Hunting RINO Hunters

(Warning: No RINOs were harmed in the writing of this piece. Mark Ciavola does not endorse actual hunting of RINOs, or any violence to any one for any reason whatsoever, unless deemed appropriate by a court of law and a jury of his peers. In no way does he mean to offend the effete sensibilities of CNN, MSNBC, or liberals who had no problem with similar wordplay until one of their own was shot. All Rights Reserved. Charges may apply. Do not eat.)

For the last few years the term “RINO,” Republican In Name Only, has been tossed around like “party favors” at Lindsay Lohan’s house. It has been used within the conservative movement to separate the men from the boys, in what is nothing short of a macho pissing contest on who can be more or most conservative. Last summer I opined on the term itself, attempting to make the point that these moderates are needed for the GOP to win seats in liberal states like Maine, Massachusetts and Delaware. I also pointed out that there is a big difference between a “RINO” and a traitor. However, as political rhetoric becomes more and more intense, reason is often left by the wayside.

Whether we like it or not we have a two-party political system here in America. Today, Independents, Libertarians, Green Party candidates, and other third-party options simply cannot win elections – especially at the federal level. Even with many Americans becoming increasingly disenchanted with both major parties, these third-parties pull an insignificant portion of the total vote. They do, however, succeed in playing spoiler on many levels, often costing Republicans elections. The reason for this is that many Independents are right-leaning, as are Libertarians. Only the Green Party and Socialist Party, in less than a dozen states, produce candidates that take votes away from Democrats. Perhaps the most interesting part of these right-leaning third-parties is that many of their followers are former Republicans.

The 2008 Republican Party Platform listed nine items: National Security, Government Reform, Economy, Energy, Environment, Health Care, Education, Crime, and Values. Clicking on the first plank, National Security, you will be treated to a 6,336-word novel that includes opinions on everything from homeland security and veterans to immigration and policies for the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East. Only the most ardent political junkie would ever make it through reading the entire plank only to be smacked with a 3,512 treatise on Government Reform, which for some reason includes the preservation of the District of Columbia. In total, anyone wishing to know where the GOP stood in 2008 “on the issues” would be subjected to an information overload of more than 35,000 words – seventeen times the length of this post.

If a “RINO” is someone who doesn’t adhere to the majority of core Republican values, we sure don’t make it easy to be a real Republican! There are 75 planks-within-planks. Even by Reagan’s standard of 80% agreement, real Republicans would disagree with the platform 15 times! It is worth mentioning that currently features a six-plank platform including National Defense, Health Care, Energy, Education, Economy, and Courts, with a one-paragraph blurb explaining the conservative side of the argument on each issue. It is broad, and most-likely intentionally vague, so as to adequately satisfy the entire Republican Party. Remember, the GOP has an obligation to represent ALL Republicans – both fiscally conservative and socially conservative. It is not the “Social Conservative Party” or the “Fiscal Conservative Party”… it is the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

As I have stated in previous articles, and countless times publicly, I do not believe in the mythical creature “RINO.” And while I am still one of the most conservative people I know, nowhere on my voter registration form was I asked if I was a conservative. Anyone who checks the box marked “Republican” is a “Republican In Name Only,” since the form does not ask you to rate on a scale from 1 to 10 how conservative you are.

The term “RINO” is being applied to Republicans who voted for TARP. Twenty-one in the House of Representatives including Paul Ryan, and 34 of 40 Republicans in the Senate voted for TARP, which was designed as a loan that would repay taxpayers – unlike the bailouts that followed under President Obama. Is Paul Ryan a “RINO?” What about Senators Coburn (OK), Cornyn (TX), Kyl (AZ), and Thune (SD)? These are some of the most conservative Republicans in Washington. Pushing people out of our party because they disagree on a few issues is ludicrous, especially when we are in the middle of an ideological battle for the heart and soul of our country. Ultimately, these representatives must act in accordance with their constituents’ wishes and not the agenda of a national conservative litmus test.

Then you have this moron, who blames Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “RINO” status for Jerry Brown’s 2010 victory. Arnold didn’t keep Republicans home on Election Day, conservatives did. Meg Whitman didn’t tell Republicans to stay home and hand Jerry Brown a victory in liberal California, conservatives did. Republicans and conservatives were not rushing to vote for Jerry Brown because Arnold and Meg were “RINOs.” Jerry Brown won because there weren’t enough Republican votes, due in large part to the unwillingness of conservatives to elect a moderate Republican over a Democrat. Period.

With all of this in mind, I’d like to introduce you to a new term: CINO. Conservatives In Name Only.

What is conservatism? According to Ronald Reagan, conservatism consists of small government, fiscal responsibility, individual responsibility, and liberty for all. These basic tenets permeate every conservative discussion in our country today, especially within the Tea Party movement. But how many conservatives are really conservative? And what about the CINOs? It’s easy to say you’re conservative, but actually standing for these true conservative principles create an interesting dynamic.

To most conservatives I’ve come in contact with, small government means adhering to the U.S. Constitution in determining which issues the federal government should take control over, and which issues should be left to the states by virtue of the 10th Amendment. It also means keeping spending low, reducing our national debt, and running an efficient government that stays out of the marketplace. Conservatives preach all day long that individual schools and communities should have local control over education. They believe that the influence of powerful teachers unions and the federal education bureaucracy has severely damaged our education system. Conservatives believe government should stay out of your personal life.

CINOs, however, have no problem with big government if it is advancing their own agenda. They have no problem with a variety of federal spending, including earmarks, if it keeps them elected. CINOs believe in local control over education, unless that local control results in the removal of school prayer. CINOs don’t want the government telling us which light bulbs to buy, or which cars to drive, but they WILL try to put a federal marriage amendment in the U.S. Constitution telling us to whom we can pledge a lifelong commitment of love.

What if marriage was defined in the U.S. Constitution in 1780? Only property owners would be able to marry. In 1820, slaves would have been prohibited from marrying. In the 100 years between the Civil War and the Civil Rights Act, a federal marriage amendment would have banned interracial marriage. Today, in 2011, none of us would support any of those definitions. So why is anyone seeking to define marriage in our most revered American document? CINOs are for state’s rights, until those rights produce unpopular results. CINOs are for small government, until they see government as a way to protect their own values.

Take a look at the New York Conservative Party platform. I can say that I either support or am indifferent to almost everything on the list. As for where I disagree, I would be indifferent toward a state constitutional ban on gay marriage so long as there are civil unions or domestic partnerships in place so that gay couples can still have legal proof and protections of their relationships. I simply cannot get behind collecting DNA samples of “every criminal who commits a crime,” and I’m not sure how any conservative could. Most people would think I’m a conservative for being okay with 43 of the 45 planks in the New York Conservative Party platform, but to many others my true belief in small government would relegate me to “libertarian” status even though I do not support the legalization of drugs or an isolationist world view.

As we evolve as a nation, we seem to remain center-right. Yet, many of those in the Republican Party are seeking to implement a far-right Party philosophy. How can the GOP be “America’s Party” if we are alienating so many moderates and Independents with an irrational addiction to far-right, and often not conservative, stances? Should we not be sticking to the core tenets of conservatism, while trying to deliver our message to a wide audience in ways they can relate to?

I often talk about the problem of attracting young people to the Republican Party. They are often turned off by social conservatism. To be clear, I believe social conservatism has its place within our Party just like fiscal conservatism does. We should all be advocating for what we believe in. It should not, however, be the ENTIRETY of our Party, or firmly established in the U.S. Constitution. We should welcome pro-choice conservatives, gay conservatives, and young conservatives into our Party. We may disagree on some issues, but for the most part we can work together to elect Republicans and maintain control of Congress and state legislatures across the country. While I am pro-life, everyone 37 years old and younger was born into a country where abortion is legal. Let’s face it: Pro-life is a choice; pro-abortion is not. Let’s deliver that message!

The fact that there is a segment of the Republican Party committed to “hunting RINOs,” shows that they care more about a purist agenda that fits their own values, and not the success of the only viable alternative to the liberal agenda – the GOP. Remember, Senator Jim DeMint famously said, “I’d rather have 30 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters.” I would rather have zero Arlen Specters, because Arlen Spector is an opportunist traitor who ditched his Party in order to thwart the will of the people and keep his cushy government paycheck. However, ultimately I’d rather have 30 Marco Rubios and 30 Scott Browns than allow a Democrat super-majority to ruin our country. And if Senator Jim DeMint doesn’t see that, then he is too senile to represent anyone in Congress.

CINOs spit on Reagan’s 11th Commandment.

CINOs piss on the theory that anyone who agrees with you 80% of the time is your friend, not your enemy.

CINOs rejoice in seeing moderates like Mike Castle lose in Delaware, only to cost Republicans a winnable Senate seat with a mismatched candidate like Christine O’Donnell. (Castle had won 18 elections in Delaware, which is only 28% Republican)

CINOs express an almost divine dedication to candidates like Sharron Angle, who – as a statement of fact – lost a GOP primary race for State Senate in 2006, a GOP primary race for U.S. Congress in 2008, and now a general election for U.S. Senate in 2010. It’s remarkable to watch someone fail upward. Even a casual observer would see that if Republicans in her own State Senate district didn’t want her, and Republicans in her own U.S. Congressional District didn’t want her, that the entire state of Nevada wouldn’t want her either. Yet these “conservatives” from all over the country pushed for Sharron in her U.S. Senate primary since she won the macho pissing contest to be labeled “most conservative.” That label may win you a GOP primary (although usually not in Angle’s case), but it won’t garner you much support from Independents and conservative Democrats. And appealing to national conservatives who cannot cast votes in Nevada (or Delaware) is entirely irrelevant.

CINOs are committed to advancing their own personal agenda, even if it means the demise of the Republican Party.

CINOs constantly invoke Reagan’s name, yet refuse to follow his most successful strategy: an inclusive GOP! (They don’t call them ‘Reagan Democrats’ for nothing, folks!)

They are CINOs.

And I’m announcing CINO season OPEN.

Endorsement From The Deceased

I could be totally off-base on this one, but I consider this development in the Alaska Senate race sick and twisted.

Incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski is set to air a television ad this week featuring a video endorsement by the late Sen. Ted Stevens, who filmed the clip shortly before his death in a plane crash earlier this year.Murkowski, who launched a write-in campaign after losing the Aug. 24 primary to Tea Party-supported attorney Joe Miller, was originally slated to air the footage this summer but pulled the ads after the legendary 40-year Senate veteran’s death.

Stevens’ daughter, Sue Covich, not only approved of this twisted campaign ad, but also appears in the ad.  I don’t care if the family approves of this morbid use of the dead for political gain.  Consider the fact that Stevens’ endorsement came before the GOP primary was decided.  He endorsed Murkowski to be the GOP nominee.

Now Murkowski has mounted this write-in campaign like a spoiled 4th-grader who can’t deal with reality.  Would Stevens have supported this juvenile effort at the possible expense of the rightful GOP nominee (Joe Miller)?  We can’t know for sure.  But Murkowski and Covich pretend to make that assumption for the deceased.

I can’t help but to think that there are Alaska voters who, like me, will find this repulsive and offensive.  I was never a huge Stevens fan though I did respect him as one of the GOP’s elder statesmen.  I can’t say for sure that Ted Stevens would do the correct thing by supporting the GOP nominee (although I believe he would), but I do know that this action by Murkowski reeks of desperation, narcissism and a total lack of class.

Palin Derangement Syndrome Leads to DWTS “BooGate”

As everyone knows, Bristol Palin has been dancing and doing very well on Dancing With the Stars.  To support her, Sarah has been sitting in the front row for the past couple of episodes. 

After last night’s episode, the media went wild.  After Jennifer Grey’s performance, the judges gave their scores.  Then, in the backroom as Grey and her partner were being interviewed, you heard a suspicious massive loud booing coming from the ballroom — and immediately, the camera went right to the host sitting and talking with Sarah Palin.


Now, it is important to watch both videos, because you’re not going to get the full rebuttal from the MSM.  Why would the MSM waste their time correcting the assertion that Palin was booed?  How about the record number of mainstream outlets and liberal blogs who enthusiastically entertained it:

And there is much more fun!  Tonight, DWTS was forced to clarify what the booing was truly all about: the judges’ scores for Jennifer Grey; who did a wonderful job, considering all she had been through.  And with the clarification, comes the real video which revealed the real truth:


So why are liberals this desperate to mischaracterize boos from an audience (known to boo at the judges all the time) which leads the media to massively over-report the mistruth?

