advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

Nobody's listening.

WANT SOME CHEERY NEWS?

By
Neal Boortz
@ April 8, 2009 9:15 AM Permalink | Comments (98) | TrackBacks (0)

This one isn't going to make your day ... at least not if you're a person who believes in yourself and your own abilities. I'm reading the book "Comeback, Conservatism That Can Win Again" by David Frum. Now a lot of conservatives are a bit upset with Frum because he is delivering a message that they don't particularly like. That message? That Reagan politics were for the Reagan years .. and that conservatives need to adjust their policies and philosophies to the current era if they are to regain any semblance of power in Washington.

Well .. you can judge that one for yourself. But I did want to share some points Frum makes in his book that I found, to say the least, unsettling. Let me just present them to you as bullet points. Here are some of the reasons why the Statists have the advantage for the time being ...

  • Republicans draw votes from white voters, Democrats from nonwhites. European Americans were 80% of the population in 1980. The number is now 70%. By 2020 it will be 60%.
  • Married women vote Republican. Unmarried? You'll vote Democrat. I would venture that this is because unmarried women look to the government for the security that should be provided by a husband. The number of women in this country who are unmarried in their late 30s has doubled since Reagan was elected.
  • If you have children you are more likely to vote Republican. No children? You're most likely a Democrat voter. Since Reagan was elected the number of women who have not downloaded a tricycle motor by age 40 has doubled.
  • Go to church, you'll vote Republican. No church? Democrat. You don't need me to tell you that church attendance is in a steady decline.
  • Just a high school education? You're probably a Republican voter. Uneducated? You'll vote Democrat. Ditto if you're sitting on an advanced degree. Guess which two groups are growing and which group is stagnated. I think you can figure this one out for yourselves.

Here are some other gems from Frum's book:

  • Democrats are far less likely than Republicans to define themselves as "extremely proud" to be an American. Nice.
  • Democrats are less likely than Republicans to believe that the United States can solve its problems. In other words, we need to look outside of our country to the international community for those solutions.
  • Democrat voters are far more likely than Republican voters to feel that their own success in life is beyond their control. If you can't control your own future ... just what good is freedom anyway? Right?
  • Democrats are more likely than Republicans to basically give up when faced with adversity. Yup ... give up and rely on government.

Things have changed out there. Self-sufficiency is out. Government dependency is in. Politicians love this .. they just absolutely LOVE it. Those who love freedom are shocked and dismayed.

Now .. as you ponder these documented statistics and facts from David Frum's book, can you tell me where the next great Republican leader is? I hate to say this ... and it isn't going to make me any friends ... but we aren't going to save American by sitting around and chanting "Reagan, Reagan, Reagan" all day long. The young voters out there that we need to rely on couldn't write one cohesive paragraph about Ronald Reagan, and they're not going to sit down and do the research. Someone needs to step forward with the eloquence and charisma needed to convince our young people that true fulfillment will come from personal achievement realized through interaction with others in a free society, not from government dependence and eventual enslavement. If you see someone out there who can deliver that message ... let me know. I've been looking for him (or her).

Categories:

Tags:

Main Index | Archives | RSS feed

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: WANT SOME CHEERY NEWS?.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/27095

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Belinda Skelton, Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!

Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • Re: Ron Paul
    Ron Paul couldn't get any more than 5% of the vote in any one state in the primary. This loser can't win anywhere other than his district in Texas. Wake all you Ron Paul supporters, and take those campaign signs down the election is over! You look like fools.
    By Barry Davis @ 05/02/09 03:11:37 AMreport abuse
  • Frum's analysis vs reality
    Just a few things that would probably throw a monkey wrench into Frum's 'statistics':

    I'm a single female, never married, no children, but I am the guardian of a mentally retarded sibling.

    The only "assistance" I get is my Army pension (which I EARNED) and my sisters's SSI, due to her disability. Out of this, I pay mortgage, utilities, food, and gas. There's usually alot of month left at the end of the money, and I usually go in the red before the next deposit.

    I've never applied for welfare or food stamps, and I never will.

    I'm agnostic.

    I have an Associate's Degree in Applied Science.

    I'm still looking for employment in the Cleveland area comensurate with my job skills, which include security, intel analysis and counter terrorism. I have my resume posted on 6 job sites. Most of the job offers I get are out of the state and out of the country. Relocation is out of the question because of my responsibility to my sister and the family home.

    I don't have anyone to depend on other than myself, so looking for "security that should be provided by a husband" is patently false.

    I come from a working class family, with a working mother who raised 7 kids. We all worked.

    I'm sick of being lumped into a category by people like Frum who are oblivious to strong, hard working women, who aren't sucking off of the public teat.

    I don't blame anyone for my problems, and I don't expect any free handouts.
    I just suck it up and drive on.

    Oh yeah, and I'm REPUBLICAN.
    By sfcmac @ 04/11/09 08:14:23 PMreport abuse
  • Republican, Democrat, or Whatever
    The present fact is that the U.S. Constitution is being ignored. Our rights guaranteed by its Bill of Rights are being eroded (and ultimately will be denied to us). The fundamentals upon which this country was founded are being corrupted. Our treasury is being depleted. The next four years will be extraordinarily long and challenging.
    By Paul M. @ 04/11/09 11:20:59 AMreport abuse
  • Reagan Republicans
    Being a Constitutionalist and a Conservative, plus an Individualist, the smallest minority group in the world,Democrats have frighten me since high school (the 60's). The only good President of the 20th century, Reagan. He cut taxes, gave us our pride back in being an American, plus trying to stop the majority socialist Democrat congress(the Republican in congress weren't even in the stadium!).
    But I must give JFK his dues, he also lowered taxes in '63, made us feel good about ourselves, and somehow got himself shot in Texas (Democrat blasphemy?)...
    But conservatism works everytime it's tried, just like abstentience from any self-destructive habit or wreckless action. I believe with all my heart and soul(and intellect), that divine intervention help guide the founding fathers in composing and ratifying the Constitution of the United States, plus the first ten admendment(The northeast colonies demanded it). Now the northeast states are leading the way in destroying this same radical document for the individual that guarantees "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" with their radical socialist agenda. Thus destroying a unique trait of being an American, individualism.
    But the point is, have the "guardian's of the peoples' liberties" betrayed the "rugged American" individualist? Free press! As goes the other amendments, so goes the 1st.
    Government school have succeeded in destroying the American education system and all the made the USA the most competitive nation in the world; American individualism. This tragedy must be laid at the feet of the congress and the teacher's unions; everyone is now a victim of the injustices of American mores and culture. Now all must belong to an American subgroup. My ancestors left Europe for some reason and never looked back as did million of other Americans. I AM AN AMERICAN! PERIOD! I DEMAND the OPPORTUNITY to work for MY (AND MINE'S) LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS WITHOUT government INTERFERENCE!
    Sophistry is rampand, talk is cheap, almost all have an opinion no matter how brillant, stupid or ignorant it may be. Much to often, actions of politicians never seem to measure up to their words. So I left with choosing the party closest to what I believe in...the lesser of two evils while I struggle to protect my individualism, liberties and my wallet.
    By Ross Batuimus @ 04/10/09 06:15:33 PMreport abuse
  • I don't care if you get an abortion, I don't care what you do in your bedroom, and I don't care if you believe in God or not. What I do care very much about is your trying to take away my God from me and my family. This country was founded on God and Godly principles for people to live by for the betterment of everyone. You do not have to believe in God, you can believe in whatever you want. But neither can you take away my freedom to believe as I see fit. That is my problem with the left and all this PC stuff. But I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU DO IN YOUR HOME as long as it does not effect others.
    By SD @ 04/10/09 11:20:43 AMreport abuse
  • Republicrats
    I gave up on the republican party when they nominated the first George Bush who had already proven to be a liar and predictably broke his promises. The republicans turn into democrats as soon as they take office, but people keep voting for them anyway. That's why we are in this mess. It's time to face the fact that the republicans are NOT the friends to freedom loving americans. They have no more respect for the constitution than their democrat twins. The republicrats with their dual headed socialist fraud party give us the chouce between two crooks, between two incompetent hacks, between two groups that seek to enslave our grandkids for their political benefit. We deserve what we get when we vote for them. But our grandkids deserve better. Vote third party, independent or write in, but stop voting for those weasels because they have a "R" instead of a "D" like the other lying weasels.
    By William R. James @ 04/10/09 10:32:12 AMreport abuse
  • changing game-plan
    I am a democrat. I am interested in reading this book so that I can be more educated on the matter of politics. I agree with the info above about changing the game-plan or stragedy for conservatives and republicans. Clearly, the number of people who will always vote republican is falling, and a much smaller percentage of new voters are voting republican. The republican party is growing very small. I believe some of the programs could really help out, but you have to keep up with the modern day! Stop focusing on things like abortion, you will get those votes, focus on other things and get the unsure people to vote republican.
    Do all this, but of course, you have to hope that Obama causes some type of catastrophe for your plans to even begin to work. I think it is sad for a failure to have to happen for all these nice conservative ideas to come in place and work.
    It is still a fair game for both political sides.
    Get a new Game-Plan to win voters and projects.
    Play ball!
    By andre Acevedo @ 04/09/09 09:36:22 PMreport abuse
  • Why Republicans are losing ground...
    One particular group has controlled the Republican party since Carter's study on the family... the Christian conservatives. The GOP will continue to lose support until they lessen the influence that that group has. They are a minority of the party, a very outspoken minority, but a minority none the less.

