On what planet does this happen?

ernesto on November 25, 2012 at 4:35 PM

Looking at the Senate, I believe your percentage is low (and slow). I think it moght be time to change parties. I wonder what would happen if all the Conservatives, who are no longer embraced by the GOP, switched to Democrats and started diluting the Dem’s Socialist philosophy. Just a thought…

Fallon on November 26, 2012 at 9:28 AM

I think it depends on where it happens. At the grass-root levels maybe, most Democrats don’t like socialism, but the loud and powerful ones seem hell-bent on eventually achieving it

I imagine it would be as difficult as getting across a conservative message on American College Campuses.

We can’t just rely on one leader to evangelize conservatism when there are dozens that will disavow it. We must have strong conservative surrogates.

Are you kidding me? Good grief, liberals make up at least 20% of the Republican Party.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Looking at the Senate, I believe your percentage is low (and slow). I think it moght be time to change parties. I wonder what would happen if all the Conservatives, who are no longer embraced by the GOP, switched to Democrats and started diluting the Dem’s Socialist philosophy. Just a thought…

The liberal media has a strangle-hold on our culture. Many of us would vote for Bill Whittle in a heartbeat, but he would be eviscerated. The conservative-living, liberal media-watching populus will be duped again. It’s a daunting problem that won’t be solved simply by having the right candidate.

I do love listening to Whittle… and Prager. If one of them had his own show on CBS I’d feel a lot better.

MT on November 26, 2012 at 8:27 AM

There ya go. That’s why Whittle won’t run. And in hindsight, I’m convinced that Sarah Palin didn’t run for much the same reasons.

Do you people live in some kind of bubble, isolated from everything? As of right now there are no alternatives, nominating the “right” candidate or building a new party from scratch doesn’t change anything. You sit and laugh at Europe but we are no longer any different, if fact we’re probably worse. And no candidate, party or campaign is going to change that.

lowandslow on November 26, 2012 at 7:57 AM

In case you haven’t noticed, I’m looking for alternatives outside the power structure that conservatives have depended on since the 1860′s. You’re giving up. And you’re mocking me for not giving up. Yeah, that sure looks really morally superior to me./

I do love listening to Whittle… and Prager. If one of them had his own show on CBS I’d feel a lot better.

You’re awfully thin on alternatives, yourself. Sounds to me like you’d just as soon let the whole nation burn as the Republican party. But enjoy your perch on that high horse, Butch.

Do you people live in some kind of bubble, isolated from everything? As of right now there are no alternatives, nominating the “right” candidate or building a new party from scratch doesn’t change anything. You sit and laugh at Europe but we are no longer any different, if fact we’re probably worse. And no candidate, party or campaign is going to change that.

Yeah, I love being lectured on false beliefs by people that think the problems in this country are just political. If we only had a true conservative running, if we only were as good at messaging as the Democrats or, the best one, if we just let the GOP fail we will have a new party rise from the ashes and save America.

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 10:08 PM

Really? Who’s lecturing who? You’re awfully thin on alternatives, yourself. Sounds to me like you’d just as soon let the whole nation burn as the Republican party. But enjoy your perch on that high horse, Butch.

It’s political fatigue. Many here believe that Romney was truly our best shot at taking America back from dark forces. Given that Romney failed, to soldier on would be an implicit admission that he was not, in fact, the GOP’s great white hope. A false belief is false no matter how sincerely it is held.

gryphon202 on November 25, 2012 at 9:44 PM

That’s not why I advocated for him AFTER the primary. It’s because there is work to do and it could be done with lots of chaos or under the status quo. I had no illusions that Romney was going to change anything and if he did it would be a very pleasant surprise.

Now we have the work to do under more hostile and difficult conditions. It still can be done if people have the will.

But almost no one outside Phelps’ little campsite hates homosexuals.
itsnotaboutme on November 25, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Phelps is a Democrat.

Joel_The_Oneth on November 25, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Just to add to that, there was some discussion before about objective reality and facing facts and so on. Objective reality can be influenced and crafted to a degree. We’re not talking about election day only, but a year out, from early campaigning, through the primaries and post convention. This type of person Bill is talking about can change things in different ways than our past two nominees, through stronger grassroots support, stronger and more convincing debate performances and so on.

Yes, every candidate makes mistakes, but this type of person will never have to worry about accidentally playing the race card(Perry) or have to ignore or run away from his prior legislative work(Romney). To think he’ll have the same effect or no effect at all is just static thinking. Why not try it? We’ll lose? We’ve already been doing that.

A famous man once said, “I have a dream.”

Bill Whittle is a dreamer. So are we all. Bill is a prophet as well. We know there is a fiscal cliff looming. We know that we can not continue to enslave half our country in entitlements. Yes, they voted for them, but the money well will run dry.

