The Republican party lost so badly because they have betrayed their traditional small-government conservatism. They need to return to the Eisenhower era Republicans who were fiscally responsible, socially moderate and multilateral on foreign policy. The party is now controlled by big-government spenders, foreign policy hawks and the religious right factions of the party and they won't win elections until they return to their roots.

You have made an interesting observation. There can be no return to the Eisenhower era because of Johnson and the Great Society, unless you have a plan to repeal the Great Society. The legacy of George W. Bush is that the Republican Party became an enabler of big-government spenders, unlike the majority of the Party, and Reagan.

I agree with what you say about fiscal responsibility .That was the dagger that drove the party from power . However ,I have to say that there is a shameful past regarding foreign policy that was alternately isolationist and accommodating to thugs around the world in the quest for "stability " . I think the goal of promoting liberty is much more honorable.
Also I think so called moderate social policies plays into the hands of extremists from the left who has pretty much won the culture wars over the post-Ike years . I would have to push back very far ;much further than so called moderation just to return to some balance ;the country has drifted so far towards socialist progressive secularists goals . I refuse to compromise on these issues even if I am a permanent minority as a result.
Republicans should strive to continue to place conservative Justices into the courts because there is where the permanent losses have been manifest.
I do not believe in bipartisanship when morals are compromised.

I think what the 2008 elections and the prop 8 vote in California demonstrate is,

That the issues the majority of voters had was primarily with the economy and the way both parties spend and spend and spend.

I think it is sad that in the age of internet and mass media that you have undecided, uninformed voters a weeks and days prior to election, or people that vote for someone based on age or race or whether they speak good or what the rest of the world thinks.


On socially conservative issues, prop 8 and the enthusiasm that Palin generated among the GOP base indicates that it would be a mistake for the GOP to be moderate or independent.


G&P

Hello in:

The left desperately hopes you're right.

If you're banking on Sarah Palin to be your savior, be prepared for a permanent Democratic majority.

excon

Hey koolaid sipper, why are you still harping on a woman that has done nothing to you. She is the governor of the largest state in the union, has a hugh budget, has worked with both sides of the isle to make her state far better than it was, has reduced taxes, gotten concessions from the oil industry, has worked at many many jobs outside of politics to raise her family. Choose to bring into the world a child that she knew could have problems. WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM?
Oh I forgot, you prefer a man that has never in his life worked outside of politics. Is a product of the Chicago political machine that brought us the likes of Blago, and that now defunct junior senator. Has questionable ties in his past, is unable to complete a sentence without inserting five or ten uhs and ahs. Has never been responsible for anything in his life. Voted present more times than not on legislation, and that people in his own party feel has lots of eye appeal, but is easily manipulated. That is why pelosi and reid pushed the largest pork bill in the history of the USA through congress with no provisions for reading or even trying to understand its content. He effectively raised the national debt by what? 35% his first month on office. Can't wait to see what he brings next when this trillion dollars fails to fix the economy.

Hello 450:

She's the gift that keeps on giving. But, I don't harp. I think she's a lovely woman. I'd LOVE to have her as my kids den mother. But, as the leader of my country, you've got to be kidding...

I'd give you the standard "she doesn't know anything" response, but I already know you think she does.

That's what makes this fun. You're really NOT kidding.

excon

Yet, you vote for president a person that has NO background except to look pretty. Zero business experience. Zero real political experience. Zero foreign trade experience. Zero foreign relations experience. Zero zest for the job. He cannot even lead in this pork package boondoggle. He turned the most important piece of legislation over to mz face lift and that goof ball from Nevada to write so he did not get his hands dirty when it fails. Is that leadership? I think not! I suspect that you are you just another of those that watches oprah and then cries at how wonderful she is?

Hello 450:

What you say is true. Obama has less experience than Palin.

But, he's smart, and she's not. He's educated, and she's not. He knows about the world. She doesn't.