    I am a libertarian. I am socially liberal, but fiscally conservative. The Republican party is neither of those things. If the Republicans want to win, they need to bring back sound fiscal policies, and stay out of people bedrooms. The stance on gay marriage (among other things) makes the Republican party look like the Southern Democrats pre-integration.
    By Will @ 04/09/09 08:23:48 PMreport abuse
  • Reagan conservatism dead?
    Neal: That will never happen as long as I am still alive. The liberals would like it to be. they think if they repeat it often enough, it will become truth.
    By Ray Thomas @ 04/09/09 07:54:13 PMreport abuse
  • Republicans are so stupid!
    It always amazes me just how stupid the republicans are. We always seem to be a day late and a dollar short with regards to our message. Yes, I'm a Republican. Our elected officials all "got religion" as soon as we lost the White House. NOW we have to be fiscally conservative and principled, NOW we stand for traditional conservative values! It's absolutely ridiculous. If "Liberal" is perceived as what "wins" I'm afraid we're going to see more misguided efforts in that direction. "Everyone that wants the rich guy to pay for everything raise your hand!" (Ummm... define "rich" please?)

    Values are what you live your life by and they should not change. Politicians use them as advertising and then change them if they don't get the "penetration numbers" they need. Sad, very sad.

    Dale
    By Dale @ 04/09/09 04:57:08 PMreport abuse
  • ChristyACB: female ambulatory pathology
    "Personally, it is crap like what you wrote that make good and strong women like me actually consider the literary supposition of reducing males to 10% of the population and breeding for docility on occassion."


    So speaks another member of the “Why bother to get a job or marry a man when they can marry the government” group of female sycophants who got BHO elected. But the again you’re apparently one of those mental defectives who thinks that personal charisma combined with vapid monosyllabic slogans like “Hope” and “Change” compensate for a veneer-thin resume’ and a non-existent voting record. Do you actually pay income taxes or are you the typical Democrat voter, i.e., deriving a false sense of moral superiority from having your butt firmly planted in that “too each according to her needs” column of that great Socialist equation?

    The real problem with society is the fact that women-children are out of control, i.e., rights w/o responsibility. To begin with, the “virtuous” gender unilaterally exercises its "reproductive rights" 1.4M (30% of children conceived) times annually (w/o considering the corresponding responsibilities)by aborting, committing infanticide, & outright abandoning their children for purely capricious & arbitrary reasons. Additionally, American women bring about 70% of divorce actions (the “No-Fault” Divorce legal movement was started by the National Association of Women Lawyers in 1960), have children out of wedlock at least 37% of the time, and are invariably “entitled” to subsidized housing, welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, child custody, child support, alimony, etc.

    In fact, “Entitlement Barbies” like you were intimidated by Governor Palin. Women have amassed such unequal power since getting the right to vote in 1920 that they will destroy anyone attempting to remove said power or expose its fraud. Sarah Palin is guilty of the exposing said fraud: she rose from hockey mom to state governor without affirmative action, whining about Alaska’s 10:1 male-to-female ratio, or complaining about glass ceilings. In other words, Palin proved publicly that women can succeed without playing the “victim” card. That was her error: she violated the female-chauvinist playbook, has undermined female-chauvinist power, and experienced the consequences.
    By Demosthenes @ 04/09/09 04:43:35 PMreport abuse
  • Republicans have no one to blame but themselves
    The Republicans did this to themselves. Bush and the other Republicans ran on smaller government, fiscal responsibility, and against nation building -- and then proceeded to bloat the government, enlarge the deficit, wreck the economy, and get into expensive foreign adventures. Why vote Republican if they're going to lie about what they want to do and then do the exact opposite when in power?
    By Bob @ 04/09/09 04:01:18 PMreport abuse
  • Concerned
    I'll start off by bringing up gay marriage. I have no problem with gays getting married PROVIDED that churches are not forced to perform the ceremonies. I'm straight, and my church had several requirements of my now husband and myself before they would agree to perform the ceremony--10 hours of premarital counseling among other things.

    That being said, we need to get back to personal responsibility. I am very concerned about the number of people willing to let the government take care of them. All this means is that the government has control of you. Someone actually said to me today that they're looking forward to government-run daycare. The very idea scares me. I went to a government school. Yes, I turned out ok, but that's because I had parents who taught me to stand on my own two feet and not depend on anyone else to save my butt. They didn't give me everything I asked for, and somehow I survived.
    By JL @ 04/09/09 03:45:10 PMreport abuse
  • End of Conversatism?
    Look folks, it's the economy. The Republicans ruled over the worst economic disaster since Jimmy Carter. Carter was kicked out for his ineptness and so were the Republicans. If Obama gets things going again with Obamanomics, he'll be reelected. If he doesn't, the death of Conservatism will be greatly exaggerated. I still believe the majority of Americans prefer limited government but in the face of catastrophe, they're ready to give something else a try. It was a long time from FDR to Reagan and it may be that long between Reagan and whomever. Frankly, even though I'm a social conservative at heart, I'm with Neal in that conservatives need to just get over worrying about abortion, evolution and gay marriage and worry, instead, about passing the Fair Tax and limiting government!
    By Bret Stossel @ 04/09/09 02:36:30 PMreport abuse
  • Lack of Development
    The party that removes themselves from social issues and keeps focus on issues which affect ALL AMERICANS will gather support.

    Both parties seek to imply entitlement to their subjective view of life, impose ideology and claim ownership of righteousness.

    Objective vs. Subjective - neither knows the difference.

    The lack of development toward accountability and responsibility is at the heart of the issue.
    By Greg @ 04/09/09 02:22:43 PMreport abuse
  • Reagan
    There has been no Reagan Republican President since Reagan. George W. Bush -- while definitely better than the Democrats -- was no Reagan republican, as he favored an enlarged domestic government.

