Ohhhh, this should be fun.Here’s why:
If the RNC pass this, the witch hunts begin.  There will now be a definitive litmus test for membership in the Republican Party and support by that party.  Inevitably, more Scozzafavas will result.  They will be responsible for the exodus of the party’s remaining viable moderates.
If they don’t pass this, the tea-partiers and the religious extremists on the far right will view it as one more sign that the Republicans aren’t conservative enough, and they’ll either jump ship or create more Doug Hoffmans.
End result either way?  Now that this resolution’s out of the bag, the Republican Party as we know it today is dead.

Purity Ball for RNC…Where they pledge their purity and ideological virginity to the RNC and any presidential candidate the party foists on the unsuspecting public.

We supportliving in the dark ages and doing more of everything that has caused the problems that we have now.
We support the rape and pillage of the economy by the Wall Street greed mongers.
We support blaming all of our bad decisions and flawed policies on the “lubruls”

The witch hunts already began…This would just take it to a whole new level where even the Maine Senators and California’s Governator are officially thrown out of the party.

A valid point…I more meant the institutionalized, party-sponsored, party-approved witch hunts.
But you’re right, the witch hunts have already started.

Good bye, Republicans.If this happens, the GOP will truly be reduced to a regional Southern/Inland Northwest party. Oh yes, and this will obviously be a “str8 Christianist white men only” party with no Latinos, no African Americans, no self-respecting women, no LGBT people, and no one from any other oppressed minority allowed.

It seems of all the things they supportBeing elected isn’t one of them
Because, DAMN, with that shopping list (and likely growing) they’re going to purge a lot of people

I was more surprised by what it didn’t say!I read this four times.  Here are some things that jumped out at me right away:
1.  No mention of pro-life (anti-choice) legislation.
2.  No mention of repeal of hate crimes legistlation or religious freedom for half-baked preachers and their sheeple.  Or any mention of religion at all.
3.  No mention of a tax credit or vouchers for those whose children attend private/parochial schools (this was always a mainstay of their platform).
4.  No mention of the “War on Drugs” or any drug-related legislation at all.
Those were just the ones that jumped out at me immediately.
If I was a right-wing christian republican, I’d be disappointed and I’d view this as pretty anemic.  

If the GOP is so adamant about big government then dissolve their partyGetting rid of the republican party would instantly cut our government in half and allow more parties to move into the void. Breaking up the two party system would have a huge effect on government and multiple parties would go a long way in reducing the government–atleast by one party.

Oxymoronic thinking at its best(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;
Pick one of the above. Can’t have both a recovery from this Depression, which would make the first four things possible, without federal spending.
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
Do they understand what cap-and-trade even means? It’s about monetizing carbon release, thereby making it feasible to go solar. IOW, putting a price on pollution. What did that word ‘market’ mean again?
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
Good thing you clarified that you’re in favor of achieving this goal by being against the policies that would make it possible–because for a minute there you were about to make sense.
I could go on, but five of their ten Theses include a dependent clause that says, Psych!
Can’t spell ‘oxymoron’ without ‘moron’, I guess. At least it’s bold thinking.

One step closer……to that Palin/Beck ticket in 2012.  Can’t wait!!!

NahSusie Creamcheese will simply correct her failings. Not a single doubt in my mind. Her buddy Joey L will help her…
I have more hope for Olympia- but not a helluva lot.  

This should be funwho’s got the popcorn?

Good list and analysis.

About #99) “We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion…”
Does anyone know if “prayer healing” will still be covered under insurance? Yes, I’m serious.

On #3 there…Cap-and-trade follows the capitalist line — it’s just a formalized system for charging economic actors (corporations and the wealthy, as opposed to exploitable labor sources like most of the population) to partially account for the externalized costs they impose on everyone else.  Of course, under real-world capitalism it’s not feasible to make a profit if you’re being charged to clean up your own messes, so cap-and-trade is unacceptable.

GOP testI see this country breaking apart.  It will be them against us.  

WOW. We really are winning
It was only five short years ago that we were #1.  Now we’re only #8.

Right?That is exactly what I was thinking! WTF? It sure as hell seems like we should at least have made the top 5.

Reagan would fail.St. Ronnie of Raygun would not be ideologically pure enough for the party that idolizes him.

The REAL Ten Points of GOP Purity1.We support smaller if any social spending by the government, and tax breaks for the richest few and for corporations by opposing everything Obama does, including eating balanced meals.
2. We support letting our political donors, the health insurance companies, loot the pockets of Americans and deliver no goods.
3. We support keeping our oil company patrons in the energy ‘driver’s seat”
4. We oppose labor unions as socialists out to pick the pockets of the hard-playing idle rich owners.
5. We support keeping brown skinned people out of America. This is a white country.
6. We support continued defense spending in two wars to keep companies like Lockheed afloat. Body counts don’t count.
7. We support partial nuclear disarmament one warhead at a time by dropping them on Iran and North Korea.
8. We suppport homophobia; the gays are the last minority that we can kick.
9. We support womb control and the right of every poor American to die in the streets.
10. We support an armed militia of birthers and tea baggers to unleash when Glen Beck gives the word.

