Monday, November 30, 2009

What Do You Think About This?

GOP Purity Test Gets Mixed Grades, Even From Conservatives

Conservative activists in the Republican Party are pushing a proposal to deny funding to GOP candidates who fail what is being called a purity test, a move that is being met with skepticism by some Republican commentators.

The proposal, being pushed by 10 Republican National Committee members, calls for money to be withheld from candidates who disagree with more than two of 10 conservative principles.

The RNC will debate the idea at its winter meeting in January.

Among the principles on the test are support of limited government, market-based health care reform, legal immigration, gun rights and military-recommended troop surges in Iraq and Afghanistan. The list also requires opposing Obama's domestic policies, including his $787 billion stimulus bill, climate change legislation and his signature health care reform plan.


Continue reading

So what do you think about this?

Is this a chance to retake the GOP from the RINO's or is it a risky move that will keep Republicans from getting elected.?

6 comments:

MK said...

If nothing else it'll put a bit of spotlight on the rinos.

Z said...

I think MK's right.
And I also think that the pussy-footing around and/or diluting the issues so's the Republicans please everyone is DISPLEASING everyone...Republicans AND CENTRISTS alike.
I'm hearing from liberal buddies "Where are the Republicans?"

Where, indeed? Time to grow a pair (sorry, but......) and BE CONSERVATIVES.

Let the rubber meet the road with those platform items...if somebody's against smaller government, etc., he's NO REPUBLICAN!

What do you think, Chuck?

(and why do you think Woods is arrogant?)

Chuck said...

MK, agreed.

Z, I think what people, conservatives and libs alike, respect is someone who stands for something. This is why, IMHO, RINO's are so disrespected. They try to be everythihng to everybody.

As far as Woods, I saw your post and responded at DaBlade's.

Z, maybe I was being a bit harsh. My point is that there is considerable indication that he may have cheated on his wife. I take a very dim view of this. I actually like Tiger Woods and think that he seems like a good guy. What I meant was that cheating on his wife is essentially a cliche of celebrities. I view this as arrogance, they can have what they want because of who they are.

Now of course this could all be false in which case I am an idiot.

Ralph Short said...

Personally, I don't believe in a loyalty test as the one described. I say this because government must at certain intervene in certain situations. For example, if we had a pandemic in the country, congress would have to pass laws to limit movement of people, tourists, etc. So, in general I believe in limited government but in a specific emergency we really need a common effort and someone to lead it.

At the same time if the "purity test" was a little more specific about favorite commie/liberal themes like a) card check b) health rationing, aka socialized medicine c) owning cos. instead of letting them go bankrupt like they richly deserved, then I would be for it.

DaBlade said...

Those values are American values, and withholding funding to dissenters is the least that should be done to them.

Chuck said...

Ralph, thanks for stopping by. I agree. I don't think anyone is advocating no government, just a limited one.

DaBlade, funding, support, manpower, etc