[SeattleBruce]

“please narrow down your list to those that have endorsed two RINOs in the primaries.”

I’ll add one more criteria - those who’ve endorsed two RINOs in the primaries since the Tea Party movement (post MAObama election.) Remaining from your list:

**Newt endorsed Scozzafava
**Fred Thompson endorsed McCain for Senate 2010
**Sarah Palin endorsed McCain for Senate 2010 and Fiorina for Senate 2010.

I don’t think too many of us are worrying about Newt and Fred Thompson, the way we’re concerned about Palin’s endorsements - as she is a current power in the Conservative movement and those other two are not really that.

[FreeReign]

I’ll add one more criteria - those who’ve endorsed two RINOs in the primaries since the Tea Party movement (post MAObama election.) Remaining from your list:

Whether one endorsed a RINO in a primary since the Tea Party movement or before the Tea party movement, doesn't make a difference to me.

Both cases would be wrong.

For example DeMint endorsed both Mitt and Goober Graham in their primaries. Both were bad endorsements.

[rintense]

You'll have to look those endorsements up, as I'm sure they're more local to their district/state. My point is, RINO endorsements happen. Yes, its not what conservatives need and it stinks.

But let me ask you this: are we supposed to choose whoever Tea Party affiliates pick? Didn't the Tea Party endorse Scott Brown? I know many complain of drinking the koolaid, but are we all supposed to drink the Tea Party koolaid too? I thought individual choice was still what makes conservatives principled? If McCain is so terrible (and he is), why hasn't the Tea Party endorsed Hayworth?

If you're looking for a perfect movement, the Tea Party isn't it.

Now, as for your criteria, seems to me you keep adding conditions. RINOs shouldn't be endorsed EVER. Doesn't matter whether its primary or election. Sarah was wrong for this and for McCain.