Thank God John McCain lost in 2008. Obama's radical agenda will bring about the revitalization of the Republican party through grassroots citizen activism that would have been impossible under a McCain presidency.

By Tom Tancredo*

Eight months into the Obama presidency the Republican Party is suddenly thriving by virtue of the patriotic reawakening generated by Obama’s radicalism. But the Republican revival may be short lived if it does not listen to the voice of the new citizen activists.

Obama was elected on the strength of Bush exhaustion syndrome and Obama’s plausible promise of “hope and change.” But now that Obama has unveiled his truly radical agenda, middle class Americans are understandably alarmed.

Obama’s radical program has provoked a grassroots rebellion of historic proportions. While the Republican Party may be one beneficiary of this rebellion, the rebellion itself has nothing to do with party allegiance or party organization. Indeed, some Republican elites feel as threatened by this new activism as Obama Democrats.

What is astounding and unprecedented in recent American politics is that this authentic citizen protest arose entirely outside of political party structures. Republican officials had virtually nothing to do with organizing the Tea Party protests that began in April or the town hall protests in August or the historic gathering of over one million people on the Capitol Mall on September 12.

Millions of Americans are seeing the radical, Marxist character of the Obama agenda for the first time. The attempted government takeover of health care, a crippling new energy tax, his affirmative action Supreme Court appointment, the World Apology Tour, the Justice Department attack on the CIA interrogation of terrorists, and now the abandonment of NATO allies on missile defense — none of this was foretold in the platitudes of the 2008 election campaign. Obama’s agenda is the fulfillment of the dreams and fantasies of the left wing of the Democrat Party, but our political and media elites were all taken by surprise. Obama is not the “pragmatic centrist” voters thought they were getting.

The unprecedented citizen activism that brought 1.5 million ordinary American to the Capitol Mall a week after the Labor Day holiday is in part a predictable reaction to Obama’s radicalism, but it is also more than that. Something more profound is also at work. The fact that it has developed outside the established political structures is a story that has not yet been told because it does not fit the dominant “narrative” of American politics: genuine grassroots populism is supposed to always be from the left, not the right.

Obama’s radical agenda is forcing the Republican Party to confront a fundamental issue it tries hard to avoid. Is the Republican Party going to seek compromise with Obama’s radical agenda to prove they are committed to the same “compassionate” agenda, or will it provide leadership based on a different vision for America?

The sad truth is that this new activism, this rediscovery of constitutional limits on government and principled resistance to further expansion of entitlement spending, could never have emerged if John McCain had won the 2008 election. If John McCain had enshrined his anemic “hands across the aisle” pragmatism as the official language of the party of Lincoln and Reagan, the Republican Party would have continued its sorrowful drift.

What is most fascinating and encouraging and revolutionary about this mushrooming grassroots activism is that it is more than a reaction to Obama’s radical program. It is more than “just say no.” It also a rediscovery and reaffirmation of the conservative principles that were abandoned or belittled by Republican Party elites in the Bush era.

The grassroots activism of the Tea Party rallies and 912 protests is almost the exact opposite of a traditional political rally organized by a candidate for public office. The purpose of these rallies is to save our country, not elect some candidate. In fact, there is often a large element of “pox on both your houses” in these protests, and Republican candidates who think they can run on traditional themes in 2010 without addressing these new challenges will have a rude awakening.

Yes, we all know that compromise is a necessary part of governance. But what the new citizen activists are demanding is that compromise be based on a constitutional, limited government, low-tax agenda. A little arsenic will kill you a little slower than a larger dose, but please don’t serve it with a chocolate mousse and call it dessert.

What course the Republican Party will take at this crossroads is an open question. Old habits die hard. Just as George Bush was tone deaf on illegal immigration, many in the Republican Party leadership are loath to acknowledge that the mainstream media is in the pocket of the Democrat Party and new modes of communication and organization are needed. The hardest words for a Republican moderate to utter are, “Rush Limbaugh was right.”

But what is clear is that there is no going back to “hands across the aisle bipartisanship” that gave us McCain-Feingold and is too often a substitute for principled leadership. We do not need more snake oil of the “no entitlement left behind” variety. The day of reckoning for reckless government spending is at hand.

The “Help (Desperately) Wanted” sign is hanging in the window. Only leaders who can speak the language of liberty and limited government need apply.

Mexico's ambassador to the United States has now picked up as a red herring an Obama administration drumbeat about US-origin firearms in the hands of his country's drug cartels. The drum major and majorette, Attorney General Eic Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have famously suggested that the cartels' armories can be weakened by more gun control in Mexico's neighbor to the north, the United States.

The following article by Rocky Mountain Foundation president John Dendahl was published December 4, 2008 at the top of its editorial page by the Rocky mountain News.

Two university professors writing in the Rocky (“The cure for carbon,” November 22) on climate change got one thing right: cap-and-trade programs are a looming economic disaster.

Though probably inadvertent, give them further credit for predicting that Barack Obama’s election will give debate about climate policy “a much needed boost.” How often have we heard from Al Gore et al that the debate is over? It’s just now getting warmed up.

The professors are jubilant about Obama’s plans for $150 billion to develop carbon-free energy technologies.

The “carbon-free” fad is where we are today in a massive international scheme of deception. Its origins among a few scientists may have been honest enough, but the status today is partly fraud (Gore’s movie is evidence) and partly politicized science driven by an unholy combination of ideology, government funding and corporate appeasement.

Winston Churchill observed in a slightly different context, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.” Xcel Energy and ConocoPhillips are companies prominent in Colorado that are carbon hysteria appeasers.

The citizens of Colorado are being asked to pay dearly in at least two ways.

One, we have a political establishment, dedicated to environmental extremism (for starters: a governor, one U.S. senator soon to be two, and a utility regulatory commission), that decrees Coloradans must pay a very high price to subsidize fledgling energy sources like wind and solar.

Two, the anti-carbon crazies are asking us to forego untold billions – an understatement if shale oil possibilities are considered – in tax revenues from producing the state’s enormous hydrocarbon resources (oil, gas, and coal).

Climate scientists won’t even agree as to whether average temperatures today are rising or falling. Wouldn’t that be more evidence of the utter stupidity of too many politicians? They would lead us into ruinously expensive climate “fixes” when they don’t even know whether it’s broken or how.

Wake up, neighbors. Ignorance is the poisonous byproduct of the snake oil we’re being sold, and it’s a far greater threat today and tomorrow than is climate change.