2013 … Bold and Fearless

It may be difficult for some of us to cheerily embrace the holiday celebrations. Many of us had great hopes for 2013 and watched those hopes and expectations dashed on November 6, 2012. We won’t have the pleasure of anticipating, with joy and relief, the inauguration of a new president. We know that the policies, deceits and abuses of our Constitution of the past four years are likely, without impeachment or divine intervention, to continue for another four years. We expect that this administration feels emboldened by their snatched victory and we can envisage an exponential increase of the aforementioned. Recognition of what lies ahead for this nation provides no cause for celebration.

I began The Bold Pursuit several years ago as a neophyte blogger who wished to share her views and concerns about the new administration. I invited other bloggers, artists, musicians and poets to join me and add their own perspectives to this forum for patriotic expression. Together, we sought to warn and inform, with objectivity, courtesy and intelligent thought, our readers and visitors.

After November 6, I questioned the purpose of continuing The Bold Pursuit; if we weren’t able to make a difference and substantiate, with fact and logic, the true threat the current administration poses to the country, as well as to future elections, perhaps we haven’t served our purpose.

While taking note of the posthumous evaluations of the election, it is clear to me that triumphing over the present regime would require formidable citizen action, as well as adopting the same corrupt and malicious tactics that the ‘winning’ campaign employed. That’s not an acceptable stratagem for those of us who consider honesty and fair play as part of our ethical DNA.

So where do we go from here? In considering TBP’s future, I looked to the quote by Thomas Jefferson in which I found our site’s name: “I was bold in the pursuit of knowledge, never fearing to follow truth or reason to whatever results they led, and bearding every authority which stood in their way.”

Boldly pursue knowledge … never fear to follow truth … These words will continue to be our guideposts in our efforts to warn and inform. We welcome the challenges that 2013 brings our way and will face them … boldly. ~ Clio

We wish to thank and acknowledge the writers, staff and contributors who supported The Bold Pursuit: our Senior Editor, Genevieve; columnist John Wayne Tucker, contributing and guest writers Jim Mullen, Robert Arvay, Dhaval Sheth, Cam Vallee, Don Hank, Sandy Stringfellow, Hartley Atkins, Victor Lundquist (MittRomneyCentral); political cartoonist, Noel Alcoba – The RightHanded Cartoonist, MittFitts, LMAObama.com (are congrats in order for another four years? Keep making us laugh, friends!), Bruce O’H (our banner artist and supporter), Bill (EVP-at-large) and Ron Devito, publisher of US4Palin and our syndicate partner. Wishing all of you a happy, healthy (don’t get sick under obamacare!) and prosperous (avoid becoming part of the 2% … or 3%. We know that target group is a fluid number) 2013. Happy New Year.

Advertisements

Guns Don’t Kill, Government Kills

by Donald Hank, Guest Contributor

Throughout the 1990s, Washington, D.C. had more of its residents killed by police officers than any other city in the United States. Now the D.C. metropolitan police department has ordered 500 AR-15 assault rifles, which they will begin issuing to inner-city patrol cops to start carrying on the streets this summer.

Obama gave heavy weapons to Al Qaeda in his zeal to get rid of West-friendly Ghadaffi and evidence shows he may be doing the same thing in Syria. US ambassador Chris Stevens was killed in an attack that involved shoulder fired missiles, more deadly and powerful than an assault weapon. These may have been supplied by the US but attempts by Congress to investigate have been thwarted by stonewalling and frequent changes in the government’s accounts of the attack.

(Obama did not cry on national TV when Ambassador Stevens and three other government agents were killed).

Under Operation Fast and Furious, Obama’s ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives), part of Eric Holder’s Department of Justice, sold firearms to known Mexican drug dealers under the pretext of tracking the weapons, which they promptly lost from view. These were assault weapons in many cases. One of these lost weapons turned up at the murder scene of border patrol agent Brian Terry and in the murder scenes of dozens of slain Mexicans:

http://www.mainjustice.com/2012/12/17/brian-terry-family-sues-atf-officials-prosecutor-involved-in-operation-fast-and-furious/.

(Obama did not cry on national TV when agent Brian Terry was killed).

