Feh.
These articles and their related threads do get tiresome after awhile. Not so much because of the underlying article, which does make for an interesting read, but because of the predictable villification of all the usual suspects and the lack of strategic thought.
Just for a moment, and solely for the sake of polite discussion, let's just assume that the article is completely correct (something I don't agree with, but that doesn't really matter) What is the reaction of conservatives? More of the same. Semantics exercises. Vows to expose the Wicked Democrat Conspiracy (registered trademark), etc. Nothing new. Nothing fresh.
In my view, which I'm fairly certain will be attacked, dismissed, and ignored in short order, the problem that conservatives have found themselves in is a lack of strategic vision. Conservatives are becoming part of the background noise. The strategies for achieving a conservative future remain pretty much limited to working with the Republican party in some fashion to achieve that.
And those who have the temerity to suggest that only 42 years after the nomination of Sen. Goldwater, very little has actually been accomplished by the GOP are dismissed as malcontents and heretics. Or worse.
I noticed that as you "deconstructed" the article you spoke volubly about its (and the Conservatives) lack of something you term "fresh and new...strategic vision." For the sake of discussion, why don't you share with us your "new and fresh" "strategic vision"? It would seem you have something by way of 'strategy' to offer but for some strange reason have not shared it with us.
Your comment regarding Goldwater is dead on.
I bought his HB book "With No Apologies" recently for the whopping sum of $3.06 shipped on eBay.
Flipping through it last night, the title's of the last several chapters caught my eye.
I have half a mind to OCR them to post here, or maybe it's online already to post the link to.
I am curious what Freepers in general think of Barry Goldwater - do they credit him with helping Reagan zero in on his agenda of restoring Limited Govt & regaining military superiority lost under Carter?
Do they give him the credit for getting the Republican party away from it's progressive, adventurous, big Govt roots first fostered by TR, and by the big Govt Rockefellers ever since, like Ike and Nixon under Keynesian economic mythology?
Just what do Freepers think of Barry Goldwater today, do they even know enough about his message?