Posted on 11/24/2009 11:45:54 AM PST by ikeonic
Predictably, Charles Johnson is up in arms over the GOP's proposed "purity test". Chamberlain-esque RINO candy ass Allahpundit has a more, balanced sane opinion.
My two cents: the purity test is wrong because if Reagan was their inspiration (someone who agrees with me 80% of the time is my friend, not an enemy), then this litmus test from Reagan should have been their guide:
“We should emphasize the things that unite us and make these the only ‘litmus test’ of what constitutes a Republican: our belief in restraining government spending, pro-growth policies, tax reduction, sound national defense, and maximum individual liberty...
...As to the other issues that draw on the deep springs of morality and emotion, let us decide that we can disagree among ourselves as Republicans and tolerate the disagreement.”So, here's your purity test:
This quote from the Gipper bears repeating:
“As to the other issues that draw on the deep springs of morality and emotion, let us decide that we can disagree among ourselves as Republicans and tolerate the disagreement.”In other words, social issues (are you listening, social conservatives?) like gay marriage and abortion are open to debate and best resolved at the local and state level and not the federal level.
But what do I know, I'm just another Chamberlain-esque RINO candy ass who has heroes like Eisenhower, Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.
restraining government policy IS RINO-ish
it needs to be REDUCE, not STOP
“Reagan tolerated pro-choice RINOs in his midst. Who knew?”
Just goes to show that as great as that man was, NO man is perfect.
correction:
restraining government spending IS RINO-ish
it needs to be REDUCE, not STOP
Too often, Republicans get into office and they just keep status quo and call it retraining. Its not enough. They need to reduce government spending. Abolish departments etc
Not sure I agree with item #2 in your list.
What constitutes “pro growth” to you is likely different what constitutes it to Obama. To him, “stimulus” is “pro growth.
I vote laissez-faire.
The further they keep their hands off the economy, the better.
I care about social issues. I need to see the Republican party support socially conservative policies.
The Rats didn’t have a “purity” test and they got taken over by radical leftists.
Done properly, I think it is a good idea. Of course the Rats are quick to play their word games by branding it a “purity test”. But I think the American people are now clamoring for a party based on a solid “Statement of Principles” that are clearly communicated.
FWIW, many are found of quoting Reagan’s self proclaimed “11th commandment”..Thou shall NOT speal ill of any other Republican..
Nice of you to just dismiss the #1 concern of up to 1/3 or more of Republican voters, probably most of them in states that actually vote Republican
And, for your scenario to be anything but a fantasy, you'll have to get the US Congress and the SCOTUS to agree to just leave those social concerns to the states.
Coming up with formulas to pander to moderates and slap social conservatives in the faced is a prescription for continued GOP losses.
"I don‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party”—when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents."
"A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers."
Yes, but not for its own sake. The point is limited government. We focus on restraining spending, and we sell tax cuts, but don't often explain why.
Limited government. To remain free you have to limit the power and scope of government.
” Nice of you to just dismiss the #1 concern of up to 1/3 or more of Republican voters, probably most of them in states that actually vote Republican”
1/3 of a minority, in a minority of states, are not in a position to command.
then gop are at fault for the debt and are whimps and not governing on principles and dont deserve office
Lol, that's true, and it's not the social conservatives who are trying to dictate the entire Republican platform for all other Republicans.
You think there's some solid majority of Republicans who want to drop all mention of abortion and other issues important to social conservatives?
government is like a parasite on a host, the bigger it is, the harder the host needs to work. The smaller the government the better the private sector will be
Yet the <10% pro-aborts in the minority party seem to think they are. Funny how that works.
NO! We must have a socially conservative nanny state that keeps the queers at bay, makes sure that God and Christmas are revered properly and throws women in the stockade if they go to an abortion quack. Condoms and birth control should be illegal and anyone fornicating outside of marriage should get the death penalty. The government that enforces the moral views of 51% of the people is a good, just and fair government. All those opposed are going to hell!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.