It looks like we are the enslaved, but in truth, the exact opposite is happening. We, conservatives can do anything we want. The entitlement class can’t. It is limited and useless. Don’t hire them. Don’t waste your time on them. Don’t listen. OUR arguments can’t make a dent to their closed minds.

Instead of degrading or demeaning Bill, listen to what he has to say. His message is for conservatives and can only be understood by conservatives. Liberals will naturally dump on it. They won’t understand it. They are the perpetually whining group that we are stuck with. but we don’t have to listen to them. Except sometimes it is helpful, because they will tell you exactly why something won’t work. They would have and did trash the Wright Brother’s and their new invention. Listen carefully and do the exact opposite. It works.

A false belief is false no matter how sincerely it is held.

Yeah, I love being lectured on false beliefs by people that think the problems in this country are just political. If we only had a true conservative running, if we only were as good at messaging as the Democrats or, the best one, if we just let the GOP fail we will have a new party rise from the ashes and save America.

How does it even begin to make sense to give up when there’s so much that can be done?

MrX on November 25, 2012 at 9:32 PM

It’s political fatigue. Many here believe that Romney was truly our best shot at taking America back from dark forces. Given that Romney failed, to soldier on would be an implicit admission that he was not, in fact, the GOP’s great white hope. A false belief is false no matter how sincerely it is held.

It’s so much easier just to invent a villain to argue with isn’t it?

lowandslow on November 25, 2012 at 9:16 PM

No. I’m saying exactly what he meant. He’s saying that people aren’t buying something they’ve never heard of. How does it even begin to make sense to give up when there’s so much that can be done?

Surely a persuasive conservative candidate can counter Obysmal’s message rooted in envy and greed, in perpetual dissatisfaction.

Go to any former Soviet bloc country and witness the destitution and helplessness of those who bought into the idea that the State would take care of them. When the Soviet bloc fell, the ones who recognized that what the State gave them was gone succeeded only if they recognized and took advantage of the opportunities that their newly found freedom gave them.

When Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” efforts eventually coerced Clinton to cut off the welfare spigot and get people to earn a living, prosperity came again. Did those people riot when the message was that the cupboard is bare for chronic slackers?

onlineanalyst on November 25, 2012 at 9:10 PM

So how does any of that relate to the current state of the country? Are we just like when the Soviet bloc fell or are we just like the America of 1994? I love how you guys accuse liberals of being disconnected from reality yet are unable to accurately assess the current cultural and ideological state of the nation right now.

There is a lot of merit to your points. I have observed anecdotally many people who claim to be liberal in the Democrat’s sense of the word who actually live very conservative lives. They have a conservative sense of fiscal responsibility. They live morally upright lives, obeying the law. They expect justice to be blind. They don’t have their hands out, waiting for bailouts. They expect our national leaders to secure our borders and to protect us from enemies from without.

Unfortunately, they are exposed via our media and entertainment to accept the caricature of conservatives as bigoted rubes.

onlineanalyst on November 25, 2012 at 9:02 PM

EXACTLY!!! Your last sentence is SO spot on. Not only that, when things turn badly as they always do at some point in our lives, they tend to fall into rank and file liberal ideology where they blame the other side of the spectrum and the liberal elites feed on the hatred. Not all liberals succumb to this mind you, but it does happen quite a bit. This is why the lib elites don’t really care about a downturn in the economy. They know it feeds into that hatred. They blame the system “made by rich white people” and it’s a circlejerk of despair.

Breaking out of that cycle is very tough. There are tons of liberals who are leading successful lives despite self imposed obstacles. These people are the hardest to reach. Young people would be easier to reach as well as the poor. Yet, no attempt is made by the Republican Party.

I think Bill Whittle actually had a video once where he contradicts what I’m saying. He says that most all liberals are actually easy to convert. It was a brilliant video and shows the fragile platform that liberalism exists upon. My point is more that they are so sheltered away from different POV’s that no one does reach them.

So your argument boils down to this:
“People won’t buy into conservatism so we should give up even though no one has even bothered to try and promote it.”

This is why you are a hack liberal. You’re a walking contradiction.

MrX on November 25, 2012 at 9:07 PM

It’s so much easier just to invent a villain to argue with isn’t it?

Go to any former Soviet bloc country and witness the destitution and helplessness of those who bought into the idea that the State would take care of them. When the Soviet bloc fell, the ones who recognized that what the State gave them was gone succeeded only if they recognized and took advantage of the opportunities that their newly found freedom gave them.

When Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” efforts eventually coerced Clinton to cut off the welfare spigot and get people to earn a living, prosperity came again. Did those people riot when the message was that the cupboard is bare for chronic slackers?

I have a theory…it isn’t that the GOP is stuck on stupid, it’s that they’re just stuck. Even the GOP – for all its faults – realizes straight undiluted conservatism won’t sell to the growing class of people trained to be dependent in exchange for their votes.

