Viguerie: RINOs Aren't The Problem

Prominent conservative Richard Viguerie is actually arguing more against any litmus test, than he is actually suggesting conservatives overlook RINOs. I agree with him on the litmus test, bad idea.

Along with pointing out non-conservative policies advocated by Rove and Bush for the sake of winning, or pragmatism, and how conservatives went along for the ride, what he's actually arguing for is a change in leadership. But his methodology presumes RINOs wouldn't make it through the primaries. That's still really the first step given what he has in mind. 

National conservatives who want to fix the Republican Party shouldn’t waste their time forcing symbolic litmus test votes on the Republican National Committee. Instead, they should consider focusing their considerable energies on solving the real problem. Now is the time to put new leaders at the helm of the House, the Senate, the RNC, the NRCC, and the NRSC.

A litmus test is only as good as the character of the person who endorses it. It’s easy for professional politicians to say they support something in order to pass a test that gives them access to campaign cash. The more important test is true devotion to the limited government principles embodied in our Constitution.

The road to new leadership for the Republican Party goes through the 2010 primaries. The current Republican members of Congress aren’t going to throw McConnell and Boehner out. But the Republicans elected in November of 2010 can get that job done.  Conservatives can help make that a reality by supporting boat-rocking principled  conservative candidates in the upcoming primaries, and making sure they win in November.

Comments

[democratsarefascists]

The party doesn't need fixing.

I am the party.
Other Republicans are the party.

The party leadership needs replacing.

The RINOs are the problem.

[Huey]

RINOs are not a problem. Never have been a problem. Never will be a problem.

Once one faces the political reality that there are some parts of the country where a "pure conservative" simply can't get elected (and, frankly, this is usually determined in a PRIMARY where even the REPUBLICAN voters reject hard-core conservatives for a more "moderate" one), then one recognizes the truth of the above paragraph.

RINOs serve because they are ELECTED. They are elected because they get more VOTES than the rest of the field. For the most part, those candidates who are more "conservative" FALL SHORT of the necessary ingredient of GETTING ENOUGH VOTES.

"Republican" isn't an IDEA; it's a PARTY. Anyone who self-identifies as a "Republican" IS a "Republican." Anyone who is ELECTED with an "R" after her name increases the number of REPUBLICANS in office -- increasing the potential for the PARTY to assume greater control of the political process, i.e., committee assignments and committee chairmanships (not to mention Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader -- titles which carry great POWER.)

Fight against the more "liberal" Republicans in the PRIMARIES if it is thought that a more conservative candidate can actually win in the general election (and, there really aren't a whole lot of areas where a "conservative" CAN'T win)... but, after the PRIMARIES -- VOTE FOR THE PARTY.

Because, it ain't just about that ONE representative -- it's about TOTAL NUMBERS of "R's" and "D's"

[Mark A. Flacy]

Huey: 'Because, it ain't just about that ONE representative -- it's about TOTAL NUMBERS of "R's" and "D's"'

An "R" that votes like a "D" isn't voting for me.

[Huey]

Mark: I understand. I have Landrieu who hardly "speaks for me" either, heh.

I totally agree that Snowe and Specter and suchlike vote too often like what they are, left of center, i.e., "liberals," and the rightful home of "liberals" is the Democratic party.

That's not the underlying point, though. Snowe is ONE of a needed FIFTY-ONE.

What I mean by this is simple: If you agree that there are some areas of the country where it is difficult, if not impossible, to elect a right-of-center "conservative," then the goal should simply to find an "R" who is ELECTABLE -- not for the votes she will CAST, but to increase the number of total "R's" so that CONTROL of the legislature will be in the hands of those who ARE true, conservative Republicans.

To put a finer point on it:

1) In the primaries, conservatives need to promote conservative candidates. The National Party needs to promote conservative candidates. Or, to be more precise, as conservative as they can BE and still WIN in the targeted area.

2) But, once the primaries are over, whichever "R" is the party candidate, no matter how left of center she might be, IT DOESN'T MATTER, because it isn't THAT vote which then becomes important, but the overall NUMBER of "R's" so that control is in the hands of the Republican PARTY, which, as a result of the efforts in the PRIMARIES in pushing CONSERVATIVE candidates will be CONTROLLED by CONSERVATIVES.

Failing to do this (holding your nose and supporting left-of-center Republicans, i.e., "RINO's") has the almost CERTAIN result of giving that seat to an equally (or greater) left-of-center DEMOCRAT, increasing THEIR numbers for control of the legislature.

We see the results of NUMBERS every day. In the greatest part, all but a very small handful of "R's" and "D's" vote WITH THE PARTY when called upon to do so. It is in their interest to do so most of the time.

