The Death of Conservatism? - 43 Mistakes and the GOP's Dobson's Choice

Sideshow Bob | January 29, 2008 | Sideshow Bob

[fightinJAG]

Excellent and spot on.

I hope you have your flame suit at hand.

[DannyTN]

It’s the fact that Fred wasn’t supportive of it at all. Fred wasn’t on the same page with us. If it got through Congress or came up from the states, Fred was going to shoot it down.

[fightinJAG]

What do you make of this, then? According to Barna Research, IIRC, it was *evangelicals* who went for *Bill Clinton* by about substantial percentage, thus giving him enough votes to squeak in. Twice.

I don’t consider a bloc vote for Bubba our “political allies,” do you?

I’ll try to find the link for that sooner rather than later.

[Carry_Okie]

The National Review, Free Republic, Human Events doesn’t provide leadership or a connective force anymore because the coalition is so diverse and disconnected; neither does the Republican party so we need to retake the party.

While a ground game ala Leadership Institute would be wonderful, the Party "leadership" won't let that happen. Just look at the way Bush wrecked the California GOP by letting Rove install Gerry Parsky after the 2000 election. Not only did they screw the GOP gubernatorial nominee, but they gave us Arnold, who cut off the entire down-ticket slate in 2006.

Conservatives have to back their guy in each primary race and stop contributing to the GOP until they change their tune.

[colorado tanker]

You left out Buchanan. He blew the Pubbies up in 1992 before Perot ever got a chance.

Yep. A primary challenger from his party's base (e.g. Buchanan for Bush 41, Kennedy for Carter) for an incumbent President is very bad news, almost always resulting in a loss.

[papasmurf]

Boy, you said a mouthful there. And I agree with all of it.

[fightinJAG]

There's lots out there; this is just what I came upon first.

[snip]

Bill Clinton in 1996 won the majority of freestyle evangelicals. But in 2000, George Bush won the majority of freestyle evangelicals. It shifted by about 10 percent away from Gore towards Bush, which, in an election that close, it was a very important shift.

from The Evangelical Vote: How monolithic is this voting bloc and how firm is its support for George W. Bush? Will religion matter in the 2004 election? Here are the views of Richard Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals; Steve Waldman, editor-in-chief of Beliefnet; Jim Wallis, editor-in chief of Sojourners Magazine; John C. Green, author of Religion and the Culture Wars; E.J. Dionne Jr., co-chair of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life; and Wayne Slater, reporter for the Dallas Morning News.

I realize people might say "well, we didn't mean *those* evangelicals . . .," but (again IIRC) it wasn't only the "freestyle" evangelicals who ended up voting for the Sinkmeister.

[the808bass]

It needs to be addressed at the Federal level to keep states like Romney's from making it difficult for the rest of us.

So, you're against the state's rights when it's one of your issues.

[the808bass]

If the governor is responsible for everything, even court orders, then Romney is directly responsible for Gay marriages in his state. Another reason I don’t like Mitt.

What's almost comical is that you don't see how this is a double standard. You give Huckabee a pasa because the "courts made him do it." You use the same logic, then, to condemn Romney. And never bat an eyelash.

[colorado tanker]

I disagree that the government shutdown was a good idea. In fact, it was a disaster, giving the new Republican Congress a black eye almost from it’s start, which prevented us from building a larger majority during the Clinton years. We played right into Billy Jeff’s hands.

[Squantos]

Conservatives have to back their guy in each primary race and stop contributing to the GOP until they change their tune.

BINGO !!!........Agree 100%

[papasmurf]

I think that Rush may be the most afraid of the dilemma that will face him as host if McCain is elected. Will he continue to attack McCain and run the risk of having liberals side with him, or will he grudgingly accept McCain and essentially ignore him in his criticism of liberals. His show could suffer.

Please don't take this personal, but that was probably the dumbest post I've seen in two or three days. LOL

No matter who wins, Rush wins!

[TheThirdRuffian]

“Conservatives have to back their guy in each primary race and stop contributing to the GOP until they change their tune.”

Yep.

[the808bass]

He didn’t endorse anyone.

He gave a sideways endorsement of Huckabee. But not enough to go down with that sinking ship.

[fightinJAG]

I do think the issue of whether "evangelicals" are the political allies of conservatives is quite complex.

Here's a flashback to 1994 that speaks to a bunch of points that are still in play:

Clinton's revelation - how and why Bill Clinton needs to appeal to Southern Baptists

[PsyOp]

Teh more I’ve seen how this election is going and the disintigration of the Republican party, the more appreciation I have of the Japanese custom of Hari Kiri.

[trisham]

Instead, we got Mitt Romney, an uber-wealthy GOP establishment moderate

***************

Who knew that success and wealth would become negatives for Republicans?

Promoting a class struggle will not help conservatives or the GOP.

[DannyTN]

"What's almost comical is that you don't see how this is a double standard. You give Huckabee a pasa because the "courts made him do it." You use the same logic, then, to condemn Romney. And never bat an eyelash."

LOL The clue there is the way I opened "If the governor is responsible for everything, even court orders..." I do give Romney a pass on the gay marriages, at least I don't know what actions he took, but I know it was court ordered. I was simply showing him the logical conclusion of not giving Huck a pass on the court order was that Romney wouldn't get a pass on gay marriages.

[the808bass]

If it got through Congress or came up from the states, Fred was going to shoot it down.

Source, please.

Please indicate how a President has any power of Amending the Constitution. Diagrams, charts and/or graphs would be helpful.

[Sideshow Bob]

Quoting from your "supportive" news article...

"Family founder James Dobson appeared to throw cold water on a possible presidential bid by former Sen. Fred Thompson while praising former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is also weighing a presidential run, in a phone interview Tuesday."

So, it's okay for Dobson to praise a serial adulterer like Gingrich (his huuuge character flaw) while accusing Fred of not being a Christian.

Good job, Dr. Dobson. Your flawed evangelical purity test will have helped to elect a closeted lesbian (not that there's anything wrong with that), a Mormon (not that there's anything worng with that), a "converted" Muslim (not that there's anything worng with that) or an areligious, angry, deranged and egomaniacal Vietnam vet (not that there's anything worng with that).

Way to shepherd your evangelical flock!

lol