Skip to comments.Purity or Strategy: The Debate We Need To Have: Would you rather put up with a RINO, or a Democrat?
Posted on 02/23/2014 11:43:17 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Last week, there was one of those mommy-and-daddy-are-fighting moments on Fox News as two powerhouse conservatives debated one of the most important issues facing the right. In one corner, was the dagger-sharp and stunningly beautiful and did I mention beautiful Ann Coulter. In the other corner, was the valiant, good-hearted and, you know, perfectly presentable in his own way Sean Hannity. No one can doubt either the patriotism or the fearlessness of these two. You may sometimes disagree with one or the other, that’s fine, but it seems undeniable that both have the good of the country first and foremost in their minds. Plus Ann’s really attractive.
You can watch the video to hear the whole thing but the gist is this. Ann thinks we have to stop “shysters” who pretend to represent the Tea Party from luring us into endless primaries against “establishment” Republicans. The thinking behind this (as I’ve heard her say elsewhere) is that there is only so much campaign money to go around and it needs to be focused wholly on defeating Democrats, winning a Republican majority in both houses and using that majority to “repeal Obamacare, repeal Obamacare, repeal Obamacare.”
Sean took a more purist Tea Party line, saying there are some Republicans who “should be defeated,” and endorsing the idea that we should primary the RINOs where we can and my words here not his we should end the civil war within the Republican Party by winning it for the true conservatives.
Just to let you know where I stand emotionally, here’s a true story. The first time I made a speech before a Tea Party crowd, I felt as if I were floating two feet off the ground. I respected, admired and agreed with the Tea Partiers so completely, that my heart rose up and I began to believe that despite the Obama debacle, the country would ultimately be fine. As I was leaving the rally, I got a call from a friend asking me to come by for a drink with a couple of the highest-ranking Republicans in Washington. It was me and them, having a glass together, eye to eye. By the time I left that gathering, I was so depressed by the establishment GOP’s blindness and philosophical corruption I could barely see straight. I phoned Andrew Breitbart for moral support. “I’ve just had a drink with [blank] and [blank],” I began. And he responded immediately, “Are they ***holes or what?”
All my sympathies, in other words, are with the Tea Party. And I would truly love to see the RINOs skewered on their own horns.
And yet… In general, Tea Party candidates tend to do well in congressional races where small, homogenous districts are in play. In Senate races where you need votes across an entire state, a primary victory for someone like Christine O’Donnell or Todd Akin may briefly fill the conservative heart with joy, but the loss of a Senate seat that could have been won is simply too high a price to pay for that momentary triumph.
We need to talk this out with good sense and without pompous ranting. Politics is the art of the possible. Writing belligerently purist articles, blog posts or comments is relatively easy. Winning elections is hard. Barack Obama is one of the most destructive presidents this country has ever seen, but a talented politician. If stopping him in his tracks requires stomaching some RINOs here and there, it seems a no brainer: It must be done. Ann may have put her case a little too forcefully in the debate above (she’s not exactly given to dithering!), but surely she’s right in the general principle that strategy and victory have to come before purity.
I’d rather put up with frustrating RINOs than continue in the minority with our country under attack from within. But let me know what you think.
And I say we have to stop shysters who pretend to represent the GOP.
Work like hell to defeat the RINOs in the primaries. But I won’t shed a tear if they get defeated in the general either. They’re nothing but turncoats anyway who will cost us dearly in the end.
You stand on principle, even if you stand alone.
There is a Great Judge who presides over all peoples and nations - and sacrificing principles for expedience betrays not only those principles - but the Creator who mandates His people abide by them.
Socialism, Marxism, Fascism, RINO-ism - are all tools of the Adversary - who HATES the principles of individual liberty, freedom and responsibility.
You do not compromise principles with ideas anathema to your foundations and God-ordained rights.
Something the ‘art of the possible’ people lecture us that we need to do in order to ‘win’ elections.
There is NO WINNING elections after Communists and Marxists achieve the highest offices of power in a nation.
With a demonrat you know what to expect from get go, with a RINO you never know when they will go full on Benedict Arnold.
NO we don’t want the liberal Willard...
Ann and Sean, don’t bother to pimp him...
Pick a few ‘purple’ district House members and run a third party candidate against them if they win their primaries.
Just a few.
It will scare the House RINOs into line.
In the Senate I guess we’ll have to stick to primarying the RINOs unless there is a very exceptional third party candidate.
If it wasn’t for Harry’s new anti-filibuster rules we could be stricter (and that’s why I don’t think the RINOs really minded the new filibustering tules).
And yet....there's the rub, folks.... there it is in all its Vichy glory. I guess the author should give Thomas Sowell a call and they can swap columns. Just damn.
RINO by a hair, but it also matters which RINO (some are more to be influenced by Conservatives than Democrats, some are not).
Tom Coburn=a conservative influenced RINO, John McCain=Obama/Hillary Lite.
So the first guy and his type (yes), the second and his type (no).
Here we go again.
Do we want the enemy in our tent?
RE: Here we go again.
Of course, the issue will always be there... especially now and 2016.
Do you vote for purity? Or the lesser of the two evils?
I will vote for conservatives
How come those who want to vote the “lesser of 2 evils” will throw a candidate under the wrong for a single dumb comment but a career of undermining conservatism is fine.
I want to win elections. You fight with the army you have. Many here want to purge our ranks then hurl ourselves on Valerie Jarrett’s bayonets while she gleefully twists the blade.
What kind of words do we have to use to get through to them?
RINOs doesn’t work - it just slides off them like water off a ducks back.
They use every Roget’s Thesaurus word that can be imagined for ‘settling’ but it still ends up that. Lowering standards, lowered expectations, appeasing, relenting. Or the great words - REALIST and PRAGMATIC... But they’re all still words for the same doggone thing. Capitulation.
Where are the words like ‘standards’, ‘promises’ and ‘principles’?
Nowhere. All we get are more and more ooga-booga “you’ll get a Democrat if you don’t vote Establishment.”
I'll go one further, and say DO NOT vote for a RINO in the general, even if it means the Dem/Liberal wins. If one supports the RINO, because they are the "lesser of two evils" in the general election, then one is doing nothing but continuing to send the message that it's OK for the GOPe to put forward liberal Republicans for election and liberal polices in office.
I will not vote ever again for a known RINO. I voted for McCain because he brought on Sarah Palin, but never again. A RINO is worse then a Democrat, because a democrat isn’t being a hypocrite about what they want. We don’t win elections when RINOs get in.
Don't Be a Krony!
The RINO’s are the ones who demand purity more than anyone. Oh No, that candidate is right on the issues but he said something dumb in a debate, “UNDER THAT BUS we need to vote RINO instead”