Maybe someone should run for President who follows the rules already created instead of focusing on spending time fixing broken rules such as immigration.
Maybe someone should run for President who believes in spending his time following the laws on the books instead of spending time fixing the problems.
We are pretty disappointed with Jindal here in Louisiana. He's a pseudo-Repubican, just like Christie. He shuffles government employees around, instead of trimming fat, and spends taxpayer money on pet projects, like 5 million dollars for a kiddy splash pool. Dude is all pork!!
well I hope Rand Paul runs in 2016. I know there have been rumors about that and I hope he does. I don't think he is as far libertarian as his father but has some of the good ideas his father had (getting rid of federal agencies that are unconstitutional). Plus he doesn't speak of national defense as if the threats that exist in the world are some ludicrous idea that can never hurt us as Dr Paul did. I always thought if Ron Paul would have just articulated his foreign policy differently, rather than making a joke of it, he would have done very well.
Sounds to me like Jindal is on the Rove bus and taking aim at Tea Party conservatives.I hope that I'm wrong.
Losing 2 in a row is not unusual for either side. See Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama. The last time we won the debate of ideas was Reagan. And yes, we do need to turn that.
I like what Jindal says, but I need to know who he thinks the "stupid" republicans are who are saying "stupid things". I get the feeling he is blaming Tea Party but I cant be sure. Until I know, I will be suspect.
I like Jindal is a smart guy and makes a lot of sense, but he will NOT win, especially with the low information voters out there. This is now the land of "free stuff," or "Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you."
If you think you can reason with a bunch of people who are getting all their paychecks or benefits from the government, good luck. They will always vote for the people who will keep those checks coming, and that is just a fact. The only time they will vote for somebody else is either when those checks STOP coming, or if the economy is so shot they have nothing to lose and try somebody else, like they did with Jimmy Carter. Things were SO bad under Carter, the American public was just itching to elect anybody else. But tell me, if Carter was president during a mediocre economy while spending literally trillions of dollars on welfare and food stamps and other entitlements, do you really think he would have lost to Reagan? I doubt it. Things will have to get much, much, worse before the country will elect a conservative again, because we've turned from a country that said "Can do" to country that now asks "How much."
I think not only have we lost 2 in a row to an obvious socialist and perhaps a communist but we have lost 5 of the last 6 and the 2000, 2008 and 2012 we lost to nut jobs. Obama has a history to prove he is anti american as does Al Gore who enhances that resume every time he opens his mouth or his check book.
Being one of the many governed, by "The Galavanting Governor",
DON'T LISTEN TO A WORD THIS BUZZARD SAYS! He is trying to get everybody off the table, so that he has a clear field. He is a liar. He is a child of folks who were here on corporate work visas, not naturalized, from the nation of India. He is NOT born of American Parents. He is, and has been, operating with the blessings of the convict/former governor Edwards.
when GOP will learn that DNC needs more voters thus "advising" GOP what to do: amnesty, food "stamps", pro-gays, pro-abortion, etc.
Naive fools, or useful/useless idiots?
Poor old GOP. Think they can get ahead by becoming even more "Democrat Lite." Without heavy, and I mean heavy, action on conservative principles the GOP is a has-been bunch. They left me long before the election of 2012; then Mitt Romney sealed it for this voter--no more GOP!
What Republicans should do is think Scott Walker and do the same thing. Look what he did in Wisconsin and what he battled. Jindal would've buckled.
I agree. Enough with the talk and DO it already! Scott Walker is the example and not Jindal at this time. Jindal needs to stop talking and do things & THEN elections will happen.
Well, I'm afraid the "we've got to stop being the stupid party" will stick to him, and to all Republicans, from now on in.
I say this because years ago the then Tory Party Chairperson, Theresa May (now Home Office Minister) said in Parliament that the Tory Party shouldn't be the toxic party ....
