Unconventional Wisdom

[VIDEO] This is a clip from last nights GOP presidential debate. Marathon Pundit got him good for this one!

YAY!!! This isn’t a cross post!

Andrew Jackson was our 7th President serving from 1829 to 1837. This American Spectator article makes a great case that President Jackson – a Democrat – would be very relatable to today’s Tea Party movement.

I’m excerpting the conclusion on Jackson’s foreign policy if he just so happened to drop in on 21st Century America and then the final paragaph of this article:

On foreign policy, Jackson would argue that America must play a significant role in the world. We are a great nation and must stand tall. But he would warn against getting involved in unnecessary wars unrelated to vital American interests. And he would ferociously attack anyone who suggested, for example, that opposition to America’s Libyan adventure amounted to isolationism. He would insist on reasonable and accurate terms of debate.

Corporate welfare in all its forms; high taxes that thwart economic activity and entrepreneurialism; persistent deficit spending; the bloated federal government; intrusions from Washington great and small into the lives of citizens; petty corruption in legislative activity; unnecessary and dangerous military ventures — all would come under Jackson’s damning political assault. Then he would take his program to the American people, let the chips fall, and rise or fall on his principles. This approach worked with the Bank of the U.S. back in the 1830s. Perhaps it will reemerge as the country’s dominant political force in the 2010s.

Give this article a full read! Jackson I would think of as one of our more unique Presidents. Who could fill his shoes today? Because I already know he’s not going to magically drop from the 19th century into the 21st century!

Via Newsalert!

[VIDEO] Since Rep. Ron Paul ran in the 2008 Presidential Race on the Republican side I’ve often pondered this subject. In that party the Conservatives had to find the right standard bearer and that turned out to be Ronald Reagan. There is still a need in the GOP to find that conservative standard bearer.

Still, I do wonder if now is the time for a Reaganesque figure for Libertarianism. If you believe that this nation needs to head in a direction that allows for less government and more liberty I would say now is the time. It does seem however that such movements takes years before eventually they do gain some success or even the Presidency or even solid control of either of our two major parties.

All the same Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit talks to former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson on this very subject. Do you think this nation is ready for mainstream Libertarianism, however that should be defined?

One analysis over how Obama wasn’t able to live up to his promise when he was first elected in 2008 provided by Rich Miller of the Capitol Fax:

It’s generally considered a rule of thumb that politicians with mainly legislative backgrounds do not make particularly effective chief executives. The two worlds, and their required mind-sets, are vastly different.

And, for the most part, our state’s better governors and our country’s most effective presidents for the past 100 years or so have had executive experience before moving to the top of the ladder. I spend a lot of time thinking and writing about legislatures, and I’ve been thinking lately that many of President Barack Obama’s bungles can be traced right to this issue.

Obama never really ran anything before being elected. But, more importantly, he also learned over the years to think like a legislator. Judging from afar, I don’t believe he has truly changed his mind-set.
…
Obama firmly believed his success at working with Republicans would help him be a better president. Heck, I thought the same thing during his campaign. So far, we’ve both been wrong.

After he was elected president, Obama was no longer a member of a large, mostly collegial group. Many of the same people who once gladly worked with him immediately vowed to block his every move.

Instead of realizing that the game had completely changed, Obama continued to approach Congress as if he were still a member of their club.

You should go over to CapFax and read the whole thing. And then in that same posting you will see another POV by Tribune Columnist Eric Zorn.

Count me as one of those who believes that “executive experience” is what one should look for in a potential chief executive. As President you have to execute the laws and the policies just as any manager would in a private business. A presidential candidate should show that he/she can lead and prove his/her effectiveness.

Of course that’s not to say that’s the only thing that matters. Obama didn’t have a large resume to begin with. Even if he did “conservatively” move up the ladder to prepare for the presidency – which would be ideal if not practical if you want to strike while the iron is hot – then there risks with that as well. To be sure lack of “executive experience” bothered me with McCain although he had a more significant resume than Obama. Although we could count McCain’s US Navy service.

American Rattlesnake on the immigration positions of Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. According to writer Gerard Perry an edge will go to Romney on his immigration position. This is all based on last night’s GOP presidential debate that aired on FOX News Channel.

[VIDEO] Very informative. Santorum went after Perry on immigration. And it seems the two front runners – Perry & Romney – went after each other hard. So here is Gov. Perry and Romney going after each other in the vid above.

Tough times are coming for President Obama according to the Tribune’s Washington Bureau:

Is it time to panic at the White House? The whispers have begun to grow louder both inside and outside the Beltway that the answer is yes, and that President Obama’s West Wing is in need of a good old-fashioned shakeup.

The loudest voice to date is that of James Carville, the boisterous Democratic strategist who helped put Bill Clinton into the White House in 1992.

Writing at CNN.com, Carville said the results of special elections this week in New York and Nevada call for an urgent response from the president to change course.

“We are far past sending out talking points. Do not attempt to dumb it down. We cannot stand any more explanations,” Carville wrote Thursday.

He outlined a three-point strategy that starts with firing “a lot of people.”

“For God’s sake, why are we still looking at the same political and economic advisors that got us into this mess? It’s not working,” he said.

I can’t disagree with the whole firing thing, it’s just that it should’ve been done and I’m thinking it’s far too late in this game to start changing ship. That should’ve been done earlier this year if you really wanted some time to right the ship into for the next election. He may have a hard time convincing the electorate that he’s on the correct course.