Talk:RINO Backers

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I think we have to be careful here - single-issue disagreement does not make "RINO"s. I strongly disagree with the labeling of Palin, Coulter and the blog redstate as Republicans in Name Only.--IDuan 13:38, 24 August 2012 (EDT)

The article reads: "...highlighted who sides with RINOs when it counts the most on important social issues, and who stands with principle." I think the point is that the people listed may or may not be RINOs themselves, but that when the chips are down, chose to side with the RINOs, regardless of their own political convictions. MattyD 13:43, 24 August 2012 (EDT)
Point taken I missed that.--IDuan 13:45, 24 August 2012 (EDT)


I saw this article and it struck me that this site is listing as RINO backers or RINOs most of the leading names of the Republican Party, elected and/or followed by the Republican electorate. Maybe the people on this site are the RINOs and need to start their own party, b/c when you call the leadership RINOs you just make yourselves sound like you're the outliers, not representative of the modern Republican Party. It's been made abundantly clear Todd Akin's views are not Republican. --BillWhitliff 19:58, 24 August 2012 (EDT)

A glance at the RINO Backers does not reveal a list of "most of the leading names of the Republican Party." Indeed, most of the people on the list are not even party officials. The party officials have released the Republican Party Platform that shows it is the RINO Backers, not Todd Akin, who are out of step.--Andy Schlafly 21:29, 24 August 2012 (EDT)
Mitt Romney is your Presidential candidate, and his running mate Paul Ryan is a Republican "Young Gun", the architect of the budget the Republican House has passed three times, and considered the party's intellectual touchstone. Sarah Palin was the Vice Presidential nominee in the last election and commands a presence in the party unrivaled by most. Karl Rove engineered the successful campaigns of the last two Presidential elections won by a Republican. And you somehow think these are the RINO/RINO backers and that you and Todd Akin are the true mantel and speak the voice of the Republican Party? What elections have you won, exactly, that gives you this thought? Perhaps it's not that they are RINOs, it's that you are the RINO, if you really look at the reality of it all. Vote Republican - but neither Mr. Akin nor you Mr. Schlafly are the Republican Party - you're outliers. When you are calling Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter RINOs, maybe you should just start your own party. --BillWhitliff 00:12, 25 August 2012 (EDT)
Most of the RINO Backers have not been elected. Of those who have, one quit her office midterm (Palin), one did not stand for reelection (Romney), one is a freshman senator who had not been to D.C. before (Johnson), and another declined to run for an open seat for statewide office (Ryan). This list of RINO Backers is hardly representative of the Republican Party itself.--Andy Schlafly 15:15, 25 August 2012 (EDT)

His Words

Forgive my ignorance, there has only been sporadic news about this in Australia. What were Mr Akin's exact words, we have been told by our media that he stated:

If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down

Obviously this is entirely scientifically incorrect, is there context that I'm missing? TheOtherGuy 00:03, 25 August 2012 (EDT)

The Todd Akin entry provides several quotations from scientific publications that are similar to what Akin said. But even if Akin were wrong, why the media bullying against him?--Andy Schlafly 14:58, 25 August 2012 (EDT)

Rand Paul

Rand Paul's support is tepid at best. While he isn't calling for Akin to leave the race, Paul stated Akin was wrong regarding the science of what happens to women's bodies during rape. Also, it should be emphasized more that Akin only believes it is rape when violence is involved - he doesn't believe it is rape if the woman is drugged, or if she doesn't fight back. SharonW 09:32, 26 August 2012 (EDT)

I don't see citations or quotes in support of those comments. Todd Akin was not redefining any terms, and Rand Paul's comment concerned the medical evidence of which he was aware (he's an ophthalmologist).--Andy Schlafly 10:25, 26 August 2012 (EDT)
Akin was a sponser of the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act", which initially had wording that only included "forcible rape", and excluded cases such as statutory rape, which often are not violent. "Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes."The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape


I read your article on Todd Akin, and it reached levels of partisanship that would make Wikipedia blush. This article is no different. All of the Republicans who are called RINOs here are trying to save the party from people like Akin who make careless comments and then pretend to be martyrs for whatever cause they spoke the comments in order to get foolish people in that cause to support them, while the people who support him are mostly doubtful as best and the ones that aren't are misled by this charlatan.

Mr. Schlafly, are you seriously doing this? Have you forgotten what you stood for? Are you being led astray by this false prophet? Right now, we are in a war for our country, and people like Akin are causing our efforts to be divided. Akin CANNOT stay. He MUST go.

Hypocrisy of DNC and Media

First, let me say that Todd Akin made some careless mistakes that reflect poorly on the Pro-Life movement. He should've researched his stance on abortion more thoroughly and his stance on abortion is more extreme than the Pro-Life movement in general, in opposing abortion in cases of rape.

With that said, there is a double standard I don't like. He made a mistake, he apologized, it should be over with. If he were a liberal, pro-choice Democrat then Democrats and the media would not be calling for his head like this over a simple, honest mistake. In fact, they would not be demanding he step down even over severe corruption.

Want proof? Just look at Sen. Charlie Rangel. --Joshua Zambrano 13:57, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

Rangel was ridiculously corrupt, but what did the Democrats do? When Republicans tried to investigate such financial corruption by Democrats, the Democrats actually locked the Republicans out, literally, by changing the locks on the doors to stop Republicans from attending.[1][2] Are Democrats calling for Rangel to resign like they are Todd Akin? Are they publicly demonizing Rangel? What about the media? No, this is a clear double standard being applied. Democrats and the media should be ashamed of themselves. --Joshua Zambrano 14:14, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

Victoria Jackson

At the moment I lack the ability to edit a wiki page with much precision, so I should be most grateful if someone were to help me out by checking the following reference and either removing my most recent edit or adding a reference to my source. which is as follows:

Thanks in advance. --TonySidaway 12:30, 5 September 2012 (EDT)

I got back to my computer and did it myself. --TonySidaway 14:27, 5 September 2012 (EDT)

Rick Scott

How does Rick Scott not fit in with the others? He's a conservative who is supposedly against abortion. SharonW 21:44, 7 September 2012 (EDT)

The quote by Rick Scott simply said he disagreed with Akin's statement. That's not in the same league as the demands that Akin withdraw his nomination.--Andy Schlafly 22:05, 7 September 2012 (EDT)