[Seizure]

"The third possibility - and the best, both for the party and country as a whole - would be to take the "big-government conservatism" vision that George W. Bush and Karl Rove have hinted at but failed to develop, and give it coherence and sustainability."

First, I have known a number of people who have been employed at Wal-Mart as well as some who shop there. A majority of those people received social services, either because of "need" or simply access to the system due to race. I do not object to the Republican Party embracing the lower middle class, of which I am a member. I was under the impression, though, that working people (regardless of how little income) who are concerned about having the government squeeze their wallet and intrude upon their lives were already members of the party.

This strategy would end any "conservative" principles within the Republican party and it's platform. This is another measure that, if taken, would be a ploy to buy votes. Could it be that the party is trying to stem the flow of blood as disappointed and disaffected conservatives head for third parties? The Republican party could no longer distinguish itself from Democrat-lite.

With Hillary Clinton having religious experiences and talking about family values and Republicans talking about embracing the Great Society, we will at last be united...

under one party.

[Sam the Sham]

With Hillary Clinton having religious experiences and talking about family values and Republicans talking about embracing the Great Society, we will at last be united...

There is such a thing as an American mainstream with the God hating, pro-sodomite, cultural elite Europe worshipping secularist outside it at one end and the Social Darwininist, free trade at all costs, "I've got mine so screw you" libertarian outside it at the other.

But then again, they are both pagans at heart so I wonder how opposite they really are ?