Steve Baldwin

Conservative Activist Proposes Third Party With Sarah Palin As Its Leader

Steve Baldwin, a former California lawmaker and onetime executive director of the Council for National Policy, believes that Tea Party and Religious Right activists should form a third party to “do to the GOP what the GOP did to the Whig Party 150 years ago.”

“I believe a coalition between social and fiscal conservatives could be formed around the issue of eliminating all federal abortion funding, reversing Roe vs. Wade (let the states fight it out), and prohibiting the Federal government from granting special rights to people based upon sexual behavior (laws that almost always infringe on our religious, property, and freedom of association rights). I believe such a platform would unite all factions of conservatives and libertarians,” Baldwin writes in BarbWire today.

And he already knows who he would like to lead the party: Sarah Palin.

The biggest obstacle to creating a Third Party is the fear conservatives have that by voting Third Party, it will weaken the GOP, thus allow more Democrats to win. And that’s a legitimate fear and is why all Third Parties in existence today receive only a few percentage points every election and have zero impact upon the political process.

However, there is a way to create a Third Party without helping the Democrats win and that involves using the power of the internet to create a Third Party on paper but not launch it until it is strong enough to be competitive.

For a Third Party to be effective, millions of voters need to join it, become active, recruit others and support its candidates. Moreover, millions of dollars would need to be raised to market the party and fight for ballot access changes. I propose that a website be set up that collects pledges. By that, I mean a person would log on, register themselves, and then electronically sign a “pledge” that commits him or her to vote for a Third Party when the party officially launches. Of course, such a pledge cannot be legally binding, but I doubt most voters would go through the process of registering themselves online unless they were serious. Of course, there would be some fraud, but that would be factored in when determining how much support the new party has.



Once the party launches and it is obvious to voters that it will be a viable party, I predict many more voters will pile on. The new party will do to the GOP what the GOP did to the Whig Party 150 years ago: it will replace the GOP as the main party contesting the Democrat Party. We would also need a stable of respected national conservative leaders such as Sarah Palin and others to lead the charge on such an effort. A well-funded marketing plan would be needed with a heavy emphasis on using the social media. Such an effort may take years but even the process of building a viable Third Party may be beneficial. It will send a strong message to the Republican Party that if it continues its liberal drift, it will be replaced. Perhaps even the mere existence of such an effort will possibly save the GOP.



Even on the social issues, I believe a coalition between social and fiscal conservatives could be formed around the issue of eliminating all federal abortion funding, reversing Roe vs. Wade (let the states fight it out), and prohibiting the Federal government from granting special rights to people based upon sexual behavior (laws that almost always infringe on our religious, property, and freedom of association rights). I believe such a platform would unite all factions of conservatives and libertarians.

The internet has been used to unite millions of people for all kinds of causes. Why can’t it be used to build the infrastructure of a new Third Party? For this to become a reality, a group of respected leaders from the Tea Party, the Christian Right, and the libertarian right would have to come together to form this new party, agree on a set of principles and then launch the website to be used to college pledges.

'From Gingrich to Santorum to Perry to Bachmann, I Think Any of Them Could Have Won'

Former Council for National Policy executive director Steve Baldwin spoke to his fellow Romney critic Steve Deace this week, where they complained that conservative leaders didn’t heed their warnings about nominating Romney, and are now mourning that “America’s culture, America’s economy [and] America’s Christian history” were dealt a potentially fatal blow after Obama’s re-election.

Deace: Some of us spent the better part of our lives in the last year and a half telling everybody who mattered in this movement that we know, that this is what was going to happen if we nominate this guy. We risked friendships, relationships, radio affiliates, business relationships, trying to avoid the conversation you and I are having right now, and yet unfortunately most of these people for reasons—I don’t really care what they are anymore—they just didn’t want to listen, they just didn’t want to list to it. That’s what’s frustrating.

Baldwin: I’ve been warning people for ten years about this man and the more I warned the more people thought I was crazy. Now here we are, the worst loss I’ve seen in terms of impact on America’s culture, America’s economy, America’s Christian history. This loss is going to do so much damage to us, this was one of those campaigns that we have to get right and we didn’t get it right.

Baldwin later claimed that Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann all “could have won” in November. He also described a conference call he participated in with other conservatives about how leaders of the Religious Right, Tea Party and Ron Paul supporters need to unite for the 2016 election so the GOP doesn’t nominate a candidate like Romney.

