From the Archives: Former state legislator Terri McCormick asks ‘What Sex Is a Republican?’

Former state legislator Terri McCormick asks ‘What Sex Is a Republican?’
December 20, 2011 7:52 PM MST

A former state legislator from Wisconsin, Terri McCormick is the author of a memoir called What Sex Is a Republican? Stories from the Front Lines of American Politics.

One reviewer, the author noted, called it “the first Tea Party book” because of what McCormick identifies as its themes.

“It’s all about integrity of leadership,” she told the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner in an interview early in 2011, while she was attending the national convention of the Republican Liberty Caucus in Arlington, Virginia.

‘Founding principles’

“All the themes are centered around the Constitution, the founding principles, and what we need to do to be a better republic.”

The reason she published the book, McCormick explained, was that she had been asked to write about her experiences as a member of the Wisconsin Assembly, where she served three two-year terms beginning in 2000. She later twice ran for Congress, seeking the Republican nomination in Wisconsin’s Eighth District in 2006 and 2010.

It was while she was serving in the legislature, representing about 60,000 constituents in and around the cities of Appleton and Oshkosh, that McCormick discovered she was a libertarian.

“I didn’t even know that I was a libertarian Republican,” she explained, “until somebody had actually watched my work and said, ‘You know what? You believe in the constitution and free market.”

‘Core values’

To McCormick, that seemed just like common sense.

“I had a set of core values. I readily knew what they were: opportunities, free market systems, and I actually believed the constitution should apply to everybody.”

When it was pointed out that her statements and the legislation she sponsored manifested libertarian values and ideas, she “thought, ‘So that’s where I fit!’” Up to that point, she admitted, that she “didn’t quite know” what a libertarian was, or that she was one herself.

Running for Congress after her self-imposed term limits ended her time in the legislature “was interesting,” McCormick said, noting an odd paradox:

“When I ran for the state house, I was recognized as having ideas and [people] wanted me. When I ran for the U.S. House, I was recognized as an individual with ideas and therefore people didn’t want me.”

Legislative achievements

Prior to her first election to the Wisconsin Assembly, McCormick had worked with various civic groups and drafted the state’s first charter schools law. She helped form a group that lobbied for the law’s passage.

Once elected to office, she chaired the economic development committee, which became her platform for regulatory reform efforts.

Challenging entrenched interests in Madison, McCormick said she “took on the [state’s] capital investment company. In order to have more capital investment readily available, I wrote the small business regulation reform act.”

Her achievements, she added modestly, came about “just by listening to others and working with them.”


Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on December 20, 2011. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

From the Archives: CPAC bars GOProud; presidential candidate Gary Johnson presciently weighs in

CPAC bars GOProud; presidential candidate Gary Johnson presciently weighs in
August 3, 2011 11:54 PM MST

In the lead-up to the 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), a minor controversy developed with regard to the presence of GOProud, an organization of gay conservatives and their allies. Several long-time CPAC participants announced that they would not take part in the 2011 conference because of GOProud’s presence.

The controversy came to a head, if not a conclusion, on July 29, when Gregg Keller, executive director of the American Conservative Union (ACU), which runs CPAC each year, sent a letter to GOProud’s Jimmy LaSalvia with what GOProud characterized as “disappointing news.”

‘Not invited’

Keller told LaSalvia: “As a courtesy to your organization, a previous co-sponsor of CPAC, this letter serves to inform you that GOProud will not be invited to participate in a formal role for CPAC events scheduled during the 2012 election cycle.”

According to the Daily Caller, a similar letter was sent to the John Birch Society, which had a formal presence at CPAC for the first time in 2011.

Keller went on in the letter to say that GOProud members were welcome to attend CPAC and its programs as “individual registrants.”

‘Divisive agenda’

GOProud’s board of directors issued a response to the letter that said, in part, ““For the last two years, GOProud has sought to support CPAC and keep the conservative movement united. Unfortunately, elements inside and outside of ACU have pushed their own narrow, divisive and sometimes personal agenda. They have done so at the expense of the conservative movement.”

The GOProud board added that the focus of the conservative movement should be on defeating Barack Obama next year, not on internal bickering.

During CPAC, the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner had an opportunity to interview Republican presidential candidate Gary Johnson and asked him specifically about the GOProud controversy. His words presaged GOProud's reaction to its banishment from CPAC.


‘Gay rights are included’

Johnson, who has distinguished himself within the Republican presidential field with his libertarian positions on social issues, said the situation was “unfortunate.”

Governor Gary Johnson at CPAC 2011

Republicans, he said, quoting the Declaration of Independence, espouse as central values “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Johnson said that “liberty and freedom” are basic “tenets of what this country" stands for and that “gay rights are included in that" vision.

The former two-term New Mexico governor went on to say that “what I’m really trying to do is grow the Republican Party” because he thinks the GOP “is the only party capable of fixing where we’re at right now.”

Looking toward 2012, Johnson stated his hope “that Americans would give Republicans another shot at doing that -- but to do that, the Republican Party’s got to grow, got to be bigger than a narrow focus.”

In July, Johnson followed up on his comments at CPAC by becoming the first presidential candidate to refuse to sign the so-called “Family Leader” pledge in Iowa, calling it “offensive and unRepublican” because of its animus toward members of minority groups. At the same time, he released a campaign video titled “Tolerance Is American.”

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on August 3, 2011. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

From the Archives: GOProud’s Jimmy LaSalvia talks about CPAC and gay conservatives

GOProud’s Jimmy LaSalvia talks about CPAC and gay conservatives
February 17, 2011 2:03 PM MST

A minor controversy erupted in the weeks leading up to the 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in regard to the participation of GOProud, an organization of gay conservatives. A handful of groups decided to sit out this year’s CPAC rather than be seen in the same room with gay men and lesbians.

Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of GOProud, spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner at CPAC about the controversy and about his organization’s mission and plans for 2011 and 2012.

GOProud, LaSalvia explained, is a national, 527 political organization representing gay conservatives and their allies.

“We started in 2009,” he said, “so we’re about a year and a half old. We’re growing, with about 10,000 members. We bring the perspective of gay conservatives to every issue that affects Americans.”

Federal issues
GOProud is based in Washington works only on federal issues, he said, “like a lot of organizations that you see here at CPAC.” He gave as examples Americans for Tax Reform and the Club for Growth as national organizations “that have a Washington presence.”

The issues that most concern GOProud, LaSalvia said, are “whatever comes up in Washington. The priorities of our membership are the same as the priorities of most conservatives and, in fact, of most Americans.”

GOProud, he said, wants to help the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives “to rein in the size of government, control spending, protect our borders, and protect us from the terrorists.” In that, he noted, “we’re just the same as everybody else in America.”

‘Biggest, best CPAC’
Despite the controversy and the absence of a few groups from the CPAC exhibit hall, La Salvia said, this year’s conference was “the biggest, best CPAC ever.”

The message of CPAC, he pointed out, “is that the conservative movement is united. We’re united around those priorities that I just talked about, the priorities of the American people. It’s been a great CPAC so far.”

LaSalvia said the reception of GOProud by CPAC attendees has been positive.

“We’ve had a lot of people come up to our booth and tell us that they’re glad that we’re here, that they’re glad that we’re part of the discussion that’s happening here at CPAC to offer solutions to our country, to help get our country back on track. It’s great,” he added.

When reminded that former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin had also spoken out in favor of including GOProud in CPAC, LaSalvia noted that she “went out of her way to say” that her own absence from the conference was due to scheduling conflicts and not because she wanted to endorse those who were shunning GOProud.

LaSalvia also pointed out the millionaire businessman Donald Trump spoke to CPAC because he was invited by GOProud and that he also favored an inclusive conference and conservative movement.

Support like that expressed by conservatives at CPAC, LaSalvia added, “has really been heartening.”

Differences in approach

Asked if there’s a difference between the way conservatives and other people approach gay issues, LaSalvia said there was not.

“There may be policy differences here and there among conservatives with issues relating to gay people, but conservatives aren’t any different than any other Americans,” he said.

“As you know,” he continued, “in the past couple of decades, more and more gay people are coming out and living their lives openly and honestly. The vast majority of Americans and the vast majority of conservatives have gay people in their lives, so as folks around the country think about issues that affect gay people, they think about people who are in their lives. They think about Joe and Bill and Sue and Lynn and their lives when they think about these issues.

The consequence of knowing gay people personally, LaSalvia explained, is that “conservatives are no different than anyone else [who] thinks about these issues.”

'Fun' plans for 2011 and 2012

GOProud’s plans for 2011 and the presidential election year of 2012, he said, are “to engage in the debate as it occurs on Capitol Hill and across the country.”

Noting that CPAC marks the kickoff of the presidential campaign season, LaSalvia said that “we’ll be very engaged in that.”

He hesitated to give more details and cautioned that “I can’t really tell you the specific things that we’ve got planned this year but a lot of them will relate to the presidential election.”

What he would say for certain is that, whatever GOProud has planned, “it’s going to be fun for everybody. It’s going to be fun for our country and the Republican party and we’re looking forward to engaging in it.”

Publisher's note: This article is part of a series marking June as gay pride month. It was originally published on Examiner.com on February 17, 2011. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

From the Archives: Gay groups comment on Obama's 2014 State of the Union address

Gay groups comment on Obama's 2014 State of the Union address
January 29, 2014 11:22 PM MST



Two gay conservative organizations, Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud, issued statements this week in response to President Barack Obama's 2014 State of the Union message.

Log Cabin

The older group, Log Cabin Republicans, released a statement from its executive director, Gregory Angelo, soon after Obama concluded his address to Congress on January 28.

“For a moment,” Angelo said, “I thought the news accidentally re-ran last year’s State of the Union, because all I really saw was more of the same.”

Obama's “only new ideas,” he continued, “involved using ‘a pen and a phone’ to push a liberal agenda for which hard-working Americans have no appetite.”

Angelo criticized “the absence of any mention of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act for LGBT workers” as well as Obama's “threat to exercise unilateral Executive actions with the explosive potential to ignite class warfare, while at the same time remaining silent on signing a common-sense Executive Order barring federal workplace discrimination.”

He called that last item “an empty promise to LGBT Americans that stands unfulfilled after six years. That’s one re-run we’re tired of seeing.”

GOProud
The next day, GOProud – which calls itself “a national organization of gay and straight Americans seeking to promote freedom by supporting free markets, limited government and respect for individual rights” – issued its own statement in reaction to the President's remarks.

GOProud caustically said that Obama's speech was made up of “the same baseless platitude- and hope-laden rhetoric that we’ve seen in every one of his flowery speeches. Fortunately, the American people don’t buy it anymore. The only thing new in the President’s address was the announcement that his vague agenda will now be guaranteed by threat of executive order.”

On specific issues, the statement (unattributed to any individual) continued by noting that “the President talked a good game about the need for quality education, but failed to mention anything about school choice. He talked about the minimum wage but did little more than toss out an arbitrary number to pacify his ultra-left wing groupies.”

The President, GOProud said, “spoke eloquently about the benefits of ending wars in the Middle East, yet spent a good portion of his time convincing Americans that they should instead be at war with each other. It’s always the us-versus-them mentality with Democrats, as they can’t seem to get Americans to believe in their message without convincing them to hate someone.”

Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) began in California in 1977 and has grown into a national organization with some three dozen local and state chapters. GOProud was started by former LCR members in 2009.

