What Is A RINO?

• What is a RINO? 
• Is the term overused? 
• Are conservatives correct in not concluding that some Republicans are the equivalent of wolves in sheep's clothing? And 
• Is there another acronym that more accurately connotes a Republican who is no longer guided by solid party principles such as defending and protecting the Constitution of the United States with forthrightness and without moral reservations?

RINO is the acronym meaning Republican In Name Only. Most conservatives apply RINO to members of the Republican Party who act as if they are working for the Democratic party or some other vested interests whose goals are in direct opposition to the platform of principles for which the Republican Party allegedly stands and its members are expected to defend.

It has long been my opinion that RINO is way overused. There are those who stray from the principles, yes.  But there are those who stray quite often and far from principles and yet they are still referred to as RINO.

What is to be done? Read on.

RINO is meant at least to be unflattering to the person or group to whom it is applied. It basically says "you are (or he is) failing to defend the principles for which Republicans are elected." There is often an implied: "Now that you have been alerted to our concerns, please reform your behavior and go in peace."

So the user wants to convey somewhat of an insult, a cautionary warning let us say, by using the term RINO.

But what if the target of the (at worst) epithet is not in the least offended? What if they have sought comfort with their dishonesty much like Bill Clinton did with his lies with the notion "Well, it depends on what the meaning of is is." The RINO finds comfort in the notion that "I'm still a republican elected to vote in the name of those who elected me even if I'm not a Republican."  So he laughs to himself at the person who calls him a republican in name only. Got it?

So what is to be done? Read on.

Many conservatives may declare someone a RINO or their behavior RINOish after witnessing their actions.  Yet they may remain reluctant to conclude that the person to whom the term has been applied has completely gone over to the other side. And that may happen even after repeated affronts. A good example was the case with Senator Arlen Specter who, when he switched to the Democratic Party, "shocked" many Republicans. In fact those who insist on seeing no evil even when confronted with a mountain of evidence to the contrary that the person or group has not merely strayed somewhat from the path, are opening themselves to the charge of RINO.

Liberals are known for claiming good intentions, and then upon making mistakes expecting to be forgiven by their fellows. But it is NOT so with conservatives for whom accepting consequences for one's actions no matter the intentions are the hallmark of responsible living. So for those who insist on seeing no evil in those claiming to be Republicans but not acting like one, there is some sound reasoning to call them RINOs or at the least RINO sympathizers, enablers, and protectors.

And let me address the dreaded charge of judgmentalism in the manner it needs. Those who claim to be Christian conservatives are well advised to turn the other cheek when someone strikes them. It should apply equally to Republicans who go against party principles. When they admit it, and ask forgiveness? Sure. Grant it. Once. Nothing in scripture says you have to take an unwarranted beating though. You are free to apply the following: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Try to fool me thrice, I'm presuming you are with the enemy.

And so we get to the question: Why is RINO still used when referring to members of the Republican Party who have repeatedly violated the party stated goals and/or compromised away nearly every principle, and/or permitted the steady erosion of the limits on federal government trespass on state and individual sovereignty as the constitution was written to prevent? 

A couple of years ago this blog sponsored a contest. Reader Guy S came up with a new acronym.

SKUNC. 

There are a number of underlying words which fit the people to whom RINO has no impact upon and is indeed unfitting given their degree of violating their oath of office to defend and protect the Constitution.

Statist Knowingly Undermining National Charters
Statist Kneeling to United Nations Control 

(Both of these definitions fit the actions of politicians all over the world, but notoriously those in Western nations, especially the pretenders in the former British Commonwealth countries.)

Also there are the support personnel in the arts and education and the media (the Agency of Lies). These groups have been taken over through the relentless use of Critical Theory out of the Marxist Frankfurt School. The Verona papers and KGB defectors told us that long ago, but since our media and  educational establishment was already infiltrated, most of our fellow citizens are still unaware, and even worse, are unwitting and uncaring victims of it. The term SKUNC applied to these perpetrators means:

Statist Knowingly Undermining National Cultures.

So do yourself and your nation a favor and stop using RINO when referring to those who have gone so far off the reservation that there is clearly not a sign of patriotism left in them. They are SKUNCs.

Updated to catalogue where I've attempted to introduce SKUNC to RINO users
For 29October2013: when Grover Norquist joined with the Left to Alinskyize Ted Cruz.

Additional words for which SKUNC is a good acronym

Statists Knowingly Undermining our Nation's Constitution (Justices, Congress-critters, and Presidents.)
Stooges Konniving to Unhinge National Consciousness (the Statists' useful idiots in the Soviet-Style Media (SSM) in particular.)

Denying Human Life Its Holy Imprimatur

When men think of themselves as gods, they invariably treat the common man as an animal. Hence the life of the majority is degraded and the individual is stripped of any rights not bestowed to them temporarily by the demigod. On good days they view as quaint our traditional Judeo-Christian ethics that sees innocent human life as something sacred and deserving of societal protection.The good days are growing fewer as the following stories suggest.

I've been warning of this for ages, but now Drudge headlines the advancing avalanche that has been mockingly called a slippery slope.

Belgium looks at euthanasia for minors, Alzheimer's sufferers...

France considers 'accelerated deaths'...

What more need I say at this point? You know this is where ObamaCare is headed. I have spoken with physicians who approve. I've read books that promoted this line of thinking while our leaders stood off on the sidelines and either said nothing or appointed the authors to higher office positions (at the CDC for instance.) There they have been establishing policies that has been quietly but detrimentally affecting what medical choices are available to us for decades. They are proponents of treating human beings as commodities and not as God's children, and -- in particular under Obama -- they are ever increasing in number and power.

You are either on the side of the ethics that gave birth to all of our modern advances -- the code derived from the variety of religions generally known as Judeo-Christianity branches -- or you've permitted yourself to be swayed into joining the camp of the new pagans (not progressives as they say, but regressives), the Sustainability worshipers. And it is sad to say that many of the heads of those religious institutions are among the Sus worshipers even as they play plausible deniability games with those who challenge them. "Sustainability? I thought that was only about conservation."

So many of you think the Statist demagogues are bad now. You have another think coming. For those who have never seen it, here is the scene in the 1939 classic, Gunga Din, where the Kali worshiping guru indoctrinates his thuggees* with a boiling, maniacal hatred: "Kill for the love of killing. Kill for the love of Kalee. Kill! Kill! KILL!"

Click here to run clip. This scene starts at 60 seconds.

As you see more and more of these stories there will still be friends and relatives who think what I'm saying is overly dramatic. If you are God revering, I think it is especially true that you try and awaken comprehension that this is the real face that is behind the Progressive mask.  Don't fear the fictional zombie hoards, fear that the Progs have so destroyed our culture that virtually all societal members have become desensitized. Consequent to their incremental cultural attacks, all of us have been stripped of some basic decent human sentiments, while some of us have been stripped of all. Fear that should you fail to provide sufficient countermeasures that your children may wind up looking at you with a face such as this and neither realize it nor care.


_____
*Thuggee (Tug-ee') were a large gang of highwaymen that infested the mid 19th Century British Raj. They delighted in murdering whomever they plundered. It is from them that our term thug derives.The new movie "The Innocent Prophet" suggests that Mohammed set the standard for the Thuggee to copy.

Pascal Fervor's Razor

The razor you need is at the end. Let me show you first why you need it.

It has become habitual for people who notice that our culture has been staggering off its pins, step by step, due to Marxist aggression aided and abetted by the Agency of Lies, to say something like the following.

I've noticed that starting in the late 90's, many elements of "new age" belief systems started mapping pretty closely to the melange of stuff that one finds floating around in the collective heads of the progressivoeftist cluster.

While I had some sympathy for new agey concepts at that point in my seek, there came a point where the material started reading more like tracts from the Democratic National Committee/Mother Jones/Utne Reader and less like spiritual insight. 

My initial take was that this was part of a common, mutually reinforcing propaganda source but in the spirit of "never explain by conspiracy that which could also be explained by cockup", this offers an alternative hypothesis.... — Geek WithA.45 in comments to "15 Questions for Atheists."

This is the pattern for many a common man. And it is understandable, and maybe forgivable. I find this sort of cut-off to rationalization to be a conditioned reflex. People would far rather be killed than dismissed from the good opinion of society. It has been a process of insidious indoctrination that has been successfully applied to several generations of Americans.

But then there are our ostensible leaders of the opposition to Statism.

People are always telling me what so and so wants to do and why he wants to do it. And I say look: I can’t look into a man’s heart. I can’t peer into his soul. I have no idea why he’s trying to do what he’s doing. All I can evaluate are the results. All I can evaluate is the output of his behavior. Whether he intends it to come out that way or doesn’t intend it to come out that way is immaterial. My obligation is the same: to defend the republic.— Scott Ott in the video that asks "Is the looming economic destruction of America deliberate?"

I cry horseshit. This is akin to the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result. It’s the same SKUNC line about not behaving like the Left who calls us names without foundation, so therefore we shouldn't even when we have good reason. (It is as if nobody ever taught us that silence will be understood to be agreement. Arrgghhhh.)

Listen Mr. Ott: you cannot effectively defend the republic if you discard good intelligence, whether it comes from facts and reports you can trust or from the preponderance of evidence played out before you.To fail to do this is the utmost ineptitude, and to counsel others to do so too is plain bad teaching. IMHO it is so bad as to place the speaker’s bona fides in question.

I, Pascal, cannot stand by in silence while a trio of apparently sharp guys tells me and others (who I am counting on, expecting them to stay cool and use their heads under pressure) the exact opposite of what we need to hear.

This is what honest leaders should tell me: "Think about and struggle with all the evidence you have and then prepare our defenses accordingly."

