A Way Out of the Wilderness

The comments here are not representative of the electorate.

However,I am sorry to find so few non -religious -fanatic Reps ...

There may be a shortage of ideas in GOP.

If Newsweek brings us an Axelrod article,it will be a big success.

sorry about the double post, I'm new here

Some of us in the South have questioned the motives of our Elected Officials when it comes to the issue of abortion. Some think they use it as an election gimmick with no intention of ever bringing it to the floor. They point to the period from 01' to 06' as an example when the Republicans held both houses of Congress, the Presidency and the majority on the Supreme Court. No cases were filed and no bills were bought. Seems like a fair arguement to me.

Some of us in the South have questioned the motives of our Elected Officials when it comes to the issue of abortion. Some think they use it as an election gimmick with no intention of ever bringing it to the floor. They point to the period from 01' to 06' as an example when the Republicans held both houses of Congress, the Presidency and the majority on the Supreme Court. No cases were filed and no bills were bought. Seems like a fair arguement to me.

If opposing abortion and gay rights are the only things the GOP has to offer us in the way of leadership than they are destined to fail again and again.
Karl Rove's permanent campaign cast a very dark shadow across America and any attempt at reviving bitter and divisive politics will only serve to remind the American people of why we voted them out.
???4 million people who attend church more than once a week??? represents around 2.36% of registered voters and a mere 1.1% of the population. So by all means hang your hat on the divisive tactics that motive those people and yet alienate the rest of us.
The GOP???s only chance of regaining power is to offer real solutions to the problems we face as a nation. If they do that even I will consider voting for them.
However if the GOP continues stepping on the constitution in the name of security, suppressing individual rights in the name of religion, and ripping off the poor to fatten the rich, well, I would vote for the devil himself before I would vote for a people like that.

I just love Karl Rove's suggestions and I hope the GOP follows them to the letter.
If opposing abortion and gay rights are the only things the GOP has to offer us in the way of leadership than they are destined to fail again and again.
Karl Rove's permanent campaign cast a very dark shadow across America and any attempt at reviving bitter and divisive politics will only serve to remind the American people of why we voted them out.
???4 million people who attend church more than once a week??? represents around 2.36% of registered voters and a mere 1.1% of the population. So by all means hang your hat on the divisive tactics that motives those people and yet alienate the rest of us.
The GOP???s only chance of regaining power is to offer real solutions to the problems we face as a nation. If they do that, even I will consider voting for them.
However if the GOP continues stepping on the constitution in the name of security, suppressing individual rights in the name of religion, and ripping off the poor to fatten the rich, well, I would vote for the devil himself before I would vote for a people like that.

The first thing the Republicans need to do is distance themselves from crooks like you, Karl. Secondly, they need to admit to all the lies and hypocrisy America's been subjected to since 2000. Third, and probably most important, they need to understand that America sees through their veil of bigotry and hatred, and has grown weary of people like you calling it "social conservatism".

It is clear why Karl Rove didn't make his name as a columnist. His writing is unbearably dull. As a liberal Democrat, my only hope in reading his columns is that it will inspire a renewed hatred for this current administration, which, these days elicits more pity than their detestable record should merit. But as a writer, Rove is just plain uninspiring. Go back to slurring adopted children from third world countries Karl. Stick with what you know.

Mr. Rove raises a very important point: that if Republicans want to win, they need to win back the young vote. I address how the GOP can do this at NextGenGOP: http://www.nextgengop.com/2008/11/17/winning-back-the-youth-vote-part-2/

Why do people constantly say we're a center-right party? The majority of the American population live in urban areas which tend to be more progressive than their rural compatriots. We're a centrist nation, shifting to the left.

Karl Rove makes some good points about his party and what they need to do to reagain their political footing. I wonder if any are listening to his comments about "mindless opposition"? Mindless opposition---that would be the Limbaugh/Hannity method of trashing everything the new President does whether it makes any sense or not. The base loves it but most Americans do not. Be for something and not against everything. Rove also realizes how important it is for the GOP to come up with an immigration policy that does not come off as "Bigots Gone Wild". There's a lot of their base that desn't care if they keep losing elections if it means retreating an inch from their rigid anti-immigration stand. In terms of his comments about social issues there are lessons for both Republicans and Democrats to learn. Yes, people do care about those issues but they won't go along with a GOP push to completely outlaw all abortions or deny gay people who choose to live together some rights and benefits. By the same token Democrats should not think they have a mandate to push for all abortion laws to be struck or think Americans will be happy if they try and completely redefine the idea of marriage. I would say to Rove and others who always repeat the mantra we are a "center-right country" that we are a "centrist" country that becomes center-right or center-left depending on the issue and the times.