S.P. Link on November 25, 2012 at 7:10 PM

The GOP doesn’t sell conservatism at all. It’s NEVER sold conservatism. Even with Reagan, he didn’t sell conservatism all that well. He sold that Carter was a bad President and that liberalism was bad.

Who exactly sells conservatism as the Presidential nominee? McCain? Romney? Bush? Don’t make me laugh. None of them promoted conservatism.

So your argument boils down to this:
“People won’t buy into conservatism so we should give up even though no one has even bothered to try and promote it.”

This is why you are a hack liberal. You’re a walking contradiction.

He lost to a guy who hasn’t made a single dime of honest money in his life, nor released a single page of his own college transcripts. And that’e leaving aside the arguably dubious circumstances of Obama’s birth and childhood. All that, and Romney still couldn’t seal the deal

gryphon202

Emphasis mine to respond to: And that doesn’t tell you something right there – that there’s something seriously sick and wrong with our society?

kim roy

Problem is neither of our last 2 candidates pointed out either of those things to the American people. Sorry, but politics isn’t for nice guys, yet that’s exactly how McCain and Romney both tried to win. Obama has more baggage in his background than probably any candidate ever, and our side failed to call him on it…twice.

Look at the bright side though….we don’t have to worry about winning in the future, because it won’t matter one bit. This election was the absolute last chance to turn this ship around. There will be no coming back now, no matter how many times we win in the future.

MrX on November 25, 2012 at 5:17 PM

There is a lot of merit to your points. I have observed anecdotally many people who claim to be liberal in the Democrat’s sense of the word who actually live very conservative lives. They have a conservative sense of fiscal responsibility. They live morally upright lives, obeying the law. They expect justice to be blind. They don’t have their hands out, waiting for bailouts. They expect our national leaders to secure our borders and to protect us from enemies from without.

Unfortunately, they are exposed via our media and entertainment to accept the caricature of conservatives as bigoted rubes.

Unfortunately (for us who understand objective reality), those who prefer to live in the deluded world that Obama followers embrace are relativists. They have no core to guide them. For them, perception is reality, and a narrative is truth. They are dupes of marketing who cannot distinguish between what is and what they wish it to be.

onlineanalyst on November 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

“Name me ONE OBJECTIVE THING you believe would sway the Free Obamaphone Lady to vote for a conservative.”

How about this: What government gives, government can take away… and there is nothing you can do about it.

onlineanalyst on November 25, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Do you see the disconnect in those two comments? It took you just seven minutes to refute yourself.

Name me ONE OBJECTIVE THING you believe would sway the Free Obamaphone Lady to vote for a conservative.

Just one.

S.P. Link on November 25, 2012 at 3:15 PM

How about this: What government gives, government can take away… and there is nothing you can do about it.

You sound like a Relativist.
Objective to whom??? Seriously?? To no one. Reality is actually not subject to ideology. In fact the one overwhelming characteristic is that it doesn’t care one sh&t what someone thinks, or believes in. It is what it is.

Objective to the actual real world and the ways policies actually have panned out and pointing out the unintended consequences of past liberal failures..

Mimzey on November 25, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Your response to S. P. Link is correct.

Unfortunately (for us who understand objective reality), those who prefer to live in the deluded world that Obama followers embrace are relativists. They have no core to guide them. For them, perception is reality, and a narrative is truth. They are dupes of marketing who cannot distinguish between what is and what they wish it to be.

If you want to win elections then learn how to be better at cheating and giving other people’s money away.

That simple.

The rampant greed of literal looters (witness the theft in hurricane-ravaged communities, the wilding in malls) and the entitlement mentality of the takers (Obamaphones) are object lessons in the disregard for private property promulgated by our government “leaders.”

Whittle is correct that Romney should never be apologetic for his honestly earned wealth, where he gave value for service. What we should be irate about is the thieves who have picked our taxpaying pockets for failed boondoggles such as Solyndra, bank bailouts, UAW rewards, etc. and pretending that they have done so to “promote the general welfare.”

Valedictorian, 3.97 GPA in combined MBA and Law, gave his inheritance to his University to create a library in honor of his father, one wife, 5 productive kids, mission work, ministering to members of his faith, using his knowledge and industry to create a fortune for himself and those who invested in him, 7 years of public service without pay, untold acts of kindness, bountiful charitable giving, not one scandal.

Is this an interview for a boyfriend, or a husband? That is what it sounds like.

Jimmy Carter was a neat guy too and had all sorts of great resume material. Veteran, self-made millionaire, good family man, helpful in his church, etc.

Carter was a terrible president.

The divorced guy who starred with Bonzo the chimp was a far superior president.

And he wasn’t good enough? Nuts.

Basilsbest on November 25, 2012 at 3:10 PM

The whole thing was about electing a president, and yet you never mentioned a single public issue.