GOP Unity Pledge
With the recent barrage of Party switching, it's become apparent that certain officials have decided that the glamour and allure of political opportunism far outweighs the importance of any stated Republican values they previously claimed to hold dear.
Because of this, Stay Red Kansas decided to draft a Republican Unity Pledge, designed to ensure that elected officials all over the State make the solemn pledge that they will never follow suit with opportunists such as Mark Parkinson, Paul Morrison, and most recently, Ron Wimmer and Rick Guinn.
In signing this pledge, Republican officials will provide voters with the solemn assurance that they will not abandon them simply because it may be politically expedient. Instead, they will be dedicating themselves to a lifetime of service to Kansas and its' Republican constituents.
Pass this on to any elected official you know. Encourage them to sign it. If not, ask them why. Hopefully, we can provide Kansas voters with a clear benchmark for their elected officials.
GOP Unity Pledge
I, _______________, promise never to abandon my present Republican Party affiliation for the purpose of political gain. The Republican Party, both nationally and domestically, was founded on sound and principled ideals, that include but are not limited to, personal liberty, individual freedom, responsive and citizen-based Government, life-affirming values, economic growth, strong and cutting edge military, low taxes and a mutual respect for fellow Republicans. Because of that, I will, at no point in my political or personal future, find cause to transfer my Party loyalty to any other affiliated organization.
I will not, at any future moment, become a registered Democrat for the purpose of seeking any political office. Additionally, I will not change my Party affiliation to that of any peripheral political party, such as the Reform Party, the Green Party or the Libertarian Party. Such a move would be not only opportunistic, it would be an unjustified trampling of everything that I previously claimed to stand for.
I care far too deeply about the previously espoused Republican ideals as well as the thousands of hard-working Republican citizens all over the State of Kansas to ever consider changing my political Party affiliation. I look forward to a life of citizen-serving, Republican political involvement. I thank the Kansas Republican Party, including all of the registered Kansas Republicans, for their years of service, good will and friendship.
I solemnly pledge to always be a Republican, no matter what promises are made by external forces seeking only to undermine the Republican values I stand for. I can have reasonable disagreement with members of the Republican Party; however, at no point will ‘Party switching’ or quitting of the Party be tolerable.
Signed,
X __________________________________
Because of this, Stay Red Kansas decided to draft a Republican Unity Pledge, designed to ensure that elected officials all over the State make the solemn pledge that they will never follow suit with opportunists such as Mark Parkinson, Paul Morrison, and most recently, Ron Wimmer and Rick Guinn.
In signing this pledge, Republican officials will provide voters with the solemn assurance that they will not abandon them simply because it may be politically expedient. Instead, they will be dedicating themselves to a lifetime of service to Kansas and its' Republican constituents.
Pass this on to any elected official you know. Encourage them to sign it. If not, ask them why. Hopefully, we can provide Kansas voters with a clear benchmark for their elected officials.
GOP Unity Pledge
I, _______________, promise never to abandon my present Republican Party affiliation for the purpose of political gain. The Republican Party, both nationally and domestically, was founded on sound and principled ideals, that include but are not limited to, personal liberty, individual freedom, responsive and citizen-based Government, life-affirming values, economic growth, strong and cutting edge military, low taxes and a mutual respect for fellow Republicans. Because of that, I will, at no point in my political or personal future, find cause to transfer my Party loyalty to any other affiliated organization.
I will not, at any future moment, become a registered Democrat for the purpose of seeking any political office. Additionally, I will not change my Party affiliation to that of any peripheral political party, such as the Reform Party, the Green Party or the Libertarian Party. Such a move would be not only opportunistic, it would be an unjustified trampling of everything that I previously claimed to stand for.
I care far too deeply about the previously espoused Republican ideals as well as the thousands of hard-working Republican citizens all over the State of Kansas to ever consider changing my political Party affiliation. I look forward to a life of citizen-serving, Republican political involvement. I thank the Kansas Republican Party, including all of the registered Kansas Republicans, for their years of service, good will and friendship.
I solemnly pledge to always be a Republican, no matter what promises are made by external forces seeking only to undermine the Republican values I stand for. I can have reasonable disagreement with members of the Republican Party; however, at no point will ‘Party switching’ or quitting of the Party be tolerable.
Signed,
X __________________________________
Signed!
Now I'm off to burn a few books. You in?
Reply to this
This is a very stupid idea.
First, the GOP doesn't really stand for stated ideals. Look at current GOP administration and last GOP Congress. They trampled on liberty and freedom and they have significantly compromised our national defense. We're a weaker nation as a result. And, this party has never shown anything like "mutual respect" for other Republicans.
You talk about "life-affirming" values but the Kansas Republicans have never passed any meaningful prolife legislation despite huge majorities. We've even had Tiller as prominent GOP donor in previous administrations. Your claim to respect life is hollow and meaningless.
Your comments about taxes are equally ridiculous. The biggest taxers in KS have always been Republicans.
Your GOP leaders have never honored the stated ideals, so why should voters be expected to make such a commitment?
Second, why don't we just pledge support to the values? The party be damned. I could care less about what social club somebody belongs to, I'm supporting candidate who represents my beliefs. I don't care if they are R, D, I, L or G. It doesn't matter.
