[cherry_bomb88]

OMG....were you picking my brain when you wrote that?????

Yes, I too am not happy with "RINOS"...but, better a RINO than a liberal....and yet, somehow, I'm always chastized by some when I say that.

I am a staunch Republican, called ultra conservative by my CEO who was a Republican State Senator for 16 years and seatmates with Speaker Hastert in the state of IL....I told him it was a compliment! ;o)

Yet, I can bring it together to ensure the Republicans maintain control.

We need to STOP all the divisions on the RIGHT if we are going to maintain control...bicker with our elected officials AFTER we have the majority. Don't bicker trying to get them there, and in doing so, fail and be stuck with something even worse than a RINO, a "whacked out far lefty extreme give it all away liberal!"

[Common Tator]

Those that believe this is a nation of the Constitution, by the Constitution, and for the Constitution are sadly mistaken. They will be crushed by those that understand how this nation works. The most important principle that governs this nation is the one Lincoln tried to teach. This is a nation of the people, for the people, and by the people.

The will of the majority prevails. It matters not what is written on a piece of paper in a law. How many Supreme court decisions does it take to prove that the Constitution says whatever 5 of the 9 justices say it says... today. Next year it may say the opposite. When voters don't like what the Justices rule as they didn't in the first Roosevelt years, they will get new justices who rule as the people want.

It is very simple. Get a majority of the voters to agree with your views. Candidates will come out of the woodwork to support and enact those views. Fail to get majority support, and some candidates may promise you things, but when in office they will do what the majority wants. Does that sound familiar to anyone?

What part of .. This is a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people, do you think confuses people most?

[unspun]

Well, the primaries are the time to fight like thunder to promote our own and keep pro-murder, socialist, statist candidates out, aren't they? Then, when it comes to general elections in states such as Illinois... if the RINO's know they can get our support with their own candidates why would they ever nominate real conservatives?

Like Dr. Dobson, I find it very unlikely I'd pick one of two pro-abortion candidates, for example, blood virtually dripping from their canine teeth, just because one has a certain party label. When an official is against the right to life, he is hardly for the constitutional rights which depend upon it. And in Illinois, there are many Democrat voters and a good number of candidates/officials who are more conservative in basic "social policies" than many on the GOP side.

As a rule of thumb, I think it's best to vote for individual candidates one can feel morally comfortable voting for.

I'm all for consolidating power at general election time (as opposed to competing against conservatives!) but only if we can say that the power is at least propotionately our power and not that of the RINO husband of the battered wife, so to speak. Let's remember, "all politics is local politics."

(Haven't read JR's piece thoroughly yet, though I generally like what I've scanned.)

My lil' ol' views.