Yes, I'd take a sort of Conservative GOPer. That's a far better choice than a damned Dem. OTOH, you'd rather starve to death, than to accept 1/2 a loaf.
Tell me, did you enjoy the 8 years of the Clintons ? If not, then you'd best try a little pragmatism. ;^)
No, there are more than a few conservatives that would work. Someone along the lines of Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond. Those are men that I would consider conservative.
Yes, I'd take a sort of Conservative GOPer. That's a far better choice than a damned Dem. OTOH, you'd rather starve to death, than to accept 1/2 a loaf.
Well if they're a 'sort of' conservative how is that going to forward this incrementalism you speak of? Surely that type of conservative will be more interested in the votes and to gain those votes would be more apt to compromise any position that would be considered too conservative to gain the most votes. This has happened time and time again on the national stage. Talk a good talk on the stump but when they get into office they're more concerned with playing the game
Tell me, did you enjoy the 8 years of the Clintons ? If not, then you'd best try a little pragmatism. ;^)
Look I'm not calling for a rebirth of the Founders themselves but I would expect some consideration instead of empty promises year after year. As I said I will always give a politician credit where credit is due. I don't dislike President Bush. Rather, I like the man and appreciate the respect he has brought back to the office of the President. However, I'm not going to say he's governing any better than moderate to moderate liberal. And that's why I can't see any progress of incrementalism back to the conservative agenda