This is why the GOP is in trouble. Schlafly has been out of touch for decades. And no, social issues are not the cause of fiscal issues...try economics 101. Had it not been for fire-breathers like Schlafly, those "losers" just might have won. But she turns off a lot of folks...including solid Republican voters.

No the primary voters did not the establishment. The establishment certainly didn´t give us foot n mouth Todd Akin, Odonnell & the others.

Remind me again who was the candidate of our esteemed purists?

#2,

how much did Romney outspend his primary opponents?

and are the republicans not just as guilty as the dimms for the $17 trillion in debt?

wait, Ryan did propose a budget last year that would have balanced the budget in 26 years,


i see you are going down with the ship.

the rest of us will do something different as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity.

oh, and one more thing, being for gay marriage is conservative, at least according to the RNC

Amen #1 and #2. It is gopers like Ms. Schlafly who while she "paid her dues" for many, many years is undermining the GOP. Frankly, I am past tired of all the screeching about the "losers" in past elections by so-called "conservative pundits". If the brain-trusts among all these "conservatives" had just been supportive, rather than bleating constantly about how disappointing the candidate of more than 55 MILLION voters was, Mitt Romney would BE the President. Rand Paul is right when he says the GOP has grown stale and Ms. Schlafly proves his point.. Good grief!

McCain, Dole - losers. Romney was a great candidate - who unfortunately - ran for office during the "Age of Voting Morons".

Scott Brown - same story. Lost to a woman who claimed to be Cherokee, just to game the system for 20yrs. And when caught in the lie, lied some more. She impressed the Teddy Kennedy Morons enough to win.

And the next Bush is already in line to ascend the throne of Republican mediocrity. We must remember that the Republican Party leaders believe in nothing and stand for nothing except their own political careers.

Do NOT send money to the RNC. Send it directly to conservative/libertarian candidates who will fight for liberty.

I love this thread. Brings out all the Brand Repubs. At least five regulars are missing. Will check back later. The GOP loves to lose. They have perfected the excuses and blame game. Why give up something they do so well.

Looking at it from a scientific angle one might deduct that the voters like the spending. Face it; it is human nature. The liberals have known it for decades. Conservatives must fight against human nature; liberals simply feed it. When Republicans join in the spending they win elections, I.e. George Bush.

Sorry, but this story only travels one direction...... until it hits the wall. It´s coming.

Dole- old, up against a young imbumbant with the press on his side and a growing economy. Mccain- old crothchity up against a young, dynamic candidate probably some voter fraud. Romney- Young, dynamic up against an imcumbant with a lousy track record but has the press, the government dependents and vote riggers on his side. That´s how I see it. Romney was no loser.

First of all we have a sick society aided and abetted by the msm.

They covered up the abuses of the Klintons while in Arkansas.

We know they covered up for the muslim brother in the white house.

Let us not forget that we are in an age of sophisticated voter fraud. This attempted theft of the presidency began in serious in Florida during the Bush v Gore election.

You´re right 11. It did start in 2000. Still don´t know why there´s no answer for Mitt not getting 1 single vote in 59 precinct in Philly...and all over the battleground states. Why Obama lost every state that required honest voting ( an I. D) and won everyone that didn´t require it.

Which old, out of touch political RINO hack´s turn is next?

I don´t know what a "Brand Repub" is, but I do know that Phyllis Schlafly doesn´t set my course.

Even when the Republican party has a winner like Romney they won´t support him. And that is why I won´t support the party anymore.

I agree with her about the "go along to get along" spineless big spending/big government rinos. We have to part company after that point.
I think it is a mistake to combine the social and the fiscal. It excludes too many people who might agree on the more important constitutional issues.
Even here I see it. Because I am a non-Christian who believes in leaving people alone to live their lives the way they want, it appears I am not allowed to be a conservative. Too bad. I am one anyway.

Mrs. Schlafly is a remarkably accomplished individual. You ignore her advice and scoff at your own peril.

Schlafly is right. The GOP is Dem Light. Give the voters a choice. Romney was a decent man but he fought his rivals for the nomination with brass knuckles but put on the velvet gloves against Obama. He didn´t even defend himself against the big lie that he was a greedy rich man who refuses to pay a little more which would have solved all the nations financial problems etc. Romney looked guilty as charged by not responding to this demagoguery. All Romney said was that he knew how to get the economy going again. We have tried Dem light enough lets try a real conservative.

The GOP Reich thinks that the American Makers are still making enough Money to buy off the Takers.
Not possible, with the thousands of Takers coming on line each minute......

As David Limbaugh said in his article today, ´´the hard truth is that the movement inside the Republican Party to abandon social conservatism is nothing short of a political death wish. Denying it will not alter the reality.´´

Poster #16 expresses well the viewpoint of the fiscal conservative/social liberal brand: "Even here I see it. Because I am a non-Christian who believes in leaving people alone to live their lives the way they want, it appears I am not allowed to be a conservative. Too bad. I am one anyway"

Here´s the problem. We are being asked to pay for letting people "live the lives they want" (eg gay marriage, permanent welfare dependence, etc). Not only that, social conservatives are already hounded out of business and education for their beliefs. So your right to "live the [lilberal/radical/anti-moral] life you choose restricts the rest of us from even voicing our opinions. Comment on the use of the Human Rights Campaign´s "Welcoming Schools" curriculum -which tax dollars support - and then tell us again why social conservatism is incompatible with fiscal conservatism.

Ramona (the Pest)

I heard her speech at CPAC & I agree with her. Dem lite is causing the repubs losses & the rinos won´t listen. Try running as 100% conservative & watch for wins.Cruz is an excellent example...no support from the big wigs yet managed to win big. ... just hope he stays that way...going to DC changes repubs into rinos...

Now this is what I´m talking about!

Phyllis Schlafly totally nailed it.

#10 and #11 El Correcto!

Phyllis Schlafy is just a stranger version of Karl Rove coming from a different direction.

Oh, SMOKIN´ baby! I hear ya, Phyllis.

What all of them had in common, including Bush, was a basic decency that would not allow them to engage in an undignified campaign of personal destruction in order to win the election. They all graduated from elite universities, were stoic in the face of personal adversity, and refused to demagogue the issues. In short, they were "gentlemen" of the old school. Maybe we don´t deserve such men, but without them we we not long survive.

You have to love Phyllis.

We already have one democrat party.

Schlafly is just trying to stop republicans from turning their party into another one.
.

The comments in #1 reflect why it is the GOP that is out of touch, not Ms. Schlafly.

Dittos #21.

Re #21, we are not being asked to pay for those choices. We are being forced to pay for those choices. I object to that, too. Being left alone to live ones life carries responsibility for those choices. Our "leadership" since the 60´s or earlier has negated much of that responsibility by raiding other peoples´ incomes. That was and is wrong.
As far as I know, nobody is trying to silence the religious right. Certainly not me. I do occasionally offer a rebuttal to that which I believe to be morally wrong, but never would I try to silence anyone. Its just not the LDotter way. Besides, I may be wrong and I am cognizant of that. It happened once back in 1982 or so. It could happen again.

I hope this is not considered a double post, its more to clarify what #3 brought up, we are all going down with the ship and the coming wipe out in 2014 will leave no doubt.

On total dollar Obama out raised and out spent collectively McCain and Romney. McCain was lousy but I supported him. I don´t buy into big money infused from Dems monkeying with our primary, they didn´t need to, they had the press. Their stated objective to "kill Romney" should´ve been an offense to both parties and with this I´m told our voters still stayed home, fraud or no fraud.

So it is suggested to throw out Cheney and Portman for a personal view although we disagree? It seems we can´t allow for any disagreement anymore? We are not splitting in a good way folks. I´m tired of being a pawn on an Alinsky chess board, & by design. I´m frustrated with our guys having no power and being ridiculed by both sides. I´m not disqualifying candidates either. Most of us are willing to try something new to rid Washington of corrupt insiders.

On the debt issue, we´ve all supported countless ´so called´ conservatives that became part of the Washington problem once elected. How does this get solved, with more cheap talk? Endless campaigns?

So just tell me who to vote for, ill show up.

Since Pres. Reagan left his stellar years of service as President, GOP party leaders & consulting pundits have been too busy trying to marginalize & ignore the expressed authentic will of the GOP voters, and indeed the American people, who stand upon Constitutional principles and rely upon the Bill of Rights for EACH individual American citizen.

Apparently the GOP party leaders have gone so far left now that these few beltway Boomtown insiders have become almost totally disconnected from those they are suppose to be representing. They don´t currently seem to, ´´represent,´´ as much as they, ´´circumvent,´´ their constituants´ views. This explains their out-of-sync candidates´ losses.

Without the votes of the historic base of this historically conservative party then the GOP Boomtown elites who think they know best might as well be lefty/lib/statist dems. ...It would be more honest, eh?