    In any case, Reagan's success came after Carter's years. A few months into the Obama Presidency and it could be the return of Carter ... so maybe it will be the return of Reaganesque policies and politicians in 2012. We can hope.
    By CDL @ 04/09/09 02:17:14 PMreport abuse
  • In this thread...
    ...Idiots think that anecdotal evidence of one or two cases outweighs a statistical majority.
    By Lulz @ 04/09/09 09:17:22 AMreport abuse
  • The government schools have done their job
    It appears that the government schools have done their job and have indoctrinated a whole generation of leftists to perpetuate their power.
    By H. Rearden @ 04/09/09 08:37:50 AMreport abuse
  • Huh?
    Just because the statistics he uses are documented doesn't mean they're correct. The research must have been performed in a college town in a red state because I can debunk every single bullet point....
    By Irritated @ 04/09/09 08:22:18 AMreport abuse
  • RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL
    Helloooo??!? Anyone getting the message yet?
    By jacob @ 04/08/09 09:53:09 PMreport abuse
  • Interesting Stuff
    Neal.
    I am not saying this is the answer to the conservitives getting out their word, but its a good read and this guy is great! Check out Alfonzo Rachel and the others on BigHollywood.breitbart.com http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/author/arachel/ Keep up the good work neal! From Kwajalein RMI..
    By KwajManDan @ 04/08/09 06:55:46 PMreport abuse
  • lent visor comment
    it must be the pot! i couldn't unnerstan uz. got pot? iz uz dislexus demoncRATs insted of rePUBICans. oh yeah got pot??
    By butt neckid @ 04/08/09 04:37:30 PMreport abuse
  • Republican?
    The reality is that while people may be fiscally conservative (or would like to vote for one) the Repubs have made it very clear that being pro-choice and being a repub is mutually exclusive. That is actually what Reagan did - he made abortion too central an issue in the repub party - and women are unlikely to vote for changing that law. So you have many people who think that issue is very high on their lists - and therefore would never vote republican because of it.
    I don't know why being fiscally responsible (which, of course, the repubs are NOT) - and being so conservative with social issues are so intertwined. If they weren't, well, THAT party could come into power easily.

    I.e., I'm a fiscally responsible adult, who is very liberal on social issues. Where do *I* go?
    By Atlmom @ 04/08/09 03:42:11 PMreport abuse
  • Hey Steve....
    Im guessing we can assume that you don't listen to comedians that take a more liberal paternalistic view of foreign policy rather than a traditional conservative one like for instance;

    O'Reilly
    Ingraham
    Coulter
    Kristol
    Morris
    Limbaugh

    and the ultimate Jerry Springer of talk radio himself Sean Hannity.

    Neo-cons also have no idea about comedy or reality. A lot of neo-cons actually believe they are traditional conservatives, which is bizarre considering their liberal, paternalistic, welfarist stance on foreign policy. And after all... what is liberalism but fascism with a smile?
    By Amalgum @ 04/08/09 03:33:50 PMreport abuse
  • Voter demographics
    I would just like to point out that simply having an advanced degree does not imply one votes for Democrats. In fact, having an advanced degree in any variation of engineering changes the equation completely, as from day one we are taught to actually solve problems rather than complain and blame others for them.
    By Aaron the Engineering Student @ 04/08/09 03:22:36 PMreport abuse
  • Young, Educated, Experienced
    There's a young Republican out there with state and federal elected experience. He's literally a Rhodes Scholar, good looking, conservative and can speak well without a teleprompter.

    He has a track record of solid conservatism and in rebuilding wrecked bureaucracies.

    If you don't know who I mean, you should.
    By A Friend @ 04/08/09 03:20:58 PMreport abuse
  • Some Truth
    There is some truth to what you say in that Republicans and Conservatism is hitting some declines. The people groups that would normally turn to the Republicans are leaving. Who can blame them? The Republicans we sent to take care of Washington rejected Conservative values and were 24 hours a day attacked by the media.

    However, I disagree with the thesis that it is Conservatism that needs to change. The basic fundamental values of Conservatism that we live in an exceptional country and hard work can take you places are correct. The message is solid, the way the message is being conveyed isn't. Ronald Reagan's ideas are still correct, it is just people have become boggled down in what these messages really are. If anything we should be adhering to stricter conservatism. We saw what Moderate Republicans like John McCain can get us into. Now's the time to show a strong offense so that people can comprehend the Conservative message and see what we mean to America.

    I said our and we but I was referring to fellow Conservatives, not you of course Neal. Wanted to make sure you didn't get that message. ^_^
    By Troy @ 04/08/09 03:10:56 PMreport abuse
  • Where were you Ron Paul Supporters before???
    You people make me sick. Where were you when Ron Paul was running last year??? The reality is, you weren't anywhere, because you were too chicken sh@t to vote for him. You were the people running around saying, "Well, I have to vote for John McCain, because he is the most popular among the Republicans and Ron Paul just doesn't have a chance." Give me a break. I'm sick of the weasels that run for the hills when someone of real substance like Ron Paul come along. Don't waste my time with these posts until you're ready to fight for the guy. Oh yeah, on top of that, stop with your pathetic Fairtax rants. If you believe in Ron Paul, you would believe in HR1207 and not the Fairtax bill.
    By LiberalHater @ 04/08/09 02:50:21 PMreport abuse
  • Indicators II
    As I said before on another post, Population Equals Regulation. If you want the minimal government we had in 1880, we will have to go back to the population density we had in 1880. Social Security isn't the ultimate Ponzi Scheme - Economic growth through population growth is. Population growth is one of the main issues where conservatives are completely missing the boat. And don't think you can just hunker down in a cabin in the woods and hide. Other people fleeing the hives will move in around you.
    By Steve Dutch @ 04/08/09 02:33:40 PMreport abuse
  • Ronnie
    Looks more like the libs have been making it hard on minorities by not allowing them to prove they can be as productive as any other group. Dems just keep handing out the candy and minorities keep taking it. They want you dependent on them so you'll keep voting for them.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 04/08/09 02:31:59 PMreport abuse
  • It's not just about charisma...
    Finding a conservative with the charisma to win over the population isn't the problem. People like Rush, Neal, Hannity, Mark Levin, Ann Coulter, Thomas Sowell, etc. have millions of listeners/readers. The problem is that governance isn't in the makeup of the liberty-lover. We would prefer to work in the private sector and stay out of other people's lives. What will be difficult isn't finding a charismatic conservative, it's finding one who would rather go through the hassle of attempting to work for the government. Anyone who is really excited about it, probably isn't the conservative we are looking for.
    By Brett @ 04/08/09 02:22:10 PMreport abuse
  • Fixing the Mess
    I'll continue to say this at every opportunity. Here are the things Republicans need to do.
    1. Ditch the anti-evolution cults. We need to face that fundamentalism is a cult, not genuine Christianity. Look how much these people helped us in 2006 and 2008. They're worthless as votes. Throw them to the wolves.
    2. Stop backing every bad position on the environment. This includes global warming. Are you there, Neal?
    3. Like it or not, government is part of the market. If Obama is offering free health care, and you don't have something MORE attractive to the uninsured, you will lose. Compete or die.
    4. How obvious is this? Since Republicans tend to favor military operations, every Republican candidate must have military service. (Me? retired master sergeant USAR, Gulf '91 and Bosnia '96, thank you.)
    5. Walk the walk. Get drunk in public, have an affair, get arrested, evade taxes, your career in Republican politics is OVER.
    By Steve Dutch @ 04/08/09 02:16:36 PMreport abuse
  • Liberals are a joke
    Ever notice that all of the talking heads for liberals are comedians? Hmmmmmm.
    Stewart
    Franken
    Garafelo (or however you spell it)
    Maher
    Moore
    Behar
    Goldberg
    Clinton (the misspelled button was funny)

    Libs just don't know the difference between comedy and reality.
    By Steve @ 04/08/09 02:04:25 PMreport abuse
  • Reagan the Tax Cutter?
    Oh yes, he didn't call his tax increases what they were, they were 'tax reform' not increases. Ah, yes, words from the Ministry of Truth. Largest corporate tax increase in history? Yep, 1986-1987. After 1981, Ronnie was about as conservative as any Democrat in the last 25 years! 1982 - TEFRA - increased taxes by 1% of GDP - WOW! Ronnie signed it! And let's not even bring up Social Security 'contributions'!

    Neal, quit trying to be like Hannity, and return to your own objective, truthful self - and stop feeding us this bull!
    By TG @ 04/08/09 02:01:44 PMreport abuse
  • Reality
    The reality is that Democrats are better are winning based on meaningful policy, but Republicans have been able to use "values" issues. And Democrats have done better at real policy.

    The thing is, in difficult economic times people are less likely to vote based on their desire to tell other people what to do in their private lives.

    This is also why both the uneducated and the well educated vote Democratic. The poor have other things on their mind beside who wants to marry who, and and the well educated are enlightened enough to know it isn't their business.

    Minorities are also less likely to base their vote on bigotry and ignorance, regardless of whether they are bigoted or ignorant, possibly because they are victims of it, as well as being more likely to be disadvantaged.

    I don't think the Republicans are dead yet, but at this point they are either going to need to adopt policies that work or find someone else to hate and be afraid of. I am guessing the latter will happen.

    And the reality is that Democrats are for far more freedom than Republicans. Democrats want to provide some basic social services and economic stimulus to support a strong capitalistic society. Republicans want to tell you how to run your life, limit your opportunities, and let corporations run your life.

    It's also kind of amusing how Boortz interprets the statistics about women, that unmarried women are just too weak to take care of them self. Unmarried and childless women (as well as men) are more likely to be pursuing personal success, the exact people who Boortz imagines are Republicans. In reality, they're Democrats, with Republicans tending towards bitter, yes, bitter, people with less ambition.
    By Lent Visor @ 04/08/09 01:46:20 PMreport abuse
  • voice for the self-sufficient
    Neal, if you can get any kind of commentary from author Terry Goodkind, you will get a good voice for the self-sufficient. Try to get him on the show, he's supposed to be an avid Rand follower.
    By Andres @ 04/08/09 01:33:57 PMreport abuse
  • FACTS?
    this may sound 60ish but, QUE
    STION authority.
    I have made it a point to always DO MY HOMEWORK. when some Xpert says this is/are the fact(s) I say to myself oh yeah? then I start doing my research. I'm not a rocket scientist but I saw one on tv once. global cooling/warming man made. not in our lifetime. humans contribute to both but Mt. Pinatobo St helens etc are bigger donors.
    politicians produce hot air and little else. don't be fooled don't be lazy do your homework.
    anytime an Xpert is speaking be skeptical. no one has all the answers and dats a fact.
    DRIP.
    don't return incumbent politicians
    By J.R.C. @ 04/08/09 01:33:04 PMreport abuse
  • A Few Good Men
    For as much as I hear so called "conservatives" complain about how the mainstream media marginalizes the issues that are important to them, I find it very interesting that so many people immediately write off people like Ron Paul as some sort of crazy.

    Granted, he is not the most eloquent guy around, but wouldn't a man with the proper understanding of the role of government be better than our current "articulate" leader?

    I agree with Red Leader, I would love to see someone like Rand Paul or, my personal favorite, Peter Schiff make a go at the White House.
    By Geoffrey @ 04/08/09 01:16:10 PMreport abuse
  • Ron Paul?
    Ron Paul's 2010 campaign slogan:
    "DON'T BLAME ME...I TOLD YOU SO!"
    By Jake @ 04/08/09 01:10:23 PMreport abuse
  • Economic freedom, social fascism
    Reality Check has it exactly right. Fewer and fewer people are taking Republicans seriously anymore because of their completely backwards stance on social issues. If you care so much about freedom, then for god's sake leave gay people alone, and let women retain ownership of their wombs. Trying to say Republicans care more about freedom than Democrats do, when Republicans are continually sponsoring anti-gay and anti-woman ballot initiatives and amendments, is ludicrious. Preaching freedom while promoting theocracy is hypocritical, to say the least.

    And yes, we need to take "personal responsiblity" for our own messes and quit starting wars we can't afford, against countries that aren't a threat.

    A real conservative, who wanted to end the drug war, expand all civil rights to every American, and stop most of our military interventionism, would get my vote... and I have never voted Republican for any national office.
    By Katherine @ 04/08/09 01:03:04 PMreport abuse
  • Big Difference
    between charity of the state and charity of the church. It is often said that REPS and CONS are more generous givers of their own money - I believe that. That would be your Church and other givings. It is also said that DEMS and libs are more generous givers of someone else's money - I believe that too. That would be your welfare.
    By shuttin down @ 04/08/09 12:58:08 PMreport abuse
  • College Grads and Democrats
    Neal:
    I won't accept the dumbing down of the US and listen to anyone who says college education is wasteful. It is a tool though only a tool. If many grads are Democrats it is because they either have few job or work skills or they were brainwashed.
    By kturnerga @ 04/08/09 12:56:59 PMreport abuse
  • A good reason to read it.
    I disagree that we need to give conservatism a makeover. Or, even do what the Dems did after 2000 and 2004 with the whole "we didn't get our message out" debacle. It's not time to slit our wrists and concede anything. The Democrats really just had to wait for the Republicans in Congress to melt down, which they did. There may never be another large core of "Reagan" style conservatives, but that doesn't mean we are done. The Third Party thing isn't viable because of people like the Ron Paulistas. Nobody in their right mind would associate themselves with that riff raff. Ron Paul is actually right about a lot of things, but he has proven to be a joker in the deck and we don't need any more of those. I believe ther's way to pull the Republican Party together in time for 2012, maybe even sooner. And look at the Dems, they really didn't have to work hard the last 8 years, we made it easy for them. I think they'll reciprocate, in spades!
    By Chuck @ 04/08/09 12:55:37 PMreport abuse
  • Oh well.
    This comment is an insult, Yes, I'm an educated SBF over 40 W/O brats and I don't depend on the goverment. Doesn't anyone remember that the southern Dixie-crates who hated minorities are now in the republican party? It's a new day. By 2018 the average 18 year old will be a non- white hispanic and the new date of the old minority will be the new majority in 2030.So tell the republican party to stop treating the minorities ( soon to be the majority) like 2nd class citzens. I can't wait for 2030.
    By Ronnie @ 04/08/09 12:51:45 PMreport abuse
  • Indicators II
    Concur with Rob that population density is a huge factor in voting trends - and REP dominates rural and low pop density areas. I saw a good example of this when I looked at the stats for votes in N. Cal in the foothills around Placerville east of Sac. The whole region east of Folsom, west of Tahoe, and north-south nearly unbounded along the related longitudes was red. There are other pockets like this strewn about in Cal - which overall went blue in the election. Guess what - no large cities in here - just lots and lots of property owners - ranches, mini-ranches, vineyards, orchards, homesteads on acreage. A lot of them "evil and rich" too I suppose according to the libs. Let me tell you - these are good people who have invested in their own lives and made good choices - and they have a lot to lose in the future entitlement economy we are headed for.

    Things change when you leave the hive and don't dance with the rest of the bees.
    By shuttin down @ 04/08/09 12:50:51 PMreport abuse
  • Stereotypes
    I hate to admit it, SED, but Neal does repeat the line about unmarried women needing security. He's been saying that for years, and I'm offended by it, but I realize that's his opinion. I also realize I may be an exception because much like Christy, I'm making my own life and paying my own way too. BTW, men get just as much security out of marriage as women do. In fact men don't initiate divorce as often as women do.