You CAN have a recovery from an economic crash without a stimulus bill from the government, it is just that it will take (much) longer. Or as Keynes said: in the long run, we are all dead.
In the meantime, without a stimulus bill, as you wait for the “magic” of the free market to work, poor(er) people lose their jobs, their homes, starve.
The Free Market Uber Alles people just don’t like to publicly admit that that is the result of the “magic” of the completely unfettered market: if you’re poor, well it is your own damn fault, you made bad choices, you can go rot.

Purity Balls?…My mind wanders to trans women and genital reconstruction surgery. Gives new meaning to the concept of Purity Balls.

Ha!Bad Autumn!

I’m not defending the way the Obama admin did itI’m hardly a fan of Obama.  

The Victory of Faith, Jaunuary 20, 1939It is interesting how a Nazi speech from 1939 matches the Conservative movement of 2009. Replace Nationalist Socialist with Conservative, and you get something that might have been written today.
Deanna

Guess that’s why I’m a Libertarian.I was good with the entire list… except No. 8.
“The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally – not a 20 percent traitor.” — Ronald Reagan

Is libertarian…a code word for selfish and generally unconcerned about anyone else?

You say selfish like it’s a bad thing.And the first thing (selfish) has not the first thing to do with the second thing (generally unconcerned about anyone else). If I want my rights, I have to stand up and be counted as being for your rights.
There may be some difference of opinion as to what those right are, of course. I have a right to keep and bear arms. That’s fact, whether Leftists want to ignore it, or when not ignoring it, fight it. Leftists want to invent a right to have a claim on the labour of medical workers. That’s a form of slavery.
So, far from being unconcerned about anyone else, you couldn’t be farther from the truth, but I am selfish. After all, if I‘m not concerned about my well-being… who will be concerned for my well-being.

It could also be…“You mind your business and I will mind my business.”
I’ve always been attracted to that particular social strain of libertarinism

The trouble isthat the “stimulus” plan was based on the model popularized by Reagan — throw as much money as possible at the already-rich and wait for it to “trickle down”.  This leads to extremely poor returns on investment (if the goal is actually the production of jobs for people who need the work — which is never the actual goal).  On the other hand, public-works programs employing out-of-work people directly can have a greater-than-unity return on investment; the less money someone makes, the greater the percentage of each dollar you give them is spent and recirculated, and the investment in infrastructure pays dividends in terms of public standard of living for years.  Of course, the bottom-up stimulus model carries a whiff of social democracy, which puts it firmly in the category of what the media is willing to call “socialist” (i.e. anything not primarily engaged in the endeavor of sucking Ayn Rand’s toes), and is so unacceptable in public political discourse in the U.S.
The problem with the Bush-Obama “stimulus” isn’t that it was too far left, but that it’s too far right.

How about a party on the left?We have a right-wing party and a corporate-centrist party.  The left in the U.S. is almost entirely unrepresented at the national level — having a genuinely left-of-center party might help shake things up.

Yup.They’re also the people who are concerned that non-discrimination laws, worker-safety laws and laws that prevent employers (at least on paper) from summarily firing anyone who tries to organize a union are anti-freedom.  (It’s a matter of reducing employers’ freedom to utilize labor resources as they see fit and the elimination of workers’ “freedom” to pursue a race to the bottom without limit.  Debt peonage is, by most Libertarian Party definitions of “freedom”, the sign of true liberty.)

If only it stuck to the social side.Or if it meant that employers should mind their own business — but to the LP, it only counts as “interference” or a violation of someone’s freedom if the entity doing it calls itself the government.

Well duh……I mean after pillaging our natural resources and polluting our cities and countrysides, why on earth should they be expected to fix it?  It’s not like they’re making a profit off of… oh wait.

Its this myopic attitudethat will be the undoing of the country. The “I’ve got mine so f**k you” sentiment is precisely what’s wrong with modern America.

Quite franklythese people disgust me. Its the personification of greed. There is a reson why most civilized societies want nothing to do with this philosophy.
Additionally, when some LGBT person starts spewing this crap, I end up feeling better about minorities ignoring LGBT rights issues. After all, they are just looking out for themselves, just like any good libertarian.

How is this any differentthan what Pam herself is advocating for the Democrats? Its a purity test.
It strikes me as odd that Pam would find anything even remotely unusual about what the conservatives are doing given that she supports the exact same idea for the Democrats.