Anyway, that's just the way I see it...push for conservative candidates in the primaries but, if you can't get one conservative enough for your tastes, it's in YOUR interests to support whichever "R" is offered, not for HIS vote, but for the increased power of the party as a whole.

[syn]

So if the candidate supports government health insurance MANDATES, raises their hand to fraudulent global warming climate change, defends illegal immigration amnesty and sanctuary-city polices, is pro-choice, stimulus-bailout advocate, want Big Govt money to fund bogus embryonic stem-cell science which creates tumors why then would this candidate want to run as a Republian?

I appreciate not every district will vote for 'conservative" (though NY-23 and NY gov race dispute this theory) however I do not appreciate the Moderate-Centrist sitting on the fence paly both parties.

Moderate-Centrists, instead of lecturing Conservative on what not to be, why not spend the time figuring out what it is you want- you cannot play it both ways without evolving into a state of confused mush.

I voted for an Centrist-Moderate "R" during the NYC mayoral race in 2001 and I ended up with a Mommy-Nanny Statist who bans stuff, believes in Global Greenie fraud, thinks terrorism is no big deal, has bloated the education budget ($20,000 per child-highest in the nation), provides tax-funded free condoms yet NYC is the abortion capital of the world, and to top ios all off-NYC tax rate is still the highest in the nation.

So no, not every place will vote for Conservative however if Moderate-Centrists continue voting Big Government then we all will be losers.

Why are Centrist-Moderates not pressuring the Democrat Party to conform to Moderate-Centrists ideals (whatever they are) instead of constantly harping on about how Conservatives should conform to Moderates-Centrists?

[syn]

One other point; sometimes I do think ending the 'war on drugs' would be sensible for the survival of the republic.

This way, Libertarians-the party pot, porn and dirty dealing with dictators because the profit margin is greater- will be so occupied with getting stoned and jerking off to internet porn that anarchists will no longer be problematic.

[syn]

I met Pat Toomey who was seeking my generous campaign cash and during our meeting expressed my excitement for Marco Rubio. Toomey told me Rubio could not win. Interesting, I am observing quite a bit of excitement revolving around Rubio.

I was disappoint and thought to myself 'if big government REPUBLICAN Crist wins the Senate seat then his vote negates small government Pat Toomey' so what matter if either win if their Senate votes negate one another.

As a result, Marco Rubio is receiving all my campaign cash I would have otherwise sent to Pat Toomey.

Lastly, if Republicans continue running Big Government candidates to attract Centrist-Moderates then Pat Toomey should quit the race and let Arlen Spector win.

[seekeronos]

At the end of the day, I'd much rather see a solid, Old Right limited government conservative in my local congressman's office than either a RINO or a Democrat of nearly any stripe.

Living in NY state as I do, though... typically means having to choose between a far-left socialist democrat and a centre-left socially liberal/big-spending/possibly defense hawk RINO.

But if there is a true conservative or a Constitutionalist that makes the primary ballot, I'll "waste my vote" on that conservative Every. Single. Time.

Same also if he runs on a Conservative Party or Independent party line (thanks to NY's funky electoral fusion laws).

Barring any better candidate than the RINO and the socialist... I'll vote for the RINO only if there is no alternative, following the argument that putting a RINO in the seat will at least work toward restoring control of the House to a party that is at least slightly more close to my own ideological stirrings.

[seekeronos]

And I'll agree with you on this Syn - bless her sweet soul for anything else, but Nancy Reagan's face on the "War on Drugs" was indeed a dark day.

I do wish that that futile "war" would simply go away, though it would mean reducing the DEA down to nothingness (le gasp!)

It just might save money, too, to say nothing of removing a crutch for race-baiters so quick to blame the old Rockefeller Drug Laws for the incarceration of 15% of the nation's black youth.

[Tom Grey]

Incumbents, generally, are a bigger problem than RINOs. But primaries to get Conservatives as the Rep candidate are where the pro-life, pro-tax cut, win in Iraq/ Afghanistan voters should be pushing to make a change.

Most voters support two of the above three positions. Reminding voters of how great the Bush tax cuts were is pretty good thing, right now.

Tax cuts work more quickly, and more effectively, for reversing any economic decline, than gov't stimulus.

[Vitamin C]

I've been reading and enjoying your excellent blog for years. Very happy to join your community here. My brothers and I recently started a new blog called Palin Drone (www.palin-drone.blogspot.com), which we are very excited about. In fact, I linked to your Smerconish story today. Like you, I am also a professional writer with a book due out soon (www.watersignsnovel.com). Hope to see you again in cyberspace. Take care! :)