homosexuals to marry. If there was a discussion of a “right to die” it was carried on at home, certainly not in the public square. To a certain extent, “Traditionalists” were the “social conservatives” of their day. However, the issues were different and today we call those same people “paleo-conservatives”. Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »