Time To throw Out the 169 Identified RINO's In The House

[Erand7899]

I just don't get why folks pushing for the cleansing of the more traditional Conservative think they can win major elections.
Exit polls have shown a move towards the middle/center by the voting public. The Tea Party hasn't moved up the polls enough to win nationally and in fact have lost support.
If change is what the far right wants and kinder and gentler approach would probably be more beneficial. But then that's not their M.O..

You obviously have no concept of what a traditional conservative is, or the real purpose of winning an election. I do not win just because a Republican wins office. I only win when that Republican holds to and votes for conservative principles.

This is not a ball game where we add up points. This is real life and the decisions made by our politicians determine the quality of that life.

I support the Tea Party principles, and I support the budget deal just made. Mainly because this is the best deal that we can get with the present makeup of congress and the presidency. Don't mistake a difference of opinion on strategy and tactics as any rift over conservative principles.

 

[Erand7899]

The funny, and sad, thing is that the people who use phrases like "Republican in name only" are the ones who aren't the real Republicans. They keep trying to hijack the party. They call themselves "conservatives" or "real conservatives." But really, they're just extremist nut jobs. It's idiots who seem to think that standing for individual freedom means dictating to other people what to do with your own lives. And who think that fiscal responsibility means that we should stop paying our bills and eliminate all spending whatsoever. And most especially, the fools who think that compromise is some kind of evil, as opposed to a mature and adult way to accomplish at least some of your goals.

It's always hilarious when libturds believe they have the necessary credibility to tell Republicans who the "real" Republicans are.

One note about fiscal responsibility: It sure as hell doesn't mean to increase spending even more than we were spending previously. However, that's the liberal conception of "fiscal responsibility" - spend! spend! spend! The so-called "compromise" doesn't cut a thing. There's no reason we can't start hacking off 20% - 30% of federal spending. Instead we are increasing it.

And compromising with Marxist thugs is evil.

When good compromises with evil, good always loses and evil always wins.

Ok, fine. Suppose YOU tell us who are REAL Republicans and who are RINO's?

.

Real Republicans have the welfare and direction of the country at heart, versus having the welfare of the Republican party at heart. We don't win unless our Republican principles win. Just putting some clown in office because he/she has an "R" by their name is not winning.

 

[kiwiman127]

I just don't get why folks pushing for the cleansing of the more traditional Conservative think they can win major elections.
Exit polls have shown a move towards the middle/center by the voting public. The Tea Party hasn't moved up the polls enough to win nationally and in fact have lost support.
If change is what the far right wants and kinder and gentler approach would probably be more beneficial. But then that's not their M.O..

You obviously have no concept of what a traditional conservative is, or the real purpose of winning an election. I do not win just because a Republican wins office. I only win when that Republican holds to and votes for conservative principles.

This is not a ball game where we add up points. This is real life and the decisions made by our politicians determine the quality of that life.

I support the Tea Party principles, and I support the budget deal just made. Mainly because this is the best deal that we can get with the present makeup of congress and the presidency. Don't mistake a difference of opinion on strategy and tactics as any rift over conservative principles.

And that's your opinion. My family has been basically traditional conservatives since they moved to the US. For years not only did they vote straight ticket GOP but also donated a good deal of money directly to the party. But in recent years they have decided to donate to individual GOP candidates who are now considered moderates and are willing to act like adults and compromise.
The for right makes up a small element of the general populace in America and the reason is simple, the Tea Party and far right are just too extreme and don't represent what a vast majority of Americans believe, whether they be moderate conservatives, centralist and of course liberals. I also think the far left is also out-of-touch with America.
Extremism has never successfully led to positive results.

 

[Toro]

Thank goodness the Small Tent Republicans lost.

This insanity has gone on long enough.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The funny, and sad, thing is that the people who use phrases like "Republican in name only" are the ones who aren't the real Republicans. They keep trying to hijack the party. They call themselves "conservatives" or "real conservatives." But really, they're just extremist nut jobs. It's idiots who seem to think that standing for individual freedom means dictating to other people what to do with your own lives. And who think that fiscal responsibility means that we should stop paying our bills and eliminate all spending whatsoever. And most especially, the fools who think that compromise is some kind of evil, as opposed to a mature and adult way to accomplish at least some of your goals.

The saddest thing of all, is that you obviously believe the nonsense that you spout. And like most modern liberal/socialists, you cannot accept the fact that many good Americans disagree with your ideas on what is, or is not, good for America. After all, you ignorant asses are absolutely certain that you have the moral and intelectual highground, and that anyone who sees things differently must be either evil, or stupid.

Conservatives come in many shades, and in various degrees of belief in fiscal and social principles. But, one thing we hold in common is that we do not want a Republican party that is nothing more than Democrat light. That does not make us extremists or nutjobs, and it does not make us anti-American. We also do not want candidates, of either party, who run as fiscal conservatives when they do not intend to vote as such in congress.

You call them Democrats, because most of you are as intelectually dishonest as your candidates, but in the Republican party, we call them Rinos.

You call them Democrats, because most of you are as intelectually dishonest as your candidates,

yea like no Republicans are ..."intellectually dishonest"....right?

we call them Rinos......

which is any Republican/Conservative who disagrees with the Far Right OR has the gall and audacity to agree with a Democrat position.....but dont worry you are not alone....the clowns on the other side do the same thing.....with the ones they call...."Blue Dogs"....

 

[Harry Dresden]

It's always hilarious when libturds believe they have the necessary credibility to tell Republicans who the "real" Republicans are.

One note about fiscal responsibility: It sure as hell doesn't mean to increase spending even more than we were spending previously. However, that's the liberal conception of "fiscal responsibility" - spend! spend! spend! The so-called "compromise" doesn't cut a thing. There's no reason we can't start hacking off 20% - 30% of federal spending. Instead we are increasing it.

And compromising with Marxist thugs is evil.

When good compromises with evil, good always loses and evil always wins.

Ok, fine. Suppose YOU tell us who are REAL Republicans and who are RINO's?

.

Real Republicans have the welfare and direction of the country at heart, versus having the welfare of the Republican party at heart. We don't win unless our Republican principles win. Just putting some clown in office because he/she has an "R" by their name is not winning.

so do you vote for these "Republicans" who dont adhere to your principals?....

 

[Erand7899]

I just don't get why folks pushing for the cleansing of the more traditional Conservative think they can win major elections.
Exit polls have shown a move towards the middle/center by the voting public. The Tea Party hasn't moved up the polls enough to win nationally and in fact have lost support.
If change is what the far right wants and kinder and gentler approach would probably be more beneficial. But then that's not their M.O..

You obviously have no concept of what a traditional conservative is, or the real purpose of winning an election. I do not win just because a Republican wins office. I only win when that Republican holds to and votes for conservative principles.

This is not a ball game where we add up points. This is real life and the decisions made by our politicians determine the quality of that life.

I support the Tea Party principles, and I support the budget deal just made. Mainly because this is the best deal that we can get with the present makeup of congress and the presidency. Don't mistake a difference of opinion on strategy and tactics as any rift over conservative principles.

And that's your opinion. My family has been basically traditional conservatives since they moved to the US. For years not only did they vote straight ticket GOP but also donated a good deal of money directly to the party. But in recent years they have decided to donate to individual GOP candidates who are now considered moderates and are willing to act like adults and compromise.
The for right makes up a small element of the general populace in America and the reason is simple, the Tea Party and far right are just too extreme and don't represent what a vast majority of Americans believe, whether they be moderate conservatives, centralist and of course liberals. I also think the far left is also out-of-touch with America.
Extremism has never successfully led to positive results.

Desiring the federal government to live within its means is not extremism. Desiring the federal government to limit its activities to those delineated in the US Constitution is not extremism. Desiring candidates for public office to govern according to the principles they campaign on is not extremism.

Compromise is not a dirty word, but compromise for the sake of compromise is a dirty phrase, and does not make anyone an adult. When the train is running in the wrong direction, compromise on how fast we go is not the proper course of action, regardless of how smart or adult it makes one feel.

If the nation was as moderate as you like to believe, congressional candidates would not be campaigning like the fiscal hawks that they have no intention of being. You need to reevaluate your contentions.

