Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Delacon
Cons must take the party back so that we dont repeat our only choices being Bush v McCain in 00 or having several big government republicans divide the vote as in 08.


Whom do you propose be the one to make that selection? Hell the Cons can't even agree on a single leader much less coalesce behind one prior to having a ‘duke out’ during the primaries. JMO

176 posted on 01/20/2009 12:45:36 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: deport
Whom do you propose be the one to make that selection? Hell the Cons can't even agree on a single leader much less coalesce behind one prior to having a ‘duke out’ during the primaries. JMO

To jump onto that bandwagon ... today's "conservatives" can't agree on a single leader, because we can't even agree on what "conservatism" means, much less how it should be implemented.

As the last ugly primary season demonstrated, "conservatism" has tended to mean "what I think, and anybody who disagrees with me is a RINO bastard."

And in the fantasy world of modern Republican politics, the name "Reagan" is used like a magic word -- candidates seek to identify themselves with Reagan. Not that their ideas actually match what Reagans were, but because Reagan was the last Republican giant. His ideas are irrelevant to the candidates, just so long as they can foster an impression of being "Reaganesque."

To be blunt, modern conservatism has lost its intellectual bearings. We're a "movement" only in the Brownian sense of the word: randomly adopting positions under the influence of what seems to offer political advantage at the moment.

179 posted on 01/20/2009 1:03:13 PM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson