Why RINO's but no DINO's?????
There has been for several years, a movement on the right to call any Republican who votes on their beliefs and their values or even the Constitution, rather than the strict policy pronouncements of the Republican Party a RINO - a Republican In Name Only. Such was just done to Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine for daring to vote to impeach President Trump for his - as they felt - treasonous encouragement of the January 6 insurrectionist attack on the Capitol.
They - and many others - are thus punished for voting their beliefs in American democracy rather than the strict party line. People are also thus punished for reaching across the political aisle. Under this standard, President Reagan - a truly great American - would be branded a RINO for his friendship with, and willingness to work with, for the good of America, Tip O'Neil, a strong Democrat and Speaker of the House. Neither man gave up their political values, but they worked together for our Democracy - showing that they were Americans first and party members second! They each saw the other as a "GOOD AMERICAN'", albeit one with whom they disagreed on policy or political issues.
I am not a Republican and do not get to set their rules - nor should I be. However, I am allowed to offer suggestions as to how the Parties - Democrat or Republican - should return to a spirit of bipartisanship, and work TOGETHER for the good of our great nation.
Nor, am I a Democrat - yes, that leaves Independent. In like manner, I am permitted to make suggestions to that side of the aisle as to the need to work toward bipartisanship.
One question for Democrats, however: If the Republicans continue to out party members as RINO's, why do you not begin to designate DINO's - it's obvious what it stands for - and a great pair to begin with would be Manchin and Sinema. Both of them have stated that they will vote against a bill to end, or modify, the filibuster - thus taking away from President Biden any ability to pass any subsequent legislation, and thus returning total power to Mitch McConnell.
So, although I believe that naming someone a RINO because they vote their beliefs is wrong, the question becomes: If RINO's, why not DINO's?????
Quakertrucker
They - and many others - are thus punished for voting their beliefs in American democracy rather than the strict party line. People are also thus punished for reaching across the political aisle. Under this standard, President Reagan - a truly great American - would be branded a RINO for his friendship with, and willingness to work with, for the good of America, Tip O'Neil, a strong Democrat and Speaker of the House. Neither man gave up their political values, but they worked together for our Democracy - showing that they were Americans first and party members second! They each saw the other as a "GOOD AMERICAN'", albeit one with whom they disagreed on policy or political issues.
I am not a Republican and do not get to set their rules - nor should I be. However, I am allowed to offer suggestions as to how the Parties - Democrat or Republican - should return to a spirit of bipartisanship, and work TOGETHER for the good of our great nation.
Nor, am I a Democrat - yes, that leaves Independent. In like manner, I am permitted to make suggestions to that side of the aisle as to the need to work toward bipartisanship.
One question for Democrats, however: If the Republicans continue to out party members as RINO's, why do you not begin to designate DINO's - it's obvious what it stands for - and a great pair to begin with would be Manchin and Sinema. Both of them have stated that they will vote against a bill to end, or modify, the filibuster - thus taking away from President Biden any ability to pass any subsequent legislation, and thus returning total power to Mitch McConnell.
So, although I believe that naming someone a RINO because they vote their beliefs is wrong, the question becomes: If RINO's, why not DINO's?????
Quakertrucker
70-79, M
