Home » Our Columns

A Veteran Conservative, Homeless Since Fred Left, Makes a Decision.

Jim Leahy 31 January 2008 34 Comments

The news that Fred Thompson has pulled out of the race for the Presidency leaves me with a decision to make, You see, I was for Thompson and although he wasn’t perfect, to me he was the true “conservative” in the race.

The one problem I had supporting Fred was, the American people and me like governors or vice presidents as president. He was neither. His dropping out didn’t come as a surprise, he was not doing as well as some of us thought he would; whether he was too deliberate or didn’t have the fire in the belly the campaign never overcame the “Lazy” label given to it right from the start. So now people like me have to go back and choose another candidate.

When this primary field was announced I wasn’t crazy about the people who were in it (that’s why I went for Fred) I had been bothered with the way this race started in August when an unknown ex-governor from Arkansas named Mike Huckabee took second place in the Iowa straw Poll and the media crowned him the conservative candidate. They did all they could to promote him giving him 3 months of wall to wall positive coverage. I was wary with the way themedia seemed to favor him. Why would they do it? I thought the media were promoting him to stop Fred and that explained their actions. Governor Huckabee then won Iowa and was given the front-runner status. He didn’t handle it well. He came off as arrogant and mean, he lashed out at some of conservatism’s largest grass roots organizations, at times using names liberals use to attack them.

His commercial at Christmas with the cross was beautiful until he said “what cross?” I don’t like to be taken for an idiot and I felt he was doing just that. He was too slippery for his own good. Still why was the media pushing him so hard? I could never answer that question and because of that I could never get comfortable with him.

Mayor Giuliani has seemed to allow his campaign to waste his once huge lead and now I don’t see him being able to right the ship. His stands on our basic conservative issues were always a problem and as our candidate he would have split the parties base. I could never vote for him.

Ron Paul has to answer one question about his world view. ‘If not America then who?” Until then he is just nuts. Senator McCain has just kept being John McCain. He is a selfish, spoiled, United States Senator who throws a fit when someone challenges his

positions. He lashes out at people who hated his immigration legislation acting as though anyone against it is too stupid to understand that allowing people to cut in line for citizenship was not amnesty because they had to pay a fine. It was amnesty they got to cut to the front of the line.

From McCain Feingold and global warming to the gang of 14 he has gone against the base of the GOP and now expects them to look beyond those issues. I won’t and can’t.

So that forces me to give Governor Romney another look. I thought that his speech on the role of religion and politics was brilliant. He answered the fears I had that the Democrats would use his religion and the peoples ignorance of it to scare the American people. I now see that Romney would make them pay a huge price if they tried to do that. I like his business background and the fact that he has made a fortune on his own. His father was a Governor of Michigan so he grew up in the Midwest and he won the governorship in the dark blue Massachusetts. I am not bothered by his change of heart on social issues since if he were to change back again he would be through. He has the money to fight the Democrats and their deep pockets and is articulate and television savvy enough to get our message out.

I have already called the Romney for President office in Illinois and volunteered. So for me it’s Romney in 08.


Jim Leahy is the executive director of the Republican Assembly of Illinois and a grassroots conservative expert.


  • mickey (author) said:

    We are BANKRUPT! We have no choice but to reconsider our policemen of the world status. It’s not a question of “If not

    America than who?” Ron Paul is stating the obvious. We have some tough decisions to make and Ron Paul is the only candidate willing to inform the people of what is happening to this country.

  • Rick (author) said:

    I don’t understand the “If not America then who?” question. Paul is pro-America on ever issue. Look at his record. Research his issues, the answers are there on his web page at http://www.ronpaul2008.com

  • Oscar (author) said:

    “If not America, then who” to do just what? Police the world? Tell me we are not an imperialistic nation (after you look up the definition).

  • Peoria Native (author) said:

    So, when a Republican changes positions, its excusable, but when a Democrat does it, it’s called flip-flopping. That’s logical.

  • Michael (author) said:


    If we continue overextending ourselves the question will not be: ‘If not America then who?’ but it will be ‘America who?’…

    We are going broke policing the world… we just can’t afford it…

    You can make all the arguments for the war and/or against it, the simple fact is we CAN NOT afford it…

  • Robert E. (author) said:

    < < Ron Paul has to answer one question about his world view. ‘If not America than (sic) who?” >>

    Nobody, that’s who!

