More childlike wisdom from a clown who has yet to comment on what I wrote and insists on using playground epiteths and braggadocio. I’d ban you for being too young to comment here but I am glad you recognize you simply can’t hold your own against most of the posters here.

ed.

Since you are too stupid to respond to anything I wrote, the question is why leave a vapid, truculent, meaningless comment? Obviously, it made you feel better - at least on the childish level your mind operates. It actually reminds me a little of the sounds of satisfaction my infant nephew makes when he wets his pants.

ed.

Lenin gets everyone on board for the great train to Communism but before the train can leave the station he dies. Stalin takes over and when he realizes the train is not moving he executes the engineer, fireman, and the conductor. Stalin dies and Khrushchev takes over, he hires another train crew but before the train leaves the station he is removed from power. Brezhnev takes over and orders the blinds over the windows to be drawn. He then says ”Pretend we are moving”.

Conservatism is the same thing, for some reason he train never leaves the station. Other than bashing the left you got nothing.

“[Bush] at least had a correct ground rules, that too much centralized power is a mistake and goes against the American tradition”

Yes . . . When I think of W’s tenure, the first thing I think of is an aversion to centralized power. Really his defining characteristic, don’t you think?

You despise Palin. Exactly why? She’s actually a moderate conservative. Bush? Moderate to even liberal conservative. McCain? Liberal-conservative.

There are basically no true conservatives in politics today. No nationalists, which by definition is one of the big tennets of conservatisim. They are all internationalists. They all seek to dismember the USA, disable our sovereignty. Most liberal voters don’t even know what sovereignty means. They only hate the rich and successful and want the “taxpayer’s money back”, as if they are going to get checks from the government. What nonsense.

It’s about philosophy. Reagan had the right philosophy. No one is perfect, much less Bush but he at least had a correct ground rules, that too much centralized power is a mistake and goes against the American tradition. Barry Dunham is a classic central planning, Fabian socialist type. Spare me his intellectual pretensions.

Agreed.

Perhaps the problem with the Republicans is the huge gap between what they say they will do and what they actually do.

Reagan said he would shrink government and government expenditure. Not true.

Bush I ran on no new taxes and tried to raise them.

Bush II ran on shrinking government, reducing government expenditure, and balancing budgets. Did not happen.

The only people left who believe Republicans are the party of “small government” and other silly talking points are locked up in their houses watching Fox News with Glenn Beck and the “Factor”. Everyone else has stopped listening to the fairy tales coming out of the GOP machine. There is more truth (and value) in Goldie Locks than in the Republican budget.

The problem is most people think the Democrats will govern differently.

@Bob:
Dems didn’t win because of immigration or poor. Dems didn’t win because of Obama. Dems won because of Bush and McCain/Palin. Bush made Republican synonamous with “lying incompetent weseal”, and McCain/Palin, despite all their talk of change, appeared to the vast majority as Bush II. If the Dems had nominated a dead goat, it would have won.