The Jacksonian Conservative

[jacksonianconservative-blog]

I wrote this article as a warning to Republicans that the 2012 election is not just about defeating Obama. It is about truly changing the course the country is taking and putting it on a "path to prosperity." If the party relies on just the failures of the Democrats and fails to carry out conservative policies, the coalition will disintegrate.

Romney has done a better job since I wrote this, and bringing Paul Ryan aboard as his VP pick has solidified the base for now, but he will have a lot of bold decisions to make if he gets elected and boldness has never been his MO.

[jacksonianconservative-blog]

This was a hypothetical piece about the potential for a Republican "brokered convention," which has not occurred since 1964 and has become increasingly rare in the 20-21st centuries. I wrote about how the division in the GOP could lead to a last minute dark horse candidate sweeping into the race at the last second and taking the nomination. Mitt Romney ended up gaining momentum and took the nomination, making the brokered convention unnecessary.

[jacksonianconservative-blog]

Newt Gingrich was soaring in the Republican primary when I wrote this piece comparing him to the greatest Speaker of the House in American history, Henry Clay. I think my comparison turned out to be remarkably accurate as Gingrich ended up shooting himself in the foot and made increasingly absurd charges against opponents. Gingrich may be one of the most talented politicians of the last 50 years and one of the greatest Speakers, but ultimately his career will end up as a disappointment because the presidency has always and will always elude him.

[jacksonianconservative-blog]

Although it is often tricky to compare historical figures to modern day politicians I made one between Rep. Ron Paul and John Randolph of Roanoke. John Randolph was an Old Republican or "Tertium Quid" from the aristocratic Randolph family in Virginia who often stood alone with his unique views. He was a strong non-interventionist, more Jeffersonian than Thomas Jefferson himself, railed ferociously against growth in government and brought ad hominem attacks to the level of an art form. I wrote how Randolph's ideas, much like Paul's, were supported by just a handful of followers, in his own lifetime but had a lasting impact on American politics. Men like John C. Calhoun claimed his "states rights" and nullification ideas came from Randolph. And President Andrew Jackson's war on the Second National Bank in the 1830's was carried out with the same ideas that seemed dead just a decade before while the bank was an unquestioned part of U.S. government policy. Paul may be an equally prophetic character if he is successful in turning the Republican Party in a more libertarian direction. The biggest difference I see between Paul and Randolph is that Randolph was an unrepentant aristocrat that "loved liberty" but "hated equality." Paul loves liberty but would in no way suggest that society should be run by an aristocratic class. Although the piece was liked by both conservatives and libertarians, some of the libertarian Paul supporters took issue with me calling out the "kooks and cranks" that frequent their movement. Overall though I considered it a relatively flattering piece about Paul and perhaps a bit more flattering than he deserved.

[jacksonianconservative-blog]

I wrote this article after the premier of the C-Span series, "The Contenders," which was about presidential contenders that lost but still had a great impact on the United States. I decided to make a list of "conservative contenders" that were mostly left off the list that was decidedly to the Left. My five were in chronological order: 1.) John C. Calhoun 2.) John C. Fremont 3.) John W. Davis 4.) Robert Taft 5.) Barry Goldwater The article was praised by the author of "The High Tide of American Conservatism," which was a book about the 1824 presidential election between Republican Calvin Coolidge and Democrat John W. Davis; both were conservatives.