Guess what - everybody and their pet has been using 'toxic' in connection with the Tory Party ever since. It's gone so far that some Tory politicians have been openly talking about 'de-toxifying' the Party. Didn't win them the election outright in 2010, and they are still so scared of being called toxic that they are throwing conservative values overboard right left and centre.
Bad move, Mr Jindal.
Isn't the fact that he is out there running his mouth on what should be and
shouldn't be done/said on the repub side an indication that he is already
thinking of running for president?
The simple truth is until the GOP stops its assault on conservatives they will continue to lose. I have said this in more ways than I can count so not to be a broken record I will put it this way:
Until the Republican party stands on conservative principles, puts for candidates who believe what we believe, policies which limit the size and scope of govt and are willing to fight tooth and nail for US they might as well go home, stay home and not spend their money. They will continue to lose elections.
More sensitivity toward the voter??? That's the problem dude!! The liberals own sensitivity. That's the last thing we need to do Jindal. Its pu$$ys with their soft hands that keep losing elections. McCain and Romney ring a bell??
First off define the who and what the republican party is anymore. They sure as hell aren't my party any longer. The republican party for the most part has been infiltrated and moved left of center. So Bobby if you can move it back to the right of center and reinstate conservative values across the board then I am all for you. That means outing the likes of Christie, Boehner, Graham and all the rest of the RINOs.
That's just it: there's no evidence that Jindal is convincing ANYBODY other than folks in the media. That did us so well in the LAST election cycle, eh?
I agree Jack. When Bobby said Republicans have to be better at redefining their principles, I was thinking, What principles? I haven't even got a clue anymore what Republicans claim to stand for as they vote one way while talking out the other side.
I was thinking- they have (had) a platform, but no one even would know what it is because they've never worked for any of it- they're too busy caving and bowing to progressives.
CFP has a platform, and whether or not people would agree with it, it's something we stand on and will always stand on.
The RINOs have been eating their own for years and the American people have had enough of their lies and hypocrisy. Progressives have stolen the democratic party and RINOs think they "own" the republicans. We are not eating our own because to a Conservative, even the smell of RINO meat sucks.
Precisely. That's all I hear from most in the political class supposedly on our side. We've been chowing down since Election Day, and it just sickens me. It would seem we engage in this very easy and non-cerebral tactic because we know it'll bring us media attention. Otherwise, I just don't see the need to air our dirty laundry in public.
Don't get me wrong: I'm all for chowing down. I just think it should be on the opposition.
Is this game to you? Bush won and conservatism lost. I'm not playing that game ever again. Stand for something or you'll fall for anything ie Bush. Bush set back conservatism for at least a decade and conservatives have to live by the mantra "never again". The best way for TPers to defeat the establishment would be to pin Bush on them instead of allowing the dems to pin Bush on all Republicans TPers included. Stop defending Bush and start denouncing his non-conservatism to take that sledgehammer away from dems.
Um yeah...eat our own?
Romney was no conservative but I bet you voted for him, I didn't and don't vote for people just because they have an (R) next to their name. Until more conservatives start doing the same we'll keep getting these RINOs as the nominee because they are convinced they just weren't centrist enough to win the Indys. They have to be flat out rejected when the GOPe forces them on us so they can't keep using that same lame excuse that they just weren't centrist enough.
Uh ... LOL! You're taking what I said as a defense of Bush, eh? FYI: I was no fan of Bush. Folks who can't read usually don't think all that well, either.
We Hold These Two Pathways To Be Self Evident
I predict Obama’s political party and his unlawful mandates will die a humiliating and very public death. Americans are very resourceful and imaginative especially when angered. They become righteously livid. There are two paths we must follow: The slower path involves re-writing of the country’s subconscious habits. We must deploy an army of conservative lecturers to teach basic civics. They will be charged with re-educating the American people about their country’s laws and its history and its honor. This process will slowly change the our beliefs about what our country stands for. Since this will take time it must begin immediately. The second path to freedom is nullification. This will stop Obama on the same day it is deployed. It is a simple as the O.J. trial and as serious as a heart attack. O.J. Simpson murdered two human beings and walked because of a thing called “jury nullification”. This precedent came from southern juries that felt some laws unjust and set the accused free. We, the American people declare these new statist laws and executive orders to be unjust as well as unconstitutional. We therefore refuse to abide by their implementation and will set ourselves free. When Obamacare comes to your state, greet them at the border with a smile and tell them to move on. We will not implement it. When Obama demands that we hand over our guns simply laugh in his face. Citizens, we must finally admit that war is not only inevitable, it has in fact begun.
