Per Ace. The RNC is vetting a set of 10 clearly stated principles; candidates agreeing to at least eight would be eligible for GOP support.
(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;
(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;
I like the idea, if not the particular choices or wording above. Locally I hear much reference to “core Republican values” but few seem to be able to articulate exactly what they are in words. This leads to misunderstanding, party disunity, obfuscation and mal-recruitment of candidates.
Please discuss.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Supporting X by opposing Y? Not so much.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 5:20 pm
1) Define smaller government. It strikes me that conservatives are always in favor of such as long as it isn;t their particular ox that gets gored.
2) Nonsensical. The market has had control of health care, and no reform is to be had or even seen. The only way to have “market based” health care reform is for the government to step in and manipulate the market. This conflicts with number 1, and makes no sense whatsoever. Consider, if you will, that the market goal is to make more money. You don’t (absolutely can’t) do that by covering more of the “uninsurable”, lower costs or actually offer more actual health care. Lucy, chu got some splainin’ to do …
3) See Doug’s comment. Cap and Trade may not (probably won’t) work. But one doesn’t evoke principle by what one opposes, only by what one favors.
4) A total lie. Card Check doesn’t mandate release of private voting practice.
5) See Doug’s comment. Apples and Oranges. Illegal immigration has nothing to do with legal immigration practice.
6) Spending more money for larger government involvement in other countries? Parish the thought. Now you’re in favor of international handouts of blood and money? What happened to number 1? Forgotten already? Here’s a pop-quiz: Define “victory”.
7) Containment has been our policy and it hasn’t worked. Please show me, or anyone, how it has.
9) Contradictory goals.
10) The only point I can agree on completely, because it’s the only goal that doesn’t contradict another or itself.
Face it, Carol. The only principle at play here is fighting the Straw Man of the liberal agenda. That isn’t principle. It’s obstructionism. These aren’t “ideas”; they are tenets of dogma. Hate this, hate that, hate anything that others want to accomplish. That is the only statement being made here.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
So we don’t get your vote?
JUST kidding..yeah we could probably do better than this, but they were put out for comment after all. The parties have platforms but there are so many accretions to it over the years, I doubt the average voter or even party member know what’s in them.
I just wish there were some way to assure people we’re on the same page, even if we’re not running around with our hair on fire about these issues at any given time.
As for Porkulus, opposition works for me.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 5:54 pm
You know the list is a good working outline to build on. It’s getting the particulars right that’s always the hard part but ultimately, it reflects a conservative pov.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Then I propose this:
1) We support leaving more money in the hands of tax payers. If government action does this (say, through health care reform even unto single payer) we support this.
2) Almost every study, including by the CBO, says that single payer or a strong public option supports goal one, and we favor goal one.
3) We support gas exploration in America as long as tax dollars are spent on industry which supports long term savings. We are in favor of the repeal of energy industry subsidies and the establishments of local energy coops, such as the publicaly owned and profitable Montana Power was.
4) We admit that unions have the right to organize in order to bolster the right of workers (real Americans) in America to demand fair price for labor as a commodity. If labor wages are traded on the “free market” we support such, until such time as foreign entities unfairly trade in this market.
5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society. We are opposed to illegal immigration and favor return of illegal immigrants. Stronger statute is needed to accomplish this goal.
6) We can, given our superior military and diplomatic might, define victory among the conflict our allies engage in, and can help them achieve their goals regardless of our interest.
7) We uphold the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive strike against any country threatens the security of our borders.
(8) We believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, as defined by our biblical view.
9) Abortion in the US must end by … date X.
10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.
At least at that point, you’d be honest.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 8:52 pm
We support local business versus centralized decision-making and foreign-owned corporations and sovereign funds … unless those big corporations bankroll our election campaigns and military expansions.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Nor bad, kind of like Fanfare for the Common Man. Needs a little work.
One thing you guys have always done well is speak on the same level as the man on the street. I mean, you’ve screwed him royally, but at the same time, using wedge issues like gun control, abortion (where, or where is gamy marriage?) to distract them.
That’s politics, and for years you have been better at it than Democrats. I expect a Republican revival in 2010, possibly a presidency in 2012.
on Nov 23rd, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Sorry - I meant “gay” and not “gamy” (Freudian?), and it’s #8 - your bases are covered!
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 6:54 am
Well, thanks, Democrats, for being so helpful on this. Oh, no wait you’re Independents, I forgot…
Any R’s out there?
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Oh, don’t get me wrong. Democrats are all about screwing the common man too. They just don’t do the Duckspeak as well as you. They feel his pain as they inflict it.