    Hugo's ghost: ROFLMAO!
    By Morrigan @ 04/08/09 12:50:47 PMreport abuse
  • Church = Republican???
    Although I understand it, I am actually pretty suprised that the opinion states that going to church makes you more likely to be a repiblican. All I hear at church (catholic) is guilt trips on how wealthy the community is and how little we are doing...and that we need to work harder for the less fortunate and give more.
    By Bryan @ 04/08/09 12:42:17 PMreport abuse
  • tricycle motor
    Not sure if it's just me, but I had to read the tricycle motor a second time before I got it. That's a great one, thanks for the lunch time laugh!
    By Chris @ 04/08/09 12:38:47 PMreport abuse
  • Reagan
    This Reagan worship is stupid anyway. Reagan was a lot like Stalin. He won the war for the good guys, or at least takes credit for it, and achieved his ideal society, but he ultimately set the world on a dark path, and his ideal society wasn't anything good.

    Among other things, he was a traitor and a terrorist supporter.

    Of course, that's really the Reagan administration. Reagan himself was just a weak, useless puppet of a person.
    By Ezun @ 04/08/09 12:31:58 PMreport abuse
  • It's actually much more simple than Frum makes it out to be.
    The entire book can be done away with and condensed into two easy steps for conservative victory.

    1) Stop preaching economic freedom while embracing social fascism. If gays get married it does not affect you, so stop trying to outlaw it. If somebody does pot in their basement it does not affect you, so stop trying to outlaw it. This list goes on for quite a ways, but simply put: Stop trying to make this a christian nation and accept the fact that not everyone shares your particular view of morality, and as long as your actions are not harming another person you should be allowed to do as you please.

    2) Stop pissing away billions of dollars killing people who have different systems. Stop lying to the American people about reasons to go to war and then saying "oops" when they find out the lie.
    By Reality Check @ 04/08/09 12:31:46 PMreport abuse
  • Indicators
    Oh, and I almost forgot. There is one factor that, above anything else, will most reliably indicate which party you will vote for. More than going to church, more than married or unmarried, more than gun owner or not, the one thing that affects voting behavior is population density. If you live in a densely populated city, you will be far more likely to vote for Democrats. If you live in an area with very low population density, you will be far more likely to vote for Republicans.

    And the US population is only going up.
    By Rob Evans @ 04/08/09 12:23:11 PMreport abuse
  • Take your money and run.
    Third world immigration has delivered up a third world nation. Way to go, Democrats!
    By RIP America @ 04/08/09 12:22:59 PMreport abuse
  • You have a chance with Ron Paul
    But you along with the rest that buy into neo-con mysticism when it comes to foreign policy over conservate non-interventionism, you threw him under the bus during the last presidential election. The young people were with Ron Paul in a major way. I was a delegate in this last election, and I can tell you now if the Republican party does not figure out a way to listen to Ron Paul's ideas it is going to go nowhere for them. Ron Paul captured the hearts and minds of the young people in the last election.Just look up the convention he held on the same day of the GOP convention The man broke the single day record for most campaign donations at 6 million dollars. Its who the young people are following, and young people are also looking for the next Ron Paul. Prime candidates? former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, and probably Ron's kid Rand Paul. I can tell you that at least 2 million conservatives in the country will never be voting for a leftist neo-con Patriot Act type like Bush or Romney ever again.We(Im 28) are looking back to traditional Jefferson type conservatism. Maybe you could get Rand Paul,Gary Johnson, Peter Schiff or Jesse Ventura on the show.The are conservative with fresh traditional ideas.
    By Red Leader @ 04/08/09 12:19:01 PMreport abuse
  • Jubilation is right!
    What is the difference between the two parties?? Clinton and Bush (and multiple "bipartisan" "representatives") built the foundation for a police state. They have allowed the "Federal" "Reserve" to set policy that led us to the current financial debacle. They began eroding our liberties. Now, Obama will gladly take the torch. So-called conservatives and their cheeleaders in the media didn't say a thing for the last eight years. Now, all the obamites that complained about Bush aren't saying a word about Obama and his continuation of Bush's policies. Wake up people, they're all the same.
    By Uncle Sam's rotting corpse. @ 04/08/09 12:12:38 PMreport abuse
  • Some things that Frum missed...
    Yes, Frum may be a RINO but the demographics are there and unmistakable no matter who says them. But the one thing Frum missed is that, in addition to the demographic changes, the technology changes of the next 20 years are going to obsolete both parties.

    This video is about 20 minutes long but you really do need to watch it:

    http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/463

    The gist is that your children (and possibly some of us) are going to essentially live forever, manufacturing "stuff" is going to be nearly free, and what it means to be "human" is going to change very radically. None of the rules apply anymore. And technological and societal change is going to happen so rapidly that no Government can keep up with it. The ONLY choice is going to be limited government, anything else will be irrelevant minutes after its put in power.

    If Conservatism (much less the GOP) are going to be remotely relevant they need to start helping people cope with the change that's going on. Help them understand that they can not only cope, but thrive.
    By Michael Mealling @ 04/08/09 12:11:30 PMreport abuse
  • Mark Sanford
    He's great, but doesn't put forth the charisma part. I'd like to find that guy Christy just described....

    Oh never mind.

    Mark Sanford, definitely keeping an eye on him and Paul Ryan. But I'm afraid we really need a good Libertarian to pull this off.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 04/08/09 12:10:32 PMreport abuse
  • Is this Reagan's fault? Probably not. It's Destiny. And the future is bleak.
    It's the statement "since Reagan was elected" that gets me.

    "Since Reagan was elected" we've had 5 Republican terms and only 2 Democrat terms. I'm ignoring the current term since it's not making the changes you're talking about, it's just delivering the results of them.

    "Republicans draw votes from white voters, Democrats from nonwhites. European Americans were 80% of the population in 1980. The number is now 70%. By 2020 it will be 60%."

    In a span of time where Republicans held the Presidancy 71% of the time, our racial make-up has grown more "non-white." Who's to blame? The guy in office for 2 terms, or those in office for 5 before *and* after?

    "The number of women in this country who are unmarried in their late 30s has doubled since Reagan was elected."

    In a culture where Republicans held the Presidency for 71% of the time, women decide less and less to marry. What happened there? Obviously having a Republican and Conservative President lessened, not increased, the conservative values of the the society around it, making it more and more liberal. Or is freedom and conservatism enabling women to not be so dependent, and in their independence, and being single, they vote for the "cute guy."

    "If you have children you are more likely to vote Republican. No children? You're most likely a Democrat voter. Since Reagan was elected the number of women who have not downloaded a tricycle motor by age 40 has doubled."

    That's to say, again, that an America that has seen a period of time with 71% percent Republican Presidency, our birthrate has dropped.

    Is that because working women are too busy to have children? That conservatism has a downside?

    "Go to church, you'll vote Republican. No church? Democrat. You don't need me to tell you that church attendance is in a steady decline."

    OBVIOUSLY the President is not influencing people in their mores and habits.

    Obama is as much a product of the Reagan Presidency as you or I.

    His choice of a racist church was done in response to a Republican President's, not a Democrat's, influence.

    "Just a high school education? You're probably a Republican voter. Uneducated? You'll vote Democrat."

    'No child left behind?' That's right, no child left behind in a nation growing increasingly stupid and incompetent. A direction is a direction, and the kids are heading down it. All we have to point to is a period of time in which Republican's held the Presidency for 71% of the time.

