Dear President Ronald Wilson Reagan, My Party Left Me Too...

My Own Thoughts | 04/20/2012 | DoughtyOne

[DoughtyOne]

...is there life after the Leftists take over?

We have been operating under the rule of "Lesser of Two Evils" for decades.  I have agreed with it.  I now stop to ask folks who have been doing the same thing, has our nation grown stronger over those decades?  At some point we have to be honest with ourselves.  For me, the answer is a clear, "No."  I can't answer for you, but there are many people out there who understand exactly where I'm coming from?

Instead of saying people who continue to do this are wrong, I want to give them something to think about.  Perhaps it will help them see things a little differently.

What we have been trying hasn't worked.  We slide farther left every single year.  At some point this has to stop, or we lose the nation we love no matter which party is in power.  Take a good look at Mitt Romney.  On just one topic alone, I can't vote for him.  He's a gun control advocate.  Once our guns are gone, they're gone.  Bad as that is, it runs much deeper.  I don't need to tell you about all of it.  You know what I'm talking about.  Romney is a blithering idiot when it comes to Conservatism.  Some would say he's lying his ass off.  It would be hard to argue otherwise.

Carter was universally scorned in 1980.  Obama, arguably much worse, isn't.  He is still wildly popular with the Left.  Has our nation changed?  It's my take that it is undeniably worse and in danger of cratering if we don't change direction.  And where is the voice of the loyal opposition?  That's right... crickets.

For this reason, I simply cannot fall back on the lesser of two evils rule of thumb we have always fallen back on.  I say this because IT IS NOT a change of direction.  If that hasn't worked, and it clearly hasn't, what reasoned argument is there for doing it again now?  Well, to my way of thinking there is no reasoned argument other than the ones that have always been used to advocate for it.  And that tactic having failed, the arguments in support of it are unsustainable.

We have tried this and failed.  So now we must come up with something different.  I, for one, will not sit by and continue play the business as usual game.  The Republican party must be made aware that it cannot continue to thumb it's nose at it's core base.

Here's the political spectrum we should be operating under.

1780 [L---------c---------R]

This is the political spectrum that would reveal us to be adhering to our Founding Father's vision and our Founding Documents.  This is precisely what the goal of Conservatives should be, to return to this model, and to do it as rapidly as possible.  Are we trending back toward that model?

I see something like this.

1980 [L---d---r-c---------R] *
1984 [L--d----r-c---------R] *
1988 [L--d---r--c---------R] *
1992 [L--d---r--c---------R]
1996 [L--d---r--c---------R]
2000 [L--d--r---c---------R] *
2004 [L-d--r----c---------R] *
2008 [Ld--r-----c---------R]
2012 [Ld--r-----c---------R]

The sad fact is, we are trending away from Conservatism.  That's why many of us are livid at our nominee this year.  AGAIN!!!!

Here is where we are headed folks.

2016 [Ld--r-----c---------R]
2020 [Ld-r------c---------R]
2024 [Ldr-------c---------R]

Does that look enticing?

With the exception of Ronald Reagan in 1980 - 1988, we have been spoon fed our candidates.  I'm not saying they spoon fed us the exact candidate, but they did take advantage of trends to make sure what types of candidates would get the nomination.  How did the RNC manage that?  It allowed it's primaries to be held under conditions that made it possible for Democrats to participate in the Republican nomination process.  Did anyone think that was going to give us more Conservative candidates?  No, it was a given that we were going to get more Leftists.  And more Leftists we got.

The RNC also continually talked up our more Leftist candidates, and made it clear they frowned on our more Conservative ones.  Look what took place this year.  Rove, Card, other party officials and office holders pushed Romney as hard as they could.