Baldwin: With $1 billion, with maybe twice as much money as John McCain had, he got 2.5 million votes less, it would be difficult to perform worse than Romney, you would have to really try hard to do as bad as Romney did.

Deace: Do you think that any of the Republicans, any of the other alternatives to Romney in this primary, do you believe that any of them would have won this election, and if so—whom and why?

Baldwin: Oh yeah, I actually think every major candidate, from Gingrich to Santorum to Perry to Bachmann, I think any of them could have won. All they had to was tell the truth about Obama’s economy, his foreign policy, his attack on our culture, just tell the truth. Romney never told anyone anything about this guy.



Baldwin: I had a long discussion with a number of conservative leaders on a conference call today and there was some agreement here that there needs to be some high level discussions that go on between the three major conservative branches of the Republican party, and they may not even like that term ‘Republican party.’ I’m talking about the Christian Right—the social conservatives—, the Tea Party conservatives, and of course there’s overlap here, and the Ron Paul conservatives, and all three groups have overlaps. But there are people respected as leaders within all three of those entities that I feel need to get together and have some discussion about how we can sing the same song sheet in the future and try to unite because there was a problem here, we conservatives were split up so many ways that Romney took advantage of that and strode right on in and clinched the primary, we can’t do that anymore.

Steve Baldwin Claims 'Human Events' Publisher is Gay, Says Romney 'Obsessed' with Gay Rights

Steve Baldwin, the former executive director of the Council for National Policy, an influential conservative policy group founded by Tim LaHaye, went on the Steve Deace show yesterday to discuss why he thinks a President Romney would be disastrous for the country and the Republican Party. Baldwin’s major gripe is his dubious claim that Romney was “obsessed” with gay rights as governor of Massachusetts.

Baldwin expressed frustration that Romney has been given a “free pass” by conservative media, which he chalked up to “conflicts of interest” in the right-wing press. Among those he claimed are biased towards Romney is the publisher of the far-right Human Events, whom he identified as a “homosexual who likes Romney.” Although he didn’t name names on the show, Baldwin has previously asserted that Jeff Carneal, president of Human Events' publisher, is an “avowed homosexual” who has supported pro-equality causes.

But Baldwin’s gay-baiting did not end with his attack on conservative media. He let loose on Romney’s tepid pro-gay rights record as governor of Massachusetts, saying, “His whole administration was characterized by an almost obsessive devotion to the homosexual agenda.” Romney, he fumes, was involved in “gay proclamations, gay dances, gay proms, gay assemblies, gay this, gay that,” adding obliquely, “You gotta start wondering here.”

Baldwin: Our conservative media won’t write negative stories about Romney. They won’t even investigate him. I’ve submitted story after story to National Review, to Human Events, to American Spectator, and every once in a while they’ll do a story with a few negative things about Romney, but a full-scale investigative piece about Romney has not appeared in most of the conservative movement’s media. And you’ll find out there’s conflicts of interests, you’ll find out National Review endorsed Romney last year, they like him this year. You’ll find out that the chairman of Regnery Gateway, that publishes Human Events, is a homosexual who likes Romney. You find out these editors have various biases. And as a result, they have collectively, along with talk radio I have to add – Sean Hannity likes Romney, a lot of our radio talk show hosts have been very hands off when it comes to Romney’s record, even though they have all been briefed and all been given information about Romney’s background. Coulter and other national columnists and Hannity and even Mark Levin say very little about Romney’s record and refuse to dig into it. So you hear nothing from our own media, so the mainstream media, they’re too lazy to dig up the stories. And so as a result, Romney’s getting a free pass here.

Deace: Does Mitt Romney have a history of supporting homosexual issues beyond the gay scoutmasters thing that we saw from 1994? What did he do in Massachusetts when he was governor?

Baldwin: Oh my goodness. Gay proclamations, gay dances, gay proms, gay assemblies, gay this, gay that. He had an entire commission called the Governor’s Commission, which served at his own discretion, and they funded gay events and programs in the schools. He promoted all kinds of laws, rules, internal, a lot of internal things, like his department of social services awarded Family of the Year, Parents of the Year, to a gay couple. He appointed homosexual leaders to key positions throughout his administration. I mean, his whole administration was characterized by a an almost obsessive devotion to the homosexual agenda. I would venture to say that Mitt Romney was the most aggressive pro-gay governor in American history, either party. Period. I mean Amy Contrada wrote a thousand page book documenting hundreds of actions by this man to advance the homosexual agenda. Hundreds. He was obsessed with it. You gotta start wondering here.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious