Featured, National - by Surekha Ratnatunga on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:15 - 6 Comments - 1,527 views

RNC Proposed “Purity Test” to Screen Party Candidates

Darkness falls download.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/3326795920_4e6fd1e669.jpg”>NBC acquired a proposed RNC resolution that lists the political stances Republicans must take to qualify as candidates or officeholders. The GOP deems unworthy of funding those who support any less than 8 of the 10 key party positions, which include a surge in Afghanistan, “market-based” health care and energy reform, and retaining the Defense of Marriage Act (full list after the jump).

We already knew Republicans were hostile to the idea of debate, but the Old Testament-style list of inviolable commandments descends the party to a new low in terms of vapidity.

The proposal is named after and inspired by the messianic Ronald Reagan, who apparently once said, “the person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.” Now that is a high threshold for a party that boasts a measly 21% of Americans as self-identified members these days. The purging of moderates with silly bureaucratic quirks like purity tests must end unless it’s Michael Steele’s master plan for the Republican party to channel the same elitism and traditions as a 13-year-old girl’s slumber party.

The Resolution on Reagan’s Unity Principle for Support of Candidates:

(1) Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;

(2) Market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) Market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) Workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) Containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) Retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) Protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) The right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership

Photo from Flickr user your mistakes are your style under the Creative Commons License

Share

6 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Raymond Galis
Nov 24, 2009 10:26

Ironically all it takes is the first bullet point and Ronald Reagan would not qualify as a candidate.

Rob Stengel
Nov 24, 2009 11:18

Do Republicans understand that healthcare is already rationed? As long as there are too many patients for to care for at once, we have rationing. We just mask it in the United States by rationing based on those who can afford care, rather than those who actually need it.

Natalie Andrews
Nov 24, 2009 21:39

Let them go ahead and weed people in their party out…it will be funny to watch and it will be a huge fail for them when it comes to voting on issues.

Ryan Craig
Nov 24, 2009 23:34

Rob, healthcare is not rationed. There are no shortages in the current system, in fact there is excess capacity. Look at the instances of Canadian hospitals (socialized medicine) transferring patients to US hospitals that have empty beds.
Further, it is amusing that Democrats kicked Joe Lieberman out of the party for disagreeing with them on a single issue right after he was their VP canidate but they want to take shots about “ideological purity”.
That is a list of conservative principles. If you are running as a candidate from the conservaitve party and want them to give you money you ought to be conservative. Would any of you expect the DNC to give money to support someone who advocated all 10 of those positions?
It isn’t not wanting to debate, it is wanting candidates that will debate from the conservative position. Just as Democrats should field candidates who debate from the liberal position.

Thomas Mannion
Nov 25, 2009 11:59

“Smaller government” except when it comes to interfering in the personal lifes and decisions that republicants disagree with; abortion and gay marriage, and then it’s ok for government to be Big Brother.

Ryan Craig, you need to try getting your facts straight and stop regurgitating rhetoric. Democrats “didn’t kick Joe Lieberman” out of the party”. He lost the democratic primary for his own seat to another candidate so he chose to run as an “independent”. Lieberman, still caucuses with the democrats.

Unlike republicans, democrats don’t have a “you’re either with us or we’re against you” edict, which their leader, Michael Steele, has voiced quite clearly on many occasssions.

Look at the way Republicans turned and are continuing to turn their own in NY23 and the Florida governor’s race. God forbid anyone have the audicity to call themselves a republican and not be in lockstep, or should the be goose-step, with the party line?

Why didn’t Steele just say to their candidates, “don’t think, we”ll do it for you”? That’s what republicans really want for us all anyway – to make our decisions for us – with r without our consent.

Jackie Holden
Nov 25, 2009 13:52

Actually, democrats field candidates from the logical position.