Why would the Republican Party do this?  For some time the leadership has been convinced that the nation was heading Left, and it didn't see any possibility of Conservatives being elected.  Rather than look at our rich history and notice that our widest victories were realized when we played on our differences with Leftist policy, they decided to adopt more Leftist policy in an attempt to look more appealing.  And as this took place, the information dispensed to the public heralding Conservatism ceased.  And as the push for Conservatism ceased, the nation moved farther left.

We are now at the point where our Constitution, Capitalism, and other tenets of a sound Constitutional Republic are scorned.

Look at the graph above, and see how that worked out for us.  Ronald Reagan was our last president who won with a large margin of victory.  Starting with the elder Bush, that margin either disappeared completely or was so razor thin that we had a public perception of a Constitutional crises arise in the aftermath of two elections.

Moving to the Left only assured us that the real Democrats would get support.  Why vote for a moderate Leftist when you can vote for the real thing?  Did the RNC learn anything from McCain?  No.  Here we go again with Rove, Card, and the usual suspects trashing better candidates and singing praises to Romney from the get-go.  What is our hope for the future, with the business as usual approach?  Think of our elections since 1988.

And so we have come to the point in our nation's history, where the Republican party is now willing to promote people who don't give a damn about our sovereignty, our Founding Documents, the sanctity of life, our Second Amendment Rights, and more.  At what point do we admit we have full blown Leftists running for office in our party, and refuse to play along any longer?

If Romney were running as a Democrat there isn't even the remotest of chances that you would vote for the man.  But now, because he's running against Obama, some entertain the thought.  And what happens in 2016, when a member of Hamas runs as a Democrat and The Republican is only as bad as Obama?  Do we then vote for the mirror image of him? 

Look folks, at some point we have to let the (R) party know, that they have jumped the shark, and we can no longer support what they want us to.  You see, if we don't, we'll forever be voting for McCains, Romneys, and worse of their ilk. 

If they can get a Leftist like Romney elected, it's effectively the end of Conservatism.  No Conservative will ever get the nomination again.  Should that be our goal?  No.

Why do I say that there will never be another Conservative nominee in the future?  Take a look at this election cycle, and realize it only gets worse from here if Romney can get elected without the Conservative vote.

I hope you'll join me in sending a message to the Republican party.  That message states these things...

1. I will not vote for Leftists(R)
2. I will no longer support the perpetual movement of this nation to the Left
3. I will no longer remain an active member of the Republican Party as long as it fails to support a return to Constitutional governance
4. If you want my support and the support of other Constitutional Conservatives, you'll talk up people who share our ideals, and criticize those who do not share them
5. You will seek to change rules and tighten up processes thus enabling more Constitutional Conservatives to win elections
6. Failing that, adios...

[DoughtyOne]

When I start threads with my thoughts, I like to let people bounce their opinions off them for a while.  Once I've made my case, I think it's your turn.

In this instance, I'm going to post some of my responses to objections to these thoughts from another thread.  I'm not going to post who wrote them to me.  We parted amicably and I'm not interested in casting dispersions.  The objections as stated were common ones.  I think it's reasoned to confront them on this thread as part of the discussion on this topic.

So, okay, it's your turn.  Later...

[DoughtyOne]

For your review and participation...

[DoughtyOne]

I don't find anything wrong with that argument as written, but it certainly implies a causal link that hasn't been proven. Namely, that the reason the country has slipped to the left is because conservatives or Republicans are willing to vote for the lesser of two evils. But I don't think that has anything to do with it.

If you'll give it a bit more thought, I believe you'll realize that it does.

We have five elections over twenty years, where an avowed Leftist campaigns against a person who claims to be a Conservative, but actually doesn't campaign by voicing staunch support for Conservative ideals.  In this environment, nobody advances the premise that Conservative tenets are more sound than Leftist tenets.  Both campaign from a Leftist point of view, but one is less of a Leftist than the other.

Does Conservatism grow stronger under this model?  No.  It's impossible for it to.  It grows weaker, and that's precisely what has taken place.

