To Name or to Principle? The Loyalty question Quote of the Week
October 27, 2009 by Doug Parris
It’s nice to belong to a political party. It’s a good thing to be active in your local community on the grassroots level, working for a better America for all. However, when party loyalty to individuals who do not uphold their oath of office and are selling America down the road, becomes more important than loyalty to God, flag and country, it becomes destructive. “
~ Devvy Kidd, 1996
Hard to put it more concisely than that. It was true in 1996 and true in 2008. But blind loyalty to a central power elite that maintains control by election fraud has become the central theme of the GOP. This internal oligarchy of the L.I.A.R.* can be, and must be, broken if American Freedom is to survive.
*Liberals Impersonating A Republican
“I am the punishment of God…If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you.” ~Genghis Khan
I am sure you heard by now that Dierdre K. Scozzafava the New York “Republican” who was running for Congress and who was backed by the Republican Establishment, most notably Newt Gingrich, Michael Steele, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.), National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chairman Pete Sessions (Texas) and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is in charge of recruiting candidates to run next year, has pulled a Sid Morrison.
To be fair to Scozzafava, she has come out publicly for the Democratic challenger whereas Morrison worked in secret to elect Lowry by giving his voter’s list to him.
But isn’t this just like a RINO. For years and years using the call to party unity they tell us that we should vote for them because they have an R attached to their name despite voting like Democrats but in the end they always betray the party by switching parties or by stabbing a conservative candidate in the back or something like that.
So, why listen to their call for voting for the R regardless when they don’t practice what they preach when they feel it’s in their interests?
I must admit I have voted for plenty of Democrats in my time. Well, of course I haven’t voted FOR them but AGAINST their RINO opponents because I honestly feel a liberal RINO Republican is a bigger threat than even a liberal Democrat. Because the one who can do you the most harm is always the one you let into your midst. The enemy within is always the most dangerous.
In the end time and time again they stab you in the back. So, why allow them to do so. At least when you elect a liberal Democrat there’s the chance of electing a real Republican next time around. When RINOS get in power they use that power to cut conservative candidates off at their knees. As dangerous as liberal Democrats are they have no influence within the Republican party except as an uniting factor. But RINOs they have great influence once elected to prevent conservative candidates from getting Republican support.
I will vote for a conservative in the primary but if the RINO win next year I will continue my practice of voting for the Democrat. And unfortunately my district is not alone in having a lot of RINO incumbents that need to go. They need to go in the primary ideally but unfortunately that is rare. SO if not the primary then we need to get them in the general so in 2012 we can put up real Republican candidates.
I am sorry to say that 2010 needs to be the year we get our own house in order. Which means more Republicans need to lose next year. Of course I mean the RINOs and we all need to look at voting records and give information to each other to identify which incumbents are indeed RINOS. Yakama for example has two RINOS despite that fact that those seats could be conservative seats if they RINOS weren’t there.
Here’s a good article by Alan Keyes about this situation.
http://loyaltoliberty.blogspot.com/2009/11/ny-23-orgy-of-self-seeking-reveals-gop.html
Here is a quote from that article.
With the withdrawal of Dede Scozzafava from contention in the special election in NY’s 23rd Congressional District, we see a clear result of implementing Michael Steele’s infamous 80/20 approach to candidate selection. Grassroots conservatives still hampered by their allegiance to the Republican Party need to consider the lessons to be drawn from the Republican party’s disappearance from that race. Scozzafava was a candidate typical of the predilections of GOP Party bosses and the majority of its big money fundraisers. They believe that the Party’s formula for political victory requires people who oppose or just give lip service to conservative stands on the issues of moral principle, like respect for the unalienable right to life and defense of the natural family, but embrace conservative positions on other fronts, especially when it comes to money issues.
But the problem with candidates like Scozzafava is the priorities they represent. Her eager endorsement of the Obama faction Democrat in the race points to the truth. In principal, politicians like her are in tune with the moral and intellectual culture of the leftist Democrats. Their election stands on money issues are a matter of cynical political calculation.
This is great analysis, Steve, and I agree except for one point.
Decades… stretching to generations… of Conservatives have voted for the lesser of two evils thinking they were working “incrementalism” to slowly bring us back to the principles of freedom. But they were going incrementally backwards, lending their weight to the deterioration of the Republic.
