Tuesday, November 3, 2009

RINO Referendum

The Poll question on the Fox News website is whether or not this is a referendum on Obama and although I see and hear more enthusiasm over an odd year election then ever before, certainly evidence suggesting an anti-Obama referendum, that point will be debated in the same fashion sports talk debates the impact of instant replay rules changes. It will create a lot of discussion and all have little bearing on what actually happens.

The real referendum needs to be on those Republicans In Name Only; the ones that leave conservatives with fewer choices at the polls and less representation when it is most needed. In some cases RINOs a la Specter just leave us all together.

I really hope that Tuesday's election becomes a "teachable moment" for the Republican party. Let's start with Doug Hoffman's loss, All the moderates and power elite pundits will cite Hoffman's lack of charisma as the reason -- bzzzt, wrong. Was it Scozzafava playing the spoiler? Her late departure from the campaign left no time to remove her from the ballot, particularly ones already cast in early voting. Her turncoat endorsement of the Democrat candidate in her robo-dialer telephone messages certainly didn't help either. All of it amounts to no real departure from the field of play. Her departure is kind of like the electoral equivalent of a trigger option, or a 3:00am 400 page amendment to a bad piece of legislation. In other words it was underhanded politics of an unprincipled elitist.

But let's not mistake that the real failure here is on the part of the local and national Republican Party leadership. Again, there was too little, too late; an utter failure to get their act together in a timely fashion. In the spirit of the Tea Party grass roots movement, a relative unknown with less money and little formal party support was able to close the gap on his own. The lesson for the RNC is that backing a real conservative early and often gives the people a chance to mobilize and act which stands a much better chance of creating the necessary momentum for victory.

Open Letter to New Gingrich:

As I heard you in a replay of one interview from a week ago you told the radio host that whoever the Republican Party nominates you will support. Newt, as one caller remarked, you have committed political suicide for a Scozzafava. Her politics were so liberal on every policy that a blind political neophyte could have smelled her liberalism a hundred districts away.

You've made your Faustian bargain with yourself, party first, principles after (if at all) and now you will inherit a handful of your own wind. Don't waste the postage and ask me for campaign contributions. You can't have my money of my own free will because you plan to take it foreceably by bargaining with a bunch of tax-icrats.

This, your most recent act to support a RINO may become your overaching legacy. Even if it does not write that final chapter of your political career, I am closing the book on you.

Open Letter to Hollywood Governor who thankfully can not ever run for President, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger:

I heard an excerpt of a a speech you gave recently thanking Vice President Biden and President Obama for the Stimulus money that "saved or created jobs" in your dysfunctional state of California. I am still waiting on you to send me a Thank You letter because after all, it wasn't THEIR money you received. It WAS MINE! Save a stamp and include Thank You cards to my daughter and son because the money the Obamakins borrowed to fund stimulus is ultimately theirs.

P.S. If the unemployment rate in California is on the decline it is only because out of work job seekers are leaving the state to look for jobs in more hospitable business climates.

Finally, Open Letter to RNC Chairman, Michael Steele:

My two other letters are open so that you can read them and understand why all your mail to me remains largely unanswered and without a check or credit card number included in those sparse few responses I have returned.

I cannot will not send you my ham.
I cannot will not, my good man.

Thats because those funds would go to support Crist instead of Rubio next year in Florida. Donations to the RNC have already gone to support a candidate like Arlen Specter instead of Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania. By the way, does Specter have to pay back that money now that he changed parties? - probably not. Those funds have gone to a Scozzafava instead of Hoffman where they were needed most. You are spending people's donations on candidates that betray conservatives every day.

I've read Aesop's fable about the Eagle shot down by an arrow containing one of it's own feathers in the fletching. I won't make that same mistake and support the efforts of so many of these RINOs in your midst who clearly want to kill the Eagle, making an enemy of the patriotic, conservative, middle class Americans of which I am one.

My campaign contributions can pass "Go" and you will not collect any of them. Because of the internet I can support real conservatives directly and without your help. My question to the RNC is "are you with us or against us?"

P.S. Michael, I see as of this morning that you trying to spin this as a referendum on Obama's policies and that's an easy target. Be sure you realize that this is a bigger referendum from the Tea Party right. We're tired of politics as usual on both sides. Don't misread the signs and get lulled into the sense that you can run a bunch of RINOs at us in 2010 and take back Congress. We are where we are right now because of that failed strategy on the part of your predecessors.

I heard Dick Armey commenting specifically about Gingrich. He said that the key to another Republican majority most certainly did not involve compromising core values.
Sticking to core principles and campaigning as a true conservative is not a new idea. It is not some untested strategy. It's tried. It's true and it has resulted in success rather consistently.

In this excerpt from a Malkin piece we hear the most successful Republican of the last century on that very same topic:

Conservatives are not demanding "purity." They are simply abiding by Reagan's own wise counsel in 1975: "A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers."


No comments: