“You can be very doctrinaire, you can demand purity”
This language is pure nonsense. Because the Establishment wants the US Senate to be PURELY MODERATE, NO CONSERVATIVES NEED APPLY.
They were for “purity” when they undermined conservative candidates who won their party’s nominations. They were for “purity” when they encouraged Lisa Murkowski to make an independent run to retain her seat. They were for “purity” when they supported traitors like Jim Jeffords, Arlen Specter, Charlie Crist and Lincoln Chafee.
They don’t want their precious US Senate changed. They want it to remain “pure.” And men like Jim DeMint, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are hated because they refuse to go along.
“Why can’t they be more like Kelly Ayotte and Ron Johnson” they probably seethe in the backrooms of the Senate! “we must do EVERYTHING we can to prevent more of them! Tell Cochran he has to run again so he can retire and we can appoint somebody later!”
It isn’t much different that those who start their propaganda posts for their selectee with:
“Nobody is perfect, but ...”
Same tactic, different wording.
Make one think that this was all focus-tested and coordinated in a beltway conference room somewhere...
As in every movement, there is a tendency by some to try to out-conservative the others.
Absolute conservatism. Is there such a thing?
What would it look like? And how many people would support it?