 

[Erand7899]

Ok, fine. Suppose YOU tell us who are REAL Republicans and who are RINO's?

.

Real Republicans have the welfare and direction of the country at heart, versus having the welfare of the Republican party at heart. We don't win unless our Republican principles win. Just putting some clown in office because he/she has an "R" by their name is not winning.

so do you vote for these "Republicans" who dont adhere to your principals?....

Only as the lesser of two evils. It would be quite nice to have a conservative Democrat that would give me a real choice, but they don't seem to exist anymore.

Far too many real conservatives have given up the fight, and just no longer vote. We can bring them back if we can get real conservatives running for office.

 

[SwimExpert]

But, one thing we hold in common is that we do not want a Republican party that is nothing more than Democrat light. That does not make us extremists or nutjobs

What you really mean to say is that you're trying to take over the Republican Party and turn it into your own. Nearly every Republican President of the 20th century would be called a RINO by today's standards. McKinley, Roosevelt, Taft, Coolidge, Eisenhower, Ford, Nixon, Reagan, Bush....The only one who might make the cut would probably be Hoover. Maaaybe.

 

[kiwiman127]

You obviously have no concept of what a traditional conservative is, or the real purpose of winning an election. I do not win just because a Republican wins office. I only win when that Republican holds to and votes for conservative principles.

This is not a ball game where we add up points. This is real life and the decisions made by our politicians determine the quality of that life.

I support the Tea Party principles, and I support the budget deal just made. Mainly because this is the best deal that we can get with the present makeup of congress and the presidency. Don't mistake a difference of opinion on strategy and tactics as any rift over conservative principles.

And that's your opinion. My family has been basically traditional conservatives since they moved to the US. For years not only did they vote straight ticket GOP but also donated a good deal of money directly to the party. But in recent years they have decided to donate to individual GOP candidates who are now considered moderates and are willing to act like adults and compromise.
The for right makes up a small element of the general populace in America and the reason is simple, the Tea Party and far right are just too extreme and don't represent what a vast majority of Americans believe, whether they be moderate conservatives, centralist and of course liberals. I also think the far left is also out-of-touch with America.
Extremism has never successfully led to positive results.

Desiring the federal government to live within its means is not extremism. Desiring the federal government to limit its activities to those delineated in the US Constitution is not extremism. Desiring candidates for public office to govern according to the principles they campaign on is not extremism.

Compromise is not a dirty word, but compromise for the sake of compromise is a dirty phrase, and does not make anyone an adult. When the train is running in the wrong direction, compromise on how fast we go is not the proper course of action, regardless of how smart or adult it makes one feel.

If the nation was as moderate as you like to believe, congressional candidates would not be campaigning like the fiscal hawks that they have no intention of being. You need to reevaluate your contentions.

It's not that I don't want government to spend within it's means. It's how it's done that concerns me.

 

[Erand7899]

But, one thing we hold in common is that we do not want a Republican party that is nothing more than Democrat light. That does not make us extremists or nutjobs

What you really mean to say is that you're trying to take over the Republican Party and turn it into your own. Nearly every Republican President of the 20th century would be called a RINO by today's standards. McKinley, Roosevelt, Taft, Coolidge, Eisenhower, Ford, Nixon, Reagan, Bush....The only one who might make the cut would probably be Hoover. Maaaybe.

It is not that hard to make the cut. Reagan was a real conservative. The Bushes were more Democrat light than they were conservative. They won because the alternatives were completely unacceptable. Both McCain and Romney lost because conservatives stayed home on election day. I personally believe that Romney, although not as conservative as I would have liked, would have kept his word and governed as a real conservative.

We can handle a RINO in the White House, if we have real conservatives in the congress. The first two years of the Bush II term showed how bad it can get when you get RINO control of both congress and the White House. That can only be outdone by Democrat control of both congress and the White House.

 

[Vandalshandle]

"Both McCain and Romney lost because conservatives stayed home on election day. "

I know. Palin simply wasn't conservative enough. Or maybe if the running order had been reveresed, she would have been elected president!