Face the facts, political parties are an antiquated relic of an earlier era. People now have full access to information on candidates to make independent decisions. Political parties just aren't needed any longer.
You're asking people to become dumb sheep who blindly follow the leader ... not matter how bad the leadership or direction. People who embrace such absolute partisanship aren't very bright.
Reply to this
Hmm..some fire under your arse. Thinking of jumping ship soon or have you already?
Reply to this
I haven't jumped ship. But I'm not going to support Rudy McRomney. I'm tired of watching Republicans pretend to be conservative, only to end up with record deficits and pork. I think that the GOP has taken conservatives for granted.
Reply to this
The great purge has begun!
Reply to this
The guy above just doesn't get it. People who are running for office as Republicans, asking for Republicans to finance their campaigns and provide support for their campaigns, should be expected to have some level of honesty about their intentions.
If they don't sign the pledge - then that is fine - they can run for office in a Republican primary and see what happens. My hunch is that they lose and get zero financial support.
As for the ideals not being followed by GOP leaders - I agree. Some have failed. That is exactly why such as pledge is needed.
You have every right to support whomever who want but that doesn't mean that Republican officals shouldn't have to sign a pledge stating that they won't pull a Rick Guinn or Ron Wimmer. Rick Guinn was claiming loyality to the GOP when he was trying to curry favor with the JOCO prec. people, but then he bolts the party and runs as a democrat. That's not just shady - that's outright lying.
I hope all Republicn officals sign the pledge. Ones that don't won't get my vote.
(I'm not saying that you have to agree with everything the GOP stands for, but if you run as a Republican than you should be expected to stay a Republican and support other Republicans. If you want to run as an Indpedendent, then run as one, if you want to run as a Democrat, then run as one)
Reply to this
You complain about all these partyswitchers. But, why?
What positions have the likes of Guinn, Wimmer or Parkinson changed? They're the same guys with the same views. They were centrists Republicans. Now they're centrists Democrats.
It's been pretty well established on this blog that the political parties don't mean much. We have liberal and conservative Republicans. And, we have liberal and conservative Democrats. There isn't much of an underlying ideology for either party.
That being said - that parties don't mean mean ... why is it such a big deal to switch? There's zero difference between GOP or Dem. So, what difference does it make?
I'm not upset at Parkinson & Co for switching.
I'm far more upset at the like of Tiahrt and Roberts for going to DC as limited government advocates only to build the biggest bureaucracy ever. I'm far more upset at so-called conservatives who vote for record deficits and out of control spending. Those are the politicians who are guilty of outright lying.
Reply to this
You misspelled 'leftists', it does not start with 'cen'.
But really, these guys are opportunists. The only thing they really believe in is power for themselves.
Reply to this
So, the GOP leaders are excused from following ideals. But, everybody is required to march in lockstep. That makes no sense.
Why don't you get Bush, Rove and the RNC to start behaving like Republicans? Why don't you get Congressional Republicans to start behaving like Republicans? Why don't you get Johnson County moderate legislators to start behaving like Republicans?
Once that happens, I might consider the pledge. But, until that happens, you're just giving the us a onesided deal.
"Vote for the Republican incumbant or nominee, no matter how bad they are" - that's what you're saying.
You sound like a typical politician. It's me me me. I say that I'll embrace partisan loyalty once a see a party worth being loyal to. Loyalty is something that needs to be earned. The Republican doesn't deserve it.
Reply to this
I disagree with the earlier comment about people not being honest when they switch parties.
I don't think that party affiliation is a major factor for voters in determining who to support.
If party affiliation was a major factor, then there wouldn't be a single Democrat officeholder in the state because the GOP has an overwhelming majority.
The simple fact is that Republicans sometimes vote for Democrats and vice versa. This shouldn't surprise anybody. My father was a lifelong Republican, but always voted for the Dockings. And, I know more than a few Democrats who gladly supported Kassebaum.
I don't think that anybody who supports Paul Morrison was particularly upset when he switched parties. If you look at the numbers, a very big part of his Johnson County support followed him and voted for him as a Democrat. They just didn't care about party affiliation.
There's really no backlash for switching parties. I don't think that I agree that political parties are no longer needed. They do a great deal of good work. But, I do think that if one party isn't doing what you want you should be free to consider going to the other party.
Reply to this
I don't think voters really care about party switching but I do think that GOP acvitists and donors care a great deal...so candidate who want to court those groups should sign the pledge...otherwise then switch parties or run as an independent...
Reply to this
Where would the GOP be without famous party switchers like Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, Henry Hyde,Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott, Arlen Specter, Jesse Helms,Elizabeth Dole, Phil Gramm, Mike Pence, Condoleeza Rice, Rick Perry, Richard Shelby, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and Billy Tauzin?
(If you're interested, Wikipedia lists around 80 notable Democrats who changed to Republicans)
Here's a quote from Winston Churchhill (who changed parties more than once) that sums up the idiocy of this post:
“Some men change their party for the sake of their principles; others their principles for the sake of their party.”
Don't try to purge people out of the party, and don't demand eternal loyalty. I have been a lifelong Republican. But if the Democratic Party once again became the Pro-Life Party and stood for tax cuts, limited government and a strong defense and the Republicans continued to waffle on those issues, I'd switch.
Politics is about principles. You join political parties because you believe they are the best vehicles to advance your principles. You may not agree with all of the platform (principles) of the party, but you join to advance the ones you care most about. When the party no longer serves that function, it's time to find a party that does.
Reply to this
Thank you Lifelong Republican. Very well said.
Reply to this
I lived in Oklahoma for ten years. Wes Watkins was my Congressman. He was a Democrat, then he switched and became a Republican. Wes was the biggest 2nd amendment advocate in Congress. I voted for him as a Democrat and I voted for him as a Republican. If he joined the Libertarian Party or Green Party, I'd still vote for him.
Reply to this
You apologists! Why even have political parties then? Why not just have an open election and allow everyone to run without a political label next to their name?
Perhaps because political parties aren't simply a vehicle for advancement as you seem to suggest - they're a group of like-minded voters with similar thoughts, beliefs and ideas about what Government should be. When you sign up for one, you're espousing the ideas of that Party. That's the whole reason behind them.
When candidates are loyal to a Party, they're not simply being loyal to a word or a letter - they're showing loyalty to a long-established set of beliefs, not to mention a ton of people. When they leave the Party because it no longer suits their career, they stomp all over those beliefs.
This all boils down to one fundamental question - why was it necessary for Parkinson, Neighbor, Wimmer, Morrison and Guinn to switch? Answer that and tell me that they left for ideals not ease.
Reply to this
Simple. They left the Republican Party is get away from the lunatic fringe that has destroyed everything.
I'm a former county chair from SE Kansas. I did not support Kline last year. The current county chair basically threatened me, telling me that I have was obligated to support Kline. That approach doesn't work. I voted for Morrison and there's not a thing that anybody can do about it.
The conservatives keep trying to force bad candidates on us. They keep telling us what we have to do because they control the party. That's what this pledge is all about. It's about a fringe minority forcing its views on others.
I wish that the Republicans would focus on getting popular candidates rather than forcing unpopular candidates down on throats. Instead of cracking the whip to try to get everybody in line, they should try to find politicians and policies that the people actually want to support.
I know that several of the people on this blog are political campaign directors and legislative aides. Take a piece of advice from an old man. Instead of barking orders and demanding obedience, you need to start listening to the voters and serving their needs. The party exists to serve the voters, not the other way around.
Reply to this
An old, former SE Kansas County Chair emparting his wisdom upon us..thanks, but no thanks.
A) The Party does not exist simply to serve the voters. Anyone that thinks he or she is greater than the Party is wrong and dangerous. The Republican Party is so much more important - than you, Phill Kline, Paul Morrison, conservatives, moderates, stupid Party squabbles - all of that.
The lunatic fringe that you refer to has not destroyed the Party. To the contrary, the Party is alive and well, holding huge majorities in the State House and Senate not to mention 2/3 of the Federal delegation. This is as bad as things will be for Kansas Republicans - and they're still pretty damn good.
If you're so easily willing to give up on things simply because of a conservative Attorney General that you didn't agree with, then perhaps you need to move on. The Republican Party is a place for moderate and conservative Republicans - but it's not a place for unprincipled Kansans either way. Pick a side and work for it, that's fine. At the end of the day, though, we're all Republicans. When mods start biting the bullet and supporting the Phill Klines of the world and the cons do the same, supporting your Sandy Praegers, then we've completely regained our place.
Until then, why don't you work toward that end rather than the soft-skinned one you just proposed.
Reply to this
You're not alone. More than 1 in 3 Republicans couldn't vote for Phill Kline. The Republican Party is nuts if they think that it's proper to run these voters off.
Reply to this
From the Republican Party of Florida website:
I am a Republican Because
I Believe... The proper function of government is to do for the people those things that have to be done but cannot be done, or cannot be done as well, by individuals, and that the most effective government is government closest to the people.
I Believe... Good government is based upon the individual and that each person's ability, dignity, freedom, and responsibility must be honored and recognized.
I Believe... The free enterprise and the encouragement of individual initiative and incentive have given this nation an economic system second to none.
I Believe... Sound money management should be our goal.
I Believe... In equal right, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, age, sex or national origin.
I Believe... We must retain those principles of the past worth retaining, yet always be receptive to new ideas with an outlook broad enough to accommodate thoughtful change and varying points of view.
I Believe... That Americans value and should preserve their feeling of national strength and pride, and at the same time share with people everywhere a desire for peace and freedom and the extension of human rights throughout the world.
I Believe... The Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.
----
The Ks GOP used to have something very similar in their handbook. For all I know, it still does. Did you notice the last line? I am a Republican because I believe it is the best vehicle to advance my principles. When/if the day ever comes that the Republican Party ceases to be the best vehicle to advance my principles, I'll leave.
I don't like people leaving my party any more than the next guy. We feel like jilted brides left at the alter. The answer to the problem is to figure out why they are leaving and fix it. Those party switchers no longer believe the GOP is the party to advance their ideas. Why not? That's the question we must answer if we're going to stop the bleeding.
