I’m A So-Called RINO…BITE ME!
Oct 7th, 2008 by RSmitty
I’m fed-up with the purists that have stolen my party. I’m fed-up with those in MY party accusing people like me of being morally bankrupt. I am indeed fiscally-conservative, hence I am a Republican. I am very much socially-CONSCIOUS, making me, in my mind, centered.
That last sentence above makes me the bane of existence for the purists that want people like me expunged. YOU use the term RINO in a derogatory way in a BLATANT attempt to discourage our participation. NO, I will NOT become an independent. NO, I will NOT leave. I grew up in this party and I know what this party used to be! I was a part of it. I am a part of it. I WILL be a part of it!
If you are so rigid that you can’t accept people like me, then no matter. The pressure coming soon, going up against your rigidity will cause you to crack and crumble into a pile of dust. The winds of change are coming and your pile of dust will blow you away, the way a few generations ago entered.
Fool yourselves no longer. In our current state, we should be ashamed to call ourselves the “Party of Lincoln,” or “The Party of Teddy (Roosevelt).” I’ll add another one that you never hear and the silence of it is indeed shameful. The Party of Edward Brooke. How about Margaret Chase Smith? Remember HER? We should be ashamed because we really have little identity left with these VERY REAL AMERICAN HEROES. Call me a RINO, indeed (that’s an indignant “indeed”). I know where I personally stand and it’s among the GREAT ideologies of these four I mentioned and many like them. Along witth me are your so-called RINOS. We are here and we never left. Yes, we foolishly fell asleep, but we are coming back and won’t make that mistake again.
LEARN! LEARN to listen and LEARN to accept. Learn to constructively challenge and learn to allow change.
I AM a so-called RINO, but I am a REAL REPUBLICAN.
Great post RSmitty.
Guess it was your last one here, huh?
LOL. Nah. You know what I expect in the comments here, but who am I in my beliefs if I sit on my hands?
Nice job, Smitty. Couldn’t have been easy to write.
Oh, I cringed as I hung my finger over the mouse, trying to click “submit.” As soon as I did it, I felt 300 lbs lighter.
That’s my new diet plan, by the way.
I’m a little bummed, though, that I won’t be able to look at and respond to the comments at work, though. My ultimate hope is to get real dialogue opened and bring REAL change. Wait, this is a blog. What am I saying? I am going to get TRASHED! BRING IT!!! WOO!
You are a hero, Smitty.
thx, but I simply espoused a strong opinion. “Hero” is humbling but far beyond what I think I deserve for putting words on a blog. Heroes are those who go to war while I am at home. Political heroes are those who put their livelihood on the line for what they believe is right. That is why I mentioned Lincoln, T Roosevelt, Chase-Smith, and Brooke among them.
Change will come, but effective change takes time and effort.
Oh, man…the Delaware Liberal writers are showing their support. I am in some serious, and I mean seeeeeerrrrriiiiooous trouble!
Great, now BOTH parties want to round you up and shoot you.
(with water pistols of course)
Nice post. The very attitude you are describing is the same one that made me choose not to join the GOP, and instead try the Libertarian party. I fit both parties equally, as I sit on the line between them.
What finally pushed me over was the fact that the national party sells themselves out, and looks as if their ideals are for sale to the highest bidder.
That, combined with the extreme religious pandering pushes many modern thinking republican minded fresh blood away from entering your party.
I sincerely hope your battle finds that you are not alone, but i think it is a losing battle.
I sincerely hope your battle finds that you are not alone…
It won’t be a quick one, that’s for sure, but I don’t think I am alone at all, Brian.
… but i think it is a losing battle.
My ideology isn’t, nor ever will be, for sale; therefore, I will never lose, regardless if the party truly recognizes its roots or not.
“Oh, man…the Delaware Liberal writers are showing their support. I am in some serious, and I mean seeeeeerrrrriiiiooous trouble!
