.
Posted on 12/03/2009 2:28:49 PM PST by Mozilla
In an interview with the Baltimore Sun today, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele publicly rejected the candidate “litmus test” proposed by a group of national conservatives. The concept behind the proposal is to force a certain “conservative ideological purity” on to candidates and elected officials in the Republican Party so that Republicans don’t end up supporting socialist-statist policies. The RNC will vote on the proposal next month when it holds its annual meeting.
While well intentioned, the litmus test proposal would do little to solve the two fundamental problems within the Republican Party: bad leadership and conservative acquiescence to bad leadership.
RINOs such as Dede Scozzafava and Florida Governor Charlie Crist aren’t the real issue. Scozzafava, Crist, and others who rightly deserve the “RINO” tag are merely an annoyance. Besides irritating their fellow Republicans with their liberalism, RINOs haven’t really had a great deal of impact on the direction of Republican party policies over the past decade.
The current Republican leadership has consistently supported our national slide to socialism. I’m talking about Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader John Boehner, and the leading architect of Republican endorsed socialist-statism, former Bush White House political advisor Karl Rove. These “leaders” have consistently abandoned constitutional principles of limited government in favor of socialist-statist programs, all in the name of “winning.”
The Bush supported Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 was the largest Federal Government give-away program in decades. Former Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay broke a few arms in the party to make sure this legislative travesty passed, and former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert cheered him on. At the time of its passage, Karl Rove mistakenly crowed that the legislation meant that the Republican Party had wrapped up electoral dominance for years to come.
In the fall of 2008, both McConnell and Boehner voted in favor of President Bush’s now infamous Troubled Asset Relief Program legislation, a $700 billion bailout of large financial institutions which merely transferred large piles of money from average taxpayers to Wall Street fat cats who had run their businesses into the ground, based in part on requirements forced on them by Congress.
During both of these disasters, as well as many others, most of the national conservative leadership maintained its silence as the “pragmatists” destroyed free markets and conservative principles.
National conservatives who want to fix the Republican Party shouldn’t waste their time forcing symbolic litmus test votes on the Republican National Committee. Instead, they should consider focusing their considerable energies on solving the real problem. Now is the time to put new leaders at the helm of the House, the Senate, the RNC, the NRCC, and the NRSC.
A litmus test is only as good as the character of the person who endorses it. It’s easy for professional politicians to say they support something in order to pass a test that gives them access to campaign cash. The more important test is true devotion to the limited government principles embodied in our Constitution.
The road to new leadership for the Republican Party goes through the 2010 primaries. The current Republican members of Congress aren’t going to throw McConnell and Boehner out. But the Republicans elected in November of 2010 can get that job done. Conservatives can help make that a reality by supporting boat-rocking principled conservative candidates in the upcoming primaries, and making sure they win in November.
WTF?
McCain, Collins Snowe, Specter, Gang of 14. Does this mean NOTHING to these RNC idiots? They need a whip session in the Conserative woodshed.
I agree with this.
And it's not a litmus test. It's called supporting the party platform. Idiots!
Exactly. Those who don't want to be held to a specific set of beliefs or principles use disparaging language.
If you don't agree with the party why is it so important to you to call yourself a Republican? It was easy for me to decide. I stopped calling myself a pubbie looooooong ago.
“And it’s not a litmus test. It’s called supporting the party platform. Idiots!”
Just so I get this straight, we demand that pubs have “principles” but if those principles conflict with the party platform they must abandon them and vote with the party?
I must be confused about the concept of “principles”...
Conservatives can help make that a reality by supporting boat-rocking principled conservative candidates in the upcoming primaries, and making sure they win in November.
Some just don’t get it.
...and if their “principles” conflict with the party and will of the people they must then abandon then and vote with...the party? The people? Their “principles”?
I’m getting confused, can somebody work up a playcard?
RINOs spend like drunken sailors when they're in charge. But the Republican Party is our only viable chance. We have to work toward winning primaries w/ bonafide conservatives on the Republican ticket.....who will draw Indy votes.
HOLD CANDIDATES' FEET TO THE FIRE. It's in our hands to dictate the terms. These are the terms under which we conservatives permit candidates to earn our support:
(1) Your conservative group holds an official position within the campaign;
(2) Your group's issue is affirmed in the candidate's platform;
(3) Your group is in attendance at all campaign strategy meetings;
(4) Your group holds a paid job in the campaign;
(5) Your group holds a paid position in the winning candidate's elective office.
(6) The candidate must renounce RINOS and pukeneos before he/she gets conservative endorsement.
PASS THE WORD To tea partiers, 9/12 marchers, pro-lifers; defense of marriage, 2nd amendment, anti ObamaCare, anti-amnesty, anti cap/trade conservatives.
If they don't believe the party platform, why do they say they are Republicans?
If they don't support the platform, why have one?
If they don't believe the platform, are they Dems in disguise? Yes.
We’re sorry that you can’t grasp the idea of principles and the difference between Dems and Republicans.
. "Besides irritating their fellow Republicans with their liberalism, RINOs haven’t really had a great deal of impact on the direction of Republican party policies over the past decade."
HUH? OFF WITH VIGUERIE'S HEAD!
.
Viguerie is a pretty clever guy...practically invented the targeted mailings to swing districts back in the day.
” RINOs haven’t really had a great deal of impact on the direction of Republican party policies over the past decade. “...
“The current Republican leadership has consistently supported our national slide to socialism. “
No truer words.
You need to type in big bold font and crayola to Bob J. ROFL
Will magic markers work? ;-)
Steele being the leader of don’t get it!
He just needs some heat to melt the earwax.
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.