We got so hung up on ideological purity that the worst possible candidate didn't have to do much except avoid throwing up all over himself. This time at least, he will have a formidable match in Bush, and perhaps Christie.
The point is to get behind one candidate on the other side of the party. Early. From where I was sitting, it really sucked hearing how Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, and (yes, even) Gingrich and Perry were not conservative enough. Regularly. Because all it accomplished was to make the worst possible choice inevitable.
And, for that reason, I see his decision as good news for conservatives.
What purity? Even I, the so called purist, was ready to vote Gingrich.
The problem was a LACK of purity. You had people ready to accept anything and millions of shouts of ‘no matter what and lesser evil.
So ultimately they got the ‘lesser evil’ they wanted. And THEN the more conservative candidate that many rationalized about, won.
Because lets face the facts. Their records in office were mirrors except for one glaring difference. One of the two was opposed to gay marriage while a Senator in office. Guess which?
There's that phrase again.
What the hell. Why not just come right out and say that conservative principles are a dusty old relic of the past, and admit that party is all that matters?
It would be liberating, don't you think? No more need to hurt our brains puzzling over candidates' records, worrying over their policy platforms, etc. We could forget about any alliances (or dalliances) they may or may not have. Whatevah.....just vote R, and leave the rest to our betters in Washington. We'd be at peace at last!!
Really!!?!?!
REALLY!!!!!???
WOW!!
I'm on the wrong web site!!
I recall trying to see if Perry was still being run by Karl Rove, and also Bachmann — both whom were “birthed” by Rove politically... (And now that Perry has Steve Schmidt as his wrangler we know that Rove was “running” Perry and IMHO also Bachmann..) But i don't recall wondering about their conservative stand... Only worried about their GOPe affiliations that could make them susceptible to RINO manipulation.
As for Gingrich, I recall wondering about his moral character and Establishment associations.
"Ideological purity" is a Rove term used to inaccurately characterize Tea Partiers as the Moral Majority in order to confuse and divide social and fiscal conservatives... Falsely accusing conservatives of having some sort of purity test confuses the issue so as to make way for the ridiculous Rove "moderate" argument while obscuring the fact that RINOs are really on the same team as Dem's . This is the terminology McCain used when he read (Rove’s) Tea Party Hobbit editorial on the Senate floor and it is used as a foil on conservatives to preset the argument and prevent us from asking questions especially about a candidates RINO associations and affiliations.
Whenever a LibRINO throws out the term “purity test” you can bet there is a disinfo campaign happening to get our eyes off the fact that the GOPe should be kicked out of the Republican Party entirely instead of us Tea Partiers wondering if we need a Third Party.