Replies

I'm more interested in defeating liberalism, bringing in more people into the ranks, instead of engaging in childish "My Conservatism is better than yours" kind of crap, day in and day out.

I don't believe Conservatism is monolithic. My definition of Conservatism is not the same as the next person's. I also don't believe we should just sit idly by while our sworn enemies define who we are.

Reagan wouldn't have won a landslide in 1984 by calling fellow Republican's that they were spineless, mealy-mouthed RINO's, or fellow American's in flyover space that they were toothless hayseed Bible-thumping hicks. Reagan wouldn't have won in a landslide believing in the all or nothing mentality. Reagan wouldn't have won as a third party type either for that matter.

There has to be some certain bit of compromise. Reagan demonstrated that well. Destroying the Republican party or each other won't get us anywhere fast, seems too many are hellbent on doing more of that instead of advancing Reagan's idea of Conservatism.

"I'm more interested in defeating liberalism, bringing in more people into the ranks..."

I agree, bringing in new blood is what it's going to take. I think, in spite of the liberalism that is rampant in colleges and universities, many of the young people today are turned off to this extreme nutty liberalism they're being exposed to daily. Many of these professors are our best "advertisement" as to why young people should consider becoming a conservative, in my opinion.

"Reagan wouldn't have won a landslide in 1984 by calling fellow Republican's that they were spineless, mealy-mouthed RINO's, or fellow American's in flyover space that they were toothless hayseed Bible-thumping hicks. Reagan wouldn't have won in a landslide believing in the all or nothing mentality. Reagan wouldn't have won as a third party type either for that matter."

This thread is about Viguerie's speech, not one word of which has anything to do with comments like that at all. He's simply said we need to build a conservative movement, independent of the GOP. Is he wrong? Or are you mad about that idea for some reason? You've been griping about the man personally up to now, now you're griping about people calling out RINOs, or calling flyover country hicks, even about how we need to compromise. You still can't seem to address the idea he put forth in his speech, which is that CONSERVATIVES need to organize INDEPENDENT of the GOP. What is wrong with that? Is that somehow 'engaging in my conservatism is better than yours?' Is that somehow implying that 'conservatism is monolithic?' Is that somehow destroying the Republican party? Feel free to explain how!