    Perhaps America is on a path that it's society and culture have destined for it, and the President, whatever his faction, has nothing to do with it. The choice of President is a symptom, not a cause.
    By John @ 04/08/09 12:08:33 PMreport abuse
  • Mark Sanford
    I'm keeping my eye on Mark Sanford. He seems like a principled guy who can convince people that responsible fiscal policies are the best way to go.
    By Matt Cole @ 04/08/09 11:54:15 AMreport abuse
  • @Skeptic, @SED, @Monica
    Skeptic - Thanks for the laugh! I really did and enjoyed it. Normally, I'm not at all angry or hypersensitive. But sometimes Neal's constant digs on women who don't have husbands get me boiling over. Pot has lid back on now. :)

    SED and Monica - He wasn't quoting from the book there, I checked. Instead, he was adding his ever so hateful towards any woman who dares to not be married twist into his "bullet". As for the statistics, I think it is funny how looking at the raw data and running them for other parameters changes things. Like, for example, if you're born in Kansas you're more likely to vote Republican...regardless of education, sex or race. Go figure.

    Most of these statistics are just too broadly based to make sense, which is why developing a cohesive strategy to appeal to voters is such a challenge in the first place.

    Until we can find a Republican with a voice like Barry White, a body like Adonis, a face like Uncle Ronny when young and as smooth as James Bond, we're going to be at a disadvantage in this media-driven political arena.

    A new republican, or better yet, a new Libertarian, that can sweep the country is going to have to be picture perfect with never a flub to compete with the glowing worship of our media.
    By ChristyACB @ 04/08/09 11:49:19 AMreport abuse
  • Frum's book
    I had to laugh at the stats. I must be doing it all wrong. I'm a single woman, no kids, own my own home that I'm paying for myself (as opposed to using alimony or money from a divorce),over 40 with my master's degree, but I've never voted democrat. Never will as long as they continue to preach reliance on the government and punish success.
    By Dawg_girl @ 04/08/09 11:47:15 AMreport abuse
  • This slightly-left-of-center independent would consider someone like Ron Paul
    If the GOP wants to appeal to 21st century America, I would agree with By Jay S. @ 04/08/09 09:47:30 AM . . . A Ron Paul type of guy would go a long ways.

    I know most republican die-hards largely confine their TV viewing to the echo chambers of Hannity, O'Reilly, weird-lips Van Susteren, and that crying psycho Glenn Beck . . . but if you would have watched some of the more youthful-oriented programs like Bill Maher or John Stewart during the GOP primary season, you would have been amazed at the positive reception Ron Paul received on these programs from their traditionally progressive, younger, more multicultural audiences.

    But of course Ron Paul didn't swallow the GOP platform hook, line, and sinker, so the GOP never gave the guy a chance.
    By AWK 829 @ 04/08/09 11:18:40 AMreport abuse
  • Randy
    I'm afraid you're right, we'll never see another republican president. And I agree with the two reasons you give. Here are a few more reasons.

    3. The 2010 census

    4. Gerrymandering using census results

    5. ACORN

    Don't be surprised to see elections deemed unnecessary and Obama appointed president for life.
    By Ben Dover @ 04/08/09 11:18:25 AMreport abuse
  • How I reached my young college friendsq
    Every one of my college friends that were going to vote for Obama, until I was able to research and get them to vote for McCain. I did this by letting them know that everyone of the Democrats talking points was a wedge into socialism. At first they did not believe me. I was able to do some research and present them with all of the talking points of Obama, and Marx. I asked each of them, do you want to be rich one day? They told me yes. I told them the burden of the taxes on rich people and how Obama wants to spread the wealth. When they took what I had to say and researched it themselves, they slowly started to change. They were not saying “yes we can” as much anymore. Then they started talking about how Republicans have always championed freedom.
    By kenny @ 04/08/09 11:15:12 AMreport abuse
  • Reagan era over?
    Reagan seemed to me to represent the core of conservatism.. if the party that claims to be of conservatives abandons conservatism.. then what is that party?

    the one that loses every election.. thats what.

    The fact that the republican party has no stance on anything.. divided into people who still beleive in conservatism.. and people who beleive in the democrats big govt spending (democrat light) are the problem.. and until we get rid of this bickering and unite under a common stance.. conservatism.. small govt.. and most importantly "LEAVE US ALONE" as the mentality we the people take towards the feds.. we're going to slip more and more towards what the democrats of today want.. which is some sort of mix between fascism and commmunism.
    By ATLlistener @ 04/08/09 11:14:47 AMreport abuse
  • Republican Stereotypes
    Wow! I busted like every stereotype listed (except for the women/minority ones). I'm a single guy w/ no kids and an advanced degree who doesn't go to church. Maybe it's because I have a low tolerance for stupidity and laziness.
    By Jared @ 04/08/09 11:14:10 AMreport abuse
  • Reagan and Future Leader
    As to your question about who the next leader should be. I think the next leader is me. And you. And all the readers that visit this site, and all of us that hold values like Freedom and Family first. Get motivated. Write your representatives. Do more than just sit on your but and wish for someone else to do something.

    I was too young to know Reagan, but I remember him. So I have started reading books about him and his legacy.

    Remember, when Reagan challenged Carter, things were just as dire. Something like 60% or more Americans identified with the Democratic Party. Nothing would point to Reagan as having a chance.

    Reagan won because people identified the values he held and he ulimately won the electorate by effectively communicating those values.

    Republicans should never try to be the party of the past. But instead, be a party of values and learn how to communicate those values to an ever changing demographic.

    I think it really is that simple.
    By Shawn @ 04/08/09 11:08:59 AMreport abuse
  • Notice Something?
    Did you notice how Neal, who claims not to be a Republican, appears to believe that the fate of the nation depends on the GOP winning elections?

    He walks like a Republican, talks like a Republican, votes like a Republican -- but insists he is not a Republican. How much longer will he continue this charade?
    By Corbett @ 04/08/09 11:07:10 AMreport abuse
  • Good Luck to our children
    All your statistics point to the fact that our country as we knew it is headed south. I personally don't see much hope for reversing the trend. The indoctrinated,ill-informed and indigent will continue to support the Democrat party. They are a robustly growing population.
    By Steve Boston @ 04/08/09 11:02:48 AMreport abuse
  • Obama is the best thing that happened...
    ..for the conservative movement. SO many young voters are becoming so disenfranchised with the Democratic party that they will never vote democratic again. And incidentally, the % of "young" voters who turned out to vote in 2008 was IDENTICAL to the % that turned out in 2004. Hmmmmm.
    By $mooth Operator @ 04/08/09 11:00:27 AMreport abuse
  • Calling BS
    Frum claimed that churchgoers are republican voters. BULL! I go to an Episcopal Church, and the predominance there are liberal voters.
    By Daibhaid @ 04/08/09 10:55:51 AMreport abuse
  • A New Party
    The GOP lost the last election because they were not being Conservatives. They were trying to be Liberals. Why would a liberal buy a fake liberal when they can buy a real one? The GOP needs to market itself better to young voters (those who have not experienced the real world yet) and stick to it's conservative roots. If they don't want to represent the conservative Christian demographic, then it is time for a new party. Plain and simple.

    http://newt.org/

    and for those who need a remedial course in Reagan...
    http://www.gingrichproductions.com/
    By Steve @ 04/08/09 10:52:01 AMreport abuse
  • What is the difference in being high school educated and having no education?

    I am curious about these stats. Could it be because people with only a HS education get into the workforce and learn about hard work and taxes faster than those who go to college?
    By Sam @ 04/08/09 10:37:01 AMreport abuse
  • Unmarried women
    The reason those women support the Democratic Party is because their Republican husbands left them for younger women. Just ask Newt's ex-wives!
    By Hugo's ghost @ 04/08/09 10:34:23 AMreport abuse
  • Republican Leader
    How about Paul Ryan (R-WI). He seems to be a pretty charismatic guy. I liked his alternative budget proposal.
    By WI Guy @ 04/08/09 10:32:07 AMreport abuse
  • @ChristyACB
    Don't forget to slip "angry" and "hypersensitive" in there.