Listen my friends. We are at the beginning of some very very dangerous times. Anyone who knows of my concerns for humanity as a whole knows that I do not trust those in power because of their consistent silence against some of the worst actors on the planet.

Similarly I do not trust those who respond to the beckon and call of those in power. The KGB had infiltrators and moles; who in their right mind thinks our powermad don’t have their equivalent nomenklatura employed to teach us not to think fully?


Pascal Fervor's Razor* observes that no matter how much evidence accumulates to inform many individuals that the State has murder on its mind, most will sadly go to their graves muttering the equivalent of "If Stalin only knew."

The razor portion of this is that individuals who insist you deny the stinking pile of the obvious be identified as soon as possible and cut off from contact with those who know what needs to be done.

Put simply (the metaphorical razor), whomever consistently avoids the elephants threatening to wreck your room, he's not your friend.
______________
*Regarding the older razors upon which this one draws. When it comes to highly visible speakers who rationalize away mountains of evidence, the time has come to discard Hanlon's razor entirely and moves on past Heinlein's.

Govt Body Counts >> Lone Gunmen

As the Agency of Lies and Statist politicians continue their onslaught on the individual's right to protect himself, never forget the title of this post and the facts which make it true. For those who do not know mathematical notation, the title to this post says

Government Body Counts are Much Greater Than That of Lone Gunmen

Mr.  President, Mr. Mayor, why do you want to leave me defenseless? Given the history of police states (where only police were permitted arms) in the last 100 years, why should I trust you when you and your ilk

1. go out of your way to protect those who have murdered before.
2. let mentally unstable people run loose on the street.
3. are more concerned about hurting peoples feelings than seeing they are well informed.
4.  
5.  
6.  
7.  
8.  

 I am sick and tired of those who hate America and Americans doing everything they can to enslave us and, to ensure that the enslavement goes along smoothly, want us ruled where only the police are armed.

May God have mercy on your scheming souls.

Dominion Bank Layabout Gloats at American Debt

The following"anonymous" comment to old post, The Genius of Blaise Pascal, came in 2 days ago.:

December 12, 2012 10:59 AM

Still enjoying the fruits of guns and drugs and AMERICA TOP SECRET Kultur? The Chinese and Muslims will eat away at your power. Like the Ottomans, you will sink into the mire.

Well the troll who left this thinks he's anonymous. Except for the fact that he left his tracks:

142.205.241.254 
from Toronto, Ontario, Canada 
at an ISP belonging to Toronto Dominion Bank

For forensic purposes, here is the a copy of what Stat Counter is showing for his visit to leave the above comment.

Click to see full size

 As you can see, since then he has posted 3 more smarmy comments from the same location.

It must be nice for "Anonymous" to be paid by a respected Toronto bank to send out malicious comments to various blogs. 

What the public needs to know is: 

1. Why does the head of Dominion Bank approve of this work?  And considering the comment  carries in it a note of gloating...
2. Just how much interest does Dominion Bank MAKE from arranging the debt now carried by China and Saudi Arabia? 

HMMM?

Despicable Union-Govt Alliance

Three stories near the top of Drudge demonstrate this today. What makes the situation I highlight despicable are all the claims of protecting freedoms in the first amendment.

Right to work laws are designed to prevent unions from creating monopolies on who gets to work and where. Otherwise we will find ourselves back to the tyranny of guild-style work arrangements.

The first story is:
Federal judge finds NC 'Choose Life' plates unconstitutional...

and the second and third stories are a pair about the Michigan right to work law. 

 Obama backs big labor bosses...


  Michigan schools close so teachers can protest right to work law...

Story one tells us that a Federal Judge has ruled for the ACLU against North Carolina. He agreed with what I imagine was the ACLU's phrase "view-point discrimination." He found this violated the 1st Amendment.

Story 2 is what we've come to expect from Bummer who will back any communistic POSs who helped him get elected.

But it is story 3 that is the real outrage in light of story 1. Tax payers and school kids get screwed so that the Teachers union can get free mobs to threaten the state legislature -- paid at tax payer expense. (And God help any teacher who does not participate -- kinda like card check if you know what I mean. Screw freedom of association.)

Where's the "view-point discrimination" ruling there? There will not be one. Because the school board is part of the problem too. They have to play along with the teacher's union because it's their money and goons who helped get the school-boards elected. Screw fair treatment of both sides of the equation when the govt only wants one side to prevail.

You, the individual, are screwed when you don't rally with others like you to discuss such outrages openly. Yes the union goons will turn out and threaten your side. But you can be ready when you need to be. And do not expect any form of media -- The Agency of Lies -- to be on your side.

Big Government Tells Us

California Teachers Union Video Features 'Rich' Urinating On 'Poor'

What I'd like to know is where is our video showing the California Teacher's Union urinating on its students? Spare us form these collectivist fictions and instead give us the facts that could really fire up a nation.