|
The RINO Factor: Why Are They Republicans?
By Tim Siggia
May 08, 2003
President Bush outlined an excellent program of tax cuts which, if enacted, would benefit all Americans (not just the rich), and redirect money back into the economy -- which, in turn, would result in increased revenue. A good deal all around. Except that certain legislators do not see it that way. We always expect opposition to tax cuts from Democrats, of course. But now, as the liberal media are gleefully reporting, opposition to the Bush program is coming from "certain Republicans" as well. We of course know those Republicans of which the media speak. They're the ones they call "moderate" Republicans. We know them as RINOs: Republicans In Name Only.
The RINO Factor is the Achilles Heel of the Republican Party. It puts us at a distinct disadvantage in dealing with Democrats, for they have no equivalent to it (unless you figure it to be the lone voice of Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), whose retirement is imminent.) On tax matters especially, the Democrats for the most part speak with one voice. Republicans do not. In fact, liberal Republicans -- excuse me, I meant to say moderate; there's supposed to be no such thing as a liberal Republican -- tend in many cases to be even more fervently liberal than their Democrat counterparts. Take Connecticut's own Republican representatives, for example. Check out their voting records, their respective ACU and ADA ratings, and their positions on the issues. Without boring you with statistics, I will tell you that Congressman Rob Simmons is by far the least liberal of the three -- and he's a long way from being conservative.
RINOs invariably stand against their party on almost everything the national Republican Party stands for. Which begs another question: Why are they Republicans in the first place? There are, of course, various answers to this question. Some will say they are holdovers from the days of the Rockefeller Republicans, the "country club" set. I personally tend to question this, as none of our legislators are really that old. Others cite demographics, and it is indeed no coincidence that a disproportionate number of RINOs come from the liberal Northeast. Perhaps Lowell Weicker, in one of his more honest moments, came closer to the truth: In his case it was simply a matter of convenience, his chances of being nominated being better as a Republican than as a Democrat.
Whatever their reasons, it would not be unreasonable to suppose that those reasons are tenuous at best, and it will not be long before we see more RINOs following the lead of Jim Jeffords. And I say let them! Even if it costs us temporary loss of a few committee chairmanships, in the long run our party will be better off for it. We do not need RINOs. What good does it do us to have those in our ranks who seek only to torpedo their own party from within? Let them go, and good riddance to them! If their hearts, minds and souls are on the other side of the aisle, that's where their seats should be as well.
|