The problem isn't conservatives voting for the lesser of two evils. Oh yes it is.  If Conservatives won't take a stand against Leftists within their own ranks, then they'll fall for anything.  McCain..., Romney...

The problem is that the horde of liberals and mushy-minded moderates all get to vote too, and they don't want the same people we do.  We could have said the same thing in Reagan's day.  Instead of adopting that strategy, Reagan reached out to Democrats by making sound arguments.  He prevailed because he supported sound policy, and sold it to others.  Who is selling it these days?  Nobody.

The stark reality is that conservatives are not the majority in this country. So if we want conservatives to win Presidential elections, we have to be fortunate enough to either 1) be running against a really crummy, uncharismatic Democrat, or 2) have a truly great conservative candidate.  Not true.  I don't think that's an outlandish comment by any means, but it is misguided.  If we want Conservatives to win, our party has to endorse them, support them, and keep lofting them.  I'm not making the case they will always win.  I am making the case that when our time does come to gain the leadership, a Conservative will be the person installed into office.  Our party clearly fights to defeat this reality.  In his day, Reagan WAS NOT the RNC favorite.  George Bush was.  None the less, Democrats reached out to thim and supported him.  The same dynamic is alive and well today.  Most people don't realize it.

Are you aware of the percentage of the populace that considers themselves to be a Conservative vs a Liberal?  41 vs 21% LINK

Sadly the RNC is operating under the same misconception you are.

Unfortunately, neither of those was available to us in this campaign cycle. I don't see that as a justification to give up on opposing the greater of two evils because of the greater damage that can be done by that greater evil. And, it seems obvious to me that conservatives are certainly going to have more influence over a GOP President than a Democrat who will be pandering to his base heavily his entire second term.

Okay, then you buy into the idea that we must always vote for the (R), no matter what.  I say that because the Leftist is always without fail described as someone we can't allow to be elected, or the nation will crumble.  Strangely, the more this seemed to make sense, the more Leftist our candidates(R) happened to turn out to be.  Now we're at the point that folks who partner with Soros, Kennedy, Kerry et al are the folks we're being asked to support.  McCain formed a 501c(3) with Soros, Teressa Heinz Kerry, and the Tides Foundation.  Look at what Romney has been up to.  Who needs Democrats when you have the level of treachery on our own side?

I'm not saying this to be mean, but you're playing right into the hands of the RNC here.  You're proving them right.  We'll vote for anything with an (R) after it.  Why should they move back to the Right, if they can get people this Leftist elected?  Do you want people this Leftist?  I don't think you do.

Just because the President is a Republican doesn't mean conservatives can't loudly and strongly oppose his policies with which we disagree.  Look, if you want to kid yourself that Republican Senators and Congressmen stand up to Republican presidents, go ahead.  The Medicare Prescription plan?  The Kennedy/McCain Immigration Reform Act?  Nice try.  Lest you forget, the Immigration Reform Act was a done deal, if McCain hadn't wanted to run for the presidency.  The Democrats were in charge.  They had the votes.  Republicans would have joined them.  So no, failing the withdrawel of support by one of the drafters, this bill passes.  Is anyone at all operating under the delusion that McCain wouldn't have revived this as soon as he was elected?  It was the realization of this that more than anything else, cost McCain the election.  And remember, he was the lesser of two evils.  His bill would have seen over 100 million Mexican nationals become U. S. Citizen in under 20 years.

As much of a squishy moderate as Bush was on some issues, I think most of us would agree this country would be in even worse shape if Gore of Kerry had been elected in his stead. And it does us no good if the patient dies before we can find the right doctor.

If the Republican party couldn't get Bush elected without Conservative support, do you think the next candidate would have been less or more Conservative?  Yes, we got Bush elected, and then he proceded to join with the Republicans and the Democrats to shape the nation that was handed off to Barack Obama.  Tell me this destroys my arguments here.  Well, you can't.

Do I want Kerry, Gore, Obama, in office?  No.  At the same time, I don't want Bush, McCain, and Romney in office.  I'm sorry, but the RNC will never get the message if we don't send it loud and clear.  This nation will get no better, and will only get worse until it gets that message.  Now, when will we send that message if not now?

[DoughtyOne]

In this environment, nobody advances the premise that Conservative tenets are more sound than Leftist tenets. Both campaign from a Leftist point of view, but one is less of a Leftist than the other.

I disagree right there. There are plenty of people espoousing conservative ideals, and they at least get presented as the alternative to what the Democrat does. And frankly, in this election cycle, Romney has rhetorically been a big booster of capitalism. It's his record on related issues that's the problem, but the conservative message is definitely getting out there even if conservatives themselves doubt his sincerity.

Okay, so your example is a guy who expouses the evils of abortion, but supported it for decades.  He now speaks out against Obamacare, but he himself supported the individual mandate to get his own health care bill passed in Massachusetts.  He's a strong supporter of gun rights, but signed on to many gun control efforts in the past.  He is the loudest voice on our team, gets full support from the RNC, Republican talking heads, Republican office holders, and the Republican elites, but is his own walking nullification.

This is what strikes you as the Republican party getting Conservatism's message out there?  LOL  Okay.  Does it ever occur to you that a man like this actually destroys our message, cheapens it, causes folks to look at Conservatives as liars and worse?

The RNC should have made it clear from day one, that Romney was a bridge too far.  He was able to run roughshod over Newt and Santorum.  I have no doubt that others who didn't have as deep pockets as Romnye did, decidced to stay out rather then go broke.

Romney was Conservatism's 2012 poison pill.  His message was brought to you by the entirely too willing RNCe.

The problem has been that conservative ideals are "tougher love" than the surface coddling that liberals offer, so it takes an exceptional messenger to make that case effectively.

No, it merely takes a messenger that has espoused these policies for more than six months.  Having done that, it must also be a person with a loud enough voice that he won't be drowned out by someone spending six to ten times more money, to denegrate him with non-stop television spots, to the point that nobody else's voice could be heard above the din.  That's exactly what we had going on this year.

What we utlimately found out this year, is that the RNCe has no standards whatsoever.  Any person can register as a Republican and do whatever they like for decades against almost every tenet of Conservatism, then decide to run for the presidency with the RNCe's full blessing.

If we want Conservatives to win, our party has to endorse them, support them, and keep lofting them. I'm not making the case they will always win. I am making the case that when our time does come to gain the leadership, a Conservative will be the person installed into office.

I don't see the virtue in drilling holes in the bottom of the boat so that the water runs out faster while waiting for that conservative to emerge. by then, we may be sunk.

I don't disagree with your premise, but I'm not confident you are seeing this clearly.

What we actually have is a boat with a good sized hole in it, we need someone to block that hole, and you don't see a problem with a guy(R) holding a smaller drill bit headed into the boat.  What do you expect him to do with that drill?  Stop leaks?  NO, he wants to make more.  They'll probably be smaller, but they'll still let more water in.  When do we STOP putting in guys with a drill in their hand?  McCain, Romney,... more holes...  Look at the holes our last guy drilled in the bottom of the boat.  Hell, he came very close to sinking the thing with the help of others.  Enough already!

Our party clearly fights to defeat this reality. In his day, Reagan WAS NOT the RNC favorite. George Bush was. None the less, Democrats reached out to thim and supported him. The same dynamic is alive and well today. Most people don't realize it.

The problem, again, is that we don't have a Reagan running. We had a pretty flawed slate of candidates. The reason we haven't nominated another Reagan is that another Reagan hasn't chosen to run.

We've got a guy running with hundreds of millions, and we can't understand why a guy with a few million won't decide to run.   As long as the RNCe allows wealthy or well-known Leftists to continue to choke the field, we'll continue to get the Leftists.  What part of this are you missing?