Just let them hump your leg a little. DO NOT let them stash a pod in your house. You’ll never be able to go to sleep again.
Lee Atwater sold your party’s soul to the devil my man, and the devil always collects. Good luck trying to get the single issue voters to recognize your right to your Republican heritage. You are talking about the same folks who can convince themselves that the Earth is 10,000 years old.
It’s less government except when it comes to your personal freedoms and responsibility. Now on the other hand, if it’s big business, well, then less government regulation and oversight is always the answer. Such hypocricy its downright laughable.
Ok, you liked the Republican party when it was a failed minority permanent party. The real heritage of the party is when it was a people’s party of fiscal sanity, national security, and a guardian of public moral standards. It opposed slavery, abortion, segregation, and favored free soil, building the infrastructure such as the railroads, civil rights, women’s rights, strong business policies, and sound money. That was the 19th century.
Jason is so correct–Newt changed it–but Atwater started the whole negative branding via GB Sr. , and now we have this. Interesting though, we went low, and the Dems followed. It’s all lousy at the top–keeping it local may keep it purer–which is why WE MUST as D’s, R’s and just citizens cry foul where we do have control–and not let the seepage run down. An encouraging and hopeful sign was the Markell victory–and I’m so proud of the Dems for doing that in this state. Now, if only we can get them to see the wisdom of a Copeland in the #2 spot. Incredible skill set, working knowledge, openess, and great understanding of the issues at hand–not just a one trick pony. And really, he has a day job, so he didn’t need to do this as a career–let alone make it known, what 2 years ago?!!! I really believe he’s here to help Delaware…and I hope the parties aren’t too narrow minded to let this one get away. I’m sure there’s a nice spot somewhere in Dover in need of Mr. Denn’s talents; but be honest; it shouldn’t be LtG at this time..too soon, and too green on issues. By the way..I caught the debate/forum at White Clay…even more convinced Copeland is needed at the Governor’s side..incredible “real, working” solutions, and not committees, and programs, and surveys, and additions, etc., etc., etc. Denn can be up and coming perhaps..but not for this job.
David, I’m not sure I understand what your saying. Correct me if I am wrong, but did you basically say the Republican Party Smitty yearns to return is dead and buried; thus, making it the Party of Lincoln, T Roosevelt no more? Please clarify.
You are a hero Smitty for standing up for your principles while those around you are reinventing theirs to be aligned with the current powers that be, and the powers who want to stay in power. The Party of Lincoln had a proud history and does not exist in any form that Lincoln might recognize it. Except, perhaps, for people like Smitty (who is not alone in being very disappointed by a party that left him) who are left trying to figure out how to get their party back.
Speaking of RINOs, Russell Peterson is looking good at 92…
wdel.com/story.php?id=690710675889
(WDEL identifies him as an R, but didn’t he switch?)
Atwater started the whole negative branding via GB Sr
Nope, the disrespect and anti-liberal rhetoric started with Reagan himself, at least in its contemporary form. In historic context, Republican anti-liberal rhetoric is simply a descendant of Red-baiting slander.
Interesting though, we went low
Republicans lapped it up when they were winning, and only seem to regret it now that it has stopped working for them.
and the Dems followed.
Link, please, to ANYTHING from a Dem that equates to the Willie Horton ad or the Max Cleland/Osama morph.
The party of Lincoln was the party I described. The 19th century Republican party is the model not the Dewey, Chase -Smith /Eisenhower party.
I support the heritage of the GOP. It’s real heritage, not the Country Club hijacking of it that Reagan reversed. This had always been a pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-civil rights party. Teddy Roosevelt supported a federal marriage amendment.
I don’t support the revisionist history. The GOP had years in the wilderness because it was culturally separated from the people. It is wrong headed to go backward. I welcome the entire contingent of the party. We have to build coalitions. Only about 35% of the people are down the line conservatives. We need half of the center right segment. Some are fiscal conservatives and some are social conservatives. We don’t need to win the liberals. We don’t need to dilute our message to appeal to them.