Other things that are never mentioned in the gun debate:

Police all over the US are using the AK15, but when THEY use it, the press kindly refers to it as a ‘tactical rifle.’ When citizens use it, they call it an assault rifle. Words used by reporters are propaganda to make you accept the official viewpoint. http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/broken-arrow-police-deploying-new-tactical-rifles-/nSYJG/

The Fort Hood killer Nidal Hasan was aided and abetted by the Obama administration, which refused to heed his wild threats to kill Americans. Despite his mental instability and terrorist sympathies, he was promoted to Major and killed military personnel with a weapon issued by the US government.

(Obama did not cry on national TV on this occasion).

Half of the citizens killed by police every year are mentally ill: http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/half-people-shot-police-are-mentally-ill-investigation-finds

Police shot 1,146 people in 2011.

Quote: In 1971, police officers in New York City shot 314 people, killing 93. (In California, the state with the most police involved shootings in 2011, the police shot 183, killing 102.) In 2010, New York City police shot 24, killing eight. Last year, in the nation’s largest city, the police shot 16, killing six. In Columbus, Ohio, a city one eighth the size of New York, the police shot 14, killing eight. Statistical diversities like this suggest that in the cities with the highest per capita shooting rates, better people ought to be hired, or the existing forces need a lot more training in the use of deadly force.

In other words, in some areas police would seem to be killing people they would not have to kill. Why isn’t this part of the gun debate? It doesn’t fit the agenda.

http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.com/2012/01/police-involved-shootings-2011-annual.html

London vs NY:

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/ny-fares-well-vs-london-in-a-new-study/83495/

Quote: A new report has found that Londoners are six times more likely to be robbed or assaulted than New Yorkers, that their cost of living is nearly 40% higher.

So the cost of disarming citizens is a net loss of security and safety and not a net gain.

Illegal aliens kill about 12 people a day: http://www.wnd.com/2006/11/39031/. (Obama has not shed any dry tears over these deaths, though many are children).

These people are here because the federal government encourages them to enter and now wants amnesty under the Dream Act, which would encourage even more unvetted people to enter the US, many with criminal background. Where are these killers in the gun debate?

The Obama administration released 19 illegal alien felons who subsequently committed murders:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/31/illegals-released-feds-19-murders-142-sex-crimes/?page=all

Further on violence by illegal aliens:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/5812-illegal-alien-sex-crimes-guns–anarcho-tyranny

http://www.infowars.com/the-horrific-crimes-of-illegal-aliens/

http://www.immigrationshumancost.org/text/crimevictims_2.html

If you add to this the lives lost defending ‘democracy’ in Middle East nations that, as a result of our intervention, have since gone over to anarchy or Islamic sharia regimes with no respect for the rights of women or minorities (especially Christians but also minority branches of Islam), it is clear that the big killer is not guns but government. 

Don Hank 

Further reading:

No, seriously, I could swear the water in this pot is getting a little hotter… (#3)

Weak-kneed Republicans must learn to fight or surely, they will perish

by Jim Mullen 

Radicals of the country, and indeed, the world, united to give Barack Obama nearly unfettered supremacy over Americans’ lives. The country’s march to fascism quickened on that fatal 2012 Election Day. 

Obama will be even more dangerous to liberty and a free economy in his next four years since he spent one out of three days in office during his first term on fundraising. Now he is virtually unencumbered to enslave this nation and convert our economy into a Marxist state. 

Nearly 60 million Americans lost their lust for liberty when they succumbed to Barack Obama’s Marxist tyranny. They sold the country’s soul for his promise of stealing money from the producers, visionaries, and job creators, and then giving it to the bitter, envious, and slothful. 

Misinformed and misguided Republicans immediately joined the liberals after the election to declare that Republicans must make policy changes to align the Party more with the winning Democratic Party strategies. In other words, they must retreat even further from Constitutional government, free enterprise, Capitalism, and teaching personal responsibility. 

One such shortsighted rant coming from the left side of the Republican Party endorses amnesty for the tens of millions of illegal aliens and their families. 

