Re: Republican Purity Test
GLOBALIST
or the Scarlet Letter. They will have to weed out the infidels.
Evelyn
"Rita" <Ri...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:76rng5hc5vq24todd...@4ax.com...
> I wonder if the Republicans in this group measure up on the
> "purity" test?
>
> The New York Times: "A group of conservative Republican leaders is
> proposing a solution to the internecine warfare over what the party
> should stand for: a 10-point checklist gauging proper adherence to
> core principles like opposing government financing for abortion and,
> more generally, President Obama's 'socialist agenda.' In what was
> being dubbed a purity test when it leaked out to reporters on Monday,
> the proposal would require the party to withhold campaign money and
> endorsements from candidates who do not adhere to at least seven
> principles on the checklist."
>
> The principles in the resolution include fairly basic proclamations,
> like "We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting
> military-recommended troop surges," along with trickier propositions
> that have bedeviled the party, like one opposing amnesty for illegal
> immigrants - a form of which President George W. Bush was accused of
> supporting.
>
> The resolution also calls for "Republican solidarity in opposition to
> Obama's socialist agenda," specifically citing the climate change "cap
> and trade" proposal and "government-run health care."
It was pointed out last evening on the Ed show, that Ronald Reagan would not
pass that list. :-)
They continue to shoot themselves in the foot. :-) Good news for the
dems!
--
Evelyn
"Even as a mother protects with her life her only child, So with a boundless
heart let one cherish all living beings." --Sutta Nipata 1.8
Islander
---[snip]---
>
> So that�s five fails and just one unconditional pass. Yep, even St.
> Ronnie wasn�t conservative enough for these people.
>
Here is the resolution in its entirety. I wonder how many Republicans
realize that not only would Reagan not pass the purity test, but that
much of it is self-contradictory! It is impossible to pass it!
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/11/24/some-conservatives-push-a-purity-test-for-gop-candidates/
(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits
and lower taxes...
****How is it possible to reduce the national debt and lower deficits
without raising taxes? There is not enough discretionary budget to do
it! Reagan found this out the hard way!
(2) We support market-based health care reform...
****What exactly does this mean? We already know that free market
health care results in costs that increase more rapidly than inflation
and provides inferior care. By reform, do they mean regulation? How
else is something that is market-based reformed?
(3) We support market-based energy reforms...
****There is that statement about market-based reform again. What are
they proposing? Reform would be making companies pay for the damage
that they do to the commons. Wait, isn't that what cap and trade does
by using a market-based approach?
(4) We support workers� right to secret ballot...
****Speaking of workers' rights, how do you protect workers' rights if
you prevent them from electing to join a union. Card Check is nothing
more than a petition to form a union. Are the Republicans opposed to
petitions?
I could go on, but this is boring...
Rumpelstiltskin
wrote:
>Rita wrote:
>---[snip]---
>>
>> So that�s five fails and just one unconditional pass. Yep, even St.
>> Ronnie wasn�t conservative enough for these people.
>>
>
>Here is the resolution in its entirety. I wonder how many Republicans
>realize that not only would Reagan not pass the purity test, but that
>much of it is self-contradictory! It is impossible to pass it!
>
>http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/11/24/some-conservatives-push-a-purity-test-for-gop-candidates/
>
>(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits
>and lower taxes...
>****How is it possible to reduce the national debt and lower deficits
>without raising taxes? There is not enough discretionary budget to do
>it! Reagan found this out the hard way!
On this group, a year or two ago, I went through a federal
budget for the prior year, and found that the dollars of
discretionary spending in the budget was not even as much
as the dollars that had to be paid that year on the debt that
had already been run up since 1980.
<snip>
Rumpelstiltskin
<snip>
> On this group, a year or two ago, I went through a federal
>budget for the prior year, and found that the dollars of
>discretionary spending in the budget was not even as much
>as the dollars that had to be paid that year on the debt that
>had already been run up since 1980.
I meant "the dollars that had to be paid that year
IN INTEREST on the debt"
Islander
solution is to cut taxes and reduce the debt as if the two weren't
incompatible! Their explanation is that all one has to do is cut
spending. This seems to have become some immutable truth for them and
they don't need to think any further. And, they get away with it!
Jean Smith
Islander <nos...@privacy.net> wrote:
They could do it by eliminating the Black Budget which no one would miss.
--
http://northalabamahealthcareforall.org http://healthcareforamericanow.org/
http://aarp.convio.net/site/PageNavigator/Myths_vs_Facts http://snopes.com
Check http://politifact.com http://healthcarefactcheck.com/
Know your stamps http://www.snopes.com/politics/stamps/eidstamp.asp
Islander
> In article <R9adnf7-2ZqlWJHW...@rockisland.com>,
> Islander <nos...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Rumpelstiltskin wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:35:02 -0800, Rumpelstiltskin
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On this group, a year or two ago, I went through a federal
>>>> budget for the prior year, and found that the dollars of
>>>> discretionary spending in the budget was not even as much
>>>> as the dollars that had to be paid that year on the debt that
>>>> had already been run up since 1980.
>>>
>>> I meant "the dollars that had to be paid that year
>>> IN INTEREST on the debt"
>>>
>>>
>> It is amazing to me that the Republicans get away with this. Their
>> solution is to cut taxes and reduce the debt as if the two weren't
>> incompatible! Their explanation is that all one has to do is cut
>> spending. This seems to have become some immutable truth for them and
>> they don't need to think any further. And, they get away with it!
>
> They could do it by eliminating the Black Budget which no one would miss.
>