BTW - Not that it should matter, but I voted for Kline every time I've had an opportunity. I'm not an apologist for Morrison et. al, I'm just a conservative Republican pragmatist.
Besides, reading the devotion to party on this blog reminds me of my Soviet Studies classes in college. The party exists to help elect candidates that share common ideas and principles.
Reply to this
SRK, I'd say the general opinion is that your pledge is a dumb idea
Reply to this
disagreed. stayred - great idea. anyone refusing to sign this better have good justification for doing so.
Reply to this
Earlier post said "at the end of the day we're all Republicans"
What does that mean? Other than working with common elephant mascot, what do we all really have in common? Where do, say, Phill Kline and David Adkins find common ground? How many times do you see Sam Brownback and Carla Stovall take the same stand?
Despite what people on this blog claim, I do not see any coherent set of "ideals" tying Republicans together. Once upon time, I think there was a philosphy of limited government. But the Bush era has clearly embraced big government conservatism. Even the most simple GOP principle has been abandoned.
You can say that same about the Democrats. Mark Parkinson and Paul Morrison hardly fit the old Democrat mold of Walter Mondale and Dick Gephardt.
I think we in a new world where political parties don't serve the same function that they once served. Today, political parties are basically incumbant reelection PACs. They define Republicanism based simply of whoever is pulling the strings at any given time. Don't confuse that with idealism.
Reply to this
That, my friend, is a sad and hollow point of view. If that's the case - and I certainly don't believe it is - politics is no longer a forum for the people - and in the Kansas Democratic world, I suppose it isn't.
Reply to this
In Louisiana, David Duke twice won GOP nomination for statewide office. He was nominated for Governor and US Senate. Would you party loyalists support David Duke if nominated?
Reply to this
The Republicans nominated a candidate for Congress who turned out to be a con man who used campaign funds to buy a $1 million house. Are we obligated to support him?
Reply to this
In SD there was a ranking GOP legislator caught with kiddie porn and soliciting kid over internet. Are we obligated to support him?
Reply to this
George Tiller is a lifelong Republican.
If he got nominated for something would the people who sign this pledge support his candidacy?
Reply to this
What an irrelevant point.
Reply to this
I think that it's a good point. This pledge is about conservatives upset that moderates are walking out. What if the tables were turned? What if the mods took over the party and made everybody sign a pledge saying that the GOP was prochoice and every conservative was required to adopt the prochoice position?
Reply to this
But the party IS pro-life (check the national platform). That is why many people are in the Republican party, yet some moderates want to actively go against this basic tenet (instead of just remaining quiet). They use the issue to drive a wedge in the party. This is the same kind of issue that split the Whigs to form the Republican party--the basic rights of a group that has no voice.
Reply to this
The party is not pro-life.
Kansas has had 35 Republican Governors. How many have been prolife? Zero.
Before Sebelius, the past four Democrat Governors were prolife.
The prolife thing isn't a part of the GOP history or tradition. It's new. It came into the party with the conservatives in the early 1990s. Don't present prolife as a basic tenet to the party. The GOP existed without the prolifers for 135 of its 150 year history.
Reply to this
This is all silly, it is perfectly reasonable to demand that elected officials sign this pledge. It's a matter of sticking to your principles, it's a matter of showing some backbone. Of all those spineless party switchers, I say, "You can have em."
Reply to this
So you'll support David Duke if he get nominated for something.
Reply to this
Somebody always has to bring up David Duke. Of course, nobody is expected to support a NAZI like David Duke. That's just plains silly. All we're trying to do is encourage party unity.
Reply to this
If David Duke or a convicted felon like Adam Taff are on the ballot, then nobody expects other GOP candidates to support them. A unity pledge has nothing to do with that crap. It has to do with be honest about your intentions - something that all voters deserve. I think Republicans have a right to know if their elected officals plan to leave there party or not. If they don't want to sign it - then they don't have to. It's just about being honest.
About 60 to 70 percent of Republicans vote a straight ticket, so those voters deserve to know in a primary if the candidate that they nominate is planning on staying a Republican.
It is just about honesty, that is all the pledge is about
Any candidate who doesn't sign the pledge will not get my vote
Reply to this
I hope that this pledge doesn't circulate because average GOP voters will find it insulting.
I think that you've drafted this pledge for legislators and party leaders who might switch parties because the Democrats offer a better deal.
I think that I understand your intent. But you've got to recognize that straight ticket voters and Republican loyalists are a rarity. Statistically, Sebelius Moore and Morrison couldn't exist unless a sizable chunk of the GOP was voting for them.
Most Republicans vote for a Democrat from time to time. It might be Sebelius or Moore. Or, it might be a sheriff or county commissioner.
Splitting the ticket is very very common. Here, with this pledge, you basically call these voters traitors. I'd guess that this pledge insults the majority of GOP voters in the state.
For most registered Republicans, party affiliation isn't a deep philosphical statement. Rather, these voters are Republicans because they're from KS and grew up in GOP families. It goes no deeper than that. They tend to support Republicans first, but they'll support a Democrat if they like the candidate. Trying to enforce fidelity and ideological correctness on this loose voluntary group is only going to offend people and push them away.
Reply to this
I agree. The pledge will offend moderate and unaffiliated voters. It will also offend conservatives who support Reform or Libertarian candidates.
