The long term fix will be to retake some of the commanding heights we’ve given up on during our period of ascendancy. Obviously, letting the left control the media is NOT working. Now that progressives have gotten smart enough to not admit what they’re up to (above my paygrade, et cetera) we must have some conservatives go into news departments.

It’s a bit frustrating to read the above since it strongly implies that I do not believe that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham represent some, but not all hard-core conservatives. To set the record straight: I have been of the opinion for years that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham represent some hard-core conservatives. This belief has been central to the thrust of some of my comments.

The writer now wants to change his original statement from …

… “the hard-core conservatives they[Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham] represent.” to some hard-core conservatives they[Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham] represent.”

… and I have absolutely no objection. I do think it’s kind of ironic that he refers to me as “sloppy” when it is he that has had to amend his original statement. All I can do is accurately quote posted words – which is what I did in this case. But no matter, I’ll happily keep amending his words as long as he wants to keep changing them. No problem at all – just let me know and it’s done.

I think my incorrect assumption that he is a Republican can be forgiven, considering that he wrote himself that he votes “Republican,” and especially since I quickly amended my statement to include the fact subsequently revealed by him that he is a “registered Democrat.” I did not see the relevance to the debate but I suppose it is all in the eye of the beholder and these details are worth getting right.

I still take issue with the “snarky” epithet the writer again introduces without explanation. I do hope this exchange doesn’t descend too far into ad hominem name-calling.

That may bother you or strike you as a terrible indictment. However, your opinion has nothing to do with it either. It is true: Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham represent some conservatives. No mystery, no scandal there.

Here I must repeat myself, so I apologize to the readers:

I have been of the opinion for years that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham represent some hard-core conservatives. This belief has been central to the thrust of some of my comments. I DO believe, of course, that it’s scandalous that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham have so much power over the conduct of the Republican Party.

I admit that this circumstance has bothered me and I believe also that it is not good for the GOP that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham have so much power among some social conservatives and over prominent Republicans. I have given my reasons for these beliefs in previous comments.

grackle — You declared me to be a Republican. You are mistaken. I am not a Republican.

But I have already indicated every way I know how that I now know that the writer is not a Republican but is instead a registered Democrat who votes Republican. I have admitted the mistake and admit it again now and will continue admitting it as long as the writer deems it necessary to bring it up. I can’t help wondering, though, is it really necessary to belabor the point? And I still cannot see the relevance to the debate

It may come as shocking news to you, but Americans do cross party lines.

But I am not at all shocked and do not know why the writer would think I was.

I’m done.

I still feel the writer owes an explanation to me about the “snarky” word.

If they don’t like what zero is doing, it’s kind of odd that they were for it until it started happening. Not to mention that, in their own ways, large or small, enabled earlier steps.
Given all that, what caused the change? What about zero is there that surprises them?

It may come as shocking news to you, but Americans do cross party lines.

I’m done.

There now, I think that clears up the misrepresentation that has the writer concerned.

grackle — More sloppy, snarky reading which is what I’ve come to expect from you.

It’s not my admission; I have nothing to do with it. It’s simply a fact that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham represent some, but not all hard-core conservatives.

That may bother you or strike you as a terrible indictment. However, your opinion has nothing to do with it either. It is true: Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham represent some conservatives. No mystery, no scandal there.

I have been a registered Democrat since 1970. If the Dems returned to a more classically liberal positions, I might vote that way again.

The writer believes that him claiming to be a “registered Democrat” is highly significant to the debate, even though he “votes Republican.” I don’t see the significance myself.

I will admit to not being the smartest fellow on the planet(yes, neo, I am a man), so “stupid” might be a fair assessment of my mental capabilities, but the “snarky” epithet the writer attaches to my last offering seems unfair and needs explaining by the writer. It’s not good to call someone “snarky’ with no explanation.

But getting back to the central problem: If the writer has not voted Democrat how is the fact that he is a “registered Democrat’” relevant? I’m just going to have to state the obvious: It doesn’t matter, dude. You haven’t voted Democrat. You have voted Republican. Voting Republican is the significant fact, not how you haven’t voted – even old “stupid” me can see that.

If the Democrats changed I might vote Democrat myself and if I won the lottery I might buy a Beverly Hills mansion but neither has happened yet so neither of those hypothetical events are very significant in the scheme of things.

I said, full-quote: “I still call myself a classic liberal, which these days means I vote Republican.”

I have been a registered Democrat since 1970. If the Dems returned to a more classically liberal positions, I might vote that way again.

You misrepresent me and I wouldn’t trust you on Republicans or conservatives either.

A registered Democrat? But earlier the writer emphatically declared that “I vote Republican.” I truly am puzzled and ask the writer to help me out on this: Why register as a Democrat if you “vote Republican.”? Is there some new way of voting that I haven’t heard about?

However, in deference to the writer’s wishes I will amend my comment to read:

Another person who votes Republican but remains “a registered Democrat” freely admits that Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham “represent” hard-core conservatives.

There now, I think that clears up the misrepresentation that has the writer concerned.

Speaking of “trust,” since the writer has introduced that concept into the debate, I’m just wondering how trustworthy someone is who registers as a Democrat but votes Republican. Just an idle thought that passed through my curious mind as I was preparing to post this comment.

I rest my case again.

Steele’s job is emphatically not to take sucker bait from the Obama administration and pick fights with prominent conservatives. He should have apologized to Limbaugh and he did. Good.

Me, I think it is Limbaugh who should apologize, especially to McCain, who was the Republican Party’s duly nominated Presidential candidate and against who Limbaugh waged a furious verbal vendetta.

I don’t think the Republican Party can consider itself a serious threat to Obama with Limbaugh leading the GOP around by the nose.

Look for Obama to take advantage of this ridiculous state of affairs in the next Presidential election. It’s what I would do if I were him. It’s just too tempting and too easy.

I hope he[Steele] keeps his head down and does his job from now on. The only way Steele should be making headlines is by raising record amounts of funds for the Republican Party.

Oh, I’m sure the thoroughly chastised Steele knows his place now. He needs to be a good fellow and never, never incur the wrath of El Rushbo.

grackle — I remain a registered Democrat. Elsewhere I have declared myself a “classic liberal.” I have also said I do not listen to Limbaugh, Coulter and Ingraham, aside from excerpts that come my way occasionally.

You misrepresent me and I wouldn’t trust you on Republicans or conservatives either.