Does the tail wag the dog?  Well it seems as if the White House is dictating the terms of the argument surrounding Republicans right now.  Even in the days of, and after CPAC, the White House formed the debate which carries on still involving the future of the republican party.  Firstly, The Rham Emmanuel comment about the “leader” if the party had driven a phatom wedge in the middle of the party.  I say ‘phantom’ because the argument of the leader of the party is frankly irrelivant.  This inturn caused Michael Steele to make comments (then appologies) to Limbaugh…again a completely irrelivant argument that even Rush acknowledges.

Secondly is the question of whether or not the Republican party should expand its base or entrench itself in the conservative ideology of the party of old (ie: Regan, Lincoln etc…).  Even in this argument, the democrats and white house frame the argument in terms of different leaders of the party.  This issue of entrenchment v.s expanding is completely missing the point, something which I want to and will make a post about either tonight or tomorrow, but it again is an example of the other party forming our own party’s debate.  The tail definitely seems to be wagging the dog in this case