A great article by Rove. In the article there was nothing about attacking, defaming, or lying about anyone or anything. He said to support the new president when he is right, and urge him to change when you feel he is wrong. Bravo! That is what brings Americans closer together. He also said to hold morals without seeming judgemental. I also, liked the point of letting as many candidates surface as possible. I consider myself not by my party affiliation but by voting for the best candidate. If the Republican party tries to force feed Palin to me I will be gladly voting for someone else. There are better candidates who appeal not to the extremes but to the middle. Thank you Rove and hopefully your party will listen!

Mr. Rove:
I embrace the final sentence in your 1st point. It???s important for the Republican Party, as a ???loyal??? opposition, to hold the new administration and its supporters ???accountable on the merits only.???
Apparently, however you don't see the irony in asking your party to "avoid mindless opposition" yet saying that you "... will be (for which I read ??? ???will & have been???) defined more by what [you] oppose than what [you] are for.??? Then you go on to be focused more on tactics than on principle, more focused on advocating with "clarity, passion and conviction," than ensuring the soundness and relevancy of the content of the message, let alone the principles behind it.
I submit that the Republican Party today seems, at least to an outside observer, focused less on principle and more on what they are against, to the point where all too often their reflexive response is opposition to anything proposed or represented by someone else.
I know what Republicans are against. The list is so well known we all can recite it in our sleep; Communism, Socialism, regulation, taxes, terrorism, welfare, the gay lifestyle, abortion, the labor movement, etc. All are plausible concerns, at least from a superficial standpoint, but it is instructive that when one enemy is perceived as "vanquished," Republicans seem to need to find another demonic opponent. This is a fear-based approach, which is primarily focused on defensiveness rather than on opportunities to move society to a point where those concerns become irrelevant because they???ve been left in the dust. It results in instinctive opposition, which then casts around for a rationale for such opposition, and perceives everything in sight through that filter of a need to justify such opposition.
Such defensive stances aren???t only sterile (except in the sense of creating obfuscation and general chaos), but counter-productive. What is needed are beacons of hope, ideas which will serve as energizing magnets to draw us forward into the unimaginable opportunities for all, which are ahead.
Let???s give President-Elect Obama a chance to be that kind of leader, and be as supportive as we can, until and unless we need to hold him and his supporters.
In support of that I would invite everyone, left, right, up or down, to engage in a respectful discussion which recognizes and respects the fundamental value of everyone, even those we oppose, with a view towards moving us as a nation, not just one segment of it, forward.
When what we do as an individual benefits the nation, and what we do as a nation benefits the individual, we all win. Whenever we believe there is a conflict between the two I would suggest that we aren???t seeing issues clearly. Senator McCain???s concession speech would be an outstanding example for all of us to follow.

In 1972 the electorate voted down the AAA candidate of Amnesty, Abortion and Acid by 20 points. Now 36 year later they have voted in the IRA candidate of Infanticide, Redistribution and Appeasement 6.5 points. My oh my how how our mainstream values have changed.

Long comments keep on ruining threads...

The subject is done...

I wish Newsweek brings us an article by Axelrod.

Roves points all need to be addressed. But I find it difficult to believe he grasps how Palin energized the base for McCain. I think what Carl really fears is if Palin gains popularity he may be put out with a few other "good old boys" come 2012 who for gave bad advice as some advisers to Palin were given to understand they needed to be part of the next election cycle by undermining Palin durring and after the election. Rove is neither a genuis or an idiot, but he suffers from that which he justifiably accuses others of durring the campaing such as George Will, Peggy Noonan and others in the Beltway crowd...appeasing to win, giving up the fight and losing. And in 2012 you'll see just how appeasing certain Republicans will be believing that's how to win...but lose again like Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota who are getting their talking points all lined up with speech's that will neither inspire or encourage the vast majority of Republicans.

If republicans would practice their small government mantra, instead of giving us the Patriot Act and trying to regulate marriage, they would have my vote.