Posted on 10/05/2004 12:31:12 PM PDT by TERMINATTOR
making sure you see this
The filibuster isn't the problem (or it isn't completely the problem). There's too many RINOs or Republicans who are just weak. And the President has spent too much time playing nice with people like Teddy Kennedy. Rather than worry about re-election, I'd like to see the Republicans take meaningful steps to limit the size and scope of the federal government.
bump to comment later
Damn dirty RINOs
Now, it is very rare that a controlling party gets a large enough majority to do what it pleases without regarding the other party.
We did see Clinton attempt this in 92 when he forced through tax increases and gun control.
Under the Republicans we have had tax cuts and a rollback of guncontrol.
With the loss in the Democratic party of most moderates due to Clinton, it is very hard for the GOP Senate majority to develop any coalitions, so we face an ideological wall.
We ought to compile a list of RINOs and name them on threads like this.
INCORRECT. The Republicans have a very SLIM majority in the Senate, and a simple majority in the House.
An ABSOLUTE MAJORITY would mean 2/3 Republicans in both the Senate and the House.
This is just another article bashing the Republians, thereby helping the Democrats a month from election day.
I suppose you and the author would prefer that conservatives turn out in droves to "punish" their Republican Senators and Congressmen (and women) by electing Democrats, right?
The first sentence and the basic premise of the article is WRONG, because Republicans do NOT have anything resembling absolute majority and have been obstructed by Democrats at every step. Just think of the Judicial nominees.
The answer is NOT to attack Republicans, but to elect more of them, so we will have an "absolute majority" in Congress.
House or Senate?
Thought you'd appreciate this...
You're correct in what you say, but we also face an ideological wall within the party. Do you share philosophical common ground with Lincoln Chaffey or Olympia Snowe? RINOs should be exposed as such. Even a slim majority can be used effectively if that majority is truly a majority. With the RINOs in the Senate, our majority is a misnomer.
Here's a challenge to Republicans: let's see if you're not too lazy to restore even a little bit of liberty. Get rid of federally-mandated seatbelt and helmet laws. Try that. Just a little liberty restored, ok?
If that's too tough for lazy Pubbies, how about giving us back our toilet-choice freedom? Can you at least get rid of federal toilet laws?
No? Not even talking about minuscule freedoms? Then what good are ya?
Since Zell Miller is not in my district, I can't imagine myself voting for a dem. Vote for a CONSERVATIVE, or stay at home!
So that's a valid excuse for doing nothing?
I want a list of every RINO everywhere - U.S. House and Senate, state legislators, city councils and county commissions ... get that on my desk by 5 p.m.
I question the timing of this.
No, but a national majority party is always going to have two 'wings' to it.
The Democrats are now the minority party because they destroyed their 'conservative' wing by forcing it to vote for Clinton tax raises and gun control.
The best way to handle RINO's is to make them irrevelant in the Party by having an overwhelming majority of solid conservatives.
Yet, the reality of national politics is that some regions of the nation are more liberal then others and will only elect RINO'S.
A RINO is therefore better then a Democrat in that same seat if that RINO is only needed to maintain our majority and is not consulted for policy decisions.
You have a realistic option you can win with: Vote (D).
Let us know if you get better results.
On a good day we have maybe 46 Senators when not counting the obvious RINO's.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.