    If the marriage is a partnership like it's supposed to be, then I believe men gain the same type of security from a woman within a marriage. However, you're right that there are some people that don't need that type of relationship to be secure in their future. It is nice to know that if you fall down, that there is someone there to help you get back on your feet.
    By Skeptic @ 04/08/09 10:27:50 AMreport abuse
  • CANIDATE
    BOBBY JINDAL
    By JINDAL LOVER @ 04/08/09 10:26:30 AMreport abuse
  • Enough with the negative
    The message of freedom in the Declation of Independence is not dead despite the efforts of our politicians and the mainstream press. People haven't changed. They still long to be free. The conservative message must be freedom and it must be pure. The Libertarian philosophy appeals to many who consider themselves Democrats or Republicans. Support the Libertarian party and let them get their message out. We owe it to the Americans who gave us their "last measure of devotion" to give us this great country.
    By Carlos @ 04/08/09 10:25:37 AMreport abuse
  • Some fresh thoughts.
    It is interesting that when a political party is heavily defeated the first inclination is to "go back to the roots." In reality the base and "roots" are not representative of the new population and hence one fundamental reason the party lost power to begin with. This holds true for all parties that lose power. The pundits have predicted that the first step of the Republican party is to do just that - go back to the 1980's and the "roots" of the Republican party movement. That was over 20 years ago. Many young working adults in their mid twenties don't even remember Reagan. I am almost 40 and Ronald Reagan is like an old, dead grandfather your family talks about but you only sat on his lap one time. In reality the "going back to the roots" strategy will only work up and solidify their strongest supporters who would vote Republican in any election while simultaneously alienating the younger and higher educated working people that are needed to move from a minority party to a majority party and win elections. Look around the Republican party and then think of when you were young had kids and who you voted for. Would you elect grandpa again? So, once the "roots" strategy fails (and if history is a source of information it will) the next step is to take a hard look, get out of the comfort zone and redefine the party. This is a very unpleasant proposition for many Republicans because it is extremely uncomfortable to question basic assumption about how you live, the meaning of conservation, is global warming a problem or not, etc. But without a re-evaluation and changes the party may simply remain a minority power in the years to come. This country is evolving. Change is not pleasant and I certainly don't enjoy many of the changes that have happened around me as a multi-generational Georgia native but you either adapt or become marginalized. You don't die but you do lose influence and power and people will complete stop listening to you. You become crazy grandpa.
    By Ben @ 04/08/09 10:24:39 AMreport abuse
  • 3rd Party
    So, where do the Libertarian Voters fit?
    By The Appalachianist @ 04/08/09 10:22:32 AMreport abuse
  • statistics aren't stereotypes
    ChristyACB, unfortunately, these are statistics. A quick google search will give you plenty of information listed in Neal's points and more.
    By Monica @ 04/08/09 10:22:09 AMreport abuse
  • Hey ChristyACB
    If you had paid attention, you would realize that Neal was quoting from the book when he made the statements about married and unmarried women voters. Please get your panties out of a wad.

    I am a single, white, gay female and I vote neither rep or dem. I vote less government, which is really hard to find in any political candidate these days.
    By SED @ 04/08/09 10:19:58 AMreport abuse
  • Republicans & Democrats
    ... and there are those of us who do not identify with any party affiliation.
    The "party" system has ruined themselves my buying votes instead of working to keep us free and productive.
    By Laughing @ 04/08/09 10:18:58 AMreport abuse
  • Republican leader
    Well i'm only 22 and I can't possibly begin to say I am wise enough to say how things should and shouldn't be run, but I have been reading Nealz Nuze for a while, and I agree with most of what Neal says. Now I don't know how others feel but I thought Mike Huckabee was a good choice, he was for the Fair tax. I also thought he was a good speaker but he got beat out by Mccain in the end, and I partly think its b/c of his religious views and how people had so much bias towards Bush at the time. But if Huckabee were to run again, and be a little more bold and get out there with the Fairtax stance, I would definitly vote for him again.
    By Cody @ 04/08/09 10:14:40 AMreport abuse
  • Reagan-Reagan-Reagan
    I seriously doubt we'll see another republican president again, for two reasons:

    1. The media simply will not allow it. It has gone from 'allegedly left-slanted' to an overtly entrenched, established, deliberate propaganda department of the democrat party.
    2. There are more ignorant, stupid non-achievers than there are smart, educated achievers, and they breed at a higher rate. Simple demographics, I believe, are predicting the coming doom.

    Just look at the people who head the Executive and Legislative branches of "our" government. The Senate Majority Leader, Speaker of the House, and (especially) the President, are all basically leftist extremists bent on enslaving the citizens of this country in order to increase government control, and they don't give a damn who is onto them because they know the numbers are on their side (see #2 above). Bright, young republicans swooping in to save the day in 2012 or 2016? Only if a plague comes along to thin the herd of the Gimme-gimmes.

    And finally, the inevitable liberal solution no one seems to worry too much about lately: Wait until one or two conservative judges drop from the Supreme Court roster, and see who is pencil-whipped through to replace them. That knocking sound you'll hear will be the last nail in America's coffin.
    By Randy @ 04/08/09 10:13:01 AMreport abuse
  • USSR & Reagan
    These are not the Reagan years there is no USSR to defeat. But in 1979 it did not look to any of the "smart" people like Reagan could make it morning in America either. The reason he is a good example is he CHANGED the stats. That is what is needed now. Somebody that can change the minds of people currently predisposed to support statism both Republican & Democrat. What we need is a _________ Revolution to reduce government.
    By Fred L. Merritt Jr @ 04/08/09 10:12:56 AMreport abuse
  • David Frum is a RINO..
    Clearly, he's out of touch with the conservative wing of the Republican party. And we wonder why McCain lost?? It's almost as if McCain lifted pages of his book for his campaign speeches. It's also interesting that all these so-called "demographics" he cites in his book are based upon loose facts. Look deeper into the % of professionals with advanced technical degrees---surprise---they vote Republican. Those with advanced degrees in liberal arts vote...you guessed...Dimocrat. No surprise there.
    By $mooth Operator @ 04/08/09 10:11:18 AMreport abuse
  • Don't think so...
    I think the author is an idiot. Just look over the past few decades, the further Republicans get away from conservative ideas the greater the flop. The more they stick to conservative ideas the better they do. George Bush ran in 2000 on much more traditional conservative values, such as a humble foreign policy. McCain went much further away from true conservative ideology, and look where that got the party.

