RINOs Redux: McHale’s Viewpoints

RINOs? Again?!

by Frank McHale

Last year, I wrote a commentary called RINOs?, where I criticized Republicans generally, and conservative Republicans specifically, for using this term when discussing party members more than them. Republicans In Name Only are Republicans, folks. They certainly are not Democrats, are they? Or radical leftists? Certainly not Obamanuts.

Even moderate and liberal Republicans are not as liberal as most Democats. With the exception of Joe Manchin, and perhaps a couple of other truly moderate Dems, all the other Democrats are as liberal and left as the day is long.

So please, friends. STOP with the name calling. It isn’t becoming. We need to unify with those who may be more liberal, or moderate than we think we are. Or soon, there will be no Republican Party of Lincoln, TR, or Reagan which will save the nation from the attempt to fundamentally change us.

Is that not the whole point? Let us put our efforts to win as a united party rather than divided one.

I present RINOs?, a chastisement to those who forgot Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment, “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.” Let’s remember this the next time you want to use that four letter word.

Monday, July 22, 2013


Why do conservatives castigate Republicans who are more moderate, more centrist or even more liberal than they are? People like Chris Christie, John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Paul Ryan are as Republican as Rick Santorum, Rand Paul, Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, yet are criticized for working with liberal Democrats in the House or Senate. Even Marco Rubio was slammed by conservatives as a “traitor” to his conservative ideals because he worked with Democrats on the immigration bill.

Now, for the sake of full disclosure, I am a registered Republican, but I have libertarian and socially moderate leanings. I am a fiscal conservative and I admit, I have voted for Democrats many times over the years. Does that make me a traitor? Absolutely not! Instead, it makes me a free-thinking and high-information American. If we want to think monolithically, perhaps we would prefer to be Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy or Red China, the best examples of monolithic governments from the 20th century.

Do we? I don’t think so.

Instead, we are a nation of diversity, exemplified by our ancestry, race, color, creed and even sexual orientation. So why wouldn’t we be diverse in our politics? I mean, isn’t that what being American is all about?

Other than, perhaps, Canada, there is no other country on earth like the USA. And even Canada is mostly English-based, except for French Quebec. So, Canada is not nearly as diverse as we are. Nor are its politics.

We need to understand that it is our fault as Republicans that Barack Obama is serving a second term. Why? Because as a party, we couldn’t get behind a winner early in the primary season and we allowed the MSM to define our candidates, rather than defining them ourselves. By the time Mitt Romney finally won enough delegates to secure the nomination, he was so bloodied by the battle and was so short of money, he struggled, and ultimately, lost the election.

I agree that Mitt could have been more forceful and challenging during the debates and the campaign. And as the honest man he is, Mitt would admit to that, as well. But the problem also was that during the campaign, he was still trying to win over the conservatives, who by and large, stayed home on Election Day, like a bunch of spoiled children who didn’t get what they wanted.

He won over the independents, and he won over many Reagan Democrats. But he was largely unable to win over his own party’s base. And guess what, folks? Whoever becomes the Republican standard-bearer for 2016, will have the same difficulties, if this attitude continues. The result will be another four years of the nonsense we have suffered through since 2009. Hillary or Joe, or whoever else is nominated by the Democrats, will be elected due to our own discord.

So, if we want to continue identifying people as Republicans In Name Only, or RINOs, soon enough we will be the 21st century version of the Whigs or the Federalists. It will be our own damn fault. And Barry will thank you all very much for completing his transformation of the USA for him.

And we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

Originally Posted by Frank McHale  on July 22, 2013 in Frankmchalesviews.blogspot.com

Reprinted with Permission

One thought on “RINOs Redux: McHale’s Viewpoints

  1. Mr. McHale has identified a key issue. I respectfully disagree with his main point.If it were true that the Republican Party, once in power, would steer America back toward its Constitutional foundations, as Ronald Reagan did, then I could grit my teeth and vote for a party of compromise. Reagan compromised and achieved much.However, what we have in the Republican Party now is not a party of compromise, but one of surrender. We have seen this over and over again. All the Democrats had to say was "government shutdown," and the establishment Republicans went scurrying for cover, fearful of losing their seats. Worse yet, every time any Republicans do stand up and make the case for conservatism, the establishment Republicans pillory the Republican, speaking PLENTY ILL of fellow Republicans. This has been the pattern, time after time. It is vitally necessary for the surrender Republicans to be put on notice that what is needed in America now is nothing less than sudden and relentless reform, a return to the founding principles, and a political party that fearlessly insists on those principles. If we cannot achieve that, then the republic is lost in any case, and why should that happen under the Republican banner?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s