They were doing something morally wrong to acheive morally right objectives.
But I believe that they would have, and could have, avoided these decades of deterioration of our nation by only doing what is right and avoiding Machiavellian machinations. It was simple. Don’t vote for evil, even if it’s “lesser.” Hitler was a “lesser evil” than the Communists it was thought.
I will not vote for a bad public servant under any circumstances. I believe doing it is morally wrong, even if you are attempting some “strategy” for a better outcome.
I have found that all that is necessary to defeat RINOs is to expose who they are on a massive basis. Their base abandons them. That is one lesson of the Scozzafava adventure… and the McGavick…and Nethercutt…and Rick White and John McCain adventures… All that is necessary for the defeat of counterfeits is for good men to do something.
I hesitate to post this Deace podcast because it is about the Iowan Gubernatorial race and of course this blog focuses on Washington State.
But as I, a resident of Washington State listened to the podcast I found the experience that these value voters leaders had so typical of what I have in the past experienced with our own Republican establishment. Although I didn’t really know the players I felt I did due to meeting the same types here in Washington State.
So, please listen because even though the race doesn’t effect us, the mentality of this politician is the same mentality we are going to be facing here next year. I guess politicians are the same everywhere aren’t they and this is not only the mentality of one Iowan politician but the mentality that the Republican establishment has nationwide regarding how they think they are going to win elections (but they are wrong.
Listen here to a story of how an Iowan politician told a bunch of value voter leaders that they need to get to the back of the bus, but they in return told him that it’s not enough to just be better than the other guy.
Here is even a better Deace Podcast.
Deace and Glenn Beck agrees that “lesser of two evils” hasn’t worked before and will not work in the future.
Listen here – Glenn Beck Sounds Like Deace – Deace plays some audio from the popular nationally-syndicated host that sounds an awful lot like what Deace has been trying to say the last three years on the air, and callers react.
What I got out of the two above podcasts was at least in Iowa, and since Beck has made similar comments, perhaps nationwide, conservatives and especially those conservative for whom so called value issue are paramount, “being better than the other guy isn’t going to cut it.
We will have to see if that attitude continues into next year’s election despite the mood of “team rivalry”, obamafear, and hating the Democrat that usually comes with election season.
And we will have to see if the mood in Iowa and with Beck is reflected with conservatives and particularly those conservative who focus on values issues here in Washington State.
But at least right now it seems from listening to that Iowan pastor “getting to the back of the bus” but “wink wink, nod, nod” we are really on your side isn’t going to generate automatic support. Perhaps they have finally realized that if a politician isn’t going to stand up for your issues while running, that politician will not stand up for your issues when such issues come across that politicians desks.
Also I believe there’s another fundamental point to be understood. The Republicans say that you should support a candidate if that candidate stands for 80 percent of what you believe even if that candidate doesn’t stand for 20 percent of what you believe. The 20 percent obviously being “values issues”. Well first the so called 20 percent might be far more important to you than the 80 percent. Second you look at how values issues have gone the last generation or so the so called 20 percent the liberals have made the 20 percent more extreme then they were before so it is more critical than ever to address them. And third history has shown us that a politician who will not stand up for the so called 20 percent is likely not to stand up for the so called 80 percent either when push comes to shove.
It is obvious that the Republicans are at least at this point thinking that next year they are going to run a campaign on “financial issues” alone and that will be enough to unite the conservatives under them and win the elections.
But they forget that they have as much credibility on financial issues as they do so called value issues. After the so called Republican Revolution Newt’s House of Representatives increased spending and the size of government even at a faster rate than the Democrats who controlled the House of Representatives for 40 years before that. It was Bush who gave us the first bailout and McCain voted for it.
So they ask us to ignore the so called 20 percent but they don’t even deliver on the so called 80 percent.
My biggest fear next year is that like in 1994 we will have a faux revolution that will elect a whole bunch of RINOS. For that will only lead to in a decade or less to what we saw in 1992 and 2008 – the election of another liberal democrat. Instead we need not a Republican Revolution but a CONSERVATIVE Revolution. But the Mainstreamers could stop all of that like they did before. That is why we need to understand that the FIRST ENEMY of the Conservatives IS the REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT.
