Replies

Hi, Jim.

I’m the guy who submitted the question to ANHQ. I was hoping, but not expecting, that Uma Pemmaraju would ask it. Si it came as a most pleasant surprise to hear my name on Fox News and see my question on the screen. I’ve been a FReeper for years, so if this thing ever happens, let it be known that FR played a role in its genesis. Or should that be Exodus?

As much clout as Sarah Palin has, even she could not be expected to do this on her own. But if a coalition of conservative heavyweights would join forces, they could pull it off.

I specifically mentioned Mark Levin in my question to Gov. Palin because he is one of her staunchest supporters, and she trusts him. Remember, she chose Levin’s radio show to make her announcement that she wasn’t running in 2012. He has a brilliant legal mind and is an expert on the Constitution.

If former candidates such a Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and others could be brought on board, they could merge their mailing lists into one very substantial voter list. The new party would also be a magnet for good political minds, i.e., those consultants and advisors who are true believers and not just hired guns.

Such a pool of talent would concentrate the star power, and the new party would create considerable media buzz. Every network would want to interview the principals behind the party, and conservative talk radio would have something positive to talk about instead of just complaining about the latest assault on the Constitution and traditional American values by the left.

Recall that the Reform Party was able to gain such momentum in the early 90s due to a lack of an outstanding presidential candidate from either of the two major parties. There was quite a bit of frustration on the part of conservatives who were unhappy with the way Bush Sr. had squandered Reagan’s legacy and allowed his coalition of conservatives, libertarians and blue collar Democrats to fall apart. A number of Democrats didn’t trust Clinton and knew that his bimbo eruptions were sure to build to the climax of a major political scandal. Had the Reform Party offered a more attractive presidential candidate than the awkward Ross Perot, it could have garnered more of the vote than the 19 percent it got in the ‘92 election.

Many of the same and similar conditions that led to the rise of the Reform Party that existed then are present today. The presidential candidates the American people have had to choose from in the several most recent elections have been lackluster. The economy has been in the tank for nearly five years. Obama is socializing, politicizing, and downsizing the U.S. military. America’s institutions, from our schools to our churches, are under assault from the left and being transformed into nefarious — if not downright evil — reflections of what they were not so very long ago. If ever there were a time for a “Freedom Party,” that time is now.

Yes, it would be an uphill struggle to pull it off. But the potential exists to make such as party “go viral,” and it could grow at an even greater exponential rate than did Perot’s effort of two decades past.

However, it could also die a quick death. All those who engage in trying to bring a “Freedom Party” to fruition should take a cue from Santayana, for if they fail to learn from history, they will be doomed to repeat it. The Reform Party lost its relevance because, in large part, of the factional squabbling which was allowed to go on and eventually tear the party to shreds. The best way to avoid that would be to set those things which divide the factions aside and keep the focus on the goal of saving the republic.