Publisher's note: This article is part of a series to mark June as Gay Pride Month. It was originally published on Examiner.com on January 29, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

From the Archives: April 15 Charlottesville Tea Party attracts protesters, onlookers, sunshine, and obscene reactions

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on April 16, 2010. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site went dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

April 15 Charlottesville Tea Party attracts protesters, onlookers, sunshine, and obscene reactions
April 16, 2010 2:47 AM MST

Tax Day – April 15 – was the day that the Jefferson Area Tea Party chose to organize a protest in favor of smaller government and against high taxes. The group attracted 150 to 200 people to a demonstration at the Post Office building on Route 29 north of Charlottesville.

Local radio talk show host Rob Schilling, whose weekday program appears on WINA-AM, said the program “started out with a bang,” when a counter-protester hurled obscenities at him. Police were called in to settle the situation, and the man was briefly detained. Schilling offered him the opportunity to apologize on videotape in return for dropping assault charges, which the man readily agreed to do. (The video can be seen on The Schilling Show blog.)

Ken Boyd, a member of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and a candidate for Congress in the Fifth District of Virginia, said that the rally represented “a great showing of Americanism and people coming together who are not happy with what’s going on in Washington and they want to make their voices heard. There are people from all walks of life, as you look around. I just think it’s great, the enthusiasm and the passion are what it’s all about.”

Boyd described the protesters’ primary message as “they got the kind of change they don’t want from the Obama administration and they would like to change it to the way it was before.”

Bill Hay, one of the founders of the Jefferson Area Tea Party who is now affiliated with congressional candidate Laurence Verga’s Fifth District campaign, said he thought the message of the rally was “smaller government, cut taxes, and throw Tom Perriello out of office.” He added that drivers passing by on Route 29 were providing “a lot of horn beeping, a lot of thumbs up, maybe a few middle fingers.”

Former Albemarle County GOP chairman Keith Drake, who now serves as communications director for the Jefferson Area Tea Party, said “This is truly a revolution. Nobody’s shooting guns, nobody’s fighting in the streets. But other than that, there’s every bit of passion you would see in a revolution, and I’m very optimistic about the future direction of our country.”

Drake explained the purpose of a new organization he co-founded (with Schilling) called IMPACT (“I’m Paying Additional County Taxes”) as “an opportunity for people who don’t think they’re paying enough [in taxes] to actually pay more, to make a donation to local county government.”

So far IMPACT has received one donation in the amount of $25.

From the Archives: GOP Senate hopeful Tony DeTora favors marijuana law reform, opposes Mark Warner

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on June 2, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

GOP Senate hopeful Tony DeTora favors marijuana law reform, opposes Mark Warner

Stafford County resident Tony DeTora is one of four candidates seeking the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate in Virginia. On Saturday, June 7, the state GOP convention in Roanoke will select a candidate to challenge incumbent Senator Mark Warner (D-Alexandria) from a list of competitors that also includes Ed Gillespie, Shak Hill, and Chuck Moss.

DeTora spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner last month on the sidelines of the Fifth District Republican Convention at Hampden-Sydney College near Farmville. The interview began with a look at Warner's vulnerabilities as he runs for re-election in November.

“If you look at the perception of Governor Mark Warner,” DeTora said, “and you compare that to the record of Senator Mark Warner, they're two different people.”

That, he said, is “a huge vulnerability.”

'Not the right guy'
Republicans “need to point that out as we approach November [because] that opens the door for us to get in there [as] some people still really, personally like him. They need to be convinced that maybe he's not the right guy for us in Washington.”

DeTora explained that in his “day job,” he is a senior policy analyst on the staff of Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-California). Rohrabacher recently submitted a successful amendment to an appropriations bill that would have the effect of prohibiting the federal government from interfering with medical marijuana providers in states that have legalized cannabis for medicinal purposes.

Since DeTora works for Rohrabacher, what does he think of efforts to reform marijuana laws?

“I don't think we should be restricting people's freedom,” he said, “without a clear constitutional reason to do so, so I'm supportive of the things he's trying to do.”

Working the system
DeTora's experience on Capitol Hill is one of the key assets he claims to bring with him into the Senate race.

“I also understand the politics and the games and how that works,” he asserted. “I understand how to work the system as well. I'm the only candidate in the race who understands all of that, has all that experience, and wants to go to Washington not to play the games better but to undo them.”

The first-time candidate also believes he can appeal to libertarian voters in the general election.

“Libertarians are going to absolutely be interested in my message. Most of this campaign is going to be about economics because the state of the economy is in a shambles. Obamacare is hurting that. Pushes for increases in the minimum wage is hurting that. All of these things are just compounding so my fiscally conservative message will resonate with libertarians,” he said.

Noting that Libertarian Party candidate Robert Sarvis will be running for the U.S. Senate this year, DeTora said that while Libertarians are “interested in getting the Libertarian Party a permanent spot on the ballot, they also don't want to send Mark Warner back to Washington to represent Virginia, so we can appeal to them that way.”

Taking the long view, DeTora explained he got into the Senate race for the sake of his two-year-old daughter.

“I'm concerned about her future,” he concluded. “We want to male sure that we secure the blessings of liberty not only for ourselves but for our posterity, as they write in the founding documents. I'm concerned that as we approach her future, that America won't be the great nation it still is.”

A podcast of this interview with Tony DeTora can be heard on Bearing Drift's "The Score."