Are you aware of the percentage of the populace that considers themselves to be a Conservative vs a Liberal? 41 vs 21%

41% is not a majority. It gets you 41% of the electorate. In any case, peoples' definition of conservative may be ideosyncratic, and may not match yours or mine. But more importantly, if we assume that number is correct, then why didn't that 41% nominate a great conservative? It's because there wasn't one running. That was the core reason we're stuck with Romney today. Crud, the primaries showed that GOP voters kept flocking to the next non-Romney, in the vain hope they'd turn out to be the next Reagan. And they all failed. I voted for Gingrich, but I'd admit that he isn't Reagan either.  No, he isn't.  I agree with that.  I'm not a big supporter of Newt.  I could vote for him, but it would be grudgingly.

Earlier you were stating that the majority of U. S. Citizens were not Conservative.  I point out that only 21% of the public claim to be Liberals, and you respond by telling me 41% is not a majority.  Pardon me for pointing it out, but 21% isn't either.  The fact remains, people self-declare to be Conservative by almost twice the number who self-declare to be Liberal.  Why are we not appealing to those self-declared Conservatives and enough of a small portion of the self-declared moderates to win?  Instead the RNCe backs the most Leftist candidate every four years.  Why are we continuing to fight for the 21% that declare to be Leftists?  It makes no sense whatsoever, and yet here we go again.  I'll ask you directly.  Why do you find yourself compelled to support this?

The core problem we've had is a lack of good candidates. And honestly, the only "fault" we can attach to that is to those non-existent candidates themselves. The best I've seen recently is Rubio in terms of the ability to communicate the conservative message effectively, but he's still unripe. I just want to be sure we still have a country when he's ready to run in 2016.

Does he have $200 million dollars?  If he doesn't, and another Leftist with $200 million decides to run, don't count on a good candidate coming forward.

 BTW, my problems isn't the money or the fame, it's the way a person has lived their lives and whether they can be trusted to mean what they say today?

 I also have a big problem with the RNCe's policy of being willing to back any Leftist slimeball(R) whatsoever for the presidency.

 Thanks for the discussion.  I know some of this is rather pointed, but I'm not upset with you.  I'm just frustrated by what we are continually faced with every four years.  I want it to stop.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks for the discussion. I know some of this is rather pointed, but I'm not upset with you. I'm just frustrated by what we are continually faced with every four years. I want it to stop.

Thank you as well. It is unfortunate that conservatives who are ultimately all on the same side often can't seem to disagree reasonably over what amounts to a difference in strategy rather than a difference in principle.  I generally agree with that, but it's not entirely off base to question where some advocacies germinate from.  If my perception is that a advocated policy might further the desires of Leftists in my own party vs the Leftists in another party, it isn't all that unreasoned to come to the conclusion that Leftists are still going to be the benificiary of that advocacy.  That doesn't mean the advocate realizes the ramifications of everything his advocacy may support in the long run.  And then again, it doesn't mean they don't.

I'm actually frustrated by those who chose not to run. He was not a perfect candidate, but Mitch Daniels was certainly more conservative than Romney, and right on all the issues even if he generally eschews red-meat rhetoric.  I share some of that frustration, but we don't know all things about people.  He may have a good reason for not wanting to run.

I'm just crossing my fingers that we make it to 2016 without things going beyond repair, when we'll hopefully have a much more conservative candidate.  Frankly, I'd like to see a majority enter the Republican Convention this year demanding the whole thing be tossed out on it's ear, and someone new be drafted.  IMO, that's the greatest most patriotic thing that Santorum and Gingrich could do right now.  They should form an exploratory committee and come up with a strategy and some names.  Sorry Newt, no way...  You had your chance and it wasn't you.

Failing that, we have got to start a Conservative coalition that will end the Republican party's lock on the nomination process.  It's past time for a civil war in the Republican party.