Reply to this
Good post SRK...I agree that this pledge is necessary...I think that all candidates should sign it and be excepted to stay with the party...Don't believe the Democrats who post on this site pretending to be Republicans...Those Dems would never put up with party switching in their own party...
Reply to this
These pledge isn't about voters who split the ticket.
It means that anyone who runs as a Republican should be obligated to be honest about what their intentions are
Very simple. The Democrats except the some thing
Reply to this
People don't vote for party. They vote for the person. So, candidates should be free to walk out on GOP when party fails.
If people voted for party, we'd never have Moore, Sebelius, Morrison, etc. It's obvious that party affiliation means little to Kansans.
Reply to this
Dennis Moore has largest cross-over vote of any member of Congress. He pulls a higher percentage of GOP votes than other member.
Party affiliation doesn't mean much in Kansas. Voters have no problem voting for somebody of other party.
Reply to this
All GOP officals better sign this thing. Many of us are getting sick of sour grapes Republicans like Guinn and Wimmer
Reply to this
The GOP could hold on to people like Guinn and Wimmer if they made a better deal than the Democrats. It's supposed to be a competetive thing. Kansas Republicans were spoiled with a one-party state for 10 years. That's over. Now, the GOP needs to do something to convince and persuade people to support it. The Republican Party seems very thinskinned. It doesn't hold up very well when challenged.
Reply to this
Screw the party! I don't think that the GOP represents the values stated in the post. The record certainly doesn't support a conclusion that the GOP is a party of ideals.
This pledge demonstrates everything that is wrong with Republican Party. We're putting partisanship above public interest. We're expected to support our President and his BS war no matter how bad it is for country. We're expected to support Phill Kline and Connie Morris no matter how embarrassing they have been for our state.
Instead of forcing support, I would like to see the Republican Party do something to suggest that it's worthy of support. Given the GOP's record of failure over the past few years, how can you possibly ask us to pledge eternal support?
Reply to this
The pledge isn't forcing anyone to vote for non-republicans, it simply asks people who want the privilege of running under the R label to be forthright about their intentions. Isn't honesty what we should shoot for here?
Reply to this
Good point sign the pledge, I agree completely
This pledge goes for conservatives who support Reform party candidates too
Reply to this
I completely understand that this pledge is not about rank and file members pledging to support the winner of GOP Primaries. Signing the pledge obligates no one to support a David Duke-type candidate who manages to get the nomination.
I still object to any pledge that requires someone to promise to do something for all time.
Phrases like "at no point in my political or personal future" and "at any future moment" are simply outrageous. Posters on here claim to want honesty, but signing this pledge is clearly a dishonest act. If the Republican Party no longer espouses the beliefs that makes a candidate a Republican, they will change parties. Whether they do it on a "personal" basis or "professional" does not matter.
I don't disagree that we have a right to expect a candidate for the Republican candidate for the Kansas House to remain a Republican once they are elected. I would like for those candidates to never have cause to leave the party in the future. However, to say that choosing to advance the Republican banner as a candidate for public office forever bars you from switching parties in the future is ridiculous.
Furthermore, signing the pledge will not have any impact on party switchers. None of these party switchers thought they would consider changing parties when they first ran for office. It wasn't until later in their career that they decided to change their party affiliation.
All of that being said, I do believe that any candidate to fulfill an unexpired term of an elected Republican (JoCo DA, Stephanie Sharp's seat, etc.) should pledge to remain in the Republican Party if they should fail to win the precinct committee race or lose in the subsequent Primary. I'm only talking about a short term pledge that is designed to stop Democrats from being elected in Party elections. Very limited.
Reply to this
As Republicans, shouldn't we be happy that the Democrats are recruiting our candidates? For AG last year, we had Republican Kline vs Republican Morrison. Isn't that a "win win" situation for GOP? If the Democrats are picking Republicans as their nominees, doesn't that mean that we've already won?
I'm quite happy with fact that Sebelius picked Republican Parkinson as her running mater. Having GOP-turned-Dem Parkinson is a 1000% better than having a real Democrat in the spot. I remember the type of people that Finney brought into state government. They were real Democrats and they were awful. I'm happier with moderate GOP turncoats than bonafide Democrats.
Reply to this
The SRK pledge is just silly! The way to have a relevant political party that attracts members and voters is to put forth ideas for governing that will improve the lives of our citizens. If conservatives are more interested in their beloved values and principals then have the courage to form your own narrow party with all the loyalty oaths you want. A party trying to win voters is large and diverse enough to negotiate common ideas for governance and then take them to the voters. It's always the social conservatives who love loyalty oaths, values purity and a "my way or the highway" approach to issues. Educated adults usually learn that they can't always have their own way but must figure out how to get along with others. Republicans will win back lost seats when they present candidates and ideas that citizens want not when they get enough loyalty oaths.
We're talking about a political party that is trying to win elections not some church of pure souls only.
Reply to this
Right. The pledge is a dumb idea. As usual, the conservatives seem to want to make the GOP a smaller party. How many people need to run off before the conservatives get a clue?
