Replies

Because it is as nice way of saying, “tyrant” (or tyrant enabler) or “evil doer” or “lover of evil.”

The "tyrant enablers" are the ones who continue to vote for RINOs.

Even now the Republican leadership is lowering expectations about what they'll do if they take the Senate in 2014.

And then there’s John McCain saying what will happen if the Republicans win the Senate: “I will work very hard to go back to 60 votes,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who boldly predicts a Republican Senate would process Obama’s nominees “more rapidly than [Democrats] do today.”

And as for the House: John Boehner: ‘Very Few’ Republicans Will Oppose Me

So tell me again how much better off we'll be voting for the RINOs.

No more voting for RINOs ever, under any circumstances. Period.

In the past I voted for McCain, and Romney nationally, and for Scott Brown in Massachusetts. But I guess it depends on your belief in how far gone this nation is, and what it will take to restore it, assuming that is even possible at this point.

Personally, I now believe that the only way to save America at this point (assuming such a thing is still possible) is to put conservatives in political offices and enact an agenda based on free markets, limited government and the rule of law. As long as we have a Republican party that actively opposes those ends (and we do, obviously), then I believe our only (slim) hope is drastic action.

As long as the Republican Party establishment believes that it can continue to survive by being Democrat-lite, and that it can continue to maintain power while actively fighting against the core principles of liberty, free markets and Constitutional law, it will never make the necessary change of direction.

Only when the Republican party understands that it must change or die can we hope to turn this country around. Our too-long-serving entrenched establishment politicians can still enjoy their comfy lifestyles, their wealth, power and prestige as members of a minority party. So why should they bother to change direction?

Surely a John Boehner (or an Eric Cantor -- had he not been defeated -- or a Mitch McConnell) would be just as happy to be minority leaders if the election cycle didn't go their way. Yes, they would prefer to be majority leaders, but what good would it do them if a conservative Republican Party won the majority and then threw them out of their cushy positions and all those perks, replacing them with real conservatives?

Ask yourself -- which do you think Mitch McConnell would prefer -- a majority Republican party in which he was stripped of his position by a conservative majority, or a minority Republican party in which he could remain Senate minority leader because the majority of Republican senators were RINOs?

You may argue that we have no time to wait for the Republicans to realize that their only choice is to change or die as a viable party. But if we don't have time for that, then what makes you think we have time to wait for the RINOs and the GOP-e to pursue a "moderately marginal" course of action designed only to maintain their personal fiefdoms at the expense of a free America operating under the rule of Constitutional law?

The GOP had majority power in the House and Senate, and occupied the White House, 10 years ago. What did all that power do to move the agenda of liberty forward? Answer: nothing.

A GOP that cannot even sell liberty, limited governments and free markets to the American people is worse than useless. It is a party of tyranny enablers, and I will have none of it.

Unbelievably, today we once again face the stark choice between liberty and death.

Once again, these are the times that try men's souls. Conservatives need to be waging aggressive war against the totalitarian leftist tyrants on all fronts -- in the branches of government at the federal and state level, in academia, in the media, through public demonstrations, and in the voting booth.

Many argue that we must continue to vote for "the most electable conservative," which means "vote for the RINO if no conservative is running." But I respectfully disagree with that choice. I am done enabling.

If we really are to lose the greatest country in the history of the world, then let's at least be fighting for it when it goes down.

And who knows, maybe -- just maybe, if we show sufficient resolve and conviction -- divine Providence will once again provide the support that gave our founders their unlikely victory in 1776, and grant us once again the "new birth of freedom" that Lincoln called for a century later.

If you reward bad behavior, you get more of it. The RINOs have managed to own the Republican party because they know that conservatives have nowhere else to go.

To continue voting for RINOs is to play right into that strategy. The RINOs have become so certain of your vote that they actually believe they can continue to stay in power by declaring outright war on the conservative base.

And when they do that, they are actually declaring war on core American principles -- war on liberty, war on free market economics, and even war on the Constitution.

The RINO Republicans cannot even make an appeal to the traditional American love of those principles, because they have lost the credibility and historical awareness to articulate them, let alone promote them.

Yes, having Harry Reid continue as majority leader is a horrific scenario. But having RINO Republicans win that office is only a marginally better short-term outcome.

And in some ways it is even worse, because as the RINOs “reach across the aisle" to promote marginally modified Democrat policies, they give the Democrats cover from the well-deserved blame for the horrific damage that they have unleashed on our country in the last five years.

America is out of time now. We cannot continue on the current path. And as things continue to deteriorate, who do you think the voters will blame if the Republicans are in power when the 2016 elections come around?

You think Mitch McConnell's senate will repeal Obamacare? You think it will take the right position on immigration? You think a Republican Senate will vote against Obama’s left wing Supreme Court nominations?

America needs clear, passionate and articulate voices to advocate and defend our founding principles, to secure our borders, to preserve our nation, and to take legislative and administrative steps to turn this country around, assuming it still can be turned around.

Majority leader Mitch McConnell will NEVER provide that voice or leadership. He is not the guy to turn things around for our formerly blessed nation.

But in 2016 a newly terrified Republican party will be forced to court instead of alienate the conservative base, and come 2017 will be in a position to put the party and our nation on the proper path. Such a duly chastised party has a real chance of nominating a Ted Cruz, instead of a Mitt Romney who, according to last night's panel on Fox News, is at this point the likely Republican presidential nominee.

So in November, for those whose only choice in the mid-terms is between a RINO and a Democrat, I urge them to stay home on election day, or vote third-party -- anything to prove the RINOs wrong in thinking that they can stay in power by literally declaring war on conservatism.

Think about it.

Politics is not a sporting event where you sit in the stands and cheer for your team, boo the opposition, blame the officials for everything that goes wrong, and then spend the off season secure in the belief that if the team has just done as you wanted all would have been well. Politics is the method whereby we collectively choose our representatives. It is a multi tiered process usually starting at the prescient level. It is at these beginning levels where you join with like minded people to set the rules by which the later contest are conducted as well as the candidates involved in those contest. These early process are usually dominated by individuals who have a heightened interest in the final outcome and also understand that he who controls the rules controls the outcome. These early process are open to everyone but generally avoided by most. It is hard work and not suited for those with a thin skin or those who operate on the idea of “my way or the highway”.

It was in these early processes where the rules allowing cross over voting in Mississippi were established and it is only through them that the rules will be changed. Likewise the rules in Kansas and other state where residency requirements are at issue. To complain about the processes after the fact is really non productive. By the time you get to the general election, it is a contest between two candidates who have successfully survived all the early processes, making compromises at all stages and trying to appeal to a sufficiently broad coalition to gain at least one more vote than their opponent. Almost no one wins just appealing to those who agree completely with them. Having the best ideas is also meaningless if you can’t get the most votes.

You mentioned Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin being asked to help rescue Pat Roberts as a negative example. To the contrary, it is an example of two very conservative individuals who fully understand the process. They know that when it reaches this stage, it is about winning; not about whose feeling are hurt. They both are making an effort to get a person elected who they may not have supported at an early level because they know he is better than the alternative. They understand that you don’t win by loosing.

In the final analysis, everyone is going to do whatever they want, and the right to do so is one of the strengths of our system.