SUGGESTED LINKS

Morgan Griffith, Robert Hurt vote against Rohrabacher amendment on medicinal pot
'Proselytizing for freedom,' Robert Sarvis bids for U.S. Senate in Virginia
GOP Senate candidate Shak Hill thinks government is 'overreaching'
Virginia Senator Mark Warner discusses budget issues, independent voters
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor explains GOP's appeal to libertarian voters

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-senate-hopeful-tony-detora-favors-marijuana-law-reform-opposes-mark-warner

From the Archives: GOP Senate candidate Chuck Moss emphasizes technology issues, outsider status

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on June 5, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

GOP Senate candidate Chuck Moss emphasizes technology issues, outsider status

Virginia Republicans will meet in Roanoke on Saturday, June 7, to pick a candidate for the U.S. Senate to run in the November election against incumbent Democrat Mark Warner.

Four men are seeking the GOP nomination: Tony DeTora, Ed Gillespie, Shak Hill, and Chuck Moss.

Moss is a Northern Virginia small business owner and engineer. He spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on the sidelines of the Fifth Congressional District Republican convention at Hampden-Sydney College last month.

Moss said he was motivated to run for the U.S. Senate nomination because he saw a lack of skills and perspectives on Capitol Hill. Specifically, he explained, there need to be more people in Congress who “understand the technology that's becoming more of an issue within national security, the economy, privacy, things like that.”

DMCA, SOPA, PIPA
He noted that technology issues are underestimated and underreported, deserving more attention from policymakers.

“In terms of technology, we need to understand what we're doing and make sure we're not undermining our large industries at the behest of special interests such as Hollywood,” Moss said.

Among legislation “that's frustrated me over the years,” Moss singled out the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and noted that the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) “had a big uproar,” yet problems in those bills recur within other pieces of legislation.

For example, he said, “right now we're looking at the Trans Pacific Partnership that's being negotiated in secret, ostensibly because of national security concerns. They're trying to fast-track that legislation and a lot of those issues that have been beaten down in the past keep coming back up in various ways. We need to keep an eye on that and not cede the control of Congress to an up-or-down vote on fast-tracking.”

Warner's Vulnerabilities
In terms of the vulnerabilities of his potential opponent, Mark Warner, Moss said that “Obamacare gives us a strong tailwind but I think we need to have a positive message as well.”

Warner, he said, is burdened by having had “a career in Washington both before and after running for office. I think we can make the argument very successfully that we need something different, that the challenges we're facing within the country are too big and too urgent to leave it to career politicians and Washington insiders.”

In terms of appealing to libertarian-minded voters, Moss said “I try not to pigeonhole myself too much, but I have described myself as a fiscal conservative with a libertarian slant. If you look at the Republican Creed and we focus on – and make clear that we support – fiscal responsibility and personal liberty, that has broad appeal that transcends party.”

In Virginia, he explained, the electorate is “very closely, evenly divided” among Republicans, Democrats, and “unaffiliated independents.”

Republican candidates, he said, “need to be able to talk to those people, the swing voters, and make sure our message of fiscal responsibility and personal freedom, if presented well, resonates and transcends party. We need to reach out to people with that consistent message and make the case that we will not only talk about it when running but stand for it when elected.”

A podcast of this interview with GOP Senate candidate Chuck Moss can be heard on Bearing Drift's “The Score.”

SUGGESTED LINKS

GOP Senate candidate Shak Hill thinks government is 'overreaching'
GOP Senate hopeful Tony DeTora favors marijuana law reform, opposes Mark Warner
'Proselytizing for freedom,' Robert Sarvis bids for U.S. Senate in Virginia
Virginia Senator Mark Warner discusses budget issues, independent voters
Morgan Griffith, Robert Hurt vote against Rohrabacher amendment on medicinal pot

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-senate-candidate-chuck-moss-emphasizes-technology-issues-outsider-status

From the Archives: GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie sees 'energized, excited' party activists

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on June 5, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie sees 'energized, excited' party activists

Former national and state Republican chairman Ed Gillespie is one of four candidates seeking the GOP nomination for the U.S. Senate from Virginia at a state party convention in Roanoke on Saturday, June 7.

The winner of the nomination contest – either Gillespie, Tony DeTora, Shak Hill, or Chuck Moss – will go on to face incumbent Senator Mark Warner (D-Alexandria) in November. Libertarian nominee Robert Sarvis may also be on the ballot, pending his meeting the petition requirements by the filing deadline of Tuesday, June 10.

Gillespie spoke to the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on the sidelines of the Fifth Congressional District GOP convention at Hampden-Sydney College on May 17. He expressed his views about health care reform, Warner's vulnerabilities, his appeal to libertarian-leaning voters, and whether he will debate any ballot-qualified candidate during the election campaign.

Party unity
Although the party canvass and convention process so far in 2014 has been fractious, Gillespie believes that “unity is possible.”

Republicans, he said, are “energized, they're excited.”

Gillespie pointed to “massive turnout at our district conventions and people getting energized and excited and coming into the process” as being “a good thing for us.”

With regard to the disputatious nature of the convention process, he said that “a little friction, a little tension here and there, that's a sign of a growing party. I would rather have the growing pains of a growing party than no pains of a shrinking party.”

Libertarian voters
Asked how he can earn the votes of libertarian-leaning Virginians in November, Gillespie asserted that “we have a lot of common ground with our libertarian-leaning members of our party and libertarian-leaning members of the electorate obviously. We are in favor of less government intrusion in our lives, we're in favor of lower taxes, we're in favor of stopping reckless spending, we want to get Obamacare out of making decisions about what our health insurance can be and who our doctors can be.”

He noted his view that, “if you believe in our constitutional principles of limited government and personal freedom, then anyone with a strong libertarian leaning needs to vote for our nominee come November.”

Gillespie would not, however, commit to debating any ballot-qualified candidate during the campaign. “I'd debate Mark Warner happily,” he said, but with regard to Robert Sarvis or any other possible Senate candidate, he demurred.

“I don't know. We'd have to look at that. Obviously, my focus is on Mark Warner,” Gillespie said.

