South Carolina is the first Republican bellwether

In many ways, South Carolina has the future of the Republican Party in its’ hands. Up until now, the Republican primaries have only flirted with defining what the Republican Party wants. Independents in New Hampshire helped push McCain to victory in a small state with little Republican presence. Michigan rescued Romney and was the most populace stage for a Republican primary yet. However, even that win comes with an asterisk in a largely Democrat state with a fair share of activists who were urged to muddle with the Republican primary by fringe left leaders. But his margin of victory should be enough to validate the win. Iowa has probably been the truest test so far but even there the state is trending Democrat.

The real indication of who Republicans think should be the next president will be in South Carolina. South Carolina is a fairly populace state with a long history as an indicator of how the political will of a good portion of the nation will shape up. South Carolina is a red state with an overwhelmingly Republican government. One of the original thirteen colonies, it chose to succeed from Britain. Later it would be the first state in the Union to secede from the United States and form the Confederacy.

The reasons behind that secession were many but the opposing principles were Federalism versus democratic rule. Robert Barnwell Rhett gave voice to this clash in 1861 with South Carolina’s call for secession.

He wrote “The Government of the United States is no longer the government of a confederate republic, but of a consolidated democracy. It is no longer a free government, but a despotism.”

Of note in his address is that the primary wedge issue was slavery. Some historical revisionists, in an attempt to rescue the image of Southern secessionists have tried to claim slavery was an ancillary issue of the day. This document makes quite clear that slavery was the issue even though political dissension was the justification for secession. But to the point, the question of federalism vs. democratic rule may not resonate with much of the country, but it does in the Midwest and the South at an almost instinctual level.

In those less populace states, under a purely democratic rule, their fates would be truly in the hands of remote urban population centers. A federalist government however, compensates for population differences (and thus cultural differences) by limiting the role of the federal government to those things defined in the U.S Constitution.

Not many of the Republicans vying for the nomination understand that the language of the red states is the language of federalism. Governor Huckabee seems willing to throw it out the window whenever it conflicts with his religious inclinations as his weakness on illegal immigration shows. Similarly, John McCain abandons the concept of federalism replacing it with his own moral code, again as demonstrated by his position on amnesty for illegal immigrants.

The fact is that sometimes federalism hurts. Nobody wants to be the bad guy who tells millions of people who want a better life to hit the road. However, the law must trump emotions. And we must trust that the weaknesses of federalism will be compensated in other ways.

For example, slavery itself, under a pure federalist system, may have never been brought down. However, other forces, such as market capitalism would have countered the weaknesses of federalism. In the example of slavery, if the federal government had not fought the secessionist states to free the slaves, it is arguable that economic boycotts and political pressure would have eventually achieved the same ends.

In the same way, we can find other ways to achieve the goal of a better future for our neighbors to the south of the border than to allow them to scramble over our gates. As Thompson stated “we get to control” who comes in the gates.

Whereas it is demonstrated that the practice of federalism must be tempered with morality, the question becomes whose morality? Why, the morality of the person seeking the highest office, of course. So especially in a federalist system, the question of morality becomes essential whether it be too much, too little, or too foreign.

A candidate who cares more about satisfying a group of people who have repeatedly flaunted the laws of this country in their own self interest, and then demand the protection of that law to legitimize their illegal acts, does not mesh with a federalist mindset. To move away from law and order is to weaken federalism. Senator McCain’s weakness on immigration is a weakness of federalism.

Fred Thompson does speak the language of federalism. He makes no bones about the fact that his message is a federalist one and not a populist one. He makes it clear that sometimes federalism hurts. He and Romney alone make it clear that they hear the clamoring in this nation to control our borders and will not supplant federalism with “good works” of a Christian flavor.

Fred Thompson notes that the greatness of our federalist government is that it “preserves to the people” the power to do such good works but that these works should not be demanded by the government upon the people. That is a position that should satisfy all Republicans, allowing the evangelical to comply with the tenants of their faith, but limits the influence over the government by religion.

A careful observer might note that while every other candidate for president has provided a string of bailout promises to some group or another, Senator Thompson has limited his political speech to addressing the protection of the people from a government bent on unlimited domestic power and growth, seemingly no matter which party is in power. In that, he is the true successor to the Reagan mantle. Reagan spoke to all Americans and not just special interests or government bureaucrats.

Local reporting from South Carolina predominately reports a Thompson surge. While many candidates claim the Reagan mantle, only Thompson adheres to the Reagan spirit. Look for South Carolina, the first Republican testing ground, to put Thompson as the Republican front-runner. His federalist positions are the key to victory among main stream conservatives.

Ray Robison is the coauthor of Both In One Trench: Saddam's Secret Terror Documents

Michelle malkin on Grahamnesty

Latest on Fred from Jawa

Comments

[delburd]

Thank you for the great article on Senator Thompson with supporters like you we are sure to win !!

