Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I Am a RINO
Usually, the term “RINO” (Republican in Name Only) is used as a pejorative — a politician who caucuses with conservatives but embraces “nonpartisanship” and sinks party strategies frequently. But I am going to give it a different spin: If forced to identify with a political party I identify as “Republican” but I have zero respect for the party and those establishment figures that shake down the electorate for money and votes but are content to never really succeed in upholding the ideals of the US Constitution.
Frankly, the party disgusts me. The “move along, nothing to see here” attitude of too many Republican leaders in the wake of the 2020 election is Constitutional malfeasance. They would say they wanted to avoid a constitutional crisis. I say that the irregularities in revisions to state election processes and the ensuing chaos in vote counting was the constitutional crisis. Was the outcome legitimate? I don’t know. And I am beyond irate that thanks to the complacency of the Republican establishment it will never be known. And also because of this complacency, it is uncertain whether the changes made in some states will be sufficient to assure future elections are credible.
And they didn’t seal the border. And they didn’t repeal Obamacare. And they didn’t take a strong stand for my civil rights during the health “emergency”. They loved the Administrative State more than I.
So I am a RINO. I have no desire to be known as a Republican. But our system, in most places, makes one ineffective unless you are registered to vote as either a Republican or a Democrat. And to be labeled as a Democrat right now feels like having to register as a sex offender: Is my crime an immature youthful indiscretion, or evidence of a crazed fiend or a life-long pervert? So being a Democrat is a “no-go zone” for me.
But I take no joy in a Republican identity. The Party pros all have their timelines filled in for 2022, 2024, 2026, 2028… But I have had my fill. I want to live in America — the strong, free, fearless version not the grifter State controlled by the monied swells at the top and the mendicants at the bottom. I want to live in a place where the doers can throw off the catcalls of the Karens and go about their business of making America great. I want to live in a place where a public servant is just that, not the final arbiter of whether I am worthy of whatever pittance my government is willing for me to have, or even to say anything, or have physical liberty.
My world is upside down. I want it righted. And I don’t think the Republican establishment wants that. They want me to think that they do, and send them money and votes. But like Lucy and the football, they are ready to pull it away and let me end up on my backside one more time. Maybe the last time. Ever.
Published in General
Most of the failures of the Republicans you point to are because they had strong opposition from Democrats in those areas. The border wall is one example.
It’s not reasonable to expect Republican politicians to ignore public health experts in the teeth of a pandemic. Expecting politicians to tilt at windmills all the time will not get you the results you want. Sticking with and supporting the party is what might do it.
I Walton: “We better figure out how to form self defense of a smaller place….”
This has been on my mind lately. How quickly could regions re-form after a general collapse? What level of basic manufacturing and infrastructure would be needed to sustain a region? How could we protect that region without falling into a system of “war lords”? Do we have enough civic morality to avoid it?
In my town, too.
Roderic: “Expecting