I love these threads! The Tea Party has already alienated everyone to the Left of Atilla the Hun, but they are not going to be satisfied until they have purified their party to the extent that Rick, from Texas, begins to look like maybe a fellow travelor of Mao Se tung, in comparoson to the Party center....


...and with this stratagy, they plan on winning elections!

 

[JimH52]

So just pushing loons into the primary system is no longer good enough for you. You are now prepared to take the knife to the wrist approach....wonderful!

Let me know how that works out for you!

 

[Harry Dresden]

Real Republicans have the welfare and direction of the country at heart, versus having the welfare of the Republican party at heart. We don't win unless our Republican principles win. Just putting some clown in office because he/she has an "R" by their name is not winning.

so do you vote for these "Republicans" who dont adhere to your principals?....

Only as the lesser of two evils. It would be quite nice to have a conservative Democrat that would give me a real choice, but they don't seem to exist anymore.

Far too many real conservatives have given up the fight, and just no longer vote. We can bring them back if we can get real conservatives running for office.

Only as the lesser of two evils..

so....you vote Republican....no matter what....in effect you would vote in a person who has the welfare of the Republican party at heart over the Country....right?....not very principled....the lessor of 2 evils is still evil......vote 3rd party....you might find someone there who actually cares about the Country....

 

[SwimExpert]

It is not that hard to make the cut. Reagan was a real conservative. The Bushes were more Democrat light than they were conservative. They won because the alternatives were completely unacceptable. Both McCain and Romney lost because conservatives stayed home on election day. I personally believe that Romney, although not as conservative as I would have liked, would have kept his word and governed as a real conservative.

So by your own admission, all but one of the 20th century's Republican Presidents would be considered RINOs today.

*shakes head*

You're the damn RINO. Go form your own party, you're no longer welcome among Republicans anymore.

 

[Toro]

Desiring the federal government to live within its means is not extremism.

Reagan was a real conservative.

s0n, you may not know this, but Reagan didn't live within his means.

Knowing history will get you farther than wallowing in mythology.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Desiring the federal government to live within its means is not extremism.

It is extremism to the extent that it is a false analogy, the Federal government’s budget does not function like a household budget, the notion is naïve and ridiculous. It’s perfectly normal and appropriate for the Federal government to go from surplus to deficit and return to surplus again as it addresses various issues.

Desiring the federal government to limit its activities to those delineated in the US Constitution is not extremism.

It is the extremism of willful ignorance, where the Constitution affords Congress powers both enumerated and implied. See McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). Indeed, “but that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’

There was a time when republicans understood the fact that the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, and respected the rule of law accordingly. There was a time when republicans pursued policies in the context of sound governance. And there was a time when republicans worked in good faith with democrats for what was best for the Nation.

Sadly, many of those republicans are gone, or exist under siege from the radical right where they are unable or unwilling to pursue sound governance for fear of being primaried.

 

[amrchaos]

According to the op, every republican is a RINO in some fashion or form.

Why do I feel like that is a good thing?

 

[Indeependent]

But, one thing we hold in common is that we do not want a Republican party that is nothing more than Democrat light. That does not make us extremists or nutjobs

What you really mean to say is that you're trying to take over the Republican Party and turn it into your own. Nearly every Republican President of the 20th century would be called a RINO by today's standards. McKinley, Roosevelt, Taft, Coolidge, Eisenhower, Ford, Nixon, Reagan, Bush....The only one who might make the cut would probably be Hoover. Maaaybe.

It is not that hard to make the cut. Reagan was a real conservative. The Bushes were more Democrat light than they were conservative. They won because the alternatives were completely unacceptable. Both McCain and Romney lost because conservatives stayed home on election day. I personally believe that Romney, although not as conservative as I would have liked, would have kept his word and governed as a real conservative.

We can handle a RINO in the White House, if we have real conservatives in the congress. The first two years of the Bush II term showed how bad it can get when you get RINO control of both congress and the White House. That can only be outdone by Democrat control of both congress and the White House.

Reagan was a REAL CONSERVATIVE?!
Because he has a picture of himself wearing a cowboy hat?
Are you kidding?!

 

[bripat9643]

It's not that I don't want government to spend within it's means. It's how it's done that concerns me.

Yeah, right. You want it done without cutting anything.