I disagree. Erick, you´re being had.

Not outraged, huh?

Ok. I wont be outraged when you finally lose your freedom.

Nope. Not one bit. In fact I will be silent. Because that´s the way you wanted it. You and your ilk worked SO HARD to silence me...It WORKED!

So when the REAL tyrants show up for their piece of flesh from you, I won´t say a word. Not of outrage, not of protest. Because you wanted it.

dance, little ballerina.

He has shown signs of this type of vitriol against Repubs. for a long time. No more RedState for me, either. Erik has turned into another jerk who needs publicity. With friends like him, you don´t need enemies!!!

Grow up.

Think a moment before you get all offended! Stop and think about it. The Republicans actually fight for nothing. They surrender and run at the slightest provocation. Instead of whining and crying, why aren´t conservatives (so-called) in Congress on the attack?

No too long ago the Republicans had BOTH houses of Congress and the White House, and they did nothing to build prosperity and freedom.

The man is telling the truth. Our so-called conservative leaders are horrible.

I have no problem with what he wrote. I agree with 90%. We aren´t putting forward ideas.

We need to focus on convincing voters that our policies will allow people to make the most of their lives and not be dependent on the rising and falling fortunes of Washington, D.C.

How can you disagree with that.

Erick the Red...sold his soul long ago.

Removed Red State from my favorites well over a year ago.

Many comments are mute testament to the adage; "Those the Gods would destroy, they first drive mad." Indeed. Erickson is a conservative, not
a ´republican´. Embarassing that many still don´t know the difference.

I didn´t read the article, but from the opening paragraph, I disagree with the part about it not being malicious and treasonous. If his skin was white, he would have been exposed by now, but instead he is protected by his groupies formerly known as the msm - and aided by chumps like this.

I do agree the Republicans should take plenty of the blame because they all want to play the game instead of really doing the hard work they were sent to do.

Like many such things, it´s what Erickson doesn´t say.

Reagan was our model of a "happy warrior", but he also expressed his share of outrage. We need to present our ideas for change, but we must also express outrage over the circumstances that demand it. We must remind the electorate that it is broke, and it is time to fix it.

What #4 and #9 said. That didn´t take long, did it? Most of those agreeing with Erickson are no more "republican" than HE is and wait patiently for someone on "our side" to begin the attack and they jump on the old band wagon. No more "red state".

Kevin DuJan at Hillbuzz pegged Eric over a year ago. Have agreed with him and other L-dotters. Eric has been in the dark side for quite some time but he thought he fooled Conservatives.

The link is below to the entire article. Much of what he says is true, but to begin with the assertion that “I do not think the President means to do this maliciously. I do not think he is treasonous" damages his credibility. How can you not be outraged at what 0bama is doing to this country?? Granted, we should be angry at the Republicans, but there is something inherently wrong with someone who isn´t outraged at 0bama and what he is doing to destroy us.

http://www.redstate.com/2013/01/20/the-loyal-opposition/

Just another stupid RINO.

So I take it this guy Erick isn´t one of the two good ol´ boys who had the recurring YouTube videos in the past, "Red State Update?"

I saw through him a long time ago.

Until the likes of Boehner and McConnell are booted out of leadership, the small number of conservatives cannot do much. I too am not surprised at Erikson.

Outrage towards the Republicans? Yes, and well deserved.

Obama is not acting maliciously, or is not being treasonous? HA! Sir, you are a naive fool.

This guy is a joke. He wants his piece of the pie that´s not his.

I grow weary at the common defense of Democrats being that they just want whats best for people. This is a load of malarkey. If Democrats wanted the best for everyone, not only would they not be Democrats, but they would work in the private sector. The logic goes like this: We Conservatives are not allowed to complain about Obama care because Democrats just want everyone insured. Who cares if it destroys the country, right?

If not malicious or treasonous what is it?

So says CNN pet conservative. What a fool.

In one sense, Erickson is right. GOP candidates have to start offering conservatism as a positive alternative, and one that can appeal to people who aren´t already dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. Can´t argue with that.

Problem is, right now the GOP is basically an opposition party, and the focus of GOP members in the house needs to be on stopping Obama´s agenda from going through. The only way to do that is to go negative. That´s just the way it is.

Erick (with too many letters), if you think that Obama is not being malicious or a traitor, then you are dense and stupid. By the way, why doesn´t your family decide on either a "c" or a "k"??

“I do not think the President means to do this maliciously." Oh, yes he does. He does everything maliciously, with malice aforethought!!

"I do not think he is treasonous." Oh, yes he is - treasonous and traitorous. In another era he would have been impeached.

"I do not hate him." Oh, but I do, viscerally. His policies are not only destructive but HE is a clear and present danger himself.

"I am not outraged by it.” Oh, but Erik, you should be outraged like many of us on L.com are. What´s happened to you?