Spot on. I appeciate what he's been saying.
Now "out" Karl Rove, Boehner, McConnell and other rats embedded within the establishment... If they want a war, give it to them.
And keep exposing the corrupt media and the left's lies. It's that simple.
As long as Rove, Boehner and McConnell along with the other RINOs continue their assault on Conservatives and Tea Party, they will never win another national election. That group is just as responsible for setting the stage for this abysmal time in our country's history as the liberal fanatics. Basically the difference between RINOs and progressives is minimal at best in the end results of their actions. When Romney cannot beat a pathological liar intent on transforming our nation, then the relevance of the GOP is obviously dwindling. I will never vote for another RINO and that is the leadership of the GOP now.
I'm with you. I have been a writer for The Tea Party Patriots for three years. I read you comment and looked up the word offensive and found a picture of Karl "Swifty" Rove. I am forming a new political party with muscular leadership, so do not lose hope. real Americans don't lose. The party is called "The Conservative Party for Democracy". The name manages to irritate both existing parties which I feel carries a message. My heroes are still RFK and JFK because until today's pretenders to the throne, they had honor.
I don't know you and any attempt to change the political status quo I would welcome but I can tell you right now I don't like that Party name at all, not even a little bit.
Did you forget the /sarc tag? If not, you had better research RFK and JFK.
JFK was light years better than the current crop of progressive lefties,
however, not a conservative and certainly unethical. Make sure you research
Joe Kennedy as well. You will be enlightened. I am glad you didn't add
Ted Kennedy to your list.
While your ideals and principles may be sound, your goals laudable, the reality of a third party is that it splits votes and not usually for the "good guys."
Having lived through many third parties here in Canada and in fact, having played a major role in one, I saw this in action. What ended up happening was the liberal forces winning re-election, while the conservatives were left to pick up the pieces, regroup and work hard to reclaim the existing Conservative party. It didn't happen overnight, but when conservative forces fin ally united, they eventually won.
At present, Jindal won't get my vote. Stop beating up our own, Bobby. The mainstream media does that well enough.
Repub's are horrid at messaging. Every traditional American admits that, just too bad that is the only sound bite MSM picks up. He needs to explain to the moron voters WHY the mantra 'tax cuts for the rich' has been a lie and WHY 'fairness' is a subjective word and not an achievable goal and WHY sitting on your arss waiting for a check from government causes depression, lethargy, and not self esteem. Repubs need to explain that giving up our energy resources only gives China more ability to succeed and does nothing to stop pollution. Preach to the moron voter with actual facts, and stop letting the Dem's to define the Repubs.
You want to preach with facts to a voter who hasn't finished school?
Methinks you're forgetting that they can sit on their arse and still draw a paycheck from the government, so there's still no incentive for them to get up off it. "Work hard = success" isn't a formula they can comprehend much less appreciate.
I do agree, though, that we have to re-define the debate every chance we get. Taking easy pot-shots at our own isn't re-defining the debate; it's simply adopting the tactics of the other side.
Yes, honesty. How said it is that honesty is such a rare quality in our political class and in people in general. Game-playing and manipulation is how they operate. God won't bless that.
Thank you - you understood my point. Respond to dumb mantras and talking points with logic and truth. Reagan and Palin were able to do that because they knew who they were and had a core belief. They weren't afraid to present themselves because they dealt from a position of honesty.
