"Sheeple get scared when things change too fast, and stating the case as above doesn't sound near as scary and radical as saying we're are going to eliminate the department of education."
Newt brought it up in 1995, and this was one of the things they used to bring him down. I remember it like it was yesterday:
"THE REPUBLICANS WANT TO CUT EDUCATION!!!"
"THEY'RE GOING TO SLASH EDUCATION FUNDING!!!"
"THE REPUBLICANS WON'T FUND EDUCATION!!!"
Newt, Rush, Hannity, and whoever else was behind the mikes were naively unaware of how it would be spun, and we therefore handed them our own defeat on a platter.
Yep the pubbies have needed a little help to understand how to frame the issues so they don't sound so radical. I heard Mort Kondracke say this past Friday, he had a litmus test that anyone who wanted to eliminate the department of education was too radical.
Never say you are for eliminating anything - just point out that the government is bloated, and in order to reduce expenses, departments need to be consolidated just like any corporation would do. Then shrink everything as much as you can get by with. Non-necessities should be trimmed just like families on budgets do.
If you change things too fast, people get scared, that's the mistake Obama has made. I think people will be fine if the pubbies say they are for reversing the Obama agenda: cut back the massive spending and eliminate the new bureaucracy back to what it was, and everything else should be consolidated and made more efficient.
I thought Miller did a fairly good job on the social security issue when Chris Wallace asked him about eliminating social security. He stated up front he was not for eliminating that for retirees and near retirees, but he did think that younger people needed to have an option since social security as currently structured would not be available for them.