I am my brother’s keeper?Ok, true enough maybe. But what choices does that leave you with when you don’t like the way you’re being kept?
Some of my business just ain’t your business. Nothing that I do in the bedroom reflects one way or another on you. Or outside the bedroom for that matter.
If that’s the way the larger society or segment of society thinks then to hell with them.
Having said that…
I said that I was attracted to it, not that I buy it wholesale. I don’t want you keeping me, though. And I don’t want you (not necessarily speaking of you, personally) giving me your community mores as if the are non-negotiable terms to remain in the group.

Err, there is no way in hellJoe Lieberman would fit into the UK’s Liberal Democrats, he’d consider them deranged leftists. Joe Liebermann would struggle to fit into the Tories that David Cameron is presenting. Even the Tories nowadays are championing the NHS, or at least pretending to, for example. Compare that with Lieberman’s position on healthcare.

Thing is, Geekyou think that group protocols trump everything, the individual thoughts and experiences mean…essentially nothing in many contexts.
I did not appreciate that type of personal attack being as I said that “I was attracted to it” and not that I embrace it wholeheartedly. It’s not like my other community is entirely supportive of my…”drive” (probably the best word for it) simply to…be.  

Let me add this…This whole topic of “group purity” is actually a pretty good one (that’s taking place accross several threads by the way). I notice that you seem not to be able to maintain a certain level of civility in these discussions.
I mean, there are times when a group identity is important. There are times when you have to have to go at it on your own, outside of the group protocols and you reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of that decision.
Ultimately, noone has to look at my ugly face in the morning but me.
I think all of of strive to balance these the best way we can.

Oh?So, in that case, you don’t have problem with people telling you that LGBT people, need to be cured of their “disease”, for the “good of society”? You don’t have people going beyond telling, and actually trying to “cure” you? Requiring you to undergo the “cure”?
You don’t have a problem with black men being harassed by police, for “law and order”, to “prevent crime”, and the “good of society”?
You don’t have a problem with religious authorities not just telling you what food to eat, what drinks to drink and not drink, what clothes to wear, what to think, but putting their beliefs into law?
I take it you support the Patriot Act, especially now that Obama also supports it?
Quite frankly, authoritarian types like you disgust me.

That’s a ridiculously simplistic definition of libertarianism.
Libertarian Party != libertarianism.
The Libertarian Party is one strain of right wing libetarianism.
Social libertarianism is one strain of left wing liberarianism.

Right Of course. It’s the medical workers you’re concerned about. NOT the insurance parasites. Oh no.
And BTW, when your wellbeing impacts the wellbeing of others, your liberty ends.
For example, someone manufacturing food has no right to poison other people, or to lie about the contents of their product, no matter how much so called “libertarians” want to rant about the magic of the free market.

It’s a bit difficult to discuss “libertarianism”when the term has been adopted by such radically different political philosophies.  It started as a term for the anti-authoritarian strain of socialism and anarchism; then, somewhere along the line, it was adopted by hard-right authoritarian capitalists who decided that outsourcing statist authoritarianism to a whole set of capitalist despots-in-miniature was the only possible definition of “liberty”.  Sure, both “libertarianisms” concern themselves with their own versions of “liberty”, but the same could be said of most political philosophies.  The most that could be said for the commonalities is that neither wants excessive meddling in social matters to be conducted by an entity calling itself “the government”.

That’s about like sayingthat the GOP and teabagger accusations that Obama is secretly a treasonous Muslim theocrat are “the exact same idea” as people suggesting that Bush lied to the country to encourage the Iraq occupation — one fits reality and demands ethical behavior, one doesn’t and demands exclusionary authoritarianism.  Stripping context from a political demand doesn’t enable a realistic comparison, it makes that comparison impossible.  Party outsiders expecting basic ethics from the Democrats is the same as power players insisting on a totalitarian loyalty oath among Republicans only if all actual content is stripped from the positions — if it’s all reduced to a formalist spectator sport.

Yeah, left libertarians / social libertarians / socialist libertariansused the term first.
Yes most political philosophies tend to have various strains, the difference is that libertarianism doesn’t fit into left and right, because left and right is only one “dimension” of social issues and politics.
Authoritarianism and liberty, society and individual is another “dimension”.
To use a simplistic example, fascism is right AND authoritarian. Leninism is left AND authoritarian.
Yeah, it is hard to discuss it, especially since most Americans have a tendency to view libertarianism as synonymous with conservatism, and everything in the context of Liberals and Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans. How many Americans consider Noam Chomsky libertarian? He is.

Yep.

These people have become Christo-Nazi’s They need to be called out on every newswire, cable tv news show, and real news blog for what they are and we need to keep hammering away at their false, delusional and pre-ordained world view until they snap and have to be put into mental wards across the country.

The “trickle-down theory” always conjures, in my head,the Rich 1% who own 70% of the economy peeing on everyone else.