Notsofastthere makes a good point. The Democrats over many years, through excellent marketing/Saul Alinsky tactics, have painted a caricature of Republicans (which, unfortunately, includes conservatives, since conservatives don't have a party of their own) that the average person (low-information folks) understands and believes. It's very effective.
In my lifetime (I'm 55), the only Republican politician that did not just spout forth meaningless and defensive talking points was Ronald Reagan. (And don't forget, he was not at all embraced by the establishment Repubs.) He did not need talking points, because he actually believed what he said. I don't think today's Republicans and self-proclaimed conservative politicians believe what they say, with the exception of Sarah Palin (we all saw the reaction to her by Democrats and Republicans -- scorn and fear). If they did believe what they say, they could easily counter the lies and spin coming from the Democrats, and paint a picture that everyone could understand (even those emotionally-driven, low-info folks), exposing their hypocrisy, especially their ties with those fat-cat 1 percenters and their crony capitalist wheeling and dealing. Pictures speak louder than words, especially when so many are basically illiterate, and the Democrats know this.
But, this begs the question: Was there ever any measurable difference between Republicans and Democrats? I haven’t seen it in my lifetime (excepting Reagan). I’ve seen a lot of theater to make it appear there is a difference, but nothing of any substance. Hmmm…
??? Sorry, but you've lost me. What you're writing doesn't smack of Conservatism in the slightest. It's the nature of 'politics,' and, if you wanna fight that, we'll always lose.
See, the grim reality of politics that most on our side of the aisle have either forgotten or refuse to refute is that THAT politics are real, they always have been, and they always will be. Republicans refuse to play politics, and, in most cases (but not all), that's why we lose.
Romney didn't want to run against Obama. He wanted to run as the stronger candidate. That gets you nowhere with the average voter.
To clarify my comment, the moron voters are not necessarily the uneducated people. They encompass elitists as well as just kindhearted people who respond emotionally. Even the average American at times needs some common sense knocked into them. They also need explanations, and mental images to confront ridiculous statements.
For Obama to say "I can afford to pay more in taxes" should be responded with, Mr. President you collect $400,000 salary and don't pay one penny for meals, phone, vacations, plane trips, or body guards. You've made money off your books and kept it. How is that fair to people who worked in the Coal or Oil industries that you shut down?? How is it fair that those just reaching the middle class are now told that your tax increases will put them back into the poverty class? How is it fair, that you tell people to share responsibility, yet don't sacrifice one thing of your material comforts?
I no longer find the GOP to be "my own." Certainly not the majority of which are progressives in republican clothes. I've come to believe that mainstream, grassroots America includes both repubs and dems from the Reagan/Kennedy part of the spectrum (right of center) that haven't been dragged to the big gov't left. We're going to have to come together on common-sense issues like energy, pollution, borders, etc if we are going to oust the elitists and the false left-right arguments. Don't think we can win back the GOP however, and a 3rd party seems futile. Basically with the rampant voter corruption I think we're hosed. Sites like this one are our only hope of educating the masses. Anyone have a case for tea party or independent party?
Agree with the group you call still right of center. But these groups could become a force together and would be formidable in numbers: The two main Parties are all about controlling the redistribution of America's wealth. If a strong 3rd Party were to emerge, each would have to at least court that 3rd Party instead of totally ignoring those of each respective Party's voters as they do now. The real problem I see is money. Big money in politics now is so invested in big government graft and corruption imposed upon them by excessive regulation that changing that status quo would be a major challange.
And, sadly, we're mostly preaching to the choir here (and other sites).
Sorry, but I disagree. A common sense platform will do us no good because (A) the political majority has no interest in common sense issues and (B) common sense has been dumbed down too much for the masses. Example: it's now considered 'common sense' to try to survive off the government dole instead of trying to fend for oneself because that's what folks believe the government exists for.
Again, the Tea Party is a lost cause politically because even our side won't embrace it. Third Party, same thing.