Job killer
Warner's vulnerabilities include “his job-killing policies, his voting with President Obama and Harry Reid 97 percent of the time,” the GOP hopeful said.

Warner, he continued, “didn't just vote for Obamacare, which kills jobs. He voted against an amendment to repeal the medical device tax --165,000 jobs right there. He's for cap-and-trade or a carbon tax. A cap-and-trade regime would cost Virginians alone 66,000 jobs. He has voted job killing policy after job-killing policy. The fact is, his policies have resulted in lost jobs, lower take-home pay, skyrocketing health-care costs, and higher energy prices.”

In contrast, he asserted, Republican policies, “based on free markets and free people, would result in more job creation and higher take-home pay, and lower health-care costs, and bringing down energy prices.”

Gillespie also summarized his views on how to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, sometimes called Obamacare.

Repeal and replace
“We need to repeal it because it's designed to get us to a single-payer system over time. We've got to repeal it and replace it with market-oriented reforms,” he said.

“I'm looking at a positive alternative to put forward for the people of Virginia. Some of the things I've been talking to people about are allowing for insurers to market across state lines. There's an artificial barrier there that doesn't exist in the auto market or the life insurance market. It shouldn't exist in the health insurance market.”

Gillespie also suggested a policy that would give “equal tax treatment for the employer or the employee, giving the employee more power in that regard. That would also help, so when you change jobs you wouldn't be at risk of losing insurance for a pre-existing condition.”

He pointed out the need for reform of medical malpractice laws, “which are driving up health care costs by virtue of defensive medicine practices or exorbitant awards. People need to be protected in our judicial process in the event of hospital error or doctor's error but we can do that without driving up the cost of health care.”

Gillespie also noted that medical savings accounts “hve been gutted by this administration” but should be “beefed up” instead.

He concluded his discussion of health-care policies by saying that he is “looking forward to talking about a positive alternative [to] replace Obamacare. People want to know what we're for as well as what we're against.”

He also expressed confidence about his chances of winning the nomination in Roanoke.

“I am very excited about the convention. I believe we're going to have a unifying convention in Roanoke; I think we can bring our party together. I'm very optimistic about how that's going and like our delegate count a lot.”

Saying he will support the eventual nominee “110 percent,” but adding that “ I'm hoping it's going to be me,” Gillespie concluded that “we have real momentum and a chance to unify our party for a big win in November.”

An audio version of this interview with Senate candidate Ed Gillespie is available on Bearing Drift's podcast, “The Score.”

SUGGESTED LINKS

GOP Senate candidate Chuck Moss emphasizes technology issues, outsider status
GOP Senate hopeful Tony DeTora favors marijuana law reform, opposes Mark Warner
'Proselytizing for freedom,' Robert Sarvis bids for U.S. Senate in Virginia
Virginia Senator Mark Warner discusses budget issues, independent voters
GOP Senate candidate Shak Hill thinks government is 'overreaching'

Original URL:  http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-senate-candidate-ed-gillespie-sees-energized-excited-party-activists

From the Archives: Author Craig Shirley considers whether Ronald Reagan was a libertarian

Author Craig Shirley considers whether Ronald Reagan was a libertarian

Yesterday was the tenth anniversary of the death of President Ronald Reagan. He died on June 5, 2004, the eve of the 60th anniversary of the D-Day invasion and the 20th anniversary of his speech at Normandy remembering “the boys of Pointe du Hoc.”

Earlier this year, Craig Shirley, author of Reagan's Revolution: The Untold Story of the Campaign That Started It All and of Rendezvous with Destiny: Ronald Reagan and the Campaign That Changed America, came to Charlottesville to speak at the Virginia Festival of the Book.

In an interview that weekend with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, Shirley noted how Reagan viewed libertarianism as intrinsic to conservatism and often defined himself as a libertarian.

'Heart and soul'
Reagan, he explained, gave an interview to Reason magazine in 1975, in which “he said that libertarianism is the fundamental basis for American conservatism.”

That interview, conducted by Reason's founding editor Manuel Klausner, appeared in the magazine's July 1975 issue. In it, Reagan said that “if you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism... The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.”

Shirley pointed out that, “for a time, [Reagan] referred to himself publicly as a 'libertarian conservative.' I have interviews with him on CBS in which he referred to himself as a 'libertarian conservative.'”

Reagan, Shirley explained, “was not libertine but he was very much of the opinion, following Locke, Paine, and Jefferson, that [limited government] was about the individual and the privacy and the rights and the dignity of the individual. He said that many, many times in his political career.”

Anti-gay Briggs Amendment
As an example of Reagan's libertarianism, Shirley recalled the then-future president's opposition to the Briggs Amendment in California, a 1978 voter initiative that would have banned gay men and lesbians from teaching in government schools.

John Briggs, he explained, was a California state senator in California. Briggs “had seen the political success that Anita Bryant had done in Dade County” with her campaign to end the local anti-discrimination ordinance that protected gay workers. “Her political star began to rise as she was taking on the gay rights movement,” he said, noting that “Briggs had higher aspirations; he wanted to run for governor of California.”

Briggs, he explained, “came up with an idea that would prohibit either those who championed a homosexual lifestyle or those who were gay and were out from being public school teachers. This deeply offended Ronald Reagan. You could say it was because of his libertarianism, or because of his upbringing, because of his mother's [influence] about allowing people to live and let live, or because of his cosmopolitan lifestyle that he was aware of during his days in Hollywood. He may have been informed by all three experiences but he was against it and he campaigned against it.”

The November 1978 referendum was defeated by a 14-point margin and afterwards, Shirley recalled, Briggs had a press conference where he “was asked by a reporter, why did it lose?”

Briggs replied: “Ronald Reagan. Reagan campaigned against it, and that was it.”