“We don’t need to win the liberals. We don’t need to dilute our message to appeal to them.”
How’s that working for ya? Seriously, I think you are over-estimating the appeal of the Far Right message. Seems to me the social pendulum has swung too far to the right, and if the Republican Party wants to gain ground they need to move back towards the middle. Have you ever considered that your unyielding ideology scares people?
We don’t need to win the liberals.
You guys don’t even know what a liberal is anymore. Years of distorting the facts have left the word with no meaning in your mouths. You have trained yourself to keep saying that all Democrats are liberals, when in fact most are centrist. Most Dems who care enough to blog are progressive activists. But if you name your three most hated liberal policies, especially in the extreme form often cited on this blog, you will probably find rank and file Dems don’t even support those policies..
The revisionist history is, as usual, the perview of those who need to rationalize the behavior of their party at any cost. TR pretty famously tried to address the business of marriage in the context of the Mormons and Utah being added to the Union. His concern was plural marriage and easy divorce in Nevada. But hey, sometimes the only way to be proud of your group is to rewrite its history.
The GOP is still culturally separated from the majority of Americans. An organizing principle of God, Guns and Gays hasn’t helped to educate anyone, hasn’t helped to solve any of our infrastructure problems, and certainly wasn’t useful in staving off the current financial crisis.
How did he want to define marriage? Did he think that it was an important enough issue to be a federal issue? How is that rewriting history. Teddy was pro-life and pro-marriage. That is a fact. The idea of same sex marriage would have gotten you tossed out of all three major parties.
Look at who tightened the abortion laws in the 1870′s. You can’t claim it is something new. That is my point. The evangelicals were at the founding of the GOP. When the party departed from that base, it blew a 70 year majority status. When it came back to it, it became a majority party.
Pandora, It works well for us. You still have to govern well. The problem is that the administration is not a fiscally conservative administration. I agree with them on social issues, but they have mismanaged the government. People want a government that works.
DA, what was the last fiscally conservative Republican administration? It was the Bushes or Regan. Gee, you might have to go back to Eisenhower.
*wasn’t* the Bushes or Reagan
The magic unicorns have put everyone to sleep and made them think Reagan and Bushes are fiscally conservative, while Dems are out of control tax and spenders.
Shhh…. you’ll wake them up.
Whoever broke it doesn’t matter. The party is broken, close to splitting down the line between fiscal conservatives with modern values and fiscal conservatives with Amish values.
If you don’t fix it, there will be a split in our lifetimes.
David – Do you believe that Lincoln was an evangelical? Wasn’t he accused of being an atheist on several occasions?
Part of the issue here is that the political parties were reshuffled through the end of the 20th century. Sadly, the Democratic party was the home to the Dixiecrats. They have pretty much moved on the the Republican party and are now “The Base” of the republicans.
I miss the Dixiecrats.
Your Party membership has been revoked please report to Bob Jones University for re-education.
noman-how about a little local ad showing Senator Roth falling over? is that low enough for you?
noman-how about a little local ad showing Senator Roth falling over? is that low enough for you?
Joanne… I don’t think there was an ad showing that, or even discussing it. I think you are just remembering news video and coverage. All the online references I could find point out that Carper tiptoed around it and didn’t make an issue of it.
BTW, when are you guys changing your banner to Mitt.
I ABSOLUTELY saw it and was HORRIFIED when I did–TWICE!!! After that, it was buried–and yes, I remember the interviews of his daughter, who was in medical school at the time, commenting on the piece. I do like Carper–my husband and I were shocked this was out of his camp–and no doubt Roth was too humiliated to comment himself, and I believe never did.
People tend not to remember Carper from his tight races and the ads he condoned to better his campaign. To put it bluntly…it made him come off like a dick each time. The Roth ad did happen and his crap with Evans was just as low.
To Dave: Oh my.
As for Smitty’s post, I think what he’s referring to is the same the Nemski pointed out in a post today. The GOP as it is currently is owned by “The 30 percenters.” Read it and weep. Then your Republicans will realize what’s happened to your party.
Except I said it before Nemski! Nahhny nahhny boo boo!
Yes, you did RSmitty. Watch out for tomorrow when I unveil my secret past as a Young Republican.
We need a new base. Maybe we have to come up with a quota system that limits the number of born again evangelical anti-evolution anti-abortion anti-gay anti-government anti-tax anti-opposition anti-mainstream media people. Say we limit that group to 20 per cent and fill all the other slots with mainly normal people.
Good post, Smitty, although it sure is hilarious to read all the denigrations of the GOP coming from the cretinous pond scum of the DE Liberal set. The only “change” the GOP should make from their perspective will NEVER satisfy them ANYWAY for the change would require becoming Democrats.
I am indeed fiscally-conservative, hence I am a Republican.
Found the source of your conflict, right there. Republicans think they own fiscal conservatism, but they do not.
Republicans want to defund programs they are opposed to. That is not fiscal conservatism; it is simply politics.
The first challenge to Republican-style fiscal conservatism is mathematical: You cannot cut discretionary spending enough to balance the budget.
The other path to fiscal conservatism is to tax enough to pay for your spending.
Democratic fiscal conservatism wants to restrain spending, but also tax enough to pay for what we do spend. The last time Dems tried that, it worked. In fact, it produced such a big pile of money that the Republicans took over on a promise to redistribute it to their friends.
Now it looks like Dems will get a chance to run the same plays again, even though we are starting from much further behind than we did in 1992.
David – Do you believe that Lincoln was an evangelical? Wasn’t he accused of being an atheist on several occasions?
He was also accused of being a black baboon. No serious person ever confused Lincoln with an atheist. He was a confessing evangelical, but I was referring more to the activists that founded the party. The Unconditionalist Republicans who were the moral and intellectual conscience of the party.
Part of the whole equation that’s missing is personal accountability. I believe that if I make a decision, I should live with the consequences, either good or bad. for example, if I sign a contract to pay a mortgage and the rate is going to reset, I shouldn’t expect the government to bail me out when the bill comes due. I believe if a bank writes a $400,000 interest only mortgage to a family that makes $50,000 a year expecting that the property will appreciate, they will flip it, make money and get paid back, I shouldn’t expect the government to bail me out when the housing market goes to hell.
I believe that life begins at conception and there are proven methods to prevent conception from happening. Why take an innocent life when you could have worn a helmet into battle? I believe that I am the best judge of how to grow the funds I earn. I accept responsibility for market fluctuations and cycles. I know best what risks I’m willing to take and what companies I want to invest in. I belive that it’s important to believe in a power greater than all of us, but don’t belive that any political party has the right to tell me what or who my God is. I believe in a strong economy that let’s people live their dreams by not by government overtaxing or overregulating them to death. I believe we need to worry about people here in our own country before we send foreign aid to some third world regime that is going to squander the check. I believe that if you come from another nation, are willing to work hard, learn our language and contribute to our society, we should welcome you are part of the American family. You will make us all better by bringing your heritage and beliefs and traditions to our family. Howver, if you sneak into our land illegally simply to enjoy our freedoms without making a positive contribution , I believe you get a one way ticket back from where you came.
I believe in hard work, sacrifice, faith and family. I believe that the Republican party has the potential to embody all of those beliefs but is too busy worrying about telling me what I should belive rather than understand why I belive what I do. I believe we need a more inclusive party that can actually field inspired candidates for office.
On that subject, whatever happened to the universally accepted notion that the business cycle is necessary and unavoidable? The governement can blunt the effect, but is as powerless to prevent it as it is the weather.
“I believe that the Republican party has the potential to embody all of those beliefs but is too busy worrying about telling me what I should belive rather than understand why I belive what I do. I believe we need a more inclusive party that can actually field inspired candidates for office.”
