Replies

There is quite a bit that could be gleaned from my graphic other than that narrow and nuanced interpretation you prefer. Conservatives are just as reliant on the GOP to see that our agenda get some legs at all and I'm sick of other conservatives throwing a wrench into the works because they refuse to understand we are a MINORITY. We make up LESS THAN HALF of the electorate and as such we need to work with moderates and accept that we won't get everything we want. Thank GOD the Greens are a minority and can't get everything they want... it works the same with us, unfortunately, until we educate enough of the public to BECOME a majority.

We're damn lucky to have Santorum, we certainly aren't automatically entitled to him given how we are outnumbered by the liberals and moderates in Pennsylvania. Moderates helped us put him in office and we need to continue to stick together on both conservative and centrist Repubicans.

You've given me a stock response, that doesn't apply to situations when the conservative agenda is damaged unnecessarily. The article explains quite clearly that Bush and Santorum's endorsement of Spectre was not brought about by any reasonable political horse trading, but by a deliberate desire to hold the religious conservatives in check. If you really have a point about political realities, try to make it in the context of this excellent article, and hold the cute graphics.

Taking a broader look, we of course understand the necessity to compromise, but a compromise is useful only if it advances the agenda. Pro-life agenda did not advance under the GOP. Matter of fact, I am not aware of any conservative plank that has advanced, despite the congressional majorities and the control of the White house.

"We make up LESS THAN HALF of the electorate and as such we need to work with moderates"

Spare us the lecture. Please listen carefully, "ARLEN SPECTER IS NOT A MODERATE, BUT A LIBERAL."