Confirmation
Shirley's recollections are confirmed in an article by James Duke Mason on June 5 in The Advocate, an LGBT magazine.

“Believe it or not,” Mason wrote, “Reagan was one of the first major politicians in history to come out for gay rights. Just a year before he announced his candidacy for president, he came out forcefully” against the Briggs Amendment.

Not only did Reagan “have no political incentive to do it, but it could’ve been a huge catastrophe. In speaking out against the initiative, Reagan used language that was way ahead of its time; he argued that 'prevailing scientific opinion is that an individual’s sexuality is determined at a very early age and that a child’s teachers do not really influence this.' Some dismiss his support as too last-minute to have made a difference. But as his biographer Lou Cannon once put it, Reagan knew the risks but 'chose to state his convictions.'”

Briggs himself blamed Reagan for his amendment's defeat. Could he have equally blamed Reagan's core libertarianism?

SUGGESTED LINKS

Craig Shirley recalls events at the start of World War II in 'December 1941'
Virginia Senate candidates remember Ronald Reagan on his 100th birthday
Historian Paul Kengor on Ronald Reagan and the collapse of the USSR - Part I
Historian Paul Kengor on Ronald Reagan and the collapse of the USSR - Part II
Amity Shlaes discusses significance of Calvin Coolidge at Heritage Foundation

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/author-craig-shirley-considers-whether-ronald-reagan-was-a-libertarian

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on June 6, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

From the Archives: Virginia Congressman Morgan Griffith clarifies aim of his medical marijuana bill

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on June 11, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.


Virginia Congressman Morgan Griffith clarifies aim of his medical marijuana bill

Although he voted against a budget amendment designed to circumscribe federal interference in the production and distribution of medical marijuana in states that have legalized it, U.S. Representative Morgan Griffith (R-VA9) has introduced his own legislation to address implications for federalism and individual liberty by reforming the nation's drug laws.

Griffith's bill, the “Legitimate Use of Medicinal Marijuana Act” or the “LUMMA,” would allow physicians to prescribe marijuana for various ailments and provide for experimentation and research by universities and pharmaceutical companies. Prescription of cannabis is currently prohibited under federal law and research is severely limited.

Congressman Griffith explained the aims of his bill in an interview with the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner on the sidelines of the Republican Party of Virginia's state convention in Roanoke on June 7.

Most of the states that have legalized medicinal marijuana “haven't adopted a policy that I would advocate,” Griffith said. “That is a policy that says that you have doctors involved with a prescription, not just a note that says it might be good for you but a prescription so that we can actually see what we're doing.”

Griffith's bill “would also allow for universities and pharmaceutical companies and whomever to start doing experiments with the levels of the THC,” he explained, “because one of the problems you have is, even where people want to use it for medical reasons, whether it be epilepsy or glaucoma and cancer, we don't really know what the right mix of THC and cannabinoid oils are to make the [use of it] most effective for particular patients.”

Currently, he continued, “because it's a Schedule One drug and the DEA won't reduce it to Schedule Two, you really can't get the research that you need to use it for real medicinal purposes.”

Griffith was critical of the way medical marijuana is regulated in those states where it's already legal.

“A lot of the states have a loosey-goosey plan,” he said.

'A serious medication'
“What we need is to have marijuana treated like any other serious drug, like we treat hydrocodone, like we treat barbiturates, like we treat morphine – treat it seriously, [because] it's a serious medication.”

Once the law treats it that way, he said, then the federal government should “step back and let the states decide whether their doctors can make the prescription. Right now they can't because it's against the federal law and you lose your DEA license to prescribe any drug if you do it.”

Now there are “22 states where the federal government looks the other way and doesn't enforce the law [while] we have a federal law that actually makes it a felony for a hospital or a doctor to actually use it in any kind of an efficacious way.”

Under the terms of Griffith's bill, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) would reschedule marijuana from Schedule One to Schedule Two. “Some would argue it ought to be Schedule Three, or maybe even lower, but Schedule Two gets us the research and allows doctors to use it,” he explained.

While Dana Rohrabacher's amendment to a budget bill last month would have ended DEA and Department of Justice interference in states with legal medical marijuana, that approach does not go far enough for Griffith.

'Patchwork set of laws'
“I think a lot of folks feel that voting for these budget amendments is solving the problem,” he said, adding that it “actually makes the problem more complex because then you have a patchwork set of rules across the nation and it's still a violation of federal law.”

As a result, “whenever a new president comes in, they say to the DEA, 'Go get those people, they're in violation of federal law.' I don't want to do that. I want there to be a respect for the law but let's get the law right.”

The right way to reform the law, he explained, is to “have our doctors, our trained medical professionals, prescribing it, and have our universities and our pharmaceutical companies testing it to get the dosage right.”

Griffith's bill, designated HR 4498, currently has two cosponsors: Rep. James Moran (D-VA8) and Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-CA47). It has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, chaired by Michigan Republican Fred Upton, where it awaits action.

SUGGESTED LINKS

Morgan Griffith, Robert Hurt vote against Rohrabacher amendment on medicinal pot
Virginia Republican Congressmen Respond to 2014 State of the Union Message
GOP Senate hopeful Tony DeTora favors marijuana law reform, opposes Mark Warner
Ken Cuccinelli clarifies remarks on marijuana legalization as federalism issue
Justin Bieber, Gary Becker, and the future of marijuana prohibition

Original URL:  http://www.examiner.com/article/virginia-congressman-morgan-griffith-clarifies-aim-of-his-medical-marijuana-bill

From the Archives: 'Republicans have learned a lesson' says GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on July 6, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

'Republicans have learned a lesson' says GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie

In an interview following the annual Independence Day parade in Crozet in western Albemarle County on July 5, U.S. Senate candidate Ed Gillespie said that “Republicans have learned a lesson” after presiding over unprecedented growth in the size and scope of government from 2001 to 2007, when the party controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress.

