Posted on 01/07/2008 2:03:00 PM PST by jmc813
There’s an obnoxious and destructive term that’s begun to do real damage to the Republican Party. That term is “RINO,” or “R.I.N.O.” – an acronym for “Republican In Name Only.” Angry conservatives use the term to attack purported moderates in their own party. Recently, Mike Huckabee and John McCain have been attacked as “RINO’s” –Governor Schwarzenegger of California regularly draws that denunciation. Those who make war on RINO’s, however, ought to confront an obvious question: would you really prefer that such people drop the Republican designation? How does it help if politicians or office-holders with whom you disagree leave your party and join the opposition? When alleged “RINO” Jim Jeffords of Vermont left the GOP and joined the Democrats, it gave them control of the US Senate. When another RINO, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, lost his Senate seat in 2006, it also gave the Democrats control; if Chafee had won, we’d still have a Republican majority and GOP committee chairs. The truth is that no successful political party has ever been built on ideological purity. You can construct a majority coalition by bringing people into your party, not by driving them away. It’s childish and self-destructive to wage war based on some notion of “real conservatism” with those who want to align themselves with your side. Ronald Reagan himself used to say that “if somebody agrees with me 70% of the time, rather than 100%, that doesn’t make him my enemy.” Democrats understand this principle--- they never attack “DINO’s,” Democrats In Name Only. In fact, they understand the usefulness of such figures: they put forward several conservative Democrats in key Congressional districts in 2006, and those “DINO’s” helped them win a majority in the House. If Republicans continue to express contempt and hostility for those they consider “RINO’s,” they’ve got to get ready for “DIMO’s” – Democrats In the Majority Only.” It’s time, in other words, for sane GOP partisans to call off the silly and suicidal RINO hunt.
Barry, I’m sorry. You’re just a shill for Rudy.
I guess a RINO is better than a WINO in office.
But becoming a RINO takes a lot of time. Few Republicans earn that title the day they get elected. It takes years of corruption and deals with the lobbyist before one Republican gets the deserved title RINO.
Wahh Wahh Wahh.
.
I'm not a "GOP partisan". I'm a republican. What else would you call a Republican who's politics don't support the republic?
***************
Well, that's a new one to me.
You may be right, he really is more deomrat than he is rino.
We don’t need RINO field fillers in the race when there are plenty of CONSERVATIVES capable of taking the job.
I’ve appreciated all the information I’ve gotten from Medved regarding religion, pop culture and especially the Israeli/palestinian age old conflict. But I lost all respect for him regarding conservative politics when he jumped on the bandwagon supporting illegal immigration. Thats the major reason why he supports McLame and the major reason why I consider McLame a democrap rather than just a stupid RINO...........
Support the RINOs and we still lose and they win..........
Medved, you ignorant slut.
I was tricked by Ahnold (I fell for the old, "He's better than a dem and he can get elected) and now you can't even call him a RINO, he's just a flat out dem!
The conservative party should stay conservative and I still think you belong over at the DUmp!
Majority or governing parties demand more of their representatives than minority or opposition parties. So Republicans are stricter about ideology than the Democrats have been. That may change if the Democrats win the next election.
Thirty years ago, there was a real difference between the average Northeastern Republican Representative and "real RINOs" like John Lindsay or Charles Goodell, Edward Brooke, Jacob Javits or George Aiken.
Nowadays, just about any Republican who can get elected in this part of the country is called a RINO. That's tantamount to writing off an entire region of the country.
I’m not for party over principle... it was an observation.
Why did Lynn Swann lose? Was Ed Rendell also running as a conservative??
Not necessarily. As others have pointed out, the only thing accomplished by running a RINO out of office without a conservative Republican to replace him is losing control of Congress.
Lynn Swann lost because people didn’t completely trust a football player.
Overall, there is a very broad base that can be used in describing a republican, or a conservative. However, some people like to claim to be conservative and are not, and some people like to claim to be republicans but are not.
Political parties will shift in their ideology.
But I will not compromise my principles, and I vote for the best conservative I can find. I do not go by the party label.
As for the Regan quote, I like it - a lot. BUT we all need to remember that if you agree with someone else 100% of the time, you probably aren’t thinking!
Several years ago we had a governor who run the state 14 billion into the red by spending tax money from the dot com bubble before it was collected, supported gun control and the gay agenda.
We mounted a recall, organized, signed petitions and voted him out of office. It was a great demonstration of democracy in action.
Problem is, we elected a guy who claims to be a republican who supports the gay agenda and gun control and who has run the state 14 billion into the red by spending tax money from the housing bubble before it was collected.
No more RINOs, no more pseudo cons.
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.