Do you not see the essential dichotomy? We we refuse to support the GOOD ideas because of the occasional perceived BAD ideas, WE have destroyed the Republican party.
Yeah, that’s great.
He should be talking about the inherently Marxist idea of taxing income in the first place, the abuses of power that the IRS commonly visit on otherwise free citizens, and the Keynesian monetary and budgetary policies that have led us to economic crisis.
If he did that, we wouldn’t be debating about making the cuts permanent, we would actually have a national dialogue about the morality of our entire economy.
Instead, he allows the line of scrimmage to be positioned way over on the left, and we argue with the statists about minutiae.
LOL, what spin!!
My point exactly.
This situation isn't Bush's fault. How in the world did anything he did prevent conservatives from rallying around the more conservative candidates in the presidential race?
It didn't and they didn't. I'm not sure why in all particulars, but the conservative candidates, who as politicians had at least the same skills as those who are front-runners today, never made it out of the bottom tier. Who is responsible for that? Well, conservatives.
Either there are not really as many conservatives as there are said to be, or conservatives aren't as conservative as they say they are, or "conservatism" is taking on a new meaning in practical, political terms . . . or . . . or . . .
The point is that whatever is happening, whatever it means that conservatives are not rallying to conservative candidates in numbers sufficient to make them viable, it is happening within the rank and file.
George W. Bush didn't keep people from supporting Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter, for example. Neither did the party, nor the MSM.
When the base becomes a loose group of single/handful of single issue groups, rather than an association of persons interested in advancing some core ideals, the base will break.