Replies

It seems that we can agree on defining the problem but can't quite get together on the solution.

That is because you are talking about what ought to be, the way you wish things were, and I am talking about how things are.

Again, I'm not talking 3rd party or extreme views.

This is a perfect example. You may not be suggesting or encouraging third party alternatives but that is the practical result of your choices.

As things are today you either work inside the Republican Party, to try to make it more conservative while supporting the best candidate you can get, or you help the Democrats. That may not be your intention but that is the result.

"As things are today you either work inside the Republican Party, to try to make it more conservative while supporting the best candidate you can get, or you help the Democrats. That may not be your intention but that is the result."

Mr. Mind (as you will forever be known to me as): You said it well. Succinctly. Beautifully. The irresistible logic of your statement can not be refuted.

For some reason America is a two party country. Other countries must deal with multiple parties. That seems too chaotic. American parties are populated by disparate groups that form coalitions, and a certain level of tolerance or acceptance of the other groups is required before you pull the lever for the (R) or the (D).

"Can we work together to get something done", is the refrain often heard.

I see the party as it is, what's wrong with it, and I am prescribing a course of action to make it healthy, just as a doctor does with a patient.

I told you that I am remaining in the party to work to correct it. I told you why others -- in huge numbers -- are not. I can't, don't, and won't blame them. The party doesn't deserve their support when the candidates are little different from those the Dems (communists) run.

Supporting those candidates brings us closer to socialism albeit at that slower rate, but why would you condemn those voters for refusing to be party to that downward slide? They know the Dems are worse, but evil is still evil and they refuse to advance evil. Giving the GOP a victory with those candidates merely encourages them to do more of the same. Just like any deal, if they can get your support by offering you 'less' why would they offer 'more'?

As I have said countless times on FR, Bush and the pubbies -- including those claiming to be conservatives -- have given us laws that would have had us marching to DC with pitchforks in hand had Clinton's done the same thing. We don't watch the pubbies as close as we do the Dems. We stopped lots of things that Clinton proposed just because he was Clinton, but Bush has got things done that Clinton could only have dreamed of that weren't much different.

Liberals wearing our team's jersey are the enemy inside our gate. They can do more damage than liberals outside the gate. That's why sometimes we must accept the loss of a seat.