David Horowitz asserted the essentially intellectual nature of Conservatism:
“Conservatives are best organized around an issue. (They) are generally already committed to religions in which the savior is not government, but a divinity. Barack Obama and the socialist juggernaut he heads have persuaded conservatives that they are prepared to destroy everything Americans hold dear. So there’s no real problem in organizing conservatives now, just focus on an issue…”
This primacy of ideas, as opposed to personality worship or political expediency, demands that conservatives quickly confront the significance and implications of Governor Palin’s endorsement of Dr. Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul. Her $2,000 donation to Paul’s campaign came with this statement:
“I’m proud to support great grassroots candidates like Dr. Paul. While there are issues we disagree on, he and I are both in agreement that it’s time to shake up the status quo in Washington and stand up for common sense ideas.”
On Fox News Sunday, Palin told Chris Wallace:
“There are things that I don’t agree with Rand Paul, and yet his domestic policies for the most part, I do agree with.”
The conclusion of Going Rogue is a magnificent outline of the author’s positions on key issues. Statements by Dr. Paul to Anti-War Radio and Alex Jones cause a jarring ideological cacophony when compared with those appropriated by his Alaskan supporter.
“Today our sons and daughters are fighting in distant countries to protect our freedoms and to nurture freedom for others…we do have a responsibility to complete our missions in these countries so that we can keep our homeland safe. America must remain the strongest nation in the world in order to remain free. And our goal in the War on Terror must be the same as Reagan’s, ‘We won. They lost.”
“Part of the reason we are bankrupt as a country is that we are fighting so many foreign wars and have so many military bases around the world. I don’t say, ‘Out of Iraq now!’ I say out of Iraq two or three years ago, or never go in – even better.”
“We are both the world’s sword and its shield…we lend not just our strength but the support of a free people to others who are fighting for their freedom. They need to know that America is not indifferent to their struggles…nations like Israel need to be confident of our support.”
“You have to ask yourself, ‘Do you kill more terrorists than you create?’ We inflamed an entire region there and I don’t think it was the best thing for our national defense or for our country. We have to decide if putting missiles in Poland is going to provoke Russia or if we can afford to put missiles in Poland.”
“But we have been given a unique responsibility to show the world the meaning and the rewards of freedom. America, as Reagan said, ‘is the abiding alternative to tyranny.’”
“I think that these issues [the economy and maintaining the American “empire:”] become the political coalition you need to win a race because there are people from the left who acknowledge the vast expenditure of the military industrial complex. There are some on the right that are beginning to understand that. It’s really that sort of right-left paradigm that you bring these groups together in order to try to win an election.”
At least Dr. Paul had the decency to tell Alex Jones clearly:
“I’d say we’d be very very similar (Dr. Rand and Ron Paul). We might present the message sometimes differently.. I think in some ways the message has to be broadened and made more appealing to the entire Republican electorate because you have to win a primary.”
This means that, while Going Rogue insists:
“It is not in our best interests or the interests of the peace-loving nations of the world for America to project weakness to terrorists and tyrants,”
Dr. Paul’s ideas about terrorists would be “very, very similar” to his father’s:
“They are terrorists because we are occupiers.”
Four months ago, Sarah Palin signed her name, tens of thousands of times, to Going Rogue’s vision of America. That vision is now so much silver to barter with. Endorsement rarely implies total concurrence. However, the logical conclusion of this endorsement is that Palin considers America’s global defense of freedom, national defense, the War on Terror, the defeat of Radical Islam, and the support of Israel and our allies, to be less important than “some” domestic policy issues.
By designating Dr. Paul as someone who should be influencing foreign policy, Sarah Palin has joined forces with a man whose vision of America substantively mimics that of Michael Moore. It is time to reread Horowitz. Deviating from principled intellectualism will reduce the Tea Party to a gruesome mirror image of the eschatological, savior-seeking deplored in the Obama apotheosis.