...and replace them with.... Democrats? LOL Like I said, a lot of good that did us in 06. We may never have had an amnesty vote or bailout vote if we had legislative control based on number of seats. If you think a Democrat supermajority will ignore bailout, amnesty and even worse legislation, you are diluting yourself. You are, as Ayn Rand said: ..reverse the philosophical hierarchy and to sell out fundamental principles for the sake of some superficial political action which is bound to fail. It means that you help the defeat of your ideas and the victory of your enemies...
Or, as Sir Winston Churchill said: In war as in life, it is often necessary when some cherished scheme has failed, to take up the best alternative open, and if so, it is folly not to work for it with all your might.
Your thoughts are appropriate for primary season, we have history to show it destroys us if we take them to the general when we don't have a better option.
There is no appreciable difference between the two any longer. If you would care not to see '06 repeated, vote for Conservatives instead of Republicans.
We may never have had an amnesty vote or bailout vote if we had legislative control based on number of seats
Nonsense. Both issues were Republican issues introduced by and supported by the Republican administration. In both cases, it was bipartisan collusion that was asked for, and in both cases Rinos champed at the bit to offer that bipartisanship, and Conservatives held it at bay.
For the most part, the only thing that has changed is that the Rinos have changed in large part to liberal Democrats, and the Conservatives have changed in small part to Blue Dog Democrats.
You are, as Ayn Rand said: [...] reverse the philosophical hierarchy and to sell out fundamental principles for the sake of some superficial political action which is bound to fail. It means that you help the defeat of your ideas and the victory of your enemies [...]
Quite the opposite- As long as the Republicans embrace the socialism which they brand as globalism, rather than the sure and lasting tenets of Conservatism, the Republicans themselves are as much my enemies as the Democrats are.
There is no room for Conservatism in coalition with globalism. they cannot agree. They are diametrically opposed as philosophies. However, there is much agreement between socialism/communism and globalism, which explains why both march forward so easily, wile Conservatism languishes.
Or, as Sir Winston Churchill said: In war as in life, it is often necessary when some cherished scheme has failed, to take up the best alternative open, and if so, it is folly not to work for it with all your might.
In saying so, you assume that Republican globalism is a "best alternative" to socialism/marxism. I reject that whole cloth.
Your thoughts are appropriate for primary season, we have history to show it destroys us if we take them to the general when we don't have a better option.
For Conservatives the "better option" lies in 3rd party candidates this year- Keyes for the Reaganites, and in building a Conservative party for the future. I am no longer a Republican, so your primary is no concern of mine whatsoever.