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Hey, weren’t the Repubs in charge for the last 8 years? How many of these goals did they accomplish?
And you’re going to fall for it again?
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
Sorry you didn’t understand the post, Steve.
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 2:40 pm
1) I support a balanced budget amendment and oppose any generational wealth transferring ponzi schemes.
(2) I support individual choice in health care and control of one’s individual self.
(3) United States’ sustainable self sufficiency is of paramount importance in energy policyl
(4) Labor has the right to organize, workers have the right to work whether they join a union or not.
(5) I support legal immigration that provides valuable resources to the nation.
(6) I support our allies in Iraq and Afghanistan who are dedicated to reason, education, individual rights and self government, and recognize that abandoning those allies would result in Pol Pot like genocidal slaughter of teachers, women, children, and all those who oppose superstitious establishment.
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
(8) Marriage is a civil, legal state open to two unrelated adults of a certain age, as determined by the states.
(9) Health care, abortion, medical choices, are all basic Lockean individual rights of control over one’s physical self.
(10) I support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Carol-
Republican candidates have always espoused these things.
On the Federal level, they’ve never gotten anything done for you. I’m sorry you don’t understand your party.
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Well written, Goof.
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Steve, I am looking for feedback on (1) whether there should even be such a list (or litmus test?), and (2) If yes to #1, what should it say. Goof has risen to the occasion. Thank you, Mr. Hoolihan.
Oh, and Wulfgar, too, though I don’t think he votes Republican.
But the silence of others suggest to me that the party may not be ready to sign off on anything like this. It is quite transparent. If someone fails to live up to the tenets, then it becomes painfully obvious.
I do think the original version is too specific to what’s going on right now.
on Nov 24th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Good news for Democrats: The Associated Press is reporting “some 40 percent of patients with consciousness disorders are wrongly given a diagnosis of a vegetative state.”
on Nov 25th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
It never ceases to amaze me, that campaigns and governance are so detached from one another, that politicians can say virtually anything they want to get elected, and then do anything they want once elected, and then go back to the voters and rinse and repeat.
We’re a sound byte culture. Lists like this are about as meaningful as New Year’s resolutions with a massive hangover. They last exactly one day, and then it is back to business as usual.
As a people we are ill-informed and so under-educated as to be defenseless against the most painfully obvious propaganda, like “drill baby drill”.
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 8:33 am
1. We support FREEDOM!
2. We support GOD!
3. We support GUNS!
4. We suport our GENERALS!
5. We support MARRIAGE!
6. We support FETUSES!
7. We support the FLAG!
8. We support the TROOPS!
9. We suport REAL AMERICANS!
10. We support FREE MARKETS!
Here’s my abbreviated version. Easier to remember for the teabaggers. They can put it on a little card so that they don’t look like the morons they are on TV interviews. Have you SEEN the interviews these folks give? I would handa these cards out prior to every teabag event.
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 9:20 am
LOL.
And where have you been??
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 10:31 am
Carol, there’s really nothing left to say. It’s pretty much over as far as I concerned. Time to hunker down and survive. The corporatations won. That should be pretty clear to everyone by now. The middle class has been eliminated. We are fast becoming S. Ameica. The systems are no longer in place to effect change. As Mark T. eloquently points out, there’s no one left to vote for. Both parties are identical. The pentagon has replaced the state dept. as the foreign policy making body, and Bush effectively placed deep moles in ALL branches of government make real governance impossible. I can barely read the news any more. Endless war for oil companies IS our foreign policy, and continued transfer of wealth to the wealthy IS our economic policy. Thus, I have retired to the ranch to live out my days in wonderment of how things went so awry on our marvelous experiment in democracy. Of course, I never give up hope, but I am not optimitic.
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 10:35 am
p.s. The ONLY things that keeps me in this country are Montana and the grandkids, otherwise I’d probably find a nice place in Mexico to live out my days.
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Carol, thanks for posting this.
First off, I’m against a litmus test for the party. We’ve got a platform, which can be changed - good enough for me.
The proposal is at the RNC level - the issues that are relevant to a New Englander are not the same as here. A candidate in Montana does not face the same issues as a candidate in California.
Ultimately, we should be including more people, candidates or base, not turning them away.
on Dec 8th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Steve, problem is, then we have the RINO problem. Who is really a Republican? Does it mean anything, and if so what? How does this list differ from the GOP platform other than being shorter and more concise?
It would not matter so much, but we are in grave danger of a mutiny on the right.