Tuesday, November 24, 2009

A GOP 10 Commandments?

Really? I'm not sure this will help the GOP at all.
The resolution invokes Ronald Reagan, and noted that Mr. Reagan had said the Republican Party should be devoted to conservative principles but also be open to diverse views. President Reagan believed, the resolution notes, “that someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent.”

Hence the provision calling for cutting off Republicans who agree with the party on seven of 10 items. The resolution demands that Republicans support “smaller government, smaller national deficits and lower taxes,” denial of government funding for abortion, and “victory in Iraq and Afghanistan.” It calls on candidates to oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants and repealing of the Defense of Marriage Act.
So if you only support 7 of these...you're SOL?
(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 health care;

(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.
Sadly, Allen Quist and Michele Bachmann added this up and support 11 out of 11.

Note #9. Republicans bundle health care for for "vulnerable persons" with anti-choice rhetoric. So in the GOP eyes, you can't support health care for a senior or low income person but support a woman's right to choose.

So, what do you think? Is this a good idea for the GOP to strengthen it's base? Or will it result in more NY 23 type races?

1 comment:

eric zaetsch said...

I can get seven just by going with the word "oppose."

Dr. No, = GOP

And what about saying no to drugs, Nancy Reagan's thing (that's eight oppose items); or being for law and order; Nixon's euphemism for Southern Strategy, aka racism.

What ever happened to old Republicanism?