Rid the GOP of RINOs: Starting with McCain

Sillie Lizzie's Rock ^ | 2009-12-16

[Ranger Drew]

As I've been reading Sarah Palin's book it was amazing how much the McCain campaign held her back. She wanted to blast Obama and was muzzled. ...WHY?

Because they were intentionally throwing the race to the democrats.

[ricks_place]

Ideological purity is a prescription for permanent minority. Republicans should accept an intersection of core political beliefs and persuade RINO votes on important legislation. On the other hand, Republicans will never worry about forcing RINO legislative support if they are never a majority in congress. There is a timeliness that says Republican majority now before the United States is permanently altered.

Liberals have captured Democrat Leadership. Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid effectively force DINOs to vote party, Pelosi more effectively than Reid.

[gitmogrunt]

We, as conservatives, have to be willing to write a check to the conservative candidtate who will oppose McCain. In my case it will be an out-of district donation.

I have already made out-of-district donations to Lt. Col West in Florida, Doug Hoffman in NY, and plan to contibute to GunnySgt Popaditch's congressional campaign in San Diego.

[fireman15]

Obama and friends are looting trillions of dollars from the public treasury. They have already bankrupted the federal government yet Obama and friends continue their looting, ensuring that future generations will live in poverty. We are witnessing corruption on a scale never previously imagined. People are starting to wake up. Somehow we need to make sure that the beneficiaries of the demands for accountability are not McCain and other RINO’s who are really just part of the Socialist conspiracy.

[AuntB]

BTT

Rinos got to go!

[ThePatriotsFlag]

I didn’t vote FOR McCain, I voted AGAINST Obama ... in fact I vot0ed AGAINST almost everybody. I even voted for a Democrat this year ... yep, somebody (who’s name I cannot remember) who was running against Lindsey Graham. Such a shame to walk into a voting booth to vote AGAINST something. (and you are right, there’s not a nickel’s worth of difference between McC and zero).

[rabscuttle385]

Ideological purity is a prescription for permanent minority. Republicans should accept an intersection of core political beliefs and persuade RINO votes on important legislation.

First you argue against ideological purity, and then you argue for it. Do you have any clue what you're saying, or are you just content to repeat the Cornyn-Steele NRSC/RNC/RINO talking points?

Let me make this very clear:

Political parties are a means to an end, and the Republican Party is NO exception.

Those "ends" follow directly from the party's "fundamental beliefs", i.e., the ones that "must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell the party's numbers." The formation and maintenance of a political party demands a set of core beliefs and strict adherence (what you call "ideological purity") to those beliefs, as they are what binds the party together.

More precisely, political parties must find unity in a common purpose, otherwise they become naught but mere agglomerations of factions that will eventually be torn asunder when one faction tries to use another faction as nothing more than a means to its own ends.

The upcoming elections must not be simply about regaining a Republican majority, as the Republicans already held majorities from 2000 to 2006 and it's fairly evident that their majorities accomplished nothing.

There is a timeliness that says Republican majority now before the United States is permanently altered.

The United States has already been permanently altered...by Republicans and Democrats alike.

Liberals have captured Democrat Leadership. Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid effectively force DINOs to vote party, Pelosi more effectively than Reid.

The Democrats have a common purpose.

What do the Republicans have, other than being anti-Obama and "not the Democrats"?

[ricks_place]

First you argue against ideological purity, and then you argue for it. No. You are fabricating.

Do you have any clue... Ad hominem, if you can't attack the position attack the person. Nice.

Let me make this clear ... demands a set of core beliefs and strict adherence.... Some political parties have successfully enforced strict adherence to the party such as USSR Communist Party, Chinese Communist Party, Nazi Party, and their kin.

More precisely, political parties must find unity in a common purpose... Agreed, but not to the point of strict adherence to the party line.

The upcoming elections must not be simply about regaining a Republican majority...The United States has already been permanently altered...by Republicans and Democrats alike. Agreed, but another round of Democrat control may be the coup d'gras

The Democrats have a common purpose. Disagree. Democrats are a big tent party of different interests. The Party Enforcers make the congressmen follow the party line, mostly.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Some political parties have successfully enforced strict adherence to the party such as USSR Communist Party, Chinese Communist Party, Nazi Party, and their kin.”

Well now Rabs, they finally got ya. You are....

A) A member of the politboro

B) A Chi-Com

C) A Nazi

D) A&B

E) All of the above

[ricks_place]

“Some political parties have successfully enforced strict adherence to the party such as USSR Communist Party, Chinese Communist Party, Nazi Party, and their kin.”

Well now Rabs, they finally got ya. You are....

• A) A member of the politboro
• B) A Chi-Com
• C) A Nazi
• D) A&B
• E) All of the above

Nothing of the sort implied at Rabs. I'm certain he is an upstanding American looking to move the country in a positive direction. Rather the implication is directed toward the types of political parties with strict adherence to a set of core beliefs.

[rabscuttle385]

with strict adherence to a set of core beliefs.

Without strict adherence to a set of core beliefs, you have nothing but a gaggle with no common purpose.

[TigersEye]

McCain is a Soros sock puppet.

Oh, c'mon, rabs. Where did you get that idea? /s

John McCain funded by Soros since 2001

John McCain Gets Soros Cash

McCain/Soros by Rabbi Areyh Spero

McCain-Soros Toppled GOP Candidates Nov. 21, 2006

Soros' "Reform" (an article about Soros‘ instrumental hand in McCain/Feingold)

John McCain: George Soros' Useful Idiot?

Through The Weeds; John McCain, George Soros and the Reform Institute

McCain’s Reform Institute donor list:

Reform Institute greatfully acknowleges Sen. McCain as past Chairman:

[ricks_place]

Without strict adherence to a set of core beliefs, you have nothing but a gaggle with no common purpose.

Disagree with your "strict adherence" policy. However, a substantial intersection of core beliefs is necessary to have a common purpose. Rational people may disagree on some beliefs and policy yet provide mutual support on the intersection.

[DoughtyOne]

Once again, amen!

[GretchenB]

Great stuff - never could figure out what this guy stood for, but just didn’t like him.
Thanks!