Ronald Reagan fell for that Democratic Party bait-and-switch in 1986. After Reagan granted amnesty for their customary lying promise of border security, Democrats showed him the backside of their mascot and said, “Thanks sucker!” Subsequently, Republicans were rewarded for their gullibility by losing 7% of the Hispanic vote in the next presidential election. Self-destructive Republicans now propose to give Democrats another 20 million votes. 

Rather than explaining how illegal aliens take jobs from low and middle-class Americans and drain precious resources and taxpayers’ money to maintain the welfare system for illegals, Republicans are ready once again to cave in to liberal intimidation. 

There is a deafening silence from politicians illuminating the lethal consequences awaiting our country from assassins crossing our nearly unguarded border. Their deadly formation of terrorist cells and attacks on the American people will make 9-11 seem like amateur play. 

Additionally, we never hear either political party talking about the drug gangs and cartels that have inundated and captured the inner cities of the United States. These people cross the border at will with guns, drugs, and human trafficking. 

Democrats learned long ago to use race baiting, immigration, and class warfare like strafing fire; they conditioned Republicans to duck, run for cover, and cower in fear. 

Republicans mistakenly believe this post-election ploy will endear them to millions of Hispanic voters. They feel that by joining the Democrats in kowtowing to political correctness and emotional blackmail, they can tap into the fastest growing demographic in America – people who should not be here. 

American citizenship is the world’s greatest and most sought-after treasure. It should never be trivialized to a point that its crown jewel is granted to those who breach our national wall, break into our society, raid the country’s treasury, steal American jobs, and then demand the bestowal of citizenship. There should be no right for any such group to change the entire political dynamics and culture of America. 

To validate illegals and equate them with natural-born Americans and those who followed the legal highway to citizenship, in the name of political correctness and humanity, is patently un-American and offensive. Yet, here we have prominent Republicans and their minions in the media advocating acceptance and glorification of illegal aliens. Indeed, they’re preparing an honored place at America’s table where people who have no respect for our laws, customs, or Constitution may partake of freedom’s bounty. 

Reagan also fell for another democratic fraud when they promised spending cuts if he agreed to raise taxes. As is their mode of operation, they tell any lie, make any promise, and attack the opposition unmercifully to win every fight. They know full well that welfare is a winner for Democrats, and that’s why they spent fifty years building their voting base around indoctrination and dependence. The strategy of creating an economical and governmental climate designed to keep people poor and enslaved to government, is in chapter one of every dictator’s book. 

To keep the votes coming, the radical left requires more and more taxpayers’ money to feed the welfare beast. Therefore, they will never agree to reduce spending and chance losing this formidable political dynasty – the most sought-after group in the electorate. They amassed the powerful voting bloc in our country’s history, well over 100 million to the welfare rolls. These numbers do not count the state, local, and charitable contributions. Adding to the misery index and maintaining a dominant welfare state of politically active poor has paid off for the Democrats. 

Republicans never learn that under no circumstance will they outbid the left in buying votes by stealing taxpayers’ money. Neither do they learn that their plaintful attempts garnered them nothing but decades of scorn and hatred, but no votes from any of the leeches in society.  

The conservative message is difficult to impart because most hardcore welfare recipients have no interest in unemployment numbers, economic growth, national debt, or the annual deficit. Likewise, adhering to Constitutional principles of less government is detrimental to their cause. They define freedom as living a carefree, uninspired, and unproductive life at the expense of others. 

Media and the government-controlled educational system successfully distort facts, promote propaganda, and indoctrinate the citizenry into believing that every tenet that built this country is racist or designed to keep the common class down. They preach that Marxism is the only fair system, when, in reality; Marxism is inherently evil and invariably lowers people to the lowest common denominator. Its design is to disallow upward mobility, and inevitably demeans humanity. 

American education devolved into teaching children from Head Start to graduate school, that the federal government is there to provide for your every need, and that Capitalism is evil and a destroyer of people. 

Obama must exert enormous pressure on Republicans for their assistance in using taxation to punish success and redistribute income. He must get massive tax increases from Republicans and demand the Federal Reserve print more money if he is to be successful at redistributing income. Even with all this, he will load trillions of dollars more debt to the backs of American youth. 