I don't know if that makes a difference to you, but it does to me.

excon

Hi Koolaid sipper,
You think he is smart? Heck, my IQ is higher than his. So what? Makes no difference in the real world. He got where he is by joining the right groups, smoozing with the right people, going to the right schools, kissing the right rear ends in the Chicago political scene. Nothing more. I would much prefer having as a leader someone with some smarts and real understanding of the world, right and wrong than someone with an IQ of 150 and not enough street smarts to toe his own shoes. But that is me and not some seattle lib like you.

Exactly right; Obama is a smooth talking, unknown; like Jimmy Carter. We call'em 'catfish': all mouth and no brains. I watched just a few minutes of Jim Cramer on some special show (CNBC); he was musing about whether he still has a job with the network. When boobs such as Cramer, who are smart financially but dim-witted in politics, wake up and realize how much the federal government has cost them, there's going to be Hell to pay out in the land of the free, home of the brave. I can hardly wait.

Hello again, righty's:

Let me see if I can dispose of the MYTH of "traditional small government conservatism".

Righty's believe in small government unless it involves your PERSONAL life.. Then NO government program is TOO big, for example the DEA. They're nothing but a HUGE government bureaucracy with a social agenda who enforces its rule with guns. What could be more liberal than THAT?

You righty's are silly.

excon

Here's what one thoughtful 'righty' had to say on medical marijuana: "William F. Buckley is one thoughtful conservative who became convinced Marijuana Prohibition was a total failure in the early 1970’s, and he has maintained that position throughout his illustrious career as an author and television personality." http://sendtherightmessage.com/schol...f._buckley,_jr.

Perhaps Chicago will sponsor the next Tea Party; bwe he he: Video - CNBC.com

Looking back: "In the face of all of this Goldwater meets the press a few days after the election. On November 15, chatting with reporters over a beer in Montego Bay. Calmly he says that it's time to change the two-party system as it is currently structured (in 1964). America needs, he says, "two new teams" called liberals and conservatives. There must be recognition of two vastly different approaches to America's problems. Focusing on the election returns that had him winning only six states, Goldwater says that "this year, obviously, millions of Republicans decided socialism and central-decided socialized government is all right. I want to find out why this, all of a sudden, has been embraced by so many." He goes on to say flatly that he believes "the time has come for a real realignment of the two parties." The American Spectator : The Goldwater Lesson

Hello again:

The Republican party is destined for the dustbin of history, as long as it continues to have dufus's as its leaders... I'm talking about people who don't know that referring to apes or watermelons in the context of black people is offensive.

I don't know WHY they don't know that, but they don't. Really! They don't know that. Or they're liars. Which one is it? From a leadership point of view, does it matter?

Me? I don't think ANYBODY is that stupid.

excon

Again, you jest. Is Congress too stupid, or just too stupid to read what they are voting on? Or just too stupid to see what a wreck it has made with the U.S. economy? Btw: that's the same crowd that says marijuana is illegal; ain't that stupid?

Your god raygun started this whole finanical mess with his trickle down my leg to the little people policies, you repukes didn't have a word to say about how George the stupid ran the country into the ground the last 8 years, why is that?

Tell me somethimg great raygun did ever Oh, I know he had the most people in his administration convicted of felonys, 109 of them.

Besides ending the cold war and starting the longest peacetime economic expansion in history that yes... trickled down to all people regardless of "class" ?

Now here is a constitutional question for you . Which President gave the biggest tax cut to the rich ?

Answer... no President... President's do not have taxing authority;Congress does.

Here's another one. When corporations pay taxes who really pays them ? I bet you thought of a corporation as some kind of individual paying taxes. This is not true .People pay taxes . So who in reality is paying those taxes charged to "big business" ? Stock holders... Those people who's pension funds and 401Ks have corporate stock in the portfolio pay the corporate tax in reduced profits. Business customers pay those corporate taxes in increased prices for goods and services. The people who lose jobs because taxes increase the costs of doing business which makes the business less competitive . They pay the price of corporate taxes.