UNTIL we defeat the Republican Establishment we can’t even think about the Democrats. First thing first.
Here is a great article by Michelle Malkin.
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/04/the-gop-elites-1-million-object-lesson-and-the-message-of-ny-23/
“Winning” in 2010 must not be our focus next year. Of course I want us to win but is it winning if we have a “Revolution” next year that puts in lots of politicians like Dede Scozzafava? Is it winning next year if Meg Whitman becomes governor of California? Is it winning if Reichert gets re-elected?
I hope there’s a bunch of third party candidates I can vote for if the Republicans put up RINOS expecting us to be so scared of the Democrats that we will jump on board even when the candidate doesn’t really reflect our values. We will not automatically come out and vote for just anyone the party establishment shoves down our throat. We don’t roll that way anymore.
Well, I guess I can only speak for myself. We shall see if others next year will still be in the grip of “lesser of two evils means voting for the Republican label no matter what.
Look if we have to be Conservative “spoilers” next year so be it. For it is far better for us to be spoilers than to have another faux Revolution under the Republican Banner that brings in a whole new crop of RINOS.
Or as Michelle Malkin so aptly put it:
Better a donkey in office that acts like a donkey than a donkey in elephant’s clothing making a complete ass of the GOP.
So what you are saying is that our main focus next year should be stopping any RINO usurping any conservative momentum next year. And if we get a few conservatives elected in the process that will be icing on the cake.
But the main focus needs to be STOP THE RINOS.
If we need to be “Spoilers” in our RINOBUSTING so be it.
No more voting for the R simply because they run under the Republican banner. We have tried “lesser of two evils” for about a generation by now and that tactic has been proven not to work.
And like Beck and so many others have said the definition of Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
Here’s another good article I found.
http://politicalderby.com/2009/11/05/%E2%80%9Crules-for-conservatives%E2%80%9D-inspired-by-doug-hoffman/
by Neil Braithwaite
When Dede Scozzafava outed herself, and all Republican moderates and RINO’s for what they truly are — Democrats, she unwittingly gave millions of frustrated conservatives, both outside and inside the Republican Party, an opening they have long been waiting for.
With the clear evidence of what transpired in New York Congressional District 23, coupled with crushing Democratic defeats in Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections, conservatives now have a “no apologies” opportunity to transform the Republican Party from being dysfunctional and ineffective, into a strong and unified Party with uncompromising conservative principles.
Doug Hoffman will be remembered as the person who inspired a conservative movement that took back the Republican Party. Three cheers for Doug Hoffman!
Let the Republican Party transformation begin with “Rules for Conservatives.”
The objective: Eliminate, once and for all, the biggest problem of the Republican Party — moderates and RINOS. They serve no purpose but to divide the party and water down the conservative agenda.
The Goal: Make the Republican Party the Party of the majority again — true conservative Americans.
The strategy: Run a true conservative candidate against every RINO and moderate Republican in 2010. (For all you blue-bloods, it’s not a bluff)
The leverage: The Republican Party can choose to run a true conservative candidate or take their chances against both a Democrat and Conservative Party candidate.
The obstacle: Spineless blue-blood elite Republicans who would rather compromise their principles, keep their country club buddies, and suck-up to the liberal media.
The myth: Getting rid of RINOS and moderates will collapse the “big-tent.” (It will however, make the liberal media cry — they need those moderates and RINOS for their Sunday shows)
The truth: Sixty percent of Americans see themselves as conservative, and that’s a pretty big tent. All are welcome.
The outcome: America is revived and thrives again!
Next year we need to be RINOBUSTERS. Only after that is accomplished can we talk about another “Republican Revolution”.
So if we must be spoilers next year – so be it!
Decades… stretching to generations… of Conservatives have voted for the lesser of two evils thinking they were working “incrementalism” to slowly bring us back to the principles of freedom.
But what am I supposed to do? It’s my duty to vote so I just can’t not vote. And since there are usually in the general election just two candidates, a Republican or a Democrat, I have to vote for the Republican even if that person is a Republican in Name Only.
I just can’t behave any differently. But I am sure if I do the same thing over and over again, someday I will get a different result. Sure it hasn’t worked in generations but as long as I behave in the same manner over and over again someday it will be different result.