New Rules of Engagement for 2010

And since I am employed, I will try to increase the amount you mentioned to a higher amount. It would be worth it to get rid of Red Nancy, Dingy Harry, and their minions.

Plus I just became a grandfather again (09/10/09). I owe this grandson of mine a better USA.

I have used a similar tactic against indivdiual nimords ( Murtha & Snowe) but a concerted campaign of targeting neewdowells is a better plan by far.

Wherever two or more are gathered in His name.... is sort of appropriate contextually.

and congrats GG

I will be curious to see your list of 10 reprobates (I love that word).

My oldest son is 13, and I have already resigned myself to the fact that he will no doubt have to join the military (like father, like son) like I did in '83 because there will be no jobs when he graduates. I hope I'm wrong, but I got a bad feeling there won't be much change...unless we get off our as*es and rattle some cages.

Keep us posted, Garnet.

I think "national Coordination" is the key phrase in multiple contexts; who we target, when we target,getting conservatives on board from sea to shining sea, etc. This is no simple or easy undertakeing. I'm thinking Glenn Beck. He's the man of the hour and if he could push this effort like he did the 9/12 project, I can imagine a tidal wave of participation. 2.1 million showed up in DC; what if just half of those joined in your plan? WOW!!! That would produce a tsunami of $$$$$ 's going into the coffers of "our" candidates. Woo hoooo!!! I'm excited. LETS DO THIS.

Looking forward to your list of reprobates. Thanks for stepping beyond preaching to the choir.

It is a fight TO THE DEATH, so we are all in whether we want to be or not!

next year, I intend to follow suit. I also await the "Retire The Reprobates" list.

I will no longer support parties, I Will support individual candidates though, and plan to be very active in replacing RINOS and dems in my area.

We have to stay active, and actually Work to get the right candidates elected.

Marches and tea parties are great, they keep the people excited, but they can only do so much, now it's time to roll up the sleeves and get to work. :o)

And congratulations on a new grandson! You're right, we owe our grandchildren a chance to experience real freedom and the benefits of the American way of life as we knew it.

to McCain and the RNC last year - for all the good that did. McCain just pi$$ed it away. And our meager contributions won't make a difference to some of the established Congressholes and Senaturds, but it can make a difference to some of the lesser democrats.

As far as the list goes, it won't include the most egregious reprobates, like Pelosi, Frank, Schumer, etc. It'll be a list of the most vulnerable, easy-to-beat democrats. We've got to start there and change the sheer numbers of dems. That could take the speakership away from Pelosi (HALLALUJAH) and make passage of new anti-American bills impossible.

The real power will be in numbers. If we can only muster 20 or 30, it will have little impact, but if we can get (at least) a few hundred, we can begin to have an influence.

We're in it up to our eyeballs, like it or not.

I've got an early list of sixteen but it needs to be further refined. The sixteen are just democrat incumbents in what are usually republican districts and are considered to be vulnerable.

Half of the Congressholes and Senaturds in Congress are republicans. Though they're usually better than the dems, they are not without fault.

Excellent, stupendous, really good idea Gar. I'm with ya.

See my next post for how you can help.

nominees for your list, Garnet92:

Senate: Kyle (AZ), Allard (CO), Bunning (KY), Vitter (LA), Inhoffe and Coburn (OK), DeMint (SC) Enzi (WY), and Barrasso (WY). That’s nine (9).

House: Bachus (AL); Franks, Shadegg and Flake (AZ); Boozman, Herger, Lungren, Doolittle and Radanovich (AR); Nunes, McCarthy, Dreier, Royce, Gary Miller, Rohrabacher, Campbell, and Hunter (CA); Musgrave, Lamborn and Tancredo (CO; Stearns, Mica and Feeney (FL); Kingston, Westmoreland, Price, Linder, Deal, Broun and Gingrey (GA); Sali (ID); Roskam and Manzullo (IL); Burton and Pence (IN); Steve King (IA); Tiahart (KS); Scalise (LA); Bartlett (MD); Walberg and Rogers (MI); Kline and Bachmann (MN); Akin and Blunt (MO); Smikth (NE); Garrett (NJ); Pearce (NM); Fox and McHenry (NC); Chabot, Jordan, Latta and Boehner (OH); Sullivan, Lucas, Cole and Fallin (OK); Shuster and Pitts (PA); Wilson and Barrett (SC); Davis (TN); Gohmert, Poe, Johnson, Hensarling, Barton, Culberson, Brady, McCaul, Conoway, Neugebauer, Marchant, Burgess, Carter and Sessions (TX); Bishop (UT); Wittman, Drake, Forbes, Goode and Goodlatte (VA); Hastings and McMorris (WA); and Cubin (WY. That’s eighty-six (86).

on what criteria did you base your exclusions from consideration? If you have already done an analysis and arrived at your list as a result, and the data is from reputable sources, I'd love to see the data detail. Note that I'm not implying that you're wrong, I'd just like to indepently verify the data before blindly accepting it.

Otherwise, and with all due respect, I'm not excluding anyone from objective consideration. The information that I'm gathering is from objective sources (without any preconcieved notions) and let the chips fall as they may.

with scores by the American Conservative Union, then parsed them by my criteria to see if they held up. Each of them has been consistently true-conservative, even when in powerless minority status and from the get-go.

But it is extremely unlikely that any of your group would be on my list anyway. I’m targeting only House democrats, and particularly those in vulnerable districts.

I did use the ACU as one of my filters, along with ratings by National Taxpayers Union, the NRA, FreedomWorks, SEIU, ACLU, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood. I’m still gathering data and plugging into Excel, etc. It’ll likely be the end of next week before I have a “semi-final” list.

Thanks for your input.

targeting Republicans, not Democrats. An example
would be Marco Rubio v. Mel Martinez in the Republican senate primary in Florida. How about someone in Arizona v. John McCain?

things. Apparently, I’ve not made my reasoning clear. The reason for targeting democrats is that they currently hold the power in the House. If the democrats vote together, Republicans (even if they’re all reincarnations of Ronald Reagan) are powerless. Even if every Republican votes in lockstep, we can’t stop the dems – the numbers simply aren’t there. So, replacing McCain with a topnotch conservative doesn’t change the democrat’s majority – they still win. Yes, some Rinos do vote with dems, and after we capture seats currently held by dems, we can work to replace the Rinos.

We need to take back seats from democrats to impede passage of any more anti-American bills (healthcare, immigration, etc.). Therefore, the goal is to reduce the democrat majority (or even overturn it) so the passage of their pet projects becomes more difficult, or impossible.

I am aiming at representatives with little seniority who have a history of voting in unison with Pelosi and are representing predominantly Republican districts. They are just pawns who will do as they’re told and help Pelosi to pass bills that we conservatives don’t want.

So, in summary, the goal of the plan is to reduce the democrat majority in the U.S. House in order to disrupt the left’s liberal agenda.

Great idea and thread, Garnet! I remember last year when the RNC went all out to re-elect Susan Collins, ME. She appreciated the effort so much she voted for the porkulus. Hard to get a handle on what any politician will do but I like the young, dark horse, Mark Rubio in Florida over Charlie Crist.

Isn't it amazing that we are still on the earth with all of so called "crisis" around us. Every thing is a crisis. Of course our gas prices in CA continue to go up, but that is not a crisis. Health Care is such a crisis we need to pass it, but hey, we won't implement to 2012 or later.

Oh and no worries about Afghanastan, no crisis there for more troops. Just American lives at stake. So, instead addressing the problem, just blame Bush. The biggest excuse this adminisration continues to make. They need a new line.