[Sherman Logan]

I'm sad to say that Medved and Hugh Hewitt are politics over principles conservatives

I'm really curious. How does losing an election by running someone you would consider a "true conservative" advance the cause of freedom?

[EveningStar]

I'm really curious. How does losing an election by running someone you would consider a "true conservative" advance the cause of freedom?

Are you saying that conservatives should make decisions based on reality rather than wishful thinking? Shame on you! :)

[upsdriver]

I'm curious, why do you think running a liberal republican can be equated with winning anything?

[Antoninus]

I'm really curious. How does losing an election by running someone you would consider a "true conservative" advance the cause of freedom?

You're talking to a guy from New Jersey. We took Medved's advice and elected a liberal Republican in the 1990s. Since then, the state GOP has imploded, the Democrats have taken over lock-stock-and-barrel, and when we do manage to put forward an excellent conservative candidate for statewide office, the liberal GOP leadership *publicly endorses the Democrat* (see Bret Schundler versus Jim "gay American" McGreevey in 2001).

Do you want that for the national GOP? How does having two liberal parties advance the cause of freedom?

[uptoolate]

Did not the last election teach us that conservatives only want true conservatives?

The untrue conservatives screwed up.

[jmc813]

I'm really curious. How does losing an election by running someone you would consider a "true conservative" advance the cause of freedom?

It would bring the idea of limited government back into the public debate.