Tea Party activists and others among the conservative grassroots know that today's Republican Party is a far cry from the fiscal hawk it once was. Years of "compassionate conservatism" and establishment leadership unconcerned about fidelity to the party's principle have gotten the GOP lost in the forest, with no plan to rescue itself.

But, this isn’t the first time the top echelon of Republican leadership has wandered from the path of virtue. Decades ago in the 1950s and 1960s, Republicans found themselves in a similar situation. Fortunately for the fate of the party -- and the modern conservative movement -- they had United States Senator Barry Goldwater to bring them back.

"There were other solid conservatives in Congress in the 1950s and 1960s, but only Goldwater had the guts to stand up on the floor of the U.S. Senate and call President Eisenhower's policies a 'dime store New Deal,'” writes ConservativeHQ.com Chairman Richard A. Viguerie in his book, Conservatives Betrayed. “That forthrightness and honesty endeared him to us conservatives, and we made him our leader."

Goldwater’s 1964 presidential campaign may not have been a success electorally, but what it did do was launch a conservative movement that is still flourishing today. By challenging the establishment leadership, Goldwater became a hero of conservatives looking for new leadership. And, today’s conservatives are beneficiaries of his courage and determination to see change within his own party.

Today, conservatives are in a similar position. The party is lost as a result of years of bad leadership, and bad politics. In a response to the abandonment of fiscal values, the Tea Party movement was born, and is fueled by conservative anger at GOP leadership that has given rise to skyrocketing deficits, a faltering economy, and the election of President Barack Obama.

Nearly all of the problems the GOP faces are a direct result of weak leadership in the preceding years.

Yet, there is a voice reminiscent of Goldwater’s. His name is Ron Paul, and since his earliest days in Congress, he’s been fighting back against the liberals in the Republican Party. The consistency in his message of fiscal values and restrained foreign policy, along with his willingness to call-out the establishment leadership, has endeared himself to conservative activists ready for a change in the ruling class.

Unlike his colleagues, who are beleaguered by accusations of flip-flopping, Paul’s message hasn’t changed over the years. “Thanks to the President and Republican Party, we have lost the chance to reduce the deficit and the spending in a non-crisis fashion,” Paul writes in a letter to the chairman of the GOP. “Even worse, big government has been legitimized in a way the Democrats never could have accomplished.”

While that letter could have easily been written in 2004, it was actually written two decades earlier -- in 1984. Paul, unhappy with the deficits of the Reagan administration, put then GOP Chairman Frank Fahrenkopf on notice.

This is precisely why Paul’s message is still relevant today, and just as necessary.

For those following the 2008 GOP nomination races may have barely noticed Paul. He was sometimes excluded from debates, and if he were to actually make it in, he was limited in airtime, and often treated as the “crazy uncle” by his colleagues on stage. Yet, Paul is now second in Iowa according to some polls. And, you better believe the other candidates are paying attention.

Since his 2008 campaign, his staple issues -- the Constitution, monetary policy, Federal Reserve, non-interventionism foreign policy, and spending -- have all become hot topics in the 2012 nomination race. Is this a coincidence, or did Paul’s growing support among the conservative grassroots force his more liberal opponents to the right? There must be a reason why, this time around, candidates are more than willing to pull out their “pocket Constitutions” to prove their “seriousness” about constitutional issues (even if getting them to directly talk about it is still like pulling teeth).

It is up to voters to decide if Paul will be the GOP’s torchbearer in 2012; however, Paul’s mere presence in the GOP nomination process has had a profound affect on the tone and topic of the debates. If anything, Paul’s constitutional, limited government platform has helped reignite a constitutional fervor that might otherwise be missing.