We may believe in such things but on average people don’t vote for them. All the Delawarians that voted for McCain in the primary certainly didn’t. People tend to forget that being a maverik has nothing to do with being more inclusive, in fact it is the opposite. Maveriks tend to exclude everyone. Imagine how strongly we might be supporting McCain if he haddn’t spent so much of his carreer excluding us.
Also, too few inspired candidates are willing to stand up and enter the political cespool. When they do, they tend to be voted down in favor of the candidate who offers more of the same.
The GOP was on its way to extinction when the Goldwater revolition took place. What followed was a sellout by the so-called ‘establishment’ that was disdainful of grass-roots activism and felt allegience to the board-room country club set.
Many saw the Republican party doomed by what was called a ‘debacle’ yet a new sprit was born. The triumphant LBJ crawled out of Washington four years later and Reagan was making a name for himself that began with a speech and eventually led to the White House. The Carter Years should have taught the nation a lesson.
Regrettably, there are still a lot of Republicans who think only in terms of generic victories. Principles are to be bargained away in back room deals. But it is principles and issues that put fire in the belly of activists.
We can never forget that politics is the art of the possible. However, when cooperation is defined as an incremential and irreverable abandonment of principles by a few self-styled aristocrats who fancy themselves to be party leaders, the spirit dies and so does the party. Remember the fate of the Whigs.
The idea of a greater respect for the Constitution should not be taken as a sign heresy. The base could be broadened by taking on both populist and libertarian (note the intentional lacke of capitalization) principles. Should the GOP be seen as the tool of big banks eager to gouge the last penny from the average person through a variety of ‘gotcha’ schemes? Should credit card reform be allowed to be the domain of the left? Adam Smith did not seem to be a vocal proponent of legalized usury. A trip along route 13 reveals a lot of fast-buck establishments offering ‘payday loans’ to unsophisticated borrowers. The ‘vigorish’ is often higher than mob loan-sharks demand. Yet what ‘respectable banks’ are maintaining these establishments as fronts?
Candidate Brady offers the hope of getting some of the insurance company scams under control.
Why does Representative Castle have such an animosity to the civil right embodied in the Second Amendment? Does this reflect an elitism or simply concern for the welfare of criminals seeking the softest possible targets?
We need an energy policy that is based on the real world and not trendiness. Hydrocarbon fuels are the most compact energy source (in terms of calories/kG) for mobile applications. We should have been drilling domestically on a grander scale 10 years ago while alternative energy sources are developed. Nuclear power has been sabotaged by neo-Luddites and we have lost a lot of the industrial infrastructure needed to get back on track. Our ample coal reserves and cheap electricity from nuclear power could make hydrogenation (liquid fuel from coal) economically practical.
The old decision between a choice and an echo needs to be made before Delaware becomes more like Maryland and New Jersey in terms of politics and taxation.
A party more dedicated to principle could inspire a broadening of the base and a new vigor. But where are the issues being raised? There is ample reason for outrage. When will steps be taken to deal with a continuum of thuggery at the DPC? Were it not for the courage of the nurses, would it even be noticed? These brave women have been threatened and been the victims of vandalism? Who dared to stop the shredding orgy that was blatant evidence tampering? How many perpetrators have been indicted or convicted?
Is political business as usual going to make a better state or nation?
The Unconditionalist Republicans who were the moral and intellectual conscience of the party. David Anderson
Note that Lincoln was originall an activist in the Whig Party. The Whigs were created as a backlash to the thuggishness of Andrew Jackson and the economic ruin that his policies created. The Whigs managed to get two men elected as President and both died in office. One of the accidental presidents was booted from the party while still in the White House and the other became a joke who ran for the Presidency as the ‘Know Nothing’ party.
The Whigs waffled on slavery and that was the hot-button issue of the day. The Republicans were formed as a viable alternative and were soon the majority party.