Republicans must come to realize that to return to any semblance of political power, they must return to constitutional doctrine, free enterprise, personal responsibility, and liberty. They are obliged to realign their efforts toward educating Americans to the fact that these principles built this country into the greatest land on earth, and it is only with the American spirit we grow and thrive. They must expose the failed Marxist philosophies of Obama and the New Democratic Party, and reveal to everyone how their policies have wrought devastation to our country. 

Unfortunately, Mitt Romney was another Republican who shied away from ruffling feathers and therefore, cannot be held blameless in the loss to a President with the most despicable four-year record in the history of our nation. Obama’s openly Marxist policies were barely challenged, and the Republican contender had numerous opportunities to connect with knockout blows during the debates and on nearly a daily basis. 

Romney, of course, chose to cower in fear when challenged, whimpered when called rich-boy, and let Obama, the media, and the far left define him and his message. In other words, he tried to win a fight without being confrontational. Remarkably, he used the identical losing strategy employed by the war hero, John McCain, so it’s fairly obvious that the problem was not a wimp image projected by Romney. Rather, it was the same wimpy strategy employed by Republicans. 

We should remember that over 3 million more Republicans voted for John McCain than voted for Mitt Romney. Evidently, they couldn’t discern enough difference between Obama’s disastrous Marxist policies and Romney’s free enterprise, Capitalist policies. If they did, it wasn’t enough to rouse them from their comfort zone to cast a vote. 

Republicans are slow studies in the Democratic Party’s no-holds-bar, win-at-any-cost tactics. They faint at the sight of the opponent’s blood, so they fight in the middle of the ring using the very sporting, Marquess of Queensberry Rules, while Democrats take off the gloves and use baseball bats and billy clubs to beat them into submission. 

To conservatives, government is about protecting freedom. To liberals, government is all about control and total destruction of freedom. If Republicans go weak-kneed and waver from conservative values, the Party will self-destruct. 

If they don’t stand and fight, and if they try appealing to the sensibilities of liberal thieves and far left politicians by going along to get along, the Republican Party may disappear into the vapor of eternity. 

The twinkle in the eye of a free America and the lust for freedom in the soul of the enslaved has waned. The American spirit is laden with an unmanageable burden of a society satisfied with an existence in the government welfare line. Too many have resigned themselves to self-failure and have an overwhelming need to be coddled, nurtured, and institutionalized by government. Americans’ lust for freedom turned to envy, resentment, greed, and destructive behavior. 

Love of liberty is the only defense against tyranny. Americans have fallen out of love with liberty and in love with their new beau – dependency. This once powerful land of the free is becoming a hotbed of parasites that are devouring their hosts. When the hosts are depleted, our Republic will perish. 

Jim Mullen, Parkersburg, WV 

http://freedomforusnow.com 

https://twitter.com/freedomforusnow

 

Jim Mullen is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit

December 7, 1941: Remembering Pearl Harbor

To the Congress of the United States

Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 – a date which will live in infamy – the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleagues delivered to the Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.

This morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.

Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces – with the unbounding determination of our people – we will gain the inevitable triumph – so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, Dec. 7, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.

Franklin Roosevelt

Non-Romney Voter Survey Says: “History Has Repeated. Bold Colors, no Pale Pastels.”

Almost immediately after Obama was reelected, a statistic was released to the effect that Romney got 2.3 million less votes than McCain got in 2008. That number has since been called into question and ultimately discredited.

Cacophony of Opinions

Why did Romney lose? It depends on who you listen to among the cacophony of pundits expressing a confusing array of opinions – all in conformance with the opinion-holder’s world view of course. Some, such as Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel and Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank blame it on the GOP not having any ground game for the Hispanic vote. Others such as Michael Medved of the Daily Beast blame it on a highly effective negative ad campaign Obama ran against Romney. Medved disputes the notion that the GOP has a demographics problem. Obama got fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 2008, according to Medved who also said that Obama’s gains among Hispanics were minimized by the decline in the number of blacks who voted for him.