I think liberal-writer Jay Anderson over at BlackVoices says it best:

Sarah Palin scares me.

If you realllllly want to have a good time, click on one of the links above and look for one of the following:

A.) Liberal Silence

B.) Liberal Denial (I.E. the neocons over at ABC were forced to do it by Palin)

The beauty and comfort for conservatives and Palin-lovers alike lies in Jay Anderson’s remarks above (though the guts of his piece is the usual left-wing blather we get on Sarah).  They are so deranged over Palin, they actually find comfort that a small studio audience in the middle of Hollywood possibly booed her and made such a big deal about it.

No other conservative has stirred up this much derangement. 

What began as a funny post here (making fun of moonbats is always my favorite hobby) quickly turns into a serious point when you consider all of the Tea Party candidates she has backed and all the RINOs she’s been instrumental in tossing out of Congress.

Folks, if you ever doubted the power of Palin, I strongly urge you to reconsider.

Don’t Allow RINOs to Turn Us Back!

It’s announced by the Washington Post moments ago that defeated incumbent RINO-Republican, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, is expected to announce a write-in candidacy after losing the Republican primary to Palin-backed Joe Miller.

What’s next?  Is Mike Castle going to do the same thing in Delaware?

This week has been funny watching liberals suddenly rush to the defense of all the same types of the Republicans they blame for the mess we are in now when we actually get around to nominating real conservatives to bring back the party’s principles.

In addition to liberals whose pants are scared off, a lot of RINO back-scratchers like Karl Rove are throwing fits on Fox News whenever a conservative Palin-backed candidate ousts another RINO incumbent.

Let me make myself clear:  RINOs are just as bad for this country and for our party as the liberals are.  IF we have to sacrifice seats this year to keep them out, it is worth it.  Because when the chickens come home to roost as a result of these rotten spending plans, we’ll know which party is responsible for it. 

We must stand united in saying “No!” to candidates like Murkowski and other RINOs alike.

Miller Closer than Expected (Thanks Sarah!)

(Notice the “grim” picture of the photo of Joe Miller used by the media)

I was very interested in the Alaskan Senate race and have been following Sarah Palin’s Facebook posts.

I spent last week paying attention to the AP and to observe alleged “Alaskans” coming out against Palin in this massive support for incumbent, Lisa Murkowski. 

Murkowski did not win her initial seat in the United States Senate.  She was appointed by the then-Governor, Frank Murkowski, who also happened to be her daddy.  Sarah Palin was a candidate back in those days of a short-list Murkowski kept to fill that seat and in the end, he chose his daughter.  As Palin was cast aside by Murkowski, he offered her the job of heading the Alaska Oil and Gas Commission.  It was there which Palin gained her vast knowledge on energy issues where she teamed up with Democrats to take out Republican operatives (establishment RINOs) who were taking information from the AOGC to oil-industry insiders.  This began Palin’s crusade against the Murkowskis.  The private jets, the personal chefs, and the nepotism of back-scratching with family members and oil-industry executives at the expense of the people was a thing of the past!

After doing this, Palin took Frank Murkowski on and won Alaska’s Governor’s race in a landslide. 

Not only did Murkowski get canned, but Palin canned every corrupt member of Murkowski’s back-scratching team.  So naturally, Lisa Murkowski has had a grudge against Palin for quite sometime.

Allegedly knowing how bureaucracy works, Lisa Murkowski defied common sense and publicly slammed Palin for resigning last year as Governor.  Even though Palin’s enemies; which consisted of both liberals and Palin-spanked RINOs, used an ethics law which Palin championed for to file almost 30 frivolous ethics charges against her that cost Palin nearly a half-million in personal legal debt as well as $2M of Alaskan taxpayer money and endless state resources of time and energy distracting Palin’s impressive administration from moving forward.  Murkowski denied the common sense characterization of Palin’s resignation (selfless and in the best interest of Alaskans) and attacked to appease the anti-Palin sentiment portrayed to this day by the media and liberals alike.

The cronyism among Murkowski-like Republicans has been just as devastating to our country as liberalism.  In fact, it’s even worse.  They do it in the name of “conservatism.”

For the last week, every media article released defined the race as a no-brainer for Murkowski.  A Politico article today describes “public polls showed Murkowski heavily favored to win Tuesday’s primary” while others simultaneously portrayed the race as a grudge match between Murkowski and Palin

Step 1. Discourage Miller’s voters from turning out.

