I am probably one among thousands in my generation who regard the three most important proponents of core conservative principles of our time as Bill Buckley, Ronald Reagan, and, albeit to a lesser degree, Jack Kemp. Among many gifts, these men had the rare ability to articulate the basic principles of freedom, limited government, and strong defense of liberty in ways that resonated widely – Buckley with erudition, Reagan with simple and heartfelt sincerity, and Kemp, at his best, with uplifting passion.

I learned about conservative principles from my parents and especially around my grandmother’s table in the early 1960s. In 1964, I was one of the few 11-year olds in my 6th-grade class (if not the country) who passionately supported Barry Goldwater. I read Conscience of a Conservative, collected campaign buttons, and attended (alone) a rally where he spoke from the back of a train in Champaign, Illinois.

I first read Buckley – dictionary in hand – in my mid teens. As an undergraduate with a rebellious nature toward the end of the Vietnam War I became a pseudo-hippie who espoused liberal causes, including working as a volunteer for McGovern in 1972. Within a few years I had returned to my philosophical roots, having read Atlas Shrugged along the way. I subscribed to the National Review, receiving a weekly dose of Buckley and his gang. While I didn’t realize it at the time, Buckley’s understated religious faith also had influence. It helped me to appreciate that some very smart and articulate people believed in historical Christianity and to start thinking seriously about those issues. Many hours watching Firing Line came later. While I didn’t always agree with Mr. Buckley, he always caused me to think, and to appreciate words. As a small town Midwesterner, I was also charmed by his urbanity and sophistication, somewhat awed by his familiarity with an entirely different world than my own.

I became a fan of Reagan in my early 20s (circa 1975), perhaps in small part due to regional bias. My father was born in Tampico, Illinois, not many years after Reagan was born there. I was born in and later graduated high school from a small steel community on the Rock River, about a dozen miles from Reagan’s boyhood home of Dixon, Illinois. As a teenager I swam in that river and at times would drive through Dixon’s Lowell Park, where Reagan saved many from its treacherous currents. For some reason I don’t recall watching Reagan’s famous speech at the 1964 Republican convention (I couldn’t stay up very late at age 11). Given his age and the visceral hatred and ridicule of him by the left and the national media, I never believed he could be elected President.  His election (President Carter’s main positive contribution to the nation) taught me never to say “never.” Reagan’s communicative ability, charisma, leadership, and fortitude in the face of domestic and foreign perils place him in the same league as FDR. Unlike FDR, he was open, transparent, lacking in guile.  (He also understood economics better.)

Like Buckley and Reagan, Jack Kemp clearly articulated conservative principles.  He inspired and helped instill pride among conservatives. He focused attention on the have not’s by articulating a positive agenda for change based on incentives and empowerment, rather than disincentives and dependence. Had he been chosen as the VP nominee in 1980 and had Reagan-Kemp won, the last 20 years would likely have been much different.  I believe that we would have been in much better shape today.

Who will inspire today’s young conservatives or conservatives in waiting? Charles Krauthammer is a fine and steady source of informed and erudite analysis and opinion, in the intellectual tradition of Buckley.  I’ve become a major fan.  Sarah Palin has charisma and sincerity, and she shows promise as an effective communicator.  Seemingly transparent and guileless, at least by politician standards, she is hated and ridiculed by the left and the mainstream media. It will be interesting to see whether she has the stamina and other qualities necessary to become a national leader. Bobby Jindal is energetic and articulate, with an inspiring personal story and a growing reputation for executive competence. Not unlike Mark Sanford, he has a ways to go on the charisma and oral communication fronts. There are other rising young stars, including some who no doubt are unfamiliar to me. Americans who believe in freedom, limited government, and the strong defense of liberty have every reason to hope for the best.

For many years Jack Kemp was a leading light for free enterprise and conservative principles.  He will likewise be remembered for his energy, enthusiasm, optimism, and good will.   He truly cared about the urban “underclass” and consistently advocated market-oriented policies as the means to break the cycle of poverty.   As the ideological and political heir to Ronald Reagan, I’m not sure why Mr. Kemp failed to become the Republican Presidential nominee in 1996, but it was the country’s loss.  All conservatives mourn his passing.

(For some details on this man’s influence, see Jeffrey Lord’s The Importance of Jack Kemp in the The American Spectator.)