Reply to this
In addition to the loyalty oath, we should create a special Republican tribunal to review allegations of "un-Republican activities." Kobach, of course, should chair the tribunal. Other members should include representatives of Opus Dei, Koch Industries, Club for Growth and just about anybody from Olathe.
Any moderate Republicans, independent Republicans, libertarian Republicans, prochoice Republicans, humanist Republicans, Jewish Republicans, gay Republicans, non-white Republicans, non-native-English-speaking Republicans, foreign-born Republican, funny-looking Republican, and any other "undesirables" will appear before the tribunal and be given the opportunity to confess their "RINOism" and beg for mercy and forgiveness.
If the tribunal believes that the "undersirable" is sufficiently repentant, he or she will be sent away for "re-education" at a special camp. Otherwise, the "undesirable" will be forever removed from party rolls (but continue to get the fundraising letters and telemarketing calls during dinnertime).
Reply to this
Somehow we need to incorporate a "foot-washing" ceremony.
Reply to this
SRK, I'd say most of your readers don't like the pledge
Reply to this
Is the state party really asking candidates to sign this pledge?
Reply to this
I am a dedicated, principled, outspoken conservative.
I spoke out against Bushes war before he took us into it. Many in the GOP ranks told me to shut up.
I spoke out against border security three years ago. Many in the GOP ranks told me to shut up.
I have spoke out against the Culture of Life. Some in the GOP ranks have told me to shut up.
Paul I like for foriegn policy. Most tell me his views make him a bad man.
Tancredo I like for border security, I have been told that makes him unlikely to go anywhere.
Brownback I like for a strong life ethic. Hurts him among many in the GOP, who find it too much.
I am big on the Second Amendment, too. Many in the GOP are not any longer.
And smaller government in constitutional bounds is a hot button issue for me. Many in the GOP, including Bush, have laughed that off as a vestige of the past.
So runs my partial inventory.
Am I a good Republican?
Evidently not.
But Rudy is. He disagrees with me on most all of the above and is likely to be the GOP candidate whom I will be duty bound to serve should I sign that "unity" pledge.
I choose the gallows. As usual.
bjbrownsblog.blogspot.com
Reply to this
Oops! I meant spoke out against the Culture of Death, and in support of the Culture of Life, of course. You know, like Rudy has not.
Reply to this
Hey Stay Red, here is a novel idea: Spend your energy finding a platform that can raid the Democrat base. Trying doing that be ending the endless feeding frenzy at corporate and big govt troughs that has killed the best in the GOP's heritage and merely caused the worse in the same to metastasize. See my blog entry of May 12 for more on the topic.
Reply to this
Stay Red please ban this moron from the blog. Noone wants to read his stuff - that's why noone does. Not only is the man certifiably insane - he's not really that intelligent (as evidenced by gramatically flawed entries like above).
Now to respond - steal the Democratic base? Are you an idiot or just really, really un-politically savvy? Kansas Republicans need to stay far away from the Democratic base - especially considering the fact that it's less than 1/4 of the State. How about we keep our voters voting our way and let the Democratic base do whatever the heck it wants. That's a strategy - not steal the socialist votes, dumbie.
Reply to this
Yeah, but the D's 1/4 of the state has been managing to pull together a coalition of 50%+1 in the last few elections.
Reply to this
'Zactly. And twice as many people love our new Democrat Guv as love our neo-con deceived Prez.
Is anyone on the soft Right really asking why, or are they all just looking for a new kinda soapy sap of a candidate to market and compete with her? (Hasn't that plan worked well?)
Reply to this
Once again, that doesn't lend any creedence to the strategy of targeting their base. They're pulling from ours - if we keep Republicans pulling the R lever, Kansas Democrats never win an election and our pocketbooks and economy are much better off.
Reply to this
You appear to be assuming that the Dem base in KS is happy with the status quo ante. They may be. But I sense a growing angst among all Americans as to the big questions, values and the culture and what is happening to the America we were raised in. Things that the neo-cons would rather not discuss, it would seem. (Lets bomb Iran instead.) Where do mom and pop old time democrat have to go? Does the GOP in this state even have a meaningful platform that all are expected to affirm? Is that not better than forced pledges with vague terms that seem to assume that personalities, rather than principles, are what matter?
Reply to this
As warped as this sounds - BJB is right.
The GOP would be better off trying to find issues that capture Democrat votes rather than driving more and more people out of our own party.
Reply to this
Don't encourage him by telling him that he's right.
Reply to this
Seems to me that the 1994 Contract was the right idea. Too bad so many sold out to the lobbyists and earmarks and thus demoralized the base. I think it would be a good idea to revisit such a statement, with hard medicine to rescue the embattled middle class.
Reply to this
The 1994 GOP Revolution wasn't really a conservative revolution. It was more of a populist revolution. The Contract for American contained term limits, balanced budget amendment, and other reform policies. We abandoned all these policies once we got power.
I agree. The Contract for American was a good idea. Too bad we broke the contract.
Reply to this
Blue Tide,
You are right, I did type it too fast and too late in the evening, and should have done a better job of proofreading. As for you Dems fearing that the RePubs might find some populist cause and raid your base....you are rightly concerned, but the chance of this happening are indeed slim. That is because those who see it the same way that I do are a minority, and because most who control the power in the Red Star gain too much from the status quo ante as far as payola and power and contracts and respect for being empty corporate suits, so you probably have nothing to worry about.