The party really hit bottom in 1940 when utility executive (and former New Dealer) Wendell Willkie hired a ‘rent-a-mob’ that chanted ‘We want Willkie’ and stampede the convention. He was allegedly the new hope of the GOP, if you read editorials in major newspapers but his positions were soon identical to those of FDR. This political messiah went on to found the New York Liberal Party. Some rescue effort!
Later saviors were John Lindsay of New York City. He eventually did a party shift. Then there were the struggles of Nelson Rockefeller to buy the GOP nomination. I suspect that he died with a smile on his face that had nothing to do with politics.
The Gospel of St. Mark has a passage warning of the poor bargain when you gain the world but lose your soul. Perhaps some self-styled ‘leaders’ would do well to take this advice.
This is an excellent thread that has turned into some real hashing out of thoughts on my point. I agree with some, but certainly not with all. You all are on a roll!
TOM – Personal responsibility, and let-live. Excellent!
David A – on the business cycle, you’re right. We have not seen it all. If my friend is right, we are about to see a tidal wave of Personal bankruptcies over the next several months…most Chap 13 (care to guess why), as well. Also, this recent sub-prime mess was mostly from the 5 and 7 ARMs, guess what hasn’t hit yet? 10 ARMs and the HELOCs that close the lines at 10 and introduce Prin. Ouch.
Tim – Your last paragraph is spot on and that’s a big problem. A lot of the “new” see this and wonder what’s the point. The “more of the same” usually has most of the establishment to propel them in a primary situation. The Dems got Markell past Carney, yes, but is Markell really “new?” Plus, he has the personal cash, most of those who would be “new,” don’t have it.
Art – I thought I was with you, then I wasn’t so sure. My feeling is that you are generally where I was at, in that today’s Republican leaders should “remember the fate of the Whigs,” not the type of Party I seek to gain from my post. Am I right or wrong with that conclusion?
The difference between the pragmatists and the fanatics, is that the pragmatists understand that our conservative ideology is not a suicide pact. From what I read here, it sounds like conservative fanatics have a masochistic streak, where they seem to get off on the pain and suffering sticking to a bad plan causes. What exactly is it that is so holy about “the conservative ideology” that we should all suffer for it instead of trying other ideas.
Tonight on TV I heard a “conservative” repeating the line about low taxes create jobs, raising taxes will kill jobs. Somebody asked him why America created 10 million more jobs in the 1990′s with higher taxes, and lost millions of jobs since 2001 when we lowered taxes. The only thing he could say is: Who ya gonna believe? My ideology or the facts? I just wish these guys would start their own party and stop embarrassing the rest of us who are agile Republicans looking for what works not what suits some old dried up theory.
I agree with Smitty and I am also Republican who already voted absentee for MCCAIN because he is hero. My reasoning is probably different than his.
DA’s comments above make smitty’s case for him. DA is a dope.
Frankly, I’ll take the stodgy old country club real conservative Repub Party over the party who thinks a moron is a great choice for vp just because she had a baby and might be able to read.
I want a party that backs a war hero without reservation and does not attempt to blame him for the loss even before the votes have been. Listen and read carefully. The ground work is all being set out for november 5 blame game against Sen. McCain and its disgusting. What they really mean when they say want to see more of Sarah Palin is that they could care less if McCain wins.
Its as if these talk radio idiots that form the base of this “new” Repub party that DA describes feel like they have the moral authority to blame McCain even after having never really supported him during the primaries and grudgingly supported him until the idiot from Alaska showed up.
Its sick that a Hero like Sen. McCain has to put up with this bullshit from his own party. This never would have happened in the “old” party where service, credentials, and honor meant something.
Shenanigans – This is clearly the year of parties turning on their own.
Tom – Excellent articulation of your POV. With the exception of your stance on abortion (though your comments in regard to contraception were spot on and the ‘wearing a helmet’ part made me smile), I agree with you wholeheartedly.