politics

Virginia GOP Demands Disloyalty to Principle

Just when you think the Republican Party has run out of feet to shoot, it aims the gun at its head.

“The State Board of Elections yesterday approved a state Republican Party request to require all who apply for a Republican primary ballot first vow in writing that they will vote for the party’s presidential nominee next fall,” reports today’s Washington Times.

In other words, in order to vote for a candidate who supports the Constitution, economic freedom, and the sanctity of life, like Ron Paul, we have to promise to vote for a gag-ruler like John McCain, a tax-and-spender like Mike Huckabee, or a pro-abort like Rudy Giuliani.

There’s no way to enforce the oath, but that’s no comfort to people (like me) who keep our vows. If this ruling stands, I won’t be able to vote in the Virginia Republican primary. Read my lips: I don’t make vows I don’t keep.

In its misguided quest to maintain political power, the Republican Party is turning its back on principles and the people who hold them–again.

h/t Below the Beltway

Sign up for our monthly newsletter with travel tips, home ideas, new recipes, and more delivered straight to your inbox!

* indicates required

7 thoughts on “Virginia GOP Demands Disloyalty to Principle

  1. Sorry, Leslie, but I’ve gotta disagree with you on this one. Absent some measurable way to restrict participation to people who identify themselves as “Republicans” (party registration, perhaps?), this method of self-identification is the only alternative left. However, to give you credit, you’re one of the few people (Doug Mataconis is another) complaining about it who actually IS an identifiable Conservative and Republican (in that order).

  2. The real question is who at RPV authorized this. It was not discussed at the last state central meeting nor the executive committee meeting. Is this Hager or Judd off on a crazy tangent again ? If it’s Judd, he needs to be gone.

  3. God forbid that any Democrats (Americans) or Independents (also Americans) should “cross-over” and vote Republican! Eeeeeewwwww – “cross-over” sounds a little like “cross-dress.” Wouldn’t want anyone who does that!

  4. Shaun, thanks for your comment, my (facebook) friend. I appreciate your taking the time, but I’m afraid your response doesn’t help me. While it is certainly my hope that the GOP will nominate someone for whom I can vote, I can’t truthfully state that it’s my intent to vote for the Republican nominee when I don’t know who he’ll be. It is most definitely not my intent to vote for a liberal pro-abort like Rudy Giuliani. Not having to offer my first-born as guarantee doesn’t matter. My word is my bond, and I’m not going to lie. Please encourage the RVP to abandon this requirement. Thanks again for commenting. I hope to see you on Saturday.

  5. Leslie, just to clear things…

    It’s a statement of intent, that *at the moment* you participate in the Republican nomination method, it is your intent to support the Republican nominee.

    That’s it. No oath, no swearing in, no first born child.

    The statement came to be after the 2003 GOP primaries where there was significant Democratic crossover in determining our Republican nominees. In 2004, the State Central Committee introduced it into the party plan as a way to protect our right to free association (in lieu of party registration).

    This has nothing to do with the 2008 presidential contests… the wheels were turning long before that.

    Hope that helps.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.