[kinoxi]

Damn dude. I'll read later.

[SpaceBar]

It's all Michael Savage's fault. There, you have your scapegoat.

[apackof2]

in some instances, the Democrats put forward candidates who were more conservative than their Republican adversaries

Bingo

[ConservativeMind]

Bush didn't meet a bill that wasn't worthy of being signed.

"COME ONE COME ALL," he seemed to say.

Signing everything didn't make him seem more compassionate. And it didn't help with the Democrats.

[PatrickF4]

Were the Dems right after all? Was Bush wrong, wrong, wrong.

When I did something wrong, I'd blame my sister. My mother never bought it, and neither should we. Let's blame Bush, let's follow Newt, let's go over the cliff.

[brytlea]

"Tragically, during the campaign season just ended, in most parts of the country, conservative voters, in order to manifest their unhappiness, were put in a position of either (a) holding their nose and voting for Republicans with whom they disagreed, (b) staying away from the polls, or (c) voting for imperfect Democratic candidates.

Exactly. I want someone I can support, not just because he's somewhat better than the other guy. He/she doesn't have to be 100% on everything, but I know we can do better than we've done. susie

[KoRn]

"promotion of a North American Union (NAU) scheme to merge the United States with Canada and Mexico,"

I call BS on that one. Even if it's in fact true, this is still mostly rumors and the average voter likely knows little or nothing about the issue.

[vox humana]

Fortunately, in some instances, the Democrats put forward candidates who were more conservative than their Republican adversaries...

Sad, but true. It is a sad day when conservative voters have to vote for a Dem because he is more conservative than the RINO he is running against.

[Man50D]

Fortunately, in some instances, the Democrats put forward candidates who were more conservative than their Republican adversaries and a handful of these candidates were successful on election day.

Meaning it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between the two parties because those who are registered as Republicans are leaning more to the left by becoming more Socialistic.

"My hope is that, as we draw closer to the 2008 Presidential and Congressional elections, Constitutionally faithful candidates not tied to the Bush Administration will receive significant media attention and popular support."

Proof enough it's time for a third party, that won't sacrifice its core principles through "bipartisanship", to replace one of the existing parties.

[FreeInWV]

Ping for later

[Mel Gibson]

The tragedy is that the Republican Congressional leadership in the House and Senate, by and large, rubber stamped unconstitutional Bush Administration policies, instead of fulfilling responsibilities of oversight and independent judgment as intended by the framers of the U.S. Constitution which made the Legislative Branch of our government primary in our Federal system.

"One can only hope that, during a time of partisan gridlock, Republicans in Congress will manifest a degree of independence from unwise Bush Administration policies and that the President himself will stand against unwise policies of the new Democrat Party majorities in Congress.

"Tragically, during the campaign season just ended, in most parts of the country, conservative voters, in order to manifest their unhappiness, were put in a position of either (a) holding their nose and voting for Republicans with whom they disagreed, (b) staying away from the polls, or (c) voting for imperfect Democratic candidates.

Howard Phillips is an honest, bona fide Conservative (not some globalist, New World Order Son of a B(i@tch)ush wimp (who won't confront the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which is not a democracy but a demonocracy and bears responsibility for the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, not Iraq), warmed over, extinct dinosaur Rockefeller wing "compassionate" pseudo conservative).

Thank you for posting, good post mortem!

[Joann37]

The author left out the fact that we didn't do much to help Israel during their war this summer.

[Rokke]

I was hoping to read some statistical support for his conclusions. Instead, this appears to be the equivalent of a FR vanity.

[Ruth C]

My hope is that....Constitutionally faithful candidates not tied to the Bush Administration will receive significant media attention

Of course they will, demonization of the constitutionally faithful has become a media staple. As to popular support, that depends on just how vocal the conservatives want to be. If they remain silent as they did in this election, you can forget popular support.

[Commander8]

He hit the nail on the head.

[MNJohnnie]

Um NO. Not getting ONLY 100% of what YOU wanted all the time was not the reason for the loss. The reason for the loss was the American People tuned into the Junk Media and heard "Gop Sucks". Then they turned into the supposedly "Conservative media" and heard people like Democrat Campaign Contributor and pseudo Conservative Mike Savage scream non stop "GOP Sucks".

Intresting piece of data for all the Bush Haters to chew on. The Gallup poll found ONLY 36% of Voters said their vote was "Against President Bush". So not even about 1/3 of Democrats buy this "It's all about Bush" nonsense.
Want to help the Conservative Movement? Join the Democrat party. Let see how well THEY do when 40% of their squad spends all their time whining about the 30% of their political glass that is empty.

Running against Bush did NOT work for the people who tried it this year. It will NOT work for "Conservatives" in 2008.

Sorry you hate the President. Get over it or go to the join the Democrats. The damage the 100%ers did to the Conservative Movement with the Judges we will not get confirmed alone is bad enough. Considering the 3 Supreme Court Justices who are over 75 and in poor health Conservatives can no longer afford people more worried about 100% ideological purity then winning