What you are attempting to do is to exclude from conservativism people that do not agree with your exclusionary criteria. They may disagree with one, two or more of your exclusionary criteria but not all.
Presently, you are now excluding yourself. This is a free country so this is your right.
I would say that all great endeavors (including political) are not based on ad hominem attacks or simple name calling (RINO). What great endeavors do is to achieve a sense of cooperation where possible and the hope of persuasion and additional coming together down the road.
A great people need a great tent. It is also true that being a Republican, conservative or what have you does not mean you should not cooperate with people who differ with you. Taken to its extreme, the failure to compromise always results in a real or defacto civil war. America has a genius for voluntary cooperation and compromise; the only time we really failed we had a Civil War and 700,000 died.
Calling someone a RINO isn't name calling, it's simply shorthand, an acronym.
What great endeavors do
This is a common liberal approach to conservatism. Characterize conservative thought as primitive, then argue from this faulty assertion. Conservative thought doesn't qualify as a "great endeavor."
It is also true that being a Republican, conservative or what have you
Haven't figured it out yet, huh?
Strange how the nitpickers of "diversity" can't tease out the difference between Republicans and conservatives.
And there have been assorted insults (many from this same person) on other threads, but frankly, I'm not about to look all of it up. This is representative of what I hear from CG and several others.
"Compromise" seems to be sanctioned by the self-proclaimed intelligentsia only when liberal dogma is deferred to.
Am I mistaken?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1994443/posts