Thus more of the same for the Red State is probably on the menu, in DC and in Kansas, which should indeed continue to facilitate a Rising Blue Tide.
Reply to this
Oh and do, by all means, ban me from this blog. While keeping Rudy's banner waivers on. That will tell me all that I need to know.
Reply to this
Let's see; Rudy G. is strong on fighting terrorists, homeland security, law and order (his record as mayor in NY), economic growth, making government work for its citizens, etc. Right, that would not appeal to the average citizen. The average citizen's daily life, economic situation and sense of security is based on winning Bill O'Reilly's bizarre culture war and killing embryonic stem cell research because who wants to find cures for those annoying diseases? Religious conservatives gave us Bush and what did we wind up with? An administration that can't handle anything right from war to immigration to health care, even passports for crying out loud. With any Republican but Rudy on the ticket we are poised to go down in near historic numbers in 08; it is going to be ugly.
Reply to this
Rudy might want to take any reference to firefighters off his one note score.
And he better make nice with Fred.
Here is an early prediction: Tennessee Fred and NYC Rudy against Tennessee Al and NYC Hillary.
Of course, how will the Dems get Hill in the back seat for Al? Good question, I don't justify 'em, I just spin them out.
See my blog for some good spinners aimed you too many of y'alls good buddy Paul the Lawdog. (Or is that lapdog?)
Reply to this
The firefighters union that is running the attack ads against Rudy have been supporting Dems for years; the head of the union is a major Dem insider. If you would read newspapers and not just listen to O'Reilly for your news you would know that the firefighters group is just a Dem front. Once Fred really gets in the race and people realize there is very little substance there, he will do a Romney and fizzle. Rudy attracting independents is GOP's only hope.
Reply to this
Which is why Rudy makes such a strong VP candidate.
And which is why the GOP is headed toward a major meltdown. How does one sell Rudy to the Christian Right coalition that has been so important to the Party? Without that coalition, the country clubbers face the Great Unwashed vastly outnumbered, and if the County Clubbers throw in with the Dems, they just might end up with Gore or Sheehan bossing them around. Sometimes the middle can be a lonely place, no?
Reply to this
The voters of the Christian Right will wind up voting for Rudy over any Democrat despite the hand-wringing of their so-called leaders. They won't vote for a Democrat and they won't stay home because that's just bad citizenship. The leadership of the Christian Right is just like any other interest group; they are into raising money and trying to gain influence. They'll find a way to reach some accomodation with Rudy to avoid becoming marginilized. They can't afford to have him win with them on the outside. In most presidential elections, each party tends to come home, even if reluctantly. It's independents who swing the vote and they won't vote for any conservative because they are really sick of Bush. It is the extemism and ultimate governing incompetence of the religious right that has brought the Republican Party to its current precarious position. The best thing about Republicans nominating Rudy would be to return us to becoming again a political party interested in governing for the benefit of the citizenry instead of being a captive of single-issue zealots.
Reply to this
I would not advise you to presume my vote, sir.
Reply to this
Well, this is all just about the silliest nonsense I've heard in a looong time. Count me as a RINO defector. I just switched parties two weeks ago after a series of emails with a high profile KS Repub who essentially told me to get out of the party. This person who lives in my neighborhood let me know he/she keeps a database of people's yard signs. Hoo boy, this person did not like it one little bit that I endorsed a Dem for the SBOE. So don't tell me 'bout no pledge. I'll vote for who the he@@ I want to and nobody will tell me any different. This is nothing but tin-type pipsqueeks trying to force their narrow-minded agenda on each and every single KS voter. It's UnAmerican, it's not good for the state, and it borders on totalitarianism. They day I have to sign a pledge to a frickin' political party is the day you can send me to Cuba to live.
Reply to this
I'm a Republican who supported Morrison last year. I've received the same type of treatment for a prominent conservative leader. I consider myself a conservative. I only supported Morrison because I know him personally.
The GOP conservatives need to learn to back off.
Reply to this
Well SRK certainly hit a nerve with this post. Most responses ever! The comments are very interesting and somewhat revealing.
1. Most of the conservatives like loyalty oaths; they seem afraid to win their issues on debate and merits.
2. It's conservatives that want to purge the party not moderates. Most moderates want to "win" by debate and elections not loyalty oaths and purges.
3. 08 will be fascinating. Wandering around Johnson County you get the sense that conservatives feel that they had problems in 06 because they weren't conservative enough. If anything they talk about moving even further right. On the other hand, what everyone seems to refer to as the "Phill Kline factor" is really boiling out there. The sense of let's finally vote the nut-cases out is very strong. Conservatives and moderates are moving further apart and Dems are looking to cherry pick some low-hanging fruit with plenty of money and state support. Yes, 08 is going to be a dandy.
Reply to this
AMEN brother!! Just general, regular republicans (not involved party-types) I talk to these days have had it up to here with the Phill Klineians. I've had my fill of Phill and so have most of my friends and neighbors. The thing is, nobody trusts him. He comes across as a snake oil salesman. And the business with the JoCo DA website link to WorldNet...well, that was THE LAST STRAW. Ain't nobody nowhere using a tax-payer's website gonna tell me what to read and what not to read. Call me a traditional former Republican.
