The rebuilding of the GOP is what the article should read.
But of course the negative approach is wht the writer wants.
Hugh Hewitt negative? Not hardly.
Hugh Hewitt is one of the biggest knee-jerk Republican party apologists there is. Fidel Castro could defect and run for president and Hewitt would probably support him if he had an "R" by his name. The fact that he writes this article should be a wake up call to the GOP.
This is townhall.com. I don't think the writer wants the GOP to go down in flames. But in order to fix any structural problems that existed in the party, mixing it up is probably not only a good thing or a necessary thing, but inevitable. Unhappy voters and politicians bring about change and happy-go-lucky ones don't. Even with the state the Bush administration and the Republican minority is in, I think the Democrats could blissfully walk into some deep pits as well, particularly if events overtake what's happening within the beltway. If Bush and the GOP were right to obsess over the war on terror up to Nov 2006, that's another reason to expect the winds to change very quickly.
Hugh Hewitt has long acted as if belittling those don't follow his lead is a winning strategy.