We got eight years of genuinely conservative government, four years of mushy RINO government (during which we got one bad and one great SCOTUS nominee) and the collapse of the Soviet Empire. Not a bad trade-off.
Of course, if there is a way to put two conservatives on the ticket, all the better . . .
“Reagan took Bush. I don’t think it was out of any great love for George H.W. Bush, but out of a need to get the RINO wing of the party united behind the only genuinely conservative candidate in half a century or more.”
Very well said, as was your entire post. Been my philosophy for a long time now.
Folks, we just can’t let 2012 be a repeat of ‘08 which is dangerously close to resulting in the demise of this republic. We MUST get b. hussein obama out at any and all costs or you can kiss it goodbye. The example of Reagan’s reasoning is spot on. Our candidate must be a unifier - not divisive, and - electable! Also, that candidate (unlike McCain) has GOT to run a rock-solid, non-PC (even ruthless if necessary) campaign against arguably the worst enemy of this country to ever occupy the people’s White House.