<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Steve Schmidt: Republicans Have To Fundamentally Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:59:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: BBQ</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424148</link>
		<dc:creator>BBQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 00:43:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424148</guid>
		<description>Rex,
I understand not liking social conservatives or at the very least the angry Religious Right but if after siting out elections why would you vote for someone that is expanding on something you think is unconstitutional and immoral?

&quot;The Illinois senator praised Bush&#039;s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives but said that it &quot;never fulfilled its promise&quot; because the administration &quot;consistently underfunded&quot; social service programs for the poor. Obama said he&#039;d replace the Bush program with a Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. &quot;The new name will reflect a new commitment,&quot; he said.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rex,<br />
I understand not liking social conservatives or at the very least the angry Religious Right but if after siting out elections why would you vote for someone that is expanding on something you think is unconstitutional and immoral?</p>
<p>&#8220;The Illinois senator praised Bush&#8217;s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives but said that it &#8220;never fulfilled its promise&#8221; because the administration &#8220;consistently underfunded&#8221; social service programs for the poor. Obama said he&#8217;d replace the Bush program with a Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. &#8220;The new name will reflect a new commitment,&#8221; he said.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshua</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424136</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 23:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424136</guid>
		<description>As far as I could tell, on the cultural angle the GOP evidently figured that given the choice between the religious right and the hard secular Left, moderate voters would err on the side of the right. But given how the course of the campaign shifted so dramatically so late in the game, it&#039;s hard to say whether this was a gross miscalculation on the GOP&#039;s part from the beginning, or whether it was, again, simply a case of unlucky timing. For the same reason, I also question whether the GOP can really draw any meaningful lessons from this particular campaign, which struck me as a once-in-a-blue-moon(-or-two) affair. What are the odds against such a huge, game-changing crisis emerging in the middle of the general campaign?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as I could tell, on the cultural angle the GOP evidently figured that given the choice between the religious right and the hard secular Left, moderate voters would err on the side of the right. But given how the course of the campaign shifted so dramatically so late in the game, it&#8217;s hard to say whether this was a gross miscalculation on the GOP&#8217;s part from the beginning, or whether it was, again, simply a case of unlucky timing. For the same reason, I also question whether the GOP can really draw any meaningful lessons from this particular campaign, which struck me as a once-in-a-blue-moon(-or-two) affair. What are the odds against such a huge, game-changing crisis emerging in the middle of the general campaign?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joe alley</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424134</link>
		<dc:creator>joe alley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 23:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424134</guid>
		<description>WE should rename the party something  that will reflect the fact we are conservatives.  Perhaps we should call ourselves The Conservative Party and then be true to the name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WE should rename the party something  that will reflect the fact we are conservatives.  Perhaps we should call ourselves The Conservative Party and then be true to the name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rex</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424112</link>
		<dc:creator>Rex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:57:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424112</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been a Republican all my life. I&#039;m 64 now. I&#039;m a Christian. I&#039;m also a realist, educated, and pro-science. I&#039;m proud to say that I have never voted for a Democrat in my life, but I sat out Bush41, second term, and Bush43, both times, but I&#039;ve never, ever voted for a Democrat. That is, until I voted for Obama in 2008. It broke my heart, but it had to be done.

The religious right is the problem and Sarah Palin is the devil incarnate in that representation. Bush43&#039;s &quot;faith based initiatives&quot; were bad enough, unconstitutional on their face and immoral beyond hope of reason. The GOP, my party, actively solicited the support of Hagee, Dobson, Robertson, and the like. All of the them self righteous, sanctimonious, superstitious, delusional, intolerant, hate mongers out to change these United States, my country, into a theocracy based on their brand of religion. Intolerable. Some of those religious zealots appear to have conditioned their support on having an uneducated, mean spirited, religious zealot on the ticket: Palin. It&#039;s just wrong. Wrong in so many ways.

Let me tell you this. If the GOP, my party, stick to the the religious right&#039;s agenda, I&#039;ll vote Democrat again. Maybe next time I won&#039;t feel so bad about it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been a Republican all my life. I&#8217;m 64 now. I&#8217;m a Christian. I&#8217;m also a realist, educated, and pro-science. I&#8217;m proud to say that I have never voted for a Democrat in my life, but I sat out Bush41, second term, and Bush43, both times, but I&#8217;ve never, ever voted for a Democrat. That is, until I voted for Obama in 2008. It broke my heart, but it had to be done.</p>
<p>The religious right is the problem and Sarah Palin is the devil incarnate in that representation. Bush43&#8217;s &#8220;faith based initiatives&#8221; were bad enough, unconstitutional on their face and immoral beyond hope of reason. The GOP, my party, actively solicited the support of Hagee, Dobson, Robertson, and the like. All of the them self righteous, sanctimonious, superstitious, delusional, intolerant, hate mongers out to change these United States, my country, into a theocracy based on their brand of religion. Intolerable. Some of those religious zealots appear to have conditioned their support on having an uneducated, mean spirited, religious zealot on the ticket: Palin. It&#8217;s just wrong. Wrong in so many ways.</p>
<p>Let me tell you this. If the GOP, my party, stick to the the religious right&#8217;s agenda, I&#8217;ll vote Democrat again. Maybe next time I won&#8217;t feel so bad about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karl</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424103</link>
		<dc:creator>Karl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 13:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424103</guid>
		<description>Although the fundamental make-up of the electorate does not prevent Republican victories, it is moving in that direction.  Latinos are voting for Democrats and they are an increasing part of the population.  There has to be some change in message or elections will become increasing hard to win.  At a minimum there has to be a real â€œcompassionate conservativeâ€ piece to the Republicans or they will not be able to sway enough middle class white voter to be effective at the national level.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Although the fundamental make-up of the electorate does not prevent Republican victories, it is moving in that direction.  Latinos are voting for Democrats and they are an increasing part of the population.  There has to be some change in message or elections will become increasing hard to win.  At a minimum there has to be a real â€œcompassionate conservativeâ€ piece to the Republicans or they will not be able to sway enough middle class white voter to be effective at the national level.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy the Dhimmi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424060</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy the Dhimmi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 03:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424060</guid>
		<description>Prop 8 passed, as did all other &quot;defense of marraige&quot; ballot questions.  There are millions of social conservatives who want to be represented.  

