Regardless of whether the purity test is formally adopted as initially outlined, the Democratic party should be using this to drive a wedge between the Republican party and its more moderate members.

Why should they continue offer it unanimous support on health care reform if it is threatening to withhold its support for them if they don't toe the party line on a variety of other extreme positions?

What assumes me is other than a couple of bedrock principles most of the list is just current fights with the Democrats. For instance are they really against health care reform?

Are the candidates going to be afforded time to study? Is it oral or written? Is there going to be a grading curve? What happens if we attain victory in Iraq and Afghanistan before next elections? What happens if Obama is impeached, since it references his specific policies? I mean so many questions.

They may water it down, but the TeaBag wing of the party will simply impose the tests de facto. If the resolution is too watered won--or doesn't pass at all--count on the TeaBaggers to pack their shit and start a new party.

Probably with Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Michele Bachmann as the party leaders.

This is entertaining -- it's like the conservative wing of the Catholic Church has taken over the GOP: "You can't be Republican and favor a public health care option . . ."

The DNC should _DEMAND_ that the RNC water this down, loudly, and constantly, for months. And if they do, proclaim victory.

I can't wait to see them at the Purity Ball, dancing with their daddies.

Nonsense, they shouldn't make any demands of the Republican party on this issue at all. But unless and until the party leadership specifically, formally and publically rejects the purity test, the Democrats should make it a ball and chain attached to the ankle of every Republican. They should repeatedly porray the Republican party as intollerant of dissent and should portray every candidate that doesn't commit primary election suicide by rejecting the purity test as having endorsed all of its (extremist) elements.

The RNC saved a bit of face by backing away from Jim Bopp's Democrat Socialist Party resolution, but that didn't do anything to change the paranoia about socialist boogeymen it sprang from. Similarly, I suspect this purity test is an attempt to gain control of the purge that's already lost the GOP NY-23. Even if the RNC does wisely decide to gut this list, it's not going to change the fact that a purity test is already being applied.

Also, I was enjoying the headline alliteration. How about "RNC Righteousness Requirements Reins In Running Republicans"?

The Thinkprogress analysis is thoroughly misconceived, I think.

What's important is not how many candidates violate one principle, but how many fail the test (by violating three or more principles). Lee Fang's post doesn't even tell us this. It's absurd that they would do an analysis and not even try to figure this out.

I hate to say this, but I agree with sarabeth. A Republican't fails the test if they fail three or more of the points, and that would have been better information to have.

On the other hand, I've read that Ronald Reagan would have failed something like 6 of the points and W at least 3, so there is that.

Oh goody! Are they going to wear Purity Rings so we can distinguish (and keep them away from) the rest of the population?

I neglected to comment on this first one when it first came out and it REALLY needs to be said if it hasn't been already:

(1) Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill

LOWER deficits will, by definition, make BIGGER national debt.

Are these guys STILL claiming superiority in the field of economics?

I'm starting to envision Mr. Benen's favorite conspiracy of the current GOP being a troupe of performance artists.