ROFLMAO!! The founders are the very definition of fundamentalists! It is the squishy middle that is of no consequence- never have been, never will be- they are vapid, and self serving; without conviction, they follow whim.
You can stand on the sidelines and hang onto your fundamentalism, like the Libertarians have, and have little or no affect on actual political outcomes. Or, you can build alliances with whomever you can most of the time even though you may not always agree with those allies all the time.
You may not have noticed, but libertarians vote with Conservatives. They are not considered different from Conservatives, they have a place at the table here. And libertarians effect political outcomes all the time. Have you heard of Ross Perot? How about Ron Paul?
That Libertarians grow so strong and rebellious is indicative of the illness within your party.
You will always be more successful; you will always be more often “in the house” and working with others instead of standing outside and complaining because no one in the house is as pure as you.
That you see me in terms of purity instead of terms of conviction belie your claims of Conservatism. This isn't religion. That you would further serve your purpose and accuse me of complaining merely accentuate the point.
Should you help elect an avowed Marxist this year, don’t expect any alliances with the majority of Conservatives, who will still be in the GOP after you help them lose.
Yes, we were told the same thing in '06, yet here we are again. Alignment with your ... kind... is of little value, as it will not advance Conservatism at all; in fact, it has served to do it immeasurable damage. It is the compromise of the so called "compassionate conservatives" which has lead us here. It is neither compassionate, nor is it Conservative. You may keep it.
If the Republicans lose (which I think they will), once again the fault will be laid at the Conservatives' door, even though this whole election, up until just before Saddleback, when the RNC and the McCain't campaign finally understood they were going to lose, was one big Giuliani Gambit.
The RNC (and the RINOs) got what they wanted, a campaign up the middle- the Conservatives no longer necessary, because the votes are in the center anyway... So now, when Conservatives (I mean the REAL ones) aren't showing up, it is somehow going to be our fault once again. You made your bed. Now go lie in it.
I am no longer interested in the GOP, finding it to be hopelessly compromised, and unworthy of it's charge. It will be my endeavor to lend my support to a new party, a new House of Reagan, one fit to bear his name.
As to the so called "majority of Conservatives", I do not believe you speak for them. I am plugged into the deep grassroots in Pro-Life and SOCON causes, and I have good friends in libertarian and FICON grassroots circles. Everywhere there is deep discontent with the GOP/RNC, and abandonment, and honest talk of abandonment. The very core of two pillars of Conservatism are looking elsewhere, believe me.
So what you are left with is the WARCONS, who are certainly devoted, as they figure into the plans of the Globalists. But they are nothing w/o their rank and file, and that rank and file will be more loyal to their country than to their cause, if their oath means anything (which it does).
The fracture is deep and nearly complete. You will not keep the SOCONS or the FICONS; try to keep the WARCONS if you can- I think they will turn to follow Reagan, yes I do.
“And libertarians effect political outcomes all the time. Have you heard of Ross Perot? How about Ron Paul?”
Ross Perot was no Libertarian, he was a populist. His IT and financial empire was built on stealing what he had been paid to develop for others, going into business using what he stole, making political friends to obtain exclusive government contracts for data processing using his ill-gotten software.
His followers were predominately NOT libertarians either.
As for Ron Pual’ he’s a nice guy, but not a force.
“Yes, we were told the same thing in ‘06, yet here we are again.”
Yes we know. The biggest shift in the ‘06 election was that so many of you stayed home. And for that, you want our thanks, for the result?!?!?! And for that, you gained what?!?!?
“It is the compromise of the so called “compassionate conservatives” which has lead us here. It is neither compassionate, nor is it Conservative. You may keep it.”
Sorry, it’s not mine and never was.
But that did not cause me to let Kerry win in 2004.
“was one big Giuliani Gambit”
Sorry. The only one backing Giuliani was Guiliani. He couldn’t even stay alive in the only state he invested in, Florida. You refer to the most miniscule GOP primary any GOP candidate ever mounted as “one big gambit”, and give it a national command it never had? Dream on.
“So now, when Conservatives (I mean the REAL ones) aren’t showing up, it is somehow going to be our fault once again. You made your bed. Now go lie in it.”
Real conservatives understand that in order to govern, in order to get your ideas into action where people can see that they work - instead of a mere philosophical discussion - you have to get elected.
I don’t know and never did “blame conservatives” for 2006.
I do blame GOP members who call themselves conservatives, as I am, who thought they would punish someone in the GOP for not being conservative enough - and helped give us Pelosi and Reid. I don’t call that a “conservative” accomplishment, no matter what I think of RINOS, whom I can’t stand.
Sorry, but as a Conservative, in the Bill Buckley tradition, starting out in Young Americans for Freedom, I will take the 200-2005 “compassionate ‘conservative’” GOP led Senate that confirmed Roberts and Alito, and yes, be glad I worked for the GOP members to be able to do that. I didn’t have to reject that leadership because they might have started-out willing to accept Meires. I could work with them and they could see we were right. Some that came our way were RINOS. None were Democrats. So, you can work with no one, because your not there, or you can work as a conservative who is there.
“It will be my endeavor to lend my support to a new party, a new House of Reagan, one fit to bear his name.”
Sorry. But Reagan started out thinking the same thing, after Goldwater lost. But he listened to more experienced minds and realized HE COULD BUILD A CONSERVATIVE BASE IN THE GOP, easier than he could create a third party.
So can the right conservative person today.
“The very core of two pillars of Conservatism are looking elsewhere, believe me.”
What, they don’t have Reagan’s fight in them? You think he went into the GOP thinking he’d have no opposition, from the “country club” RINOs.
Conservatives leaving the GOP over single issues is what has helped make the GOP “more moderate”. It’s a circular argument that you lose by your own choice. Reagan fought for the GOP by fighting for Conservatives in the GOP.
You want to run? Go ahead.