Republicans May Consider Test of Purity

5173860Members of the Republican National Committee are pushing a resolution built on "conservative principles and public policies" and opposition to "Obama's socialist agenda" that Republican candidates would have to largely accept and adopt if they want the party's support.

The New York Times reports that ten RNC members have signed onto the resolution, which was circulated today. It contains ten principles, among them support for the Defense of Marriage Act, gun rights and "military-recommended troop surges" in Iraq and Afghanistan; opposition to President Obama's health care reform efforts, cap and trade legislation, a card check bill and amnesty for illegal immigrants; and support for "smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes."

Any Republican who breaks with more than two of the ten principles, the resolution says, would be denied the GOP's endorsement and money from the party for his or her campaign.

Republicans may debate the resolution, which invokes Ronald Reagan, at their winter meeting in Honolulu in January, which could put party chairman Michael Steele in a difficult spot as he tries to hold together the Republican coalition.

Republicans are now involved in an internal debate over to what degree their party can and should be a "big tent" that includes both conservatives and moderates. While tea party protesters and some lawmakers have pushed for the GOP to essentially excommunicate potential candidates with relatively moderate or liberal positions, other Republicans have suggested such a strategy is a mistake that will effectively keep the GOP out of the majority in Congress.

The Times has the full list of ten principles here.

[MichaelCrimmins]

This is my response to "G.O.P. Considers ?Purity? Resolution for Candidates".
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/gop-considers-purity-resolution-for-candidates/#more-54737

I am a firm believer in the intent of our Founding Fathers as they originally wrote the Constitution. As a candidate for Congress, I am a pragmatist when it comes to policy making and the role of the federal government. When electing a representative, you should foremost be fully aware of their principles and values. Elected officials should be held to the same high standards of conduct and behavior we hold our military officers too.

I have a long and proven history in public service. As a Major in the Marine Corps, I served over 20 years from Vietnam though Desert Storm. Later, I invested over a decade in the future of our children, as both a teacher and then a high school principal here in San Diego. In 2008, I was honored to be the Republican nominee for Congress against Susan Davis. With the developing momentum, she can be beat in 2010.

I hold the following to be some of my core policy values:

1. I support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes. I do not believe stimulus bills fundamentally save or create jobs or boost the economy. I believe all cases of fraud, waste, and abuse should be severely dealt with.

2. I support market-based health care reforms and oppose the option for a government run health care plan. Much of health care reform is non-partisan. These reforms include tort reform, lowering costs, increasing competition by permitting insurance policies to be sold across state lines and allowing groups to form coalitions to achieve lower prices. We should be drafting and voting on 3 to 5 specific bills to reform health care; not one massive overarching bill.

3. I support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and tax legislation. Consumers and businesses are taking tremendous strides to go green, whether by installing solar panels, recycling, building the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) qualified green infrastructures or by purchasing carbon credits to lower their impact. The market is setting the precedent for responsible business operations. We do not need to tax businesses out of business for the sake of lower carbon emissions, especially when India and China have no restrictions.

4. I support the workers? right to a secret ballot by opposing card check.

5. I support legal immigration and welcoming legal immigrants as proud new citizens into American society. However, I oppose rewarding illegal entry with amnesty for those who broke our laws. Many of those who aspire to live and to work in the United States are great people with a rich heart, strong family values and an impenetrable work ethic. I welcome them to stand in line, share in the American Dream and pay taxes. We can do this by implementing an effective guest worker program and immigration reform package that includes due process, tamper-proof identification cards and a path to citizenship.

6. I support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges. Supporting our troops should never be about polls or public relations or the agenda at hand. It must always be what is best for the security interests of the United States and the safety and security of our troops, our true national treasure.

7. I support containment of Iran and North Korea and particularly in effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat.

8. I support the traditional family values. These were at the very core of our Founding Fathers, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

9. I oppose health care rationing, the denial of health care and the government funding of abortion.

10. I fully support the Second Amendment and oppose any further government restrictions upon it.


Major Michael Crimmins, USMC (Ret)
Candidate for United States Congress (CA-53)

Website: http://www.crimmins4congress.com

Facebook: http://facebook.com/michaelcrimmins

?Some people wonder all their lives if they've made a difference.
The Marines don't have that problem.? - Ronald Reagan

[thebob-bob]

The Republican Inquisition begins.
Ideology trumps Common Sense.
Ideology trumps Science.
Ideology trumps Economics.
Ideology trumps all.

Only the purist of The Pure. "Real" Americans, "Real" Christians.

Real Nutjobs. The Rightwing Lunatic fringe

[jrand2]

So, now they don't want candidates that think for themselves or represent their constituents. So much for the independent vote.

[babooph]

Pure" delusion" for themselves & the suckers who follow them...

[stn_sage]

My comments are as follows:

1. Purity test, huh? That kind of rhetoric sounds like the same thing the National Socialist Party pushed during the 1930s...they also were an extremist right-wing group of people...that eventually started WWII!

2. The 'standards' look a little shaky and inclusive to me. Traditionally, low taxes, less government, and little foreign involvement WERE the de facto GOP standards. Here, the standards are expanded to include amnesty for illegal immigrants, NOT what most Republicans are going to support! Let criminals go free!?

3. IF this is the 'correct' platform, then why would you allow ANYONE to violate even ONE of these resolutions?! You wouldn't! Hence, it's bogus.

Finally, the people calling for this would be wise to reconsider! Rank-and-file members will look upon this as continuing evidence of the 'mental meltdown' of the leadership of the GOP, and it will motivate them to continue the exodus to other parties!

[endurorob_5]

It sounds like a common sense stance.

[sleepyric]

Purity? Pure?? Pure evil maybe. Oh yeah,,,Sandford, Ensign, and all the others who can't keep their pants up. Yeah,,,really pure.

[ellenbrandtphd]

If you believe that as extremists at both ends of the political spectrum become more vociferous and divisive, many more Americans will move towards the Center, please join our brand-new Centrists Group at Linked In.

We welcome all who believe consensus is not only desirable, but possible, whatever their party affiliation or lack thereof.

Provocative, but cordial and respectful, discussions and debate on national and international issues. No Flamers, ranters and ravers, script bots, or clandestine political operatives allowed!

Please contact me at Linked In for an invitation.

Thank you so much.

Ellen Brandt, Ph.D.

[esq777]

This is really funny. So much for the "big tent." Of course, it seems unenforceable since any Republican who wants the money can do what they do naturally -- lie about their positions.

[tafhdyd]

Funnier than Sarah Palin.