Finally... some real substance!

I'll forgo the Reagan-bashing for now... fun as it can be to watch you freak out, there's more important things to discuss.

Ryan wrote:

"... you seem to think conservative/Tea Party demands, their litmus test, is so unrealistic it will leave them with no one to support, because no one could live up to it. My answer is this- they sure as hell found plenty of people to support for the midterms. Tea Party backed candidates won the nation over, and nobody promised to eliminate the Ed Dept. "

I do NOT think that, but I do worry that there will be enough of a field of candidates that more than one strong choice could emerge... and a divided vote could result. The possible scenarios are too numerous to voice, but just to bring one to the table would be Sarah Palin. She is the darling of the movement, and has become a voice for conservative people across this nation... but I sometimes think there are as many conservatives that hate her as there are liberals. I trust the American conservative voter to understand that a repeat of the mistakes that occurred in 1992 are bad for the country, and that they will avoid that now... but only in the general election.

THAT is the worry I have... the road leading to the general election. In 2008 we had a hell of a field, led by Ryan's favorite, Mitt Romney, with the aging and wishy-washy Senator from AZ a distant 3rd or 4th in the list... but look who ran! Who won the convention ballot?

The 2010 victory of the Tea Party candidates was real, valid and stunning... but it was NOT on a national level. This was a product of targeted local, state and regional campaigning that put conservative candidates in the Congress... and that is undeniably important (more so in 2012, too... the Senate is ripe to fall)... but it is a different process with a campaign for President.

First off, as Ryan has pointed out in the past... there IS NO TEA PARTY. There is no one body of conservatives, all carrying cards and tee shirts that label them as Tea Party members, nor will they seat a candidate in a debate or hold a convention. The entire movement is "grass-roots" and is comprised of lots of smaller parts scattered all across the land. The issue, in my eyes, is really a "Catch 22" problem: not enough time in the lime light, and a candidate isn't any better than any other; while too much time in the lime light and the public tires of the name/face/issue far before it is decided.

Still, a clear ROAD MAP... platform, direction, call it what you will... is VITAL for the effort. Paul Ryan recognizes this, but few others seem to want to get onboard. Where is the general consensus amongst conservative politicians and the GOP in general as to what the plan for 2012 is going to be? It can't simply be "less spending"... what the hell does THAT mean? What spending is going to be cut? How much LESS is ENOUGH?

Am I wrong for asking for details? Is it even possible to get them, at this stage in the game?