During the current economic environment with unemployment reaching 8.5%, the highest level since 1983, and following the election of Barack Obama to the world’s most powerful and important office, it is natural to recall the times and Presidencies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan.

An eloquent orator confronted by the Great Depression and menacing developments abroad, FDR denounced Wall Street greed and the privileged class.  He oversaw the enactment of fundamental changes in the banking system and bank regulation.  He significantly increased marginal income tax rates on the affluent, and he championed and signed into law Social Security, unemployment insurance, and public works for the unemployed, which were associated with substantial investment in the country’s infrastructure.  He accomplished these changes in the face of extreme economic turmoil and great uncertainty about the stability of the American system.  FDR believed that his strong interventionist agenda was necessary to preserve democratic capitalism, just as he believed that his actions in leading the country away from isolationism and in saving Great Britain were essential for defeating the Nazis and protecting America.  FDR’s preparation for his rendezvous with destiny included service as Assistant Secretary of the Department of the Navy under Woodrow Wilson during World War I, as a state legislator, and later as Governor of New York, then the most  populist state.   Between the war and his election as Governor, FDR exhibited iron strength and determination as he recovered from his crippling attack of polio, which required him to be carried up and down stairs the rest of his life.  The same iron strength and determination characterized his years as President, along with an optimistic spirit that cheered a large majority of Americans and millions around the globe.  The efficacy of many of FDR’s economic policies is still being debated, and it ultimately took war to bring the country out of the depression.  But his national and international leadership up to and following American’s entrance into the war secures his stature as one of greatest Presidents.

President Reagan, whose preparation for the office included eight years as governor of California, inherited rampant inflation, sluggish employment, a moribund housing market, and a weakened national defense during the height of the Cold War.  Also an eloquent  orator, he denounced big government and bureaucracy.  When confronted with high inflation and a recession that produced unemployment as high as 10.8% at year-end 1982, he championed and oversaw significant reductions in marginal income tax rates as a means of stimulating economic freedom and economic growth.  He helped slow the growth of government and regulation.  He played a leading role in accelerating the implosion of the Soviet Union, which freed tens of millions of people from totalitarianism, and billions of people from the overhanging threat of mutually assured destruction.  Reagan’s leadership focused on several key policy objectives and principles.  He stuck to those objectives and principles even when subject to avalanches of criticism for federal budget deficits and his hard-line stance towards the Soviets.  Not unlike FDR, his cheerful optimism buoyed the spirits of many.  Despite the Iran-Contra controversy in his second term, his stature as a great President is secure.

President Obama’s remarkable ascension to the Presidency following his service as both a state and U.S. Senator placed him in the midst of a banking crisis and sharp economic downturn, albeit much less severe than in the early 1930s and without the high inflation of the early 1980s.  He faces rapid growth in entitlement spending, especially for Medicare.  He is confronted by turmoil on our southern border, by shooting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, by the continued risk of terrorist attacks, and by the threat of nuclear proliferation among radical regimes.   He has championed and signed an $800 billion stimulus package, with some investment in infrastructure, and he apparently has assumed de facto control of GM and Chrysler, if not AIG.  He proposes higher marginal tax rates on top earners, and unprecedented increases in the federal budget and projected deficits.  He champions expansion of government-subsidized and mandated health insurance, and he advocates green technology and cap and trade legislation to reduce greenhouse emissions, which would substantially increase energy prices.  On the international front, he has apologized to Europeans for American arrogance and asked that they lend a hand in “overseas contingency operations.”

Given the historical parallels and his stunning ascendancy to the Presidency, speculation about whether President Obama could ultimately rise to the stature of Reagan or FDR, two giants of the 20th century, is difficult to resist.  He is an inspiring orator who has buoyed the spirits of many Americans and thus far been well-received abroad.   He might have the “right stuff” — character, ability, skill, determination, persona — and opportunity from events to develop into a great President.  Unfortunately, my strong belief, based on economic theory and the historical record, is that his current policy agenda is fundamentally misguided, including the amounts and types of proposed spending, the planned tax increases on the most productive citizens, an emphasis on greenhouse emissions that is disproportionate to the threat, and his apparent belief that significantly more government planning and control of economic activity is desirable and appropriate.  Enactment of significant parts of President Obama’s agenda would slow economic growth, increase inflation, lower living standards, and undermine freedom and security at home and abroad.  Let’s hope and pray for a better legacy.