[Non-Sequitur]

Besides, this is the business of the Kansas GOP. I'd feel the same way if my state party let Dim advocates into leadership positions or let them run ads for Dims.

I am in the Kansas GOP. And I can understand the need for loyalty among those recognized as leaders of the party, though that should not require an oath for them to do the right thing. I find it mildly surprising that the most opposition seems to be coming from the wing of the party you would least expect defections from.

[George W. Bush]

I find it mildly surprising that the most opposition seems to be coming from the wing of the party you would least expect defections from.

They might fear a Rudi nomination when they would then be compelled to vote for him and endorse him, etc. Or conservatives in some parts of the state may feel their prospects of getting a Blue Dog elected that favors gun rights over a local RINO might be used against them.

Loyalty oaths of this type really are generally a suspect notion. But I think the line is pretty carefully drawn. Still, this is you guys' business, not subject to Cornhusker approval from moi. The NE GOP has plenty of its own problems. Like the membership of Hagel.

[longtermmemmory]

If a right to life leader has a need to support a democrat in a particular year as a leader of THAT organization then they simply should not be in a leadership position of the republican party. It is that simple.

Party leadership is for the party, NOT personal political power. Ticket splitting when you are a republican party leader is a blatent form of personal power.