MW is right.  Blaming &quot;deregulation&quot; is burning the Reichstag.  It gives people who advocated the failed social engineering policies of our government which caused this mess an excuse to pass the blame, and they can call for more government intrusion to &quot;fix&quot; it.  Justin is a great example of this.  There was no regulation that was preventing the mortgage crisis, which was then removed by the Bush administration.  Name it if you think otherwise.

Obama won because he was in the right place at the right time.  Bush is not liked because of the Iraq war, the fact that he is presiding over a bad economy, and that he is a boob of a personality.  Obama &quot;represnts &quot;change.&quot;  Thats it.  That&#039;s why he will govern from the center, because this is a center right country and he will never win re-election if he does all of the things he said he would do during the campaign.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Prop 8 passed, as did all other &#8220;defense of marraige&#8221; ballot questions.  There are millions of social conservatives who want to be represented.  </p>
<p>MW is right.  Blaming &#8220;deregulation&#8221; is burning the Reichstag.  It gives people who advocated the failed social engineering policies of our government which caused this mess an excuse to pass the blame, and they can call for more government intrusion to &#8220;fix&#8221; it.  Justin is a great example of this.  There was no regulation that was preventing the mortgage crisis, which was then removed by the Bush administration.  Name it if you think otherwise.</p>
<p>Obama won because he was in the right place at the right time.  Bush is not liked because of the Iraq war, the fact that he is presiding over a bad economy, and that he is a boob of a personality.  Obama &#8220;represnts &#8220;change.&#8221;  Thats it.  That&#8217;s why he will govern from the center, because this is a center right country and he will never win re-election if he does all of the things he said he would do during the campaign.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mw</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/steve-schmidt-republicans-have-to-fundamentally-change/comment-page-1/#comment-424056</link>
		<dc:creator>mw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 02:42:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=10784#comment-424056</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; &lt;i&gt;&quot;Bush and company still believe in the free market, but the days of deregulation as the greatest good are all but over and the moderate majority that swings elections no longer believe that Democrats are the socialistic boogeymen that Republicans try to frame them as.&quot;&lt;/i&gt; - JG&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Two problems here. 

First, I&#039;ve corrected you on this before, but I see I will have to keep doing it every time you bring it up. I don&#039;t know what they &lt;i&gt;&quot;believe&quot;&lt;/i&gt;, but what &quot;Bush and company&quot; &lt;i&gt;&lt;b&gt;did&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/i&gt; has little or nothing to do with free markets. Corporate welfare, cozy big business k-street bribery/contracts and favoritism, protectionism, and cronyism  - which are the hallmarks of the Bush administration, have nothing to do with free markets. Nothing. Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, by definiton, have nothing in common with a free market.  

In fact, I&#039;ll suggest a new slogan:

&lt;b&gt;&lt;large&gt;&quot;Bush lied. Free Markets Died.&quot;&lt;/large&gt;&lt;/b&gt;

Second, that is an awful big sweeping conclusion about moderates based on exactly one data point, when it looks far more likely that they were not so much voting for Obama, as they were voting to reject Bush Republicanism, and against the McCain/Paiin ticket.  I suggest you at least wait to &lt;b&gt;look&lt;/b&gt; at another election &lt;b&gt;before you leap&lt;/b&gt; to that conclusion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> <i>&#8220;Bush and company still believe in the free market, but the days of deregulation as the greatest good are all but over and the moderate majority that swings elections no longer believe that Democrats are the socialistic boogeymen that Republicans try to frame them as.&#8221;</i> &#8211; JG</p></blockquote>
<p>Two problems here. </p>
<p>First, I&#8217;ve corrected you on this before, but I see I will have to keep doing it every time you bring it up. I don&#8217;t know what they <i>&#8220;believe&#8221;</i>, but what &#8220;Bush and company&#8221; <i><b>did</b></i> has little or nothing to do with free markets. Corporate welfare, cozy big business k-street bribery/contracts and favoritism, protectionism, and cronyism  &#8211; which are the hallmarks of the Bush administration, have nothing to do with free markets. Nothing. Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, by definiton, have nothing in common with a free market.  </p>
<p>In fact, I&#8217;ll suggest a new slogan:</p>
<p><b><large>&#8220;Bush lied. Free Markets Died.&#8221;</large></b></p>
<p>Second, that is an awful big sweeping conclusion about moderates based on exactly one data point, when it looks far more likely that they were not so much voting for Obama, as they were voting to reject Bush Republicanism, and against the McCain/Paiin ticket.  I suggest you at least wait to <b>look</b> at another election <b>before you leap</b> to that conclusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
