“Will it be yet another Pyrrhic victory? I don’t know, but I keep waiting for a Mel Gibson moment. You should prepare yourself.”
Dem activists conducted illegal investigations and passed them to the press, who then made HIM the story and ignored the statement by that POS in the WH. Hannity did nothing to change the story (but throw a toy football like a girl). You seem to be in the “blame conservatives first” branch of the The Grand Old Potty.
You refuse to acknowledge this for some reason. Obama did not “avoid back;ash” because of anyhting other than the fact that the left controls the media that you want to placate.
You are either a willing idiot or don’t understand the dynamic of the press. Maybe both. Either way, if you think that the path to victory over the left comes through soft Republican political tactics, you will end up with an ice pick in your ear. That there is some pretty reliable history, Bubba.
Good luck with your kinder gentler Republican tactics and winning through influencing the American press.
You refuse to acknowledge this for some reason. Obama did not “avoid back;ash” because of anyhting other than the fact that the left controls the media that you want to placate.
You can, of course, demonstrate where I said that we should "placate" the media? Oh, and btw, we knew they controlled the media before we played into their hand over and over by agreeing to play by their rules. Sometimes your opponent has the upper hand, or controls some key utility, but you don't just say "Oh well, I guess I can't beat him" but reconsider and find ways to get around his advantage.
You are either a willing idiot or don’t understand the dynamic of the press. Maybe both. Either way, if you think that the path to victory over the left comes through soft Republican political tactics, you will end up with an ice pick in your ear. That there is some pretty reliable history, Bubba.
Again, you can, of course, demonstrate where I have suggested "soft Republican political tactics"?
Good luck with your kinder gentler Republican tactics and winning through influencing the American press.
Again, you can of course demonstrate where I have ever suggested "kinder gentler Republican tactics"?
You are very confused. Victory through anticipating the attacks of your opponents, and cornering them in indefensible words and actions is not "soft," "kind," "gentle" or "placating." We had Obama over a barrel with his own words on tape, and we let him get the upper-hand because, even though we knew he had the media on his side, we ignored the risks and let the story change focus entirely. No, that's wrong, we changed the focus on purpose and gave them the perfect out. That is stupid, and weak, and soft, and flaccid, and any other word you can throw at it.
I want to see real conservative victory through intelligence. How is it soft to focus on the ignorant and revealing mistake of Obama during the campaign? Please tell me how it was strong and tough to bring "Joe the Plumber" into the studios day after day and thereby undo any response to the accusations when they arose? It doesn't take two working brain cells to know better than to take the focus off of the smoking gun in the middle of an election. It is like trying to get the defendant to try on the bloody glove in front of the jury. What I want to know is why you think strength is always stupid and self-destructive?
Every time I say we need to be careful and smart, and look for traps and not make mistakes, you say I am being weak, flaccid, or soft. You also insist that I am not being conservative, or trying to be less conservative. I have never said be less conservative, or suggested we take a different position on any issue, but for you it is the same thing. Being smart is being liberal, and being stupid is being conservative. What kind of a "conservative" can you actually be?