Educating the masses is a good idea -- it's never a bad one -- but, again, we have to keep in mind that just as we are trying to get our message out it's a message for the minority. As we need one, two, or three generations to do what we can to affect positive change, the other side HAS the majority, and they're not going to stop changing the way the government takes care of the masses now that they have the votes (and election results to prove it).
Andrew's passing was lamented by us and praised by the other side.
I agree, Shapiro et. al are doing a marvelous job to fill some very big shoes but he's no Breitbart. In spite of that, the survivors do what they have to do to bring the truth to light, in spite of the odds,to show people what is happening.
It's folks who can't accept the truth of our circumstances that forever doom our party. The other side is CLEARLY the political majority -- and that's a very specific phrase that has very specific meaning -- and that's all that fundamentally matters at this point in history.
If you can, go out and find the book, "The Bully Pulpit." It's several years old and probably hard to get a copy of, but it very clearly spells out how any party (Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, etc.) can control national elections by seizing the political majority. It's accomplished by simply controlling a handful of states (the whole red state versus blue state kerfuffle), and the Democrats CLEARLY control the political majority. Otherwise, we wouldn't have lost the last election -- say what you will.
I agree with your sentiments about the media, but I don't think we'll ever take over the mainstream because we're not mainstream. Heck, even those of us who watch closely can tell you Fox isn't on our side as much as most folks think they are. The only way you accomplish this is to destroy their influence; that can be done, but, like I said, nobody listening, and fewer people are actually reading.
Last week I was watching a clip of Andrew Breitbart. I felt a tragic lament that one of the few really capable of taking "it" to the creeps and thugs in the MSM would die so soon an untimely death... and no one is yet to pick up the torch... Ben Shapiro comes close, but not quite. It's the example that Breitbart set that, had he lived, could set a fire under younger kids coming up. Sadly his example is no more. We lost more than we know with Andrew's passing.
Along with taking back the GOP, FOX News needs to get back on message. Their Middle East masters have set the agenda for a while now and they have progressed to...well..."progressive."
The answer is not another station, but people speaking out by not watching, by advertisers not advertising. FOX's ratings are sliding for this very reason.
It worked for Media Matters (think Glenn Beck), it can work for the good guys as well. Conservatives have to start using the left's tactics to get their message out, not sitting in perpetual damage control, having to constantly defend themselves against unwarranted attacks from the left.
NO! Thats' a myth. The other side is NOT the majority... not yet anyway. . The other side are manipulated dupes and low information voters who would vote conservative if they heard a conservative message that resonated with their own internal view of the world. Only through their almost total control of the media does it appear that they are the majority. The process is not yet irreversable. The media controls the message... and it is the media which needs to be taken over. Do I have a method to do this? NO!.... but that's where the solution lies.
Just curious, how do you see him beating up our own? Much of what he says I find to be constructive criticism - agree or disagree with it.
Uh ... hello? "We have to stop being the stupid party." Apply our principles "where we don't insult the intelligence of the voters."
What's constructive? "We gotta appeal to Americans." (How is that any different a statement than "we gotta deliver hope and change"?) "Instinctively, Americans know that they can't spend more money than they take in." (Really, Bobby, what's the evidence of THAT given the govt's reckless spending and only the Conservative few are preaching against it?) "I think we need to honor the Americans intelligence and speak to them like adults." (Oh, really, Bobby ... like Mitt Romney did? That worked so well the last election.) Sorry, Scoop, but every single point Bobby made was the exact same point Romney made in the last electoral cycle and it doesn't work!
As I've said many times in the last few years (maybe not harped on it so much here as I have other boards), Conservatives really need to accept that we -- our principles, our values, our hopes and, yes, our dreams -- ARE in the political minority. We need to accept the cold, hard reality that the only difference between the Entitlement Class and the Political Class is the amount of money paid to them by our government. As I have said here before, the Political Class -- those elected to "serve" us in Washington -- are as much parasites and vultures as those reaping the pocket change thrown at them on the other end of the fiscal spectrum.
As I've also said here (I'm pretty sure), we've really lost sight of the political history starting in the late 1850's up through the fiscal collapse of the Great Depression: there are so many many similarities that deserve greater study because many appear to be cycling through again today.