[rawcatslyentist]

They didn’t just leave. They sold it to Soros!

[JRandomFreeper]

I happen to agree with you. I'm not a republican. I'm conservative. And every cycle, hope the GOP has a conservative to vote for. And sadly, that has not been the case for far too long.

So I won't vote for a liberal. Ever.

Especially Romney. In fact, I do, and will campaign AGAINST him to all my friends, associates, and family.

The insanity has to stop.

We have one liberal party with two faces.

/johnny

[W. W. SMITH]

Romney is a deep planted mole and another attempt by the communist/socialist zombies to destroy the party.

[W. W. SMITH]

The stark reality is that conservatives are not the majority in this country.

---

I’m not so sure your right here. A good 90 to 95 percent of the population is to the right of center. They are feed a diet of leftist clap trap day in and day out and when they are not prodded into thinking about the difference between parties will end up voting stupid.

[IronJack]

Well said, old friend. And now it’s time to don your kevlar briefs because you’ve undoubtedly antagonized FR’s Vidkun Quisling Brigade.

[af_vet_rr]

If the Republican party couldn't get Bush elected without Conservative support, do you think the next candidate would have been less or more Conservative? Yes, we got Bush elected, and then he proceded to join with the Republicans and the Democrats to shape the nation that was handed off to Barack Obama. Tell me this destroys my arguments here. Well, you can't.

This is a major part of the problem in my view. The elder Bush gave us a more expensive government, then lost to Clinton. Dole - lost to Clinton. George W. Bush - gave us the biggest, most expensive, most powerful, and most intrusive government in our nation's history, and then with the help of McCain handed it off to Obama to abuse even more.

Obama looked at how Bush made the government more powerful and more intrusive, and decided he could make it even more powerful and more intrusive.

This is what voting for the GOP has gotten us since 1988 - more government which we then gave to the Democrats, and Romney is just more of the same, only a lot more liberal.

I'm with you, I'm done with the GOP as a party if Romney gets the nomination. The Republican Presidential nominees have done great harm to this country since 1988, and we are running out of time. This idea that things will eventually improve if we just bend over one more time is ridiculous. The Republican establishment is running out the clock on us, and we aren't willing to call a time out.

[Rex Anderson]

Although we've disagreed on some things over the years, I've always held you and your opinions in high regard, from back in the Buchanan Brigade days.

Are you suggesting that, due to the slide to the left over the last decade, 'we' conservatives need to hit rock bottom, and build up from there?

I have to admit, back in the glory days of '98, none of us could have ever imagined the cultural shift to the left that has occurred. And, I'm sorry to admit, I don't envision it being righted in my lifetime.

[hope]

I was a registered Republican since 18 up till 6 months ago..I’m now a registered Independent. Never again will I vote for the lesser of evils...I’ll let God Almighty sort it out!

[W. W. SMITH]

1980 [L-—d-—r-c-————R] *
1984 [L—d——r-c-————R] *
1988 [L—d-—r—c-————R] *
1992 [L—d-—r—c-————R]
1996 [L—d-—r—c-————R]
2000 [L—d—r-—c-————R] *
2004 [L-d—r——c-————R] *
2008 [Ld—r-——c-————R]
2012 [Ld—r-——c-————R]

I really like this, it shows what I have been trying to tell people for years.
The media is out there at the finish line cheering on the parties race to the end. With the Democrats in the lead the Republicans have the last few decades been pushing hard to at least catch up. This election cycle will see the parties reaching the finish line with Obama and Romney arguing over which of them can get us there quicker. The end result will be the enslavement of this nations citizens. Isn’t that special?

[Colonel_Flagg]

Well done.

Whomever it was that told you conservatives aren’t in the majority hasn’t seen repeated polling that shows Americans identify themselves, in the main, as center-right. They’re concerned for their families and their well-being, they are concerned that runaway spending is selling them up the river, and they want to feel safe in their homes and the country generally.