“The difference between Republicans and Democrats,” he told the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner at Claudius Crozet Park, “is, I think, Republicans have learned a lesson.”

Continuing, he noted that “the fact is, I agree that when Republicans had the House, the Senate, and the White House that we spent too much money.”

That experience from the first decade of the 21st century, he added, “pales in comparison to what the Democrats did when they got control of all three – the House, the Senate, and the White House – but that's not enough.”

'Size and scope'
Republicans, he said, “understand that, if we're given the opportunity to govern again, and we get majorities in the House and the Senate and then, certainly, the White House, we need to reduce the size and scope of the federal government and get it in its proper size and scope.”

Gillespie said that “there are a number of functions that the federal government performs that would better be performed by individuals in the private sector and by the states. I think the federal government over the past five years, in particular, has encroached on state prerogatives.”

When asked to name three federal programs that he would like to see eliminated, however, the GOP Senate candidate would name only one, the Export-Import Bank, which is due to be reauthorized in September.

“One that I have said already that I believe should not be reauthorized and doesn't deserve to be continued in funding is the ExIm Bank,” Gillespie said, “but we'll roll out more details later as we go along.”

Gillespie, who served in the George W. Bush administration and has been chairman of both the Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Virginia, explained that his victory over incumbent Democrat Mark Warner in November will be a harbinger of a GOP majority in the U.S. Senate.

“Not only would Mark Warner become the former Senator from Virginia,” he said, “but Harry Reid will become the former Senate majority leader. That would have a major impact on the future of the country: an immediate, beneficial, positive impact on the direction of the United States.”

Reid (D-Nev.), he said, “has bottled up legislation not just bills that have come from the House which deserve a fair hearing in the Senate.”

'Vigorous agenda'
With a Republican majority in the Senate, Gillespie explained, “you will see a much more vigorous agenda” in the upper chamber “and we'd be able to work with a Republican House to get legislation to the President's desk.”

Asked whether a Republican-controlled Congress would repeal Bush-era laws that expanded the federal government, such as No Child Left Behind and Medicare Part D, Gillespie expressed uncertainty.

“I don't know yet,” he said, “how much support there would be for that.”

Crozet's holiday parade was the fifth Gillespie had marched in so far this weekend. He said he was next heading to Virginia Beach to participate in festivities there.

SUGGESTED LINKS

GOP can regain control of Senate in 2014, says strategist Grover Norquist
GOP Senate candidate Ed Gillespie sees 'energized, excited' party activists
Virginia Senator Mark Warner assesses situation in Iraq and the Middle East
'Proselytizing for freedom,' Robert Sarvis bids for U.S. Senate in Virginia
Senator Mark Warner defends his record against GOP challenger Ed Gillespie

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/republicans-have-learned-a-lesson-says-gop-senate-candidate-ed-gillespie

From the Archives: 'They won and we blinked' says former Sen. George Allen on Iran deal

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on September 13, 2015. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site is scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

'They won and we blinked' says former Sen. George Allen on Iran deal

Former Virginia Governor and U.S. Senator George Allen spoke in Charlottesville on Saturday, September 12, at the monthly breakfast of the Albemarle County Republican Committee. His message to the gathered activists was one of inclusion, saying that political parties win elections by addition, not subtraction.

Before he delivered his remarks, the Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner asked him about some foreign policy matters that are in the news. Allen said that, if he were still in the Senate, he would vote against the proposed deal with Iran on nuclear technology. He also said that the best solution to the refugee crisis in the Middle East is to build a “safe haven” in Syria rather than encourage migrants to come to Europe or the United States.

'Sanctions worked'
One aspect of the agreement with Iran that bothers Allen is the unfreezing of assets.

“One of the things I worked on when I was in the Senate,” he explained, was the issue of people who had been held hostage, injured, and killed by Iran over the years.

Going back to the Carter administration, he said, there were court judgments in favor of those injured parties that could be paid out of frozen Iranian assets in the United States and elsewhere.

“We have all these assets,” Allen said, “and they ought to be able to get their judgments paid out of those assets. Those assets are being released back to [Iran], going back to a regime that's going to use that money to support Hamas and Hezbollah and all sorts of terrorist organizations around the Middle East.”

On the nuclear aspect of the agreement, he said, “People will argue over the verification and so forth of that, and you can argue endlessly. But here's the other point: they are a state sponsor of terror and in five years the arms embargo is off. Then in seven or eight years the ballistic missile sanctions are removed.”

Iran, he said, is “a dangerous force and they can be even more dangerous after this when they can get more arms and they can get more missile technology.”

Acknowledging that the agreement will go forward, Allen said “I hope that I'm wrong but I see no evidence to evince any sort of confidence that this theocracy will change its ways and will only be stronger. In fact,” he added, from Iran's perspective, “they won and we blinked.”

Stated flatly, he concluded: “Sanctions worked. What we ought to do is keep the sanctions on but these other countries” that are party to the agreement “are all capitulating because they want to go [into Iran] to make a little money.”

'Safe haven'
On the matter of the refugee crisis in the Middle East – over four million refugees from Syria are now in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan but the United States has promised to take in just 10,000 – Allen was reluctant to suggest that the United States should commit to receiving more asylum seekers.

“I think the best solution to all of this is to create an area, a safe area, in Syria, maybe along the Jordanian border,” he said, “and just create a safe-haven city so that the folks from Syria don't have to leave their country on risky boats going to Greece.”

That solution, he said, “would be a whole lot less expensive to our government, to the governments of Europe and the world, to create that sort of a situation rather than having them so desperate to live and get food they have to make these risky trips. To me, that's the solution to it rather than creating this diaspora from” Syria in the United States and Europe.