    Sure there are a lot of liberals out there, but the real problem is that the Republican party is alienating a lot of potential supporters by getting away from the conservative values! Those who voted for McCain are die hard and will vote Republican no matter what. There are others who vote on ideology and they are jumping ship and moving to third parties!
    By Elisabeth @ 04/08/09 10:06:15 AMreport abuse
  • Outlier
    4 of the 5 points listed above say I should be voting Democrat...but I don't. Of course, I don't count on the reporting of the mainstream media to tell me what's going on. I watch politicians on C-SPAN and actually read proposed bills on thomas.gov and make up my own mind. I know very few people who do that and none of them vote Democrat.
    By That Woman in Kansas @ 04/08/09 10:03:20 AMreport abuse
  • WANT SOME CHEERY NEWS?
    I would like to tell a little story if I may. My in-laws (mother, father, grandmother, and late grandfather) are all democrats. During the 2004 election my then, 10 year old daughter, was all excited to here on the news that John Kerry was leading in the polls. Of course the grand parents had influenced her to be a Kerry supporter. I asked here what John Kerry stood for, of course she rattled off what her grand parents said. Then, I not only explained, but showed her what Kerry stood for, Right there she changed her mind and became a Bush supporter.
    Now she is 15 years old freshman in high school. She is a member of the young Republicans Club and is very aware of her political surroundings. She knows the three branches of government and who our district Congressman and Senators are. She cares about the future of our nation. She also is a huge (that is an understatement) RONALD REAGAN fan.
    I, the guardian and parent of this child, despite her being educated in a GOVERNMENT school ensures that she is “TOTALLY” informed about issues. I’m involved in her everyday life; I ask questions about what she has learned in school. I tell her not to take the word of those that are elected into office or the ones that educate (teachers) her. If something sounds amiss, research it, find the truth.
    Parents can make a huge difference in a Childs life. I show my children that I care what they are taught; who their friends are, where they go, and that their choices can make a huge difference in their lives. I’m not an over bearing parent, I allow them to make mistakes so they can learn from them and make choices for themselves, but most of all I try to teach them “PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY” . Personal responsibility, in my humble opinion, makes a true “CONSERVITIVE”, someone that recognizes that they are responsible for their own life.
    Personal responsibility is a “COVER ALL” clause. It allows you to make wise decisions, it allows you to see through people who are trying to take advantage of you, it tells you that you need to work to earn a living, and it allows you to think for yourself so you can make up your own mind.

    The CHEERY NEWS is this; if all parents took the time to teach their children personal responsibility our nation will be strong and prosperous.
    By Bill @ 04/08/09 10:03:02 AMreport abuse
  • Democrat, Republican ...
    What's the difference?

    None. Both are politicians. All politicians are in it for the personal power, not for the benefit of the electorate. Democrap, Repoopycan, same difference.
    By Jubilation T Cornpone @ 04/08/09 10:01:36 AMreport abuse
  • This is the problem
    These are the so-called conservatives that need to be kicked out ot the curb. I've seen this idiot many times on the Bill Mahar show. He is now the darling of the left, just like any other RINO or phony conservative. This was the moron behind "compassionate conservatism".

    So, according to Frum and his ilk, your core values no longer matter. The game plan is: (1) Do a survey of the demographics, (2) take a poll of what the average braindead voter wants, and (3) devise your new values around that.

    Incredible! Using Frum's logic then, if the demographics change and most of the people want to have sex with animals, well, by golly, we need to change our platform.

    What we need is a clear message on our principles of limited gov't, and a messenger who can speak. We welcome anyone to our side. We've changed our message, our core values over the past decade, how did that work out for us?? You can't out-liberal a liberal.
    By Club-a-Liberal @ 04/08/09 09:57:02 AMreport abuse
  • What did people reject about Republicans?
    "Someone needs to step forward with the eloquence and charisma needed to convince our young people that true fulfillment will come from personal achievement realized through interaction with others in a free society, not from government dependence and eventual enslavement."

    Here's a hint: Lots of young people like the idea of self-sufficiency and free markets. They just don't like reckless wars, policing the world, church-state intermingling, anti-gay rhetoric and policies, and the morality police.

    Drop those, and you'll see a Republican resurgence.
    By Rob Evans @ 04/08/09 09:56:51 AMreport abuse
  • david frum's book
    Neal,

    We may not be able to resurrect Reagan in the flesh, but the way in which his brand of conservatism appealed to a big tent is still legitimate and can be utilized for the ages. We can't go back and exactly relive those days, but we can draw from those lessons that made Reagan conservatism so popular among so many. What we don't need is Democrat lite. We don't need their brand of socialism but just less of it. We need to figure out how to appeal to those hardworking minorities and legal immigrants who want to be here for the long term. Ultimately, conservatism will serve them as long as they're willing to work hard. They don't want all of their money to be thrown away just like we don't want it to be thrown away in giveaways to lazy ass types. We have to stop subdividing conservatives into 3 or 4 distinct groups. We have to stop talking about people like McCain as if he were a real conservative. He wasn't. Anyone who advocated his politics needs to be drawn and quartered because McCain's style and his ideas were what got us skewered back in November. Frum advocates this from what I've understood. We need to turn back to our roots. If that means going back to social conservatism, then so be it. I do not know a soul who can honestly say we're better morally now than we were back 30 years ago. Get back to our roots. Doing this will draw out the real conservatives. As to who might be the leader---I have some ideas but nothing concrete. The new leader of our movement will not surface until near the 2010 elections.
    By richtfan @ 04/08/09 09:54:14 AMreport abuse
  • Losing Chance?
    Look we know that soon the Democratic Party will be passing a new amnesty law to allow the 20+ million illegal aliens to fast track into American citizenship which will secure many more districts and states under their control. Also as the Republican base ages, do they tend to vote for their retirement benefits which are championed by the Democrats?
    By Jake @ 04/08/09 09:51:04 AMreport abuse
  • Neal, are you an idiot?
    I gotta say, I love the idea of fair tax and sometimes you actually make sense, but you are rapidly becoming a barbarian idiot from the dark ages. Next, you'll be wearing an inquisitor robe and burning women who dare to think. You're almost a caricature of a man from a Sheri Tepper novel!

    You wrote, "Married women vote Republican. Unmarried? You'll vote Democrat. I would venture that this is because unmarried women look to the government for the security that should be provided by a husband. The number of women in this country who are unmarried in their late 30s has doubled since Reagan was elected."

    Um...hello! Stereotype much? How about this. I'm a woman, divorced, multiple advanced degrees, executive who also happens to grow most of her own food, hire go-get-'um teens to help with yard work to inspire work ethic, mentor, provides jobs and has never, ever, relied on the government for anything, never defaulted or been late on a bill, and is an atheist to boot.

    Like many others, I'm not going to tolerate an idiot trying to control our lives while sapping our lifeblood and livlihood by their biological possession of a pair of testicles!

    I am not alone!

    This is not the mythical '50s where women stand idly by while men make their decisions and control their lives. Those "surrendered" spouses who vote republican because their husbands require it are just as bad as welfare losers who vote democrat on the basis of handouts.

    Get over your absolute hatred of and feelings of superiority over women. You're not better than us. Never were. Never will be.

    Personally, it is crap like what you wrote that make good and strong women like me actually consider the literary supposition of reducing males to 10% of the population and breeding for docility on occassion.
    By ChristyACB @ 04/08/09 09:50:45 AMreport abuse
  • Figure out what Ron Paul did
    He managed to get a lot of support from the young, much of it viral in nature. Instead of deriding him, Republicans should be studying the heck out of what he did in his last campaign to figure out what political stances translated into support. He may not have gotten that much in the way of votes at the ballot box, but he pretty much had zilch support from the mainstream Republican establishment. He won't run again in 2012 as he'll be 77 and we need someone who is a bit more polished and rants less.

    I'm not saying we should astroturf here as that will backfire and translate into no votes. Learn what truly caused young people who had otherwise never voted to get out and support a candidate. I think you'll find that a message of liberty and sometimes having to do the unpopular thing (unpopular in the sense that most people think they won't benefit from it) is one that resonates with the youth. More people under 30 are disenchanted with the welfare state than you can imagine.
    By Jay S. @ 04/08/09 09:47:30 AMreport abuse
  • Um, statists?
    "Here are some of the reasons why the Statists have the advantage for the time being"

    Um, Neal, and exactly how are Republicans NOT statists?
    By John @ 04/08/09 09:37:05 AMreport abuse
  • Candidate
    We probably won't find a really good candidate in time for 2012, all we can do it kick out the Obama supporters starting in 2010.
    By Joyce M/Blythe @ 04/08/09 09:31:05 AMreport abuse
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement