He actually seems to see my point:
Where is it written that conservatives have to have new popular ideas? If we can’t make our existing ideas popular, is it really so terrible that conservatism become unpopular? Or does conservatism have to become a de facto political party of its own, constantly churning out new ideas that will get swing voters to call themselves "conservatives" not by converting them to conservatism, but by converting conservatism into some rightwing progressive agenda? This seems like a brand of me-too conservatism. See? People who call themselves conservatives can really be progressives too! Indeed, ever since his national greatness days, I occasionally find in Brooks a desire to keep riding the label "conservative" while quietly switching horses to something very different.
I’ll respond more fully to this debate after lunch.
The Dish 