We're fools for ever trusting "converted" leftists. One has to be a fundamentally dishonest person to ever have been a convinced leftist in the first place. We must assume that people like the author and the Neocons are lying poseurs and infiltrators. Note that none of them ever do anything like real penance for their crimes against our country. Not a single Neocon has done the honorable thing and left the country for good.
They are liars, and the children of Darkness.
The insistence on ideological purity among many here is, in my less than humble opinion, symptomatic of a broader problem that conservatives are facing nationwide.
Use President Reagan as an example. He won, and was able to effect positive change from a position of political power, because he had a broad base.
Many among us vilify any who do not agree wholeheartedly on litmus test matters. It’s all or nothing. Those who agree 80% of the time need not apply.
Rather than cultivate those who lean right, rather than bringing converts into the fold, we insult and demonize them.
Would it be better to have them with us, even it means a leader with whom we only agree 75% of the time? Or would it be better to continue to insist on absolutism and as a result be left with leaders who despise all that we stand for and seek to destroy the foundations of freedom?
I cannot poll my house, much less my neighborhood or my office, and find 100% agreement. But my house is probably at 98%, my neighborhood at 75, and my office maybe 85 or 90. And they are all pretty happy places most of the time.
Food for thought...
FYI, Danusz is the male diminutive for Daniel; Danusza the female diminutive.
Danusha is an Anglicized spelling of the female diminutive.
Huh? Ronald Reagan was a democrat. Charleston Hesston was a democrat. Thomas Sowell was a liberal. It is quite a broad brush you paint with.