See post 16. I should have read your comment before I spent time articulating what you just said!
Many of us are on the same wavelength. :)
It is a odd happening that once a party holds the presidential office, it often forgets and even seemingly ignores and discards the inspiration (that was usually sold nice enough in the campaign season to get the candidate a win--in our last case George Bush the first round 2000. The second 2004 was about keeping him in.) that got him in the office in the first place.
President Bush--love him or resent him or both-- discarded fiscal conservatism and along with him so did the stand by the GOP. Why is this? To a certain extent there is the issue of not wanting to undermine the so called 'leader of our party'. Why call the president the leader of our party at that stage though? I think that is a mistake as now he is the leader of all Americans and has another responsibility as much as we would like to see our Republican presidents tow seamlessly the party line and make it alive in law and deed. Except for Reagan they rarely have. So maybe we need to change such a title--most likely given by the MSMediots anyway.
I wonder if the party fades back into the woodwork during these times and instead veers according to condition as opposed to holds steady with its ideals molding instead the sell of the 'product' to fit the need of the day. The product itself should not change much at all, maybe shifts in certain types of platforms, but there should be fundamental truths regarding the party and one of those should ALWAYS be fiscal conservatism and responsibly, less government in our lives, and upholding the traditional interpretation of the constitution as opposed to changing as one sees fit to fit their new degrading morals (or old for some.) The cross fertilization can work against the party if the president veers away from core ideals and maybe in the future we need to steel ourselves against such cross fertilization and instead strengthen the media campaign ourselves toward selling our product absent of the president and in fact in a way that pushes the president toward our side.
After all Reagan knew to go directly to the American people if he couldn't sell it there in Washington and the GOP needs to know this works as well and make it difficult for even its own party's president to get away with such great discard of core values. In the end the president will be gone, but the party will live in and it must be self contained.
Your comment spurned new consideration and served to remind. These political parties we choose mostly because of the ideals they espouse along with the values they uphold (UH--in a perfect world--UGH!)
I call all this out as I feel it is time to make certain changes in structures and behaviors that work against the fulfillment of carrying our ideals to the public and seeing them carried out over the long term--not seemingly ever changing to just win election. It is the sell that should change. The focus to what is current. Not the disposal of ideals that are fundamental. Sort of like many of us view the upholding of our constitution over time.