[David M]

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 01/18/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.
http://thunderrun.blogspot.com/2008/01/web-reconnaissance-for-01182008.html

[Joseph]

Will be back after the votes are counted to laugh in YOU FACE!

You Are So Delusional

[Ray Robison]

umm, joseph, where exactly did I predict a victory for Thompson? the closest I got was a "look for" statement which isnt exactly firm, THATS MORE OF A MAYBE, if things line up right. If I felt he was a lock, why even bother to write this? And dont bother comming back, I dont like having stupid people misrepresent my words.

[Frederick Paxson]

FRED THOMPSON is the best person to lead this country. He is a true conservative and has been his entire life. All one has to do is check his record to see this.

During my time in the Army as an Intelligence Analyst, I served under both Presidents Carter and Reagan (as my commanders in chief). Without argument, President Reagan was the best commander-in-chief a military person could ever have served under. Fred Thompson possesses the same qualities and vision as President Reagan in that he is strong on national defense and sees a dire need to secure our borders and control immigration.

I can think of no better person to lead this country and fix the problems we have. He is the only candidate from either party who has specific and detailed plans on border security and immigration reform; revitalization of America’s armed forces; saving and protecting Social Security; and tax relief and economic growth. These are detailed on his Web site at www.fred08.com . I challenge you to find any other candidate who has laid out specific plans to fix anything.

Fred Thompson has published his first principles, some of which are mentioned above. In addition to those, he strongly believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, federalism, traditional American values, the rule of law and is a strong proponent of the Second Amendment — all concepts established during the birth of our country and documented in our Constitution.

Again, try to find any candidate who has laid out their plans to “fix” this country. You will find they all speak in vague and abstract terms on their plans.

For those who have heard Fred Thompson speak, you will usually hear him say that the Fred Thompson you see today is the same Fred Thompson you saw yesterday and is the same Fred Thompson you will see tomorrow. He stands by his principles and values and doesn’t shift his positions based on polls or public opinion; in other words, he doesn’t say what the voters want to hear just to get elected, but remains steadfast on his views and convictions.

During his time in the Senate he focused on three areas: to lower taxes, strengthen national security and expose waste in the federal government. Fred Thompson has foreign policy experience, having served as member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Intelligence committees.

As chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, he opened the investigation in 1997 on the Chinese government’s attempt to influence American policies and elections, and this investigation identified connections with the Clinton administration (documented in the committee’s report).

As a member of the Finance Committee, he worked tirelessly to enact three major tax-cut bills. Fred Thompson remains steadfast and even though a person may not agree with all his views and he understands some may disagree with him, you can count on him to be consistent and unwavering.

Don’t be fooled by his laid back approach and what critics call his “laziness.” As a former assistant U.S. attorney, he earned a reputation as a tough prosecutor and he possesses the toughness this country needs in order to tackle today’s and tomorrow’s issues.

I ask that you take a hard look at what this country needs, then take a hard look at all the other candidates’ views, policies, their records and their track record on consistency. Fred Thompson possesses integrity, loyalty, commitment, energy and decisiveness, all traits of an effective leader, and will emerge as the best person to take this country boldly forward.

Please help Fred win in 2008:
https://www.fred08.com/contribute.aspx?RefererID=c637caaa-315c-4b4c-9967-08d864cd0791

[mike]

Well, S.C. used to be a Conservative/Red state, if the vote is any indication, No Mo! I used to live and work in Columbia,S.C. many, many years ago! Had this older gentleman take me for a walking tour of the Capital over one lunch, he showed me all the Canon ball marks that us yankees put in the Wade Hampton(SP?) bldg!!:)

Course he made sure to tell me the difference between a yankee and a "Damn Yankee!"

Yankees come visit and go home, "Damn Yankees," stay! I'm beginnin to think there are too many "Damn Yankees" in S.C.!!

I've donated to Fred's campaign twice, as long as he decides to stay in, I'll continue! If the Pubs nominate McNutt, Rudy, or Romney, it'll go down in flames! Used to call myself a Pub, NO Mo!!

[Ronald Abrams]

Mike

The cannonballs hit the state capitol bldg, not the Wade Hampton office bldg behind the capitol. All yankees lately are Damn Yankees..scalawags,too. For you the un-educated a scalawag was a turncoat person of Southern birth who sided with the yankees and reconstruction. Point of order..if slavery was the reason for secession..then why did the South reject the proposed constitutional amendment by northern democrats such as Ohio's Vlandaningham(sp?) to appease Southerners to stay in the union?
Thanks for your support, Mike. you are what we call a copperhead and not a yankee.For those who wonder what a copperhead is, well look it up. DEO VINDICE!