Battleground Watch says Romney relied on flawed internal polling. Others cite massive voter fraud – especially with touchscreen machines sans a paper ballot backup and still others cite anti-Mormon sentiment.

The Republican Party is “too socially conservative” says Republican Alien Professor, citing “changing social mores.” Speaking of “social mores,” some have alleged that Evangelicals simply would not vote for a Mormon, but data does not support this assertion at all. According to Eric Gorski of the Denver Post, 80% of Evangelicals voted for Romney. Nancy French, who spent a month in the Palin home to help Bristol Palin write Not Afraid of Life, was the founder and publisher of Evangelicals for Mitt. French hosts Bristol’s Blog on Patheos. As we’ll see later, the number of people who cited Romney’s faith as their reason to not give him a vote appears to be miniscule.

Professor John Switzer, who posts as “The Liberty Professor” suggests that Romney failed because he made his economic message “us versus them” and also because the Republican Party is trying too hard to be like the Democratic Party.

But Some Number of Conservatives Did Not Want Romney…

However many votes Romney got in 2012 versus McCain in 2008, some number of voters either did not vote at all or did vote, but abstained, voted for existing third party candidates or used the write-in. Did these voters hand victory to Obama on a silver platter? It’s debatable. But, their discontent with the Republican Party and its offerings is not debatable.

Over 37 years have passed since Ronald Reagan gave his famous “Bold Colors” speech. This speech was born out of his polling voters who stayed home, yielding a disastrous election result for the GOP. The voters Reagan polled said they saw no difference between the two parties. There was much talk back in 1975 about forming a third party. Sound familiar? Reagan, who had been a Democrat said he became a Republican because the party was different – not because it was the same. His words grace the US for Palin site in reference to former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s endorsed candidates.

AGU Survey Launched

While there has been no shortage of speculative opinions and blame assignment on this disastrous outcome, no one has polled the non-voters to see what motivated their behavior, and to get some sense of where this Republican Party should go. On November 19, in my capacity as New York State Coordinator for American Grizzlies United/Organize4Palin, I launched a survey to begin answering these questions.

Polls Versus Surveys

A poll consists of only one question. Online Polls are routinely and very easily astroturfed by all parties concerned who want to show their candidate or opinion as being in the lead. Professional pollsters often purposely bias the single question to gin up the desired response. When Gov. Palin said, “polls are for strippers and cross-country skiers,” she was on target. Polls are not reliable indicators of anything.

A survey consists of several questions, follows a much more scientific process, and is far more difficult to astroturf. The magic number for a survey sample size is 400 because it yields a +/- 5% margin of error and a confidence level of 95%. Reaching this number usually requires paid panels through a market research firm or surveying multiple specific constituencies. Surveys require considerable thought as to question composition and a lengthy, often costly implementation process. A properly executed targeted survey of the general public with a sample of 400 can cost $750 to $1,500 or even more, with the higher costs being either for pre-qualified responses or surveying large panels and weeding out disqualified responses.

AGU Survey Methodology

The AGU survey is preliminary and it closed with 149 respondents. The margin of error on this survey is, therefore, 8.03%. The survey had a 100% incidence rate, meaning there were no disqualified respondents and no mid-survey terminates. No quota was set. The Republican Party has a clear and present interest in determining its political direction, thus the onus is on the GOP to survey a representative sample of its membership. The AGU survey was posted on key Palin sites, Free Republic, some generic conservative sites, and Ron Paul sites to get as representative a sample as possible of non-Romney voters. Special thanks to Josh Painter, US for Palin Editor and the Publisher of Sarah Palin Journal; Elizabeth Hawkes, Youth for Palin; and Isabel Matos, GOP Are You Listening for promoting this survey to the various non-Palinista constituencies. No paid panels were used, because this preliminary survey was conducted without a budget. I purposely did not mention any candidate’s names except for Romney or Obama in question lists, since candidates’ names are loaded words that connote different things to different readers. I instead had respondents fill in their choices tabula rasa.

AGU Survey Results

As we see from the first chart, of the 149 people surveyed, 116 voted in the 2012 general election, 31 did not vote at all citing disgust with both parties, and two did not vote at all due to sic
kness, accident, or other emergency.