I listen to Rush, but I'm not so naive as to believe (as he does) that something magical will happen to turn this all around. This ain't turning around ANY TIME soon. This IS the new reality. Having dealt as I have in healthcare (billing, not services), I've been saying for the last ten years that we were on a huge unimaginable cultural divide that was going to change the way we do business, and, like it not, the Democrats recognized that and seized the opportunity.
What are we (folks like Jindal) doing instead? We're simply gathering much of the same rhetoric that's been used against us. I hear nothing of substance in what he said. I hear nothing of substantive action. That's why he won't name names. It's not in our make-up ... while the Democrats are still out there using our names and (if you follow the gun control debate) they're now even USING OUR ADDRESSES to destroy us.
Where I agree with Rush (and many here on the boards, which I do love despite my soapbox moment this morning) is when he says "we don't even realize what we're up against." That's very true, and that's what's most alarming.
I've voted for Jindal every time he's run for governor. The first time he lost to Gov. Blank-Out.
I would vote for him for president too, but in a GOP dominated by Karl Rove and Anne Coulter who dictated on Hannity tonight that us Pro-life conservatives need to get over it and accept exceptions for rape, Jindal would never come close to winning the nomination unless he completely capitulated on his many strong conservative beliefs, such as no exceptions for rape for abortion.
I believe we have wasted an enormous amount time, effort and treasure in pursuing an unattainable objective, namely winning the Republican Party back for the principles of Ronald Reagan. It is a totally vain delusion which Rush and Mark Levin and others are obsessed with even thought the evidence is overwhelming that the Big Whigs of the GOP have never accepted the principles of Ronald Reagan and have even undertaken a scortched earth policy since the TEA Party revolt of 2010 brought the house back for the GOP to marginalize, ostracize and eradicate any and all TEA Party candidates.
Michele Bachmann is an excellent example of what they have been doing with Karl Rove as one of the driving forces behind this war against TEA Partyers in the GOP.
Anne Coulter is one of Rove's spokesmen who Hannity trots out regularly to tell us all about how wonderful RINO's like Chris Krispy Creme of New Jersey are.
Levin and Rush and other conservative pundits have no interest in trying the one thing that would actually succeed - namely putting together a genuinely conservative third party alternative populated with TEA Partyers, NRA members and Pro-lifers to compete in every election where the Karl Rove's have gotten their candidates to win GOP primaries. With the social media we have today it should be very easy to put together a third alternative to the two big government parties of the Marxist Democrats and the Inside-the-beltway GOP.
We have to stop wasting our time and talent and energy on pursuing vain delusions about taking the GOP back because it will never happen.
We have to try another approach much as did the founders of the GOP did before the Civil War when they created a new party out of the Whig Party to oppose slavery.
Tonight Mark Levin talked about Kasich of Ohio, and the governor of Arizona both caving on Obamacare and others in the process of doing the same. The hand writing is on the wall for conservatives in the GOP and so why not go and form a genuinely conservative alternative party as the GOP did over 100 years ago to oppose what's happening to us as a nation?
If you always do what you always did,
You’ll always get what you always got!
Mark Crutcher – Life Dynamics
It gets worse because the mainstream started -- long ago -- simply putting words in the mouths of our candidates, so we'll NEVER get a fair shake from the mainstream establishment. Any of you (or us) hoping, waiting, praying for that day really need to wake up and smell the Twitter, so let me be clear: "we will never get a fair shake from the media establishment."
If we accept that one simple lesson, then we can actually start down the road toward establishing a gameplan; but, unfortunately, we're all still too enamored with the gospel of Bobby Jindal to see the forest from the trees.