    No person has the right to tell another how to live his life. This applies as much to the people runnig various governments as it does to you and me.

  • Dan Kelley (author) said:

    If America quits playing the role of the World’s policeman, it is time to bar the door and wait for the end. Maybe you could pass the time away reading Gibbon’s “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” while the barbarians are massing at the gates of the city. If the USA stops defending itself and civilization, the battle is lost.

  • Patrick Williams (author) said:

    A brief reply to your analysis of Ron Paul’s position on foreign policy. The idea that someone needs to serve as the policemen of the world and “if not America, then who?” is the wrong argument. America simply cannot afford it. By following the notion that a righteous and benevolent force is necessary for the safety of the planet, America has undermined and jeopardized the its own economy and its own citizens. While many will disagree that our actions abroad are even having a positive impact, Paul’s basic principle that we are bankrupting ourselves makes this idea irrelevant.

  • Larry (author) said:

    “If not America, then who?”

    What’s wrong with thinking other countries can stand up for their own sovereignty? Who or what do you think we are, the world’s nanny?

    I can’t hardly keep my head above water now, why do I want my money going to prop up the world’s dictators?

    As executive director of the Republican Assembly of Illinois, you’ve got to be able to see the big picture!

  • Pat Hickey (author) said:

    Well Done, Jim!

    Unlike some you make a stand.

    I’m with McCain.


  • C. Wesley Fowler (author) said:

    I agree with the universal sentiment here: your views don’t really represent Conservative principles. We have no business (and no money sufficent to) go around the world “fixing” everything our lawmakers disagree with. This is especially true given the true motives behing these actions: fleecing you and I to the benefit of very, very large corporations.

  • Anonymous (author) said:

    Ron Paul’s isolationist positions on foreign policy are perfectly suited for the last century. He is not in touch with reality and the polls bear this out. I honestly do not understand why he was not excluded from the recent debate panels. He is a fringe candidate supported by the lunatic fringe.

  • Rick (author) said:

    Noninterventionist is the word you are looking for…Mr. Anonymous.

  • Debbie Shipman (author) said:

    If I invite my neighbors over for a barbecue and they invite me over to watch the Superbowl, does that mean we are responsible for refereeing each other’s arguments? Am I allowed to set my neighbor’s teenage son’s curfew and can they tell my daughter that she can’t get her ears pierced? Of course not. That would be interventionist. If we all stay in our homes and avoid our neighbors, that is isolationist. There is a difference. I’m really sick of people saying Ron Paul is an isolationist. We can encourage other people to behave themselves by diplomatic efforts and by spending our dollars elsewhere; how does the barrel of a gun spread freedom and democracy? Why do we tell our children that we should lead by example when what they see is our government continually saying “Do as I say, not as I do”? The people who started this country’s move toward independence a couple hundred years ago were considered “the lunatic fringe” and yet those are the people we still celebrate today. I’ll be the first to admit that I’m a lunatic. It makes me absolutely crazy to see how many people in this country refuse to wake up and see the truth that this is a nation run by the corporations for the corporations. Anyone ever heard of the military industrial complex? Or, is that just a conspiracy theory? My only hope for this country is that the apathetic idiots who can’t be bothered to educate themselves on the issues (the ones who think watching the 6 O’clock news is enough) will be too lazy to get up and go to the polls.

  • Mark D (author) said:

    Ron Paul offers us a choice no other republican or democrat can offer: EMPIRE and IRS vs. No IRS and noninterventionism. How can you say yes to policing the world when you can say no to the IRS?

    As for fiat currency, all I can say is it looks like a bubble getting pumped up to me!-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:USACPI1800.png

  • Mark D (author) said:

    Ron Paul offers us a choice no other republican or democrat can offer: EMPIRE and IRS vs. No IRS and noninterventionism. How can you say yes to policing the world when you can say no to the IRS?

    As for fiat currency, all I can say is it looks like a bubble getting pumped up to me!


  • John Powers (author) said:

    As an admirer of Ron Paul’s principle’s, I often wonder if he is too much engaged in the theoretical to practice politics.

