To Jungle Flush Jet, yes.
To normal folks, no.
I had this conversation with a buddy after watching The Newsroom on Sunday and SPCA's post just reminded me of it...
Essentially, I feel like my generation is socially liberal in most cases... At least those of us not sheltered at current. When social issues are brought up here, I don't even like discussing them because I'm disinterested... They simply don't matter in the grand scheme of things...
My affinity for the Republican party stems from my family at a younger age and because quite simply, the Democratic party isn't going to help me in the long run. If anything, I feel longstanding Democratic leadership in positions of power would hurt me and any future people I care/will care about... I could talk about the why's, the how's but all that is inconsequential... It's simply MY belief...
I said that to say this... If I simply choose not to voice my opinion on issues I feel are unimportant, or if I disagree with you about issues I personally feel are unimportant, even though you may hold them in the utmost importance...But I agree with you on issues we both feel are important, how can you call me a RINO?
The same conversation piece holds true to conservatives being called liberals/crypto-liberals/etc...
To Jungle Flush Jet, yes.
To normal folks, no.
I agree with your post. My opinion is formed from the private sector to whom I work for and try to help. Government, IMO, should never be able to provide a situation which exceeds the level available to those whom they govern and pay for it.
After writing this up my conclusion is that you and I and those that have similar views are part of the TEA Party/Libertarian wing of the GOP.
Funny, I use it to bemoan (R) who run on conservative fiscal and defense principles, then Govern in a way directly counter to them.Some hardcore types would use the term RINO to disparage any R voters that aren't socially conservative.
Like G.W. Bush, for example.
Like I fear (and believe) Romney will be.
I will enjoy watching you and Flushing debate this point.I think personally that the social conservatives are the RINO's.
I was going to say, sounds like you're describing Libertarians, not Republcians.Real conservatives espouse smaller government and fiscal responsibility. They value personal freedom above reliance on government. I guess in a way the philosophy more accurately describes libertarians vs conservatives.
After writing this up my conclusion is that you and I and those that have similar views are part of the TEA Party/Libertarian wing of the GOP.[/QUOTE]
Last edited by Warfish; 08-29-2012 at 05:02 PM.
My question to you is:
Why do you care whether you're labeled that or not? You don't need anyone's approval. Your ideals are your ideals. They may overlap with one party's platform or the other more or less. It will constantly change. Vote accordingly.
The only label that defines you is your name.
The only parties I'm interested in serve booze
Not that I know the answer.
I'm fiscal and defense conservative; "pragmatist" on everything else. I'm against abortion for humanist reasons as well as religious, but also common sense reasons ("its not life" is semantic nonsense).
A candidate who voted for gay marriage would not be denied my vote for that reason (although I'm against gay marriage, but not for religious reasons).
I'm in the Tea Party, but don't agree with everything my fellow TPers believe in.
Rarely are things black and white in this life.
If you are socially liberal and fiscally conservative, your views are poorly represented by the Republican Party. They have been failing on both of these fronts for many years.
In a literal sense of the phase, you are a Republican In Name Only.
If you wipe away the media lies and propaganda the reality is that the TEA Party is born of the frustration fiscal conservatives had with both parties. They have done a great job holding politicians accountable for broken promises RE: small government fiscal conservatism.
Christie, Walker, Kasich, Paul Ryan, Jindal, Nikki Haley, Cruz, all folks embraced by the TEA party as small government types. Christie is not even socially conservative. Romney is not either. These are responsible government types.
Contrast that with the socialistapalooza lineup for the D convention. There is a stark contrast.
Can you give any examples of their "great job?" For all intents and purposes, nothing has changed. At the federal level, we are spending more than ever. Policy wise, they are a mirror image of Republicans but focus their rhetoric on fiscal issues.If you wipe away the media lies and propaganda the reality is that the TEA Party is born of the frustration fiscal conservatives had with both parties. They have done a great job holding politicians accountable for broken promises RE: small government fiscal conservatism.
Paul Ryan, a TEA Party icon and as fiscally conservative as anyone is on the ticket for goodnes sakes.
Republican means whatever you want it to mean.
These political parties are not vehicles for ideals and good government.
They are machines, ways for individuals to gain power. Nothing more.
I thought the term RINO had more to do with spending and size of government than social issues?
I guess each fragment of the GOP, whether it be Ron Paul's libertarians, Santorum's religious conservatives or the Romney/Christie American exceptionalism types would view each other as RINO's.
I think JetPotato hit the nail on the head - people will classify you however they like, but you'll likely never find a party or candidate that completely, or even mostly, matches your views. We're all essentially voting the lesser of two evils.
Last edited by SafetyBlitz; 08-29-2012 at 09:32 PM.