Community | November 23, 2009 | 11 comments

G.O.P. Considers ‘Purity’ Pact for Candidates

source: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/gop-considers-purity-resolution-for-candidates...

Image
current89
The battle among Republicans over what the party should stand for — and how much it should accommodate dissenting views on important issues — is probably going to move from the states to the Republican National Committee when it holds its winter meeting this January in Honolulu.

Republican leaders are circulating a resolution listing 10 positions Republican candidates should support to demonstrate that they “espouse conservative principles and public policies” that are in opposition to “Obama’s socialist agenda.” According to the resolution, any Republican candidate who broke with the party on three or more of these issues– in votes cast, public statements made or answering a questionnaire – would be penalized by being denied party funds or the party endorsement.

The proposed resolution was signed by 10 Republican national committee members and was distributed on Monday morning. They are asking for the resolution to be debated when Republicans gather for their winter meeting.

The resolution invokes Ronald Reagan, and noted that Mr. Reagan had said the Republican Party should be devoted to conservative principles but also be open to diverse views. President Reagan believed, the resolution notes, “that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent.”

Hence the provision calling for cutting off Republicans who agree with the party on seven of 10 items. The resolution demands that Republicans support “smaller government, smaller national deficits and lower taxes,” denial of government funding for abortion, and “victory in Iraq and Afghanistan.” It calls on candidates to oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants and repealing of the Defense of Marriage Act.

The development is going to put pressure on Michael Steele, the party chairman, as he tries to maintain a balance between those in his party who have been saying the road to victory is to include divergent views, and those who say the party needs to embrace conservative principles that have been at its core.


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/gop-considers-purity-resolution-fo...
  1. groups:
    Community,   US Politics,   Right Wing Nuts,   Current Republicans
  2. tags:
    Republican Party,  teabaggers,  right wing nuts
  3.     
    |

11 comments // G.O.P. Considers ‘Purity’ Pact for Candidates

  • bike10
    • 0
      bike10  

    • So much for your Big Tent and party of Inclusion and not Exclusion Mr. Steele.
      What is the punishment for those who fail the test? One hundred lashes with wet tea bags?

    • 2 years ago
  • kennymotown
  • Maeveeo
  • CreditFigaro
    • 0
      CreditFigaro  

    • This is great news!

      "According to the resolution, any Republican candidate who broke with the party on three or more of these issues– in votes cast, public statements made or answering a questionnaire – would be penalized by being denied party funds or the party endorsement."

      That means that we are going to have more democrat votes in battleground states. Way to hang yourselves, guys! Keep at it!

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  

    • Here is the resolution’s list:

      (1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill; ( We support unemployment)

      (2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run health care; (We support dying quickly when sick)

      (3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation; (We support pollution and global warming if we knew what it was)

      (4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check; (We still hate unions)

      (5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants; (We still hate immigrants)

      (6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges; (We still love war. We wants it forevers!)

      (7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat; (The axis of evil is still evil and we hates it)

      (8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act; (We hate fags)

      (9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; (We still don't understand healthcare reform but we demand control of your uterus)

      and

      (10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership. (We still loves our guns. Yessss my precious)

    • 2 years ago
  • ChristopherX
  • kennymotown
  • good_stuff
    • 0
      good_stuff  

    • Too obvious to point out that the wars are increasing government size and budget, so nobody can be entirely for all 10 principles without corrupting 1 or more.

      My plan is coming along perfectly. We will have the 3 pary system sooner than I thought.

    • 2 years ago
  • pakazak
  • Chique
  • pakazak
more from Community:
from the community

top videos