    Wouldn’t it be possible to propose phase out the IRS over 8 years (say via an interim flat tax) rather than shutting down the whole thing tomorrow?

    Or with the Fed, how about putting some brakes on what these guys do to the markets, rather than eliminating the whole thing overnight.

    I am not convinced revolutionary measures are practical for the country, though I do agree we should seriously reduce the amount of government meddling in the everyday lives of citizens.


  • David Dines (author) said:

    John Powers,

    I agree with you, but if you’ve watched the Ron Paul interviews (not many of them anymore) he has acknowledged that you cannot immediately abolish the IRS or the Fed. He wants to recapitalize by cutting overseas operations drastically, pay back social security and reign in the budget. He would push for drastic tax cuts until there are no income taxes left. As for the Fed, he wants to legalize gold currency and let a “gold dollar” compete with the fiat dollar in the open market. This way the people can decide which currency to use. And if you think exchanging currencies is too hard, you would just have to kick around Europe for a few weeks (no, the Euro is not the only currency in Europe) … it’s not hard.

  • John Powers (author) said:

    Hi David,

    With all the money that Ron Paul has raised, he should be making this clear then rather than starting off in debates by saying “the first thing I would do as President is abolish the Fed”.

    As it stands Ron comes across as a revolutionary, rather than a thoughtful reformer.


  • Rick (author) said:


    He has started to advertise in many of the Super Tuesday states and even some of the states that hold primaries after Tuesday. If you investigate the Fed, a private organization by the way, then you see that one reason why the dollar has lost value is the inflationary tax placed on Americans from the Fed printing too much money. He has not started off every debate by saying that he would abolish the Fed, but you can be sure that would be one of his goals as President while working towards a sensible monetary policy.

  • taxactivist (author) said:

    If not for American government, who would have given Osama Bin Laden and the muhajadeen (now Al Qaeda) money and weapons in the 1980s strengthening them into the force they are today? If not for American government, who would have helped prop up Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship in Iraq in the 1980s giving him money and weapons? If not for the American government who would have let Saddam stay in power for another decade after the first gulf war? If not for the American government who would have orchestrated the overthrow of Iran leading to the current regime they have?

  • taxactivist (author) said:

    If not for the American government, who in the world would be meddling in all these foreign affairs trying to control other countries and their people creating great resentment and generally making things a whole lot worse than they were before being meddled with? Before arrogant, power-hungry American politicians hijacked our dangerous foreign policy it was the British screwing things up by drawing arbitrary borders around countries that will create more wars for years to come. As we stepped in their place I’m sure some other country’s leaders will convince their citizens that leading a global crusade is a wonderful idea making their country the next target.

  • taxactivist (author) said:

    America’s entangling, controlling, and meddling foreign policy since WWII has largely created the problems of today. If not America, then who would have created the problems we’re dealing with? I hope nobody. And if they did, then they would be facing the blowback instead of us.

    If not American government, then who will provide us health care or retirement or education or hippy museums or LGBT community centers or NFL football stadiums or research grants to study the speed of ketchup or ??? If not America, it’s up to the people of Iraq to over-run Saddam. And any individual American should be absolutely free to send them money to help or to fly over and join them or whatever. And American politicians are absolutely free to point out where in the world people are being oppressed and what can be done to help them. If not America, then who? Individuals first. Churches, relief organizations, charities, philanthropists, religions, etc. America can still lead the world and influence things for the better in other countries. In fact, we will have a greater positive impact by doing it with bread instead of guns.

  • taxactivist (author) said:

    This $150 million stimulus package being proposed is a great example. If that money were given equally to every person in Iraq, it would be enough money to double every one’s current standard of living for 5 years. For the money we spent taking out Saddam and bringing Al Qaeda into Iraq, we could have sustained their entire economy for 10 years. Probably 15 years by the time we are done. Granted, inflation would have crashed their economy if no one had to work for 15 years, but you get the point. We could have basically bribed the Iraqi people with our inherent generosity over the past 20 years with a fraction of the cost of this war and had much better results.

    John Powers, I have not heard Ron Paul give any timetables for eliminating the IRS and Fed, let alone is it safe to assume he would or could eliminate them overnight. I believe that he knows he has a huge fight to get rid of them since the President doesn’t (or shouldn’t) have that kind of power. He’ll need people like you to help convince Congress to devise an 8 year plan. I doubt Ron Paul would be against that.