Step 2. Be able to portray this as an overwhelming message of America’s anti-Palinism while loving the RINOs who have contributed to running our country in the ground.

But tonight, with 51% of the precincts reporting, Miller leads Murkowski by 52% to 48%.

Even though the media did its best to underscore the Palin-endorsed candidate’s chances.  Even though Alaskan “Republicans” have been coming out of the woodwork mysteriously to tell us how Palin embarrasses them and doesn’t speak for them.

No matter how this race concludes, the power of Palin and the tea party against establishment RINO incumbents; who suck up to convenience and diss conviction is undeniable. Even if Murkowski does pull ahead in the second half of the precincts to report, knowing she massively outspent Miller, the fact that she’s probably pissing in her pants right now is proof.

I cannot wait to get the AP’s interpretation of this tomorrow.

Notice how everything the AP does lately with regard to the upcoming midterms centers around Palin and her influence.  But expect to turn blue holding your breath waiting for them to accurately portray it.

Yes, they can (and yes, they DID!)

Being a midwestern night owl, I was about to go to bed after drying my eyes over Hoffman’s loss in NY23 when this headline popped up:

“Maine voters repeal law that would have allowed gay marriage.”

Yes, for the last five national elections, Maine has been loyal to the Democrats.

Yes, Maine has a Democrat for a Governor.

Yes, Maine’s members of the U.S. House are Democrats.

And if that’s not bad enough, Maine is also responsible for RINO, Olympia Snowe.  (The one John McCain should have picked, remember?)

Somehow, the national mandate on banning gay marriage continues to pass in state, after state, after state.

To the members of my community giving all of your support to RINOS and/or liberals, ask yourselves how forceful big-government politicians have managed to persuade Americans on this issue.

Hoffman Concedes

Just moments ago, both CNN and Fox News declared Democrat Bill Owens the winner of NY23.

The biggest disappointment here is that  this truly was such a hard fought battle for Hoffman who lagged in 3rd place behind the original Republican (RINO) candidate and Owens for the past several weeks.  It wasn’t until Sarah Palin endorsed him 13 days ago that he had begun to pick up speed.  After just one week of soaring in the polls, the soar-losing liberal-Republican dropped out and took her few loyalists with her to tip the scale for Owens – even though Owens supports a public option for health care, something the liberal-leaning Scozzofava claimed to oppose.  Scozzofava even worked tirelessly phoning voters of the district stomping for Owens.

This was a god-awful case of bad timing.  Because there was no primary in this district, a committee of closed-door politicians selected the candidates FOR the voters.  With just 13 days under his belt as the head candidate against Owens, Hoffman lost by – get this – 3 lousy percentage points with the candidates virtually splitting the counties in half.

If the district had allowed the constituents the opportunity to vote in a primary, Hoffman could have had a much larger chance at having the luxury of competing with ample campaign funding giving him the victory he deserved tonight.

This seat will be up again in one year – it will be interesting to see if Hoffman comes back for a fair and decent first class campaign enjoyed by both Scozzofava and Owens.

One thing is for sure, Scozzofava and her behavior during this entire display of fairness and democracy should be a lesson to us all going forward with regard to RINOS – they are never to be trusted again!

Now, I will leave it up to Mel or Phil to gloat about the massive wins in New Jersey and the entire state of Virginia.  🙂

Sarah Palin Gets Results!

When news broke last week that Sarah Palin was endorsing the third-party but more-conservative candidate; Doug Hoffman in NY, an independent poll had Doug Hoffman in third place at 23% trailing the Democrat and the RINO endorsed by Newt Gingrich.  Just Friday, Newt declared support for Hoffman ‘a mistake’ as he continues to give his support to the pro-abortion RINO, Dede Scozzafava.

After Palin’s announcement, Doug Hoffman raised an amazing $116,000 in one day and in a newly released independent poll today, Hoffman has soared to first place.

I hope Newt is paying attention.  I regard the man with so much respect and cannot believe he doesn’t notice the country’s crave for real conservative values.  As bad as I feel for Newt’s dissent, I am thrilled that once again; however, we are reminded of the sheer power that Sarah Palin possesses over public opinion.