Here’s this weeks edition of five items of things that I found interesting, engaging or enraging. I hope you find them to be so as well.
Dangerous Minds pointed this out, and among conservatives I think this is really not well known. She actually supported Gerald Ford over Ronald Reagan in 1976. She wrote in her Ayn Rand Letter:
Now I want to give you a brief indication of the kinds of issues that are coming up, on which you might want to know my views.
1. The Presidential election of 1976. I urge you, as emphatically as I can, not to support the candidacy of Ronald Reagan. I urge you not to work for or advocate his nomination, and not to vote for him. My reasons are as follows: Mr. Reagan is not a champion of capitalism, but a conservative in the worst sense of that word—i.e., an advocate of a mixed economy with government controls slanted in favor of business rather than labor (which, philosophically, is as untenable a position as one could choose—see Fred Kinnan in Atlas Shrugged, pp. 541-2). This description applies in various degrees to most Republican politicians, but most of them preserve some respect for the rights of the individual. Mr. Reagan does not: he opposes the right to abortion.
Then in her last public speech:
In conclusion, let me touch briefly on another question often asked me: What do I think of President Reagan? The best answer to give would be: But I don’t think of him—and the more I see, the less I think. I did not vote for him (or for anyone else) and events seem to justify me. The appalling disgrace of his administration is his connection with the so-called “Moral Majority” and sundry other TV religionists, who are struggling—apparently with his approval—to take us back to the Middle Ages, via the unconstitutional union of religion and politics.
The threat to the future of capitalism is the fact that Reagan might fail so badly that he will become another ghost, like Herbert Hoover, to be invoked as an example of capitalism’s failure for another fifty years.
Observe Reagan’s futile attempts to arouse the country by some sort of inspirational appeal. He is right in thinking that the country needs an inspirational element. But he will not find it in the God-Family-Tradition swamp.
Rand was a secular libertarian, of which I have no use for. She is an example of how secular libertarianism and conservatism are simply not compatible with one another. Yet, we have conservatives who are fans. Her overall philosophy finds itself at odds with the Christian faith. See below (HT: Steve Deace):
Are there things she promoted that were good, certainly, but I don’t believe one can follow Ayn Rand and Jesus. You need to decide.
His team is checking out Iowa, they’re forming plans. That indicates to me he’s seriously considering a run. I welcome Governor Perry jumping into the race. I think he would have a lot to add, he’s a fiscal and social conservative, and he is a 10th Amendment candidate. I think he would match up very well against President Barack Obama. Besides, we’ve got to have a southern in this race. This week he gave a speech for the Heritage Foundation which Rich Lowry called a draft stump speech.
this was a draft stump speech by Gov. Perry. There are three things a presidential candidate generally needs: 1) presence (does he fill the room?); 2) a narrative (does his biography and/or record add up to something?); 3) a theme (does he have a point in running?). Based on tonight, I’d say Perry could well have all three.
On top of this he apparently knocked the socks off of those who attended the Republican Leadership Conference (which I would have loved to have been at) in New Orleans.
Oh those unnamed sources, they’re so unpredictable. One Republican source said that Palin was expected to announce her intentions next week. Governor Palin said via Twitter, “Really? Hmm, guess they forgot to inform me what I’m "expected to do" next wk.” At least Stacy McCain never burns his sources though, even if they burn him.
4. State Representative Renee Schulte’s Inadequate Defense of Mitt Romney
Cedar Rapids Republican Renee Schulte, a member of Romney’s 2012 Iowa campaign leadership team, came to Romney’s defense, saying she agrees with his decision to not sign the pledge.
“Not signing one particular pledge does not undermine his pro-life credentials,” said Schulte, a state representative. “It simply shows that he will not make empty promises just to win elections.”
Schulte, who worked for Romney’s 2008 campaign, said he was “100 percent pro-life in the last campaign (and) that has not and will not change.”
I’m sure Romney’s signature on the pledge is an empty promise. Schulte told me via Facebook that, “Signing a pledge does not make you one thing or another. Actions speak louder than words.”
I completely agree. Actions do speak louder than words. Renee wouldn’t you agree then that prolife Republicans in the Iowa House should not have voted against the Personhood bill and that you should have been present during the vote? Perhaps you had a really good reason for missing the vote, but it was a great opportunity to demonstrate some action.
Romney came out with his own prolife life pledge, but again it’s talk. Schulte pointed out his veto of two bills in his time in office – as he was likely considering a run for the presidency. He was adamantly pro-abortion before that. Color me unimpressed. He’s been running against this issue, and during the New Hampshire debate was frustrated with questions related to social conservative issues instead wanting a focus on the economy and jobs (which most of the debate was centered on).
5. Ron Paul wins yet another straw poll.
Ok, this isn’t news. When he tops a real poll or tops the Iowa Straw Poll, that’ll be news. Jon Huntsman came in second, that’s somewhat news. It must be due to the awesome ads he’s been running. More like he paid people to be there to vote for him which his campaign hasn’t denied.