  • General Jack D. Ripper (author) said:

    Where does Ron Paul stand on the fluoridation of water? Should we all drink green rain water to protect our precious bodily fluids?

    Let’s haggle phrases and argue about semantics. I do not think that there is too much difference between being an isolationists and a noninterventionist. If Nazi Germany did not declare war on the USA, would Dr. Paul have permitted Hitler to overrun Europe? After all, it was not our fight.

    Who is his preferred running mate? Lyndon LaRouche or Mike Gravel? Will Paul receive the endorsement of the Flat Earth Society?

  • taxactivist (author) said:

    Hitler did overrun Europe before we got involved. Then he declared war on us and us on him. That’s how it’s suppose to happen with great debate throughout the US using as many facts as are available and not rushing to judgment. Ron Paul isn’t fighting Hitler though, is he? What if George Bush had been President during WWII with Rumsfeld and Cheney running things underestimating the job at hand and not being prepared with a long term strategy? Would Hitler have won? That’s just as fair of a question as you are presenting concerning Hitler.

    How about we leave Hitler out of it since the only reason to mention Hitler is to try to spin some exaggeration.

  • Rick (author) said:


    Isolationists do not talk or trade with other countries.

    Noninterventionists don’t send our men in uniform all around the world to meddle in the business of other countries. They Do use diplomacy. They look to have commerce and conversation with other nations. Am I to believe that you think the 10 billion that we sent to Musharraf was a good investment? How many more countries are we going to leave our men behind in? We have Japan, South Korea, Germany and now we will have Iraq and Iran. Do you support a draft? Because otherwise our 1.5 million man military will not be able to continue with this insane foreign policy forever.

    By the way, more donations from military personnel, active and veterans, go to Paul than any other candidate. Men who are there, men who are on the ground and seeing the effects of our foreign policy are sending their money to Paul. What does that tell you?

  • Rick (author) said:

    Oh, Jack D. Ripper, I get it. Nice joke name. You must not have family or friends who are over there involved in all this mess, funny man.

  • Sterling Hayden (author) said:

    Actually, I have had family members who were in the field.

    Obviously, you need to watch more Stanley Kubrick films.

    Enjoy the unpasteurized milk and your guru’s single digit percentage of the vote on Election Day.

  • Alan K. (author) said:

    Dan Kelly,

    Clearly, it is YOU who do not understand the fall of the Roman Empire, and how the USA is so obviously falling into the same pattern, and the same inevitable fate. Rome was an overextended empire, with a continually growing military, continually growing enemies, a continually growing bureaucracy, continually growing trade imbalance, and a continual debasement of the currency that stifled trade and savings. Hmmm, sound familiar?

    It was Rome’s imperial overreach, far more than anything else, that led to her decline. What proud company you warmongers wish to keep, and in whose footsteps you wouuld “patriotically” led the American sheep.

  • The Center Does Not Hold (author) said:

    All science trembles at the searing logic of your fiery intellect.

  • Rick (author) said:

    Alright Sterling,

    I’ve watched the Kubrick films and it seems to me that you are walking through life with your “Eyes Wide Shut”

  • SH (author) said:

    A question: Wasn’t “Eyes Wide Shut” the one with the loony Scientologist in the lead role?

    That wasn’t necessarily the movie that I had in mind. Of course, cult members and political extremists may have some points in common.

    If Ron Paul had as many supporters as the number of comments posted by his devoted bloggers, this online exchange would be unnecessary since your candidate would be leading in the total number of delegates.

  • Rick (author) said:


    Take jabs if you will, but you would be a fool not to admit that the MSM has closed the shutters on Paul as much as they can. How else can you explain Rudy being on every station, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, after he had spent nearly $40 million and hadn’t come close to a win? I think that this race has a long way to go and if you would just take a moment to look at the issues, if you are a Conservative as I am, then you would also be with Paul.

    And yes, that was the movie with Captain Scientology himself, but who are we to say the a DC 90 didn’t bring us all here from an over crowded planet. We may very well be living our lives with Thetans attached to us, holding us back and not allowing us to achieve our full potential. Probably not though. :-)

Leave your response!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.