Recently, I read this article discussing how Mitt Romney, according to GOP insiders, would fare better than someone like Rick Perry in the general election against Obama.

The obvious reaction to this is “yeah, that is what they said about McCain.”

GOP ‘insiders’ are recycling the idea that a candidate, such as Romney, will appeal to moderate voters (where the election is won) in the general election. In other words, the GOP ‘insiders’ are pushing the idea that a more liberal / progressive Republican candidate is the key to winning the 2012 election.

To understand how bad a liberal / progressive Republican occupant in the White House can be, you don’t have to look too far back in history. For one example, go back to the late 60′s through the early 70′s and take another look at Richard Milhous Nixon.

I realize most people don’t associate Richard Nixon with the Progressives. I mean he was a Republican after all. However, looking at many of Nixon’s domestic policies, he acted more like a liberal / progressive than a conservative:

Foreign policy initiatives represented only one aspect of Nixon’s presidency during his first term. In August 1969, Nixon proposed the Family Assistance Plan, a welfare reform that would have guaranteed an income to all Americans. The plan, however, did not receive congressional approval. In August 1971, spurred by high inflation rates, Nixon imposed wage and price controls in an effort to gain control of price levels in the U.S. economy; at the same time, prompted by worries over the soundness of U.S. currency, Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard and let it float against other countries’ currencies.

A president suggesting the federal government guaranteeing every American an income? Sounds very progressive. Sounds very FDR-like. The idea also sounds a lot like a state run health care initiative.

Aside from being the only president to resign, the lasting legacy of Richard Nixon is the one agency (besides the IRS) that liberals love. The EPA.

…because there are no local or State boundaries to the problems of our environment, the Federal Government must play an active, positive role. We can and will set standards. We can and will exercise leadership.

State of the Union Message on Natural Resources and the Environment, February 14th, 1973

Federalism? Nope. The 10th Amendment? Ignore it.

Nixon created a sprawling agency with broad and sweeping powers that, at their essence erode personal property rights. They have gone as far to classify, through the use of pseudoscience, CO2 (the gas all humans exhale) as a “threat to public health.” Even though any second grader will explain to you that CO2 is necessary for all plant life. to exist.

According to Mr. Nixon, the Federal government “will set standards, the Federal government will exercise leadership” because the states can’t do it themselves.

Looking back at Richard Nixon’s record and the many initiatives he supported during his time in office, you can see how important it is to get a conservative in office and not vote for a guy just because he has an R after his name.

For more on the Progressives @ MCT:

• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: Looking Backward
• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: FDR and Obama’s Internationalist Views
• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: Maurice Strong To Obama
• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: Obama, Teddy Roosevelt & Living Wage
• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: Jimmy Carter And Energy
• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: Woodrow Wilson and Peace Without Victory
• The Long Shadow Of The Progressives: The Great Society