E. Lee is right. There is absolutely nothing a conservative can say that will NOT be spun and manipulated by the media, no matter how delicate, nuanced or sophisticated. It will always be boiled down to "extremism, racism, dumb ass Republicans etc". And to have putative Republicans mouthing the same dissing platitudes that the media is so fond of, in the name of self-reflection or constructive criticism is not going to build up Republicans and conservatives by any stretch in this country. I've seen Jindal doing this and he is on the wrong track imho. He's repeating just what the Dems want to hear.
The only dissing and mealy mouthed comments I would like to see from conservatives themselves are comments exposing and shredding those so-called Republicans like a Karl Rove. And if that were to happen, then I guess it wouldn't really be "mealy mouthed", but a courageous act of truth telling.
I thought Whittle was spot on and it was a message that would definitely sell well to the American people.
Really? You wanna run with the "it's OK to be rich in America" message and win over voters? OK, good luck with that. As I've said (or tried to be clear), I agree with it; but I don't think you're gonna sway anyone in the majority with that, especially when you have 85% of the press who're gonna spin it to sound exactly the way it sounds to them.
Actually I think he's right. We don't communicate our principles very well at all which has been part of the problem in our electoral contests. We're scared to embrace that it's ok to be rich in America and we don't always appeal to the common sense that most voters relate to.
Remember Bill Whittle's demonstration after the election of what a Romney candidate should have sounded like?
I think that's what Jindal is talking about.
Republicans have to be vigilant about the sound-bytes we give to the media.
They won't exploit their own guys mush-mouths but will constantly pounce on ours.
Jindal referring to the Republicans as the stupid party is an example. It is bad form and a vulnerability, albeit an unfair one.
Usually, it's the establishmentarians who insult their own party.
Like Theresa May in the UK calling the Tories the Nasty Party.
A good explanation of possibly the biggest problem Conservatives, any ideology, have in messaging: How to explain a concept to someone that has been taught the exact opposite of the concept is the concept. As soon as the concept is mentioned you are seen as a lying fraud. So you first have to teach the truth which most people will defensively reject outright. How does one convince another that 2+2=4 when they have been taught and believe 2+2=5?
Thanks for the kind words aposematic.
There's no doubt about Rove, that's certain. He's entirely useless to conservatism, if not outright dangerous to liberty in general.
I might be wrong, but here's a big problem as I see it.
If you were to ask a random group to judge whom was more "conservative" (as the general semi-political public perceives that term, not us), and you put up a picture of Rove versus Reagan, most people, not really understanding conservatism would pick Rove over Reagan as the more "conservative" (their definition). Or, said another way, if this same group of people were asked (and HAD to make a choice) which "conservative" they would deem LEAST likely to promote an expansion of their personal freedoms (same-sex marriage, for example), Rove or Reagan, they would deem Rove less likely. (What's this world coming too...? I utilize the example merely to make the point.)
While Rove is decidedly to the left of Reagan, the masses of politically-ignorant people equate conservatism, not with CONSERVING personal liberty and the American way, etc. Alternatively, such people actually subscribe their limited understanding of "conservatism" to being associated somehow with government-sponsored restrictiveness in one's exercising their personal liberty; however unfounded that premise may be.
Indeed, the term "fiscal conservative" is a horrible term in my estimation because co-mingling these two words changes the entire context of the latter as far as politics is (or should be) concerned. Plus, the term is regularly used by media as a cudgel against the poorly informed and keeps them uninterested in learning anything about conservatism in the first place.
In other words, the masses of semi-political people don't even understand what "conservatism" means at its most basic level. They confuse conservatism with something other than what it actually is and the media encourages further confusion.
Even though they don't have to worry about the media using their words against them, nevertheless, the leftards never rat out their own. Never.
Our guys need to write a script, stay on point, and use care with the adjectives so the visual images generated do no harm to conservatism's cause. Plus, it's hard to attract the fence-sitters to our side if they think we're a bunch of spineless back-stabbers attacking the very foundation of the family.
Only bad citizens air their dirty laundry in public.
Always liked most of your comments Gary; for whatever that's worth, or not; but, with turncoats like Rove in charge of a lot of the big money influence, how can the R's not be the stupid Party?