The Republican Party refuses with all its being to cater to these people. Instead, they go along to get along, get invited to all the right parties, and ride the gravy train in the seats right behind the engineers in the Democrat Party.

Should Mutt Romney be elected President, we won’t get a chance to even try to nominate a conservative candidate until 2020 — at which time, the Republic may well be either destroyed or damaged beyond repair.

I’m not going to support that by voting for Romney simply because he has an “R” by his name. I’ll fight like hell for conservatives at every level of the downticket, but Mutt can take a long walk off a short dock.

[ansel12]

Too much color for me, I tried to read the thread, but no go on all this colored text.

[mnehring]

I think you are missing one big thing here. A lot of people here may not like it, but it is just my opinion. (I've been considering writing a vanity on this for a while).

Conservatives have failed Reagan. Reagan was not a victorious Conservative because he was a champion of the government fixing problems for Conservatives. On the contrary, he taught us the scariest words in the English language: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Reagan simply reminded us that the greatness in the United States comes not from the government, but from her people. Reagan said unleash that greatness.

Have we unleashed greatness?

In my opinion, no.

We took a few years of believing in the greatness that Reagan reminded us of and instead of nurturing greatness within ourselves, we kept looking at politicians to help.

Don’t get me wrong, there were moments. The Tea Party seemed on the verge of restoring people’s faith in themselves. And while they did stand for Conservative policies, once again they missed the principle; stopping with wanting someone from the government who is here to help.

We would not have Obamacare if a majority in this country found the thought of having their butt wiped by the government appealing.

The GOP”e” can’t give us their “e” candidate if it weren’t for millions of individual people voting for that “e” candidate. We can’t even really blame Democrats crossing over. Republicans and Democrats voting for non-Conservative candidates are a failure of Conservatives joining in the cheer of looking for someone from the government who is here to help instead of communicating individual Conservativism.

We need, for the lack of a better term, a revival. We need an awakening that the answer doesn’t come from the next election or the next politician. The answer comes when 300 million people stand up to 300 politicians and say, enough, we don’t need you. We won’t accept your help or your promises.

The only way that will happen is if people start living individual Conservativism in their own homes first. Then, take it to their neighbors, their friends, and their family. In essence, it is a philosophical Going Galt.

You talk about voting for the lesser of two evils, but how often does politics give us any different. It is the very nature of politics. It attracts people who want to control others. Maybe once in a lifetime we get a statesman who doesn’t fit that mold, but they are so rare, we should never expect it. If you want someone who isn’t a ‘lesser evil’ you won’t find it in DC or wanting any hall of leadership. They are found leading businesses, in operating rooms, raising children, even bagging your groceries. That is the greatness of this country. Not politicians from the government, here to help.

Sadly, I saw someone on this very site, who everyone respects recently say “I am not a leader”. This is the core of our problems. We are looking outward for leaders from the government who is here to help. We need to wake up and realize, we are all leaders. It is our responsibility to make the country Conservative, not some guy from the government who is here to help.

So I’m sorry Mr. and Mrs. Conservative. You are a leader, whether you like it or not. Now lead. But lead people away from DC, not to it. D.C. is not the promised land of a future leader, it is our slave-master of Egypt we should get away from.

::rant off::

[W. W. SMITH]

#1; pray that the horse learns to sing.
#2; Try to talk every delegate into voting sane.
#3; Surround the convention center with 500k plus and don’t let them leave until they nominate some one good.
#4; surround the convention center with 500k plus and conduct a nomination right there in the open. Get a small radio station to broadcast live so everyone can hear and know what is going on. Take nominations and conduct votes right in the street and then dare the RNC to try and ignore us.
#5; or hell .....pray for the horse to learn to sing.

[luvie]

Well said! :)

[Theodore R.]

All this is mostly true. However, we have to support Romney now because former 1988 rivals Dole and GHWB say we must. Well, we just must.