Noting that he understands asylum laws and how they affect refugees from conflict zones, Allen concluded that “to me the solution would have been, and should be, and in fact, can still be, to create a safe haven for them in Syria.”

SUGGESTED LINKS

Former Senator George Allen 'stunned' by Donald Trump's popularity in GOP
House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte is 'sympathetic' to Kim Davis
DC-area expatriates rally to provide assistance to storm-damaged Dominica
Congressmen Bob Goodlatte and Robert Hurt comment on WDBJ-TV killings
Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt speaks out for free trade in Charlottesville

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/they-won-and-we-blinked-says-former-sen-george-allen-on-iran-deal

50 Years Later, Barry Goldwater's GOP Convention Speech Still Resonates

“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice” was the biggest applause line of Barry Goldwater's speech accepting his party's nomination as a presidential candidate.

It is probably also the most misunderstood, ripped-out-of-context line in a speech that stands, even today, as a succinct definition of conservatism.

Surprisingly, in 3,186 words, Goldwater never used any form of the word “conservative” in this famous speech. This stood in contrast to four years earlier, when he scolded supporters who threatened the cohesion of the Republican Party by saying, “Let's grow up, conservatives.”

Fifty years ago today, on July 16, 1964, grown-up conservative Barry Goldwater spoke to the GOP convention in San Francisco.*

Most readers of this blog are too young to remember Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign, yet it is almost universally credited with launching both the modern conservative and the modern libertarian movements. The principal founders of the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation worked on Goldwater's campaign. The founding members of the Libertarian Party were Goldwater campaign volunteers, and Virginia's current Republican National Committeeman, Morton Blackwell, was the youngest Goldwater delegate at the 1964 convention.

The campaign set the stage for a transformation of the Republican party and Ronald Reagan's election in 1980. As George F. Will has put it, Goldwater won the 1964 election but it took 16 years to count the votes.

Something of a précis of his 1960 book, The Conscience of a Conservative, Goldwater's convention speech endeavored to explain conservatism – or what he called “Republicanism” on that occasion, eschewing specific references to the C-word – to listeners who had not yet learned much about it and who unfairly feared it.

In the same speech, Goldwater displayed a certain amount of prescience regarding the course of human history and offered advice to his fellow Republicans who, then as now, often found themselves among bickering factions.

In one, brief paragraph about halfway through the speech, the Arizona Senator summarized the conservative view of individual liberty and the proper role of government.

We see, in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society. And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We do not seek to lead anyone's life for him - we seek only to secure his rights and to guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed.

Goldwater also drew a contrast explicitly to the communist, totalitarian vision and, implicitly, to big-government liberalism then in vogue, and recognized the tensions inherent in simultaneous pursuits of liberty and equality.

Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies. Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.

In a line that could be welcomed equally today by the Tea Party and by the Occupy movement, Goldwater said that conservatives must “resist concentrations of power, private or public, which enforce such conformity and inflict such despotism. It is the cause of Republicanism to ensure that power remains in the hands of the people.”

And, as if envisioning the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Empire a quarter-century later, Goldwater made remarkably accurate predictions in this paragraph:

I believe that we must look beyond the defense of freedom today to its extension tomorrow. I believe that the communism which boasts it will bury us will, instead, give way to the forces of freedom. And I can see in the distant and yet recognizable future the outlines of a world worthy our dedication, our every risk, our every effort, our every sacrifice along the way. Yes, a world that will redeem the suffering of those who will be liberated from tyranny. I can see and I suggest that all thoughtful men must contemplate the flowering of an Atlantic civilization, the whole world of Europe unified and free, trading openly across its borders, communicating openly across the world.

Toward the end of his speech, just before the famous line about “extremism,” Goldwater pointed out the factionalism in the Republican party was not necessarily new, but also was not necessarily bad.

The GOP, he said, is “a Party for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists.”

Then he quoted Abraham Lincoln in 1858 “because he probably could have said it during the last week or so: "[The Republican Party] was composed of strained, discordant, and even hostile elements.'”

As if warning the Tea Party and “establishment” branches of the conservative movement of the 21st century, or the social conservative and the libertarian factions, Goldwater admonished: “Let our Republicanism, so focused and so dedicated, not be made fuzzy and futile by unthinking and stupid labels.”

Explaining that the Republican Party should require no litmus tests, Goldwater explained:

the beauty of this Federal system of ours is in its reconciliation of diversity with unity. We must not see malice in honest differences of opinion, and no matter how great, so long as they are not inconsistent with the pledges we have given to each other in and through our Constitution. Our Republican cause is not to level out the world or make its people conform in computer regimented sameness. Our Republican cause is to free our people and light the way for liberty throughout the world.

It was in that context – between “stupid labels” and the beauty of the American system – that Goldwater added:

“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" -- the second part being so often forgotten while the first part so often misinterpreted.

He concluded with the modest thought that conservatives have “a very human cause for very humane goals.”

Perhaps suggesting that he knew victory in November was unlikely, Goldwater went on to note that his 1964 campaign was a first step in a long journey.

This Party, its good people, and its unquestionable devotion to freedom, will not fulfill the purposes of this campaign which we launch here now until our cause has won the day, inspired the world, and shown the way to a tomorrow worthy of all our yesteryears.

Barry Goldwater's nomination acceptance speech of July 16, 1964, can be viewed in its entirety on the C-SPAN web site, where you can see people smoking openly on the convention floor.



*Twenty years later, when the Democrats chose the same city for their nominating convention, then-UN Ambassador Jeane J. Kirkpatrick repeatedly dripped with contempt the phrase “San Francisco Democrats” in her own GOP convention speech.

(Cross-posted, in slightly different form, from Bearing Drift. A shorter version of this essay also appears on Examiner.com.)