The second chart reveals that the largest bloc of those who did vote – 61 – picked an existing third party candidate on the ballot. The second largest bloc – 51 – used the write-in. The remaining voters voted down-ticket only and abstained from the Presidential contest. There is an apparent discrepancy between the number of non-votes and those who voted in the 2012 general election. This is because some respondents abstained in the Presidential contest, yet voted down-ticket.

Gov. Palin got the lion’s share of the write-in choices with 38 votes. Libertarians Ron Paul and Gary Johnson were second and third in trail with 13 and 10 votes respectively. The remaining three votes went to fringe candidates.

“No difference between the two candidates” represented the largest sub-group in the sample with 54 responses. “Not a true conservative” took the second largest sub-group with 25 responses.

Flashback 37 years: “More than half of those who didn’t vote have been polled and say, ‘it no longer makes any difference which party wins….'”

Excessive change in positions on issues – “flip flopping” – took the third largest sub-group with 21 responses.

Only five people cited Romney’s Mormonism as their reason for not voting for him. Three were of the “Mormons aren’t real Christians” mindset. The other two were against all religion and cited Romney and/or the GOP being “too religious” as their reasons. Both sides only add up to 2.68% between them.

All 149 respondents expressed who they wanted to see run in 2012. Gov. Palin got 82 responses – 55%, followed by the Pauls, Johnson, Judge Napolitano, and Jesse Ventura – the Libertarians at 44 votes or 30%. Fringe candidates took 13 responses, and 10 people didn’t have a candidate in mind for 2012.

The vast majority of respondents 116 or 79% said the GOP should return to the principles of Reagan conservatism. Only 32 respondents or 21% said the Republican Party should “broaden the base” by becoming more moderate on social issues.

The 82 people who wanted Gov. Palin to run in 2012 are obviously Palinistas. Among them only two people chose “broaden the base,” and that choice may have been an unintended selection error. One did not vote at all due to disgust with both parties. The other Palinista voted for Gov. Palin using the write-in and picked Romney’s excessive changes in positions as the reason for discomfort with Romney. A strong argument could be made to infer that these two Palinistas intended to choose Reagan conservatism, but an equally strong argument could be made against that decision, for the respondents may in fact have intended their answers. A surveyor may use inference to correct obvious errors. To use inference in this instance is incorrect, because doing so interjects surveyor’s bias. The two Palinistas’ choices stand as entered.

Our community has always seen Gov. Palin as “Reagan in a woman’s body,” and this is often depicted by images of Reagan’s spirit toasting, saluting, passing a torch or otherwise transitioning his legacy to Gov. Palin. I should know, since I am the creator of the saluting montage. That 98% of our community would respond with a return to Reagan conservatism is not a surprise….

What is surprising is that 44 respondents identified as Libertarians via their desired 2012 candidate choices, yet 24 out of the 44 or 55% joined ranks with our Palinista community in saying that the GOP should return to Reagan conservatism. Libertarians are fiscal conservatives, foreign policy isolationists, and tack far toward the left on social issues. The majority support abortion-on-demand as well as legalization of drugs and prostitution as core components of their platform. Libertarians tend to be non-religious if not outright anti-religious. Libertarians are RINOs, because many of their positions contradict the Republican Party platform. So, 55% of this sub-sample within this constituency supporting a return to Reagan conservatism is a surprise. I can only conclude that fiscal conservatism took priority over social liberalism for this group. The remaining 45% not surprisingly chose “broaden the base.”

This preliminary survey with its 8.03% margin of error is not the end-all or be-all. The results will be forwarded to Reince Priebus, the GOP party chair with the suggestion that he either continue the study until the sample size reaches 400 or conduct one of his own. Will he do either? I won’t know until he is asked. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Irrespective of Mr. Priebus’ decision, 79% of the entire sample – supporters of multiple political figures – said they wanted a return to Reagan conservatism. Even 55% of a group we would consider RINOs also desire this return to basics.

This survey suggests that history has repeated itself:

“Let’s have a new first party – a Republican Party – raising a banner of bold colors – no pale pastels – a banner instantly recognizable as standing for certain values which will not be compromised.”