Reply to this
Correct. The conservatives are digging in their heels. The moderates have basically moved for centrist Republicans to liberal Republicans. To moderates, there's a hatred of Bush-Cheney-DeLay-Frist that has pushed people further to the left than expected. After the fall of Kline, the conservatives feel like they're under attack from all sides. If you talk to them, they want to play victim. Also, the conservatives have now run the state party for four years ... and, they've run the thing into the ground. They're wanting to blame moderates for absolutely everything.
My prediction: Ryun's campaign dissolves, Kobach bankrupts state party, Kline gets accused of further misconduct, and the Democrats keep recruiting more and more partyswitchers. I think that the conservative revolution of 1994 is finally over. Now, it's the beginning of the end for conservative movement.
Reply to this
The GOP can kiss my *ss! I spent 30 years voting for Republicans. Now, I think I've finally had enough. The conservatives have destroyed this party.
Reply to this
Word.
Now who wants to write the pledge for our DC and Repub wannabes to sign to get us back on track with that?
Reply to this
Well, here's the delicious irony. The KTRM Values document is actually a very traditional GOP set of principals and values. Focuses on things like limited, efficient and fiscally responsive government, quality education, strong economy, etc. and a focus on finding solutions to issues that divide. It makes no mention of abortion, stem cells, spanking kids (like the state party platform), etc. I would challenge any true conservative to read the KTRM values and find fault. It focuses on political party governance issues and leaves the social issues to be fought out by the various interest groups (Operation Rescue, KFL, Planned Parenthood). In other words, it is a political party approach to appeal to the concerns of the citizenry in their daily lives and is geared toward winning elections, which is what political parties are supposed to do. Most of the conservatives who rag on KTRM have no idea what their values are; they are relying on secondhand innuendo. By the way, KTRM must be doing something right; when KRA was racking up successes people constantly attacked them. Now the attacks are against KTRM - hmmm!
Reply to this
KTRM is what the state party is supposed to be.
Reply to this
I'd say that the "unity pledge" doesn't do much for "unity." In fact, stuff like this is very divisive.
The conservatives need to understand that moderates aren't interested in making any commitments. They'll walk in a heartbeat. The coalition is that fragile.
Basically the conservatives have already pushed too far to the right. Move another inch to the right and the mods will be Democrats. The message is: "Conservatives, back off!"
I think that the conservatives basically controlled the GOP and party agenda since mid 1990s. Look where it's gotten us. The conservatives have had their time. Step aside, or the mods will take their business elsewhere.
Reply to this
I agree and it should be implemented - good thought...
Reply to this
Why should we use a pledge that Stay Red writes? If there is a pledge - and I don't think there should be - it should be written and voted on by the convention delegates. Hopefully, that would reflect the entire state. Using pledges is a scary thing, though, because then people only focus on that and not the real issues.
Reply to this
Mods are country club republicans. Just like Kathleen, who is a country club Dem. Paul just switched ties (red to blue), still in the same Club.
Who is looking after the middle class, those who cannot afford country club dues? The Dems pretty much assume they have a working class vote. Conservatives can take talking points from PJB and run the table in this used to be Dem stronghold. Let's do it. No more free trade with developing nations, it destroys established economies. No more wars of hegemony, they are building empire instead of a Republic. No more money wasted on needless bureaucrats, let's cut costs in government (education should be under local control) and balance the budget. On and on. See the 1994 contract for places to start, borrow from Perot and PJB to build the populist message.
Or keep following Bush and the SQA inside the beltway to oblivion.
Reply to this
I switched to the Democratic Party after President Bush invaded Iraq. HE abandoned Republican values -- not me. If the Republican Party supports war crimes, torture, and domestic spying I'm out.
Reply to this
If you really ever were a 'Republican' you wouldn't have left the Party over the liberation of an enemy country - perhaps if the Republican Party became the Party of higher taxes, pro-abortion stances and an adoption of a pro-gay agenda - but not for military intervention.
Reply to this
You bunch of idiots. I was never ashamed to be from Kansas until now
Reply to this
[URL=http://hyqocawf.com]bfkjsvux[/URL] aqlabuuk">http://oqdjdsau.com">aqlabuuk lkbxquzo http://tyucywda.com fgcjxaqn txhxhrce
Reply to this
rjrhzhbt http://fywxedbx.com rgxyhsak otnppvxs
Reply to this
[URL=http://wbovoyqx.com]namnimoa[/URL] cpjcuaal">http://rcqtpfap.com">cpjcuaal xasarwxt http://ccfnmrht.com wdikfebg lsfotmhp
Reply to this
[URL=http://fqkntqtv.com]azooayur[/URL] mjjhvrfe">http://czkpcaxn.com">mjjhvrfe lgtroufm http://azkvwvat.com ietgxtzw fpodmjmo
Reply to this
hlpoziqa http://suumtfhr.com ukiatxom cdkoucnn [URL=http://vyugtaqf.com]rbewojzi[/URL] wxcsmgcf">http://bsicpyyb.com">wxcsmgcf
Reply to this