Your post is spot on. I differ only in absolving Republicans of fault. On the whole they have not been as strong as they should be, as they MUST be. How often has the banner of “bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people” been raised? On the whole the Republican party prefers the pale pastels, allowing the Democrat party to select issues & frame the language of debate. Just look at the current pitiful state of the Republican party: lukewarm candidates like Romney, establishment aspirants who claim they will govern like Lyndon Johnson, their collective advocacy of “repeal and replace” rather than the abolition of PPACA - the greatest assault on the foundation principles of this country second only to slavery.
“[Conservatism] by its very nature it cannot offer an alternative to the direction in which we are moving. It may succeed by its resistance to current tendencies in slowing down undesirable developments, but, since it does not indicate another direction, it cannot prevent their continuance. It has, for this reason, invariably been the fate of conservatism to be dragged along a path not of its own choosing. The tug of war between conservatives and progressives can only affect the speed, not the direction, of contemporary developments.” Excerpt from The Constitution of Liberty
http://press.uchicago.edu/books/excerpt/2011/hayek_constitution.html
We need a party of liberty.
“but, since it does not indicate another direction”
Hayek was talking about something other than what is today known as conservatism.
We have a direction. We know which way to go.
We have not yet been able to make it happen. Not since Ronaldus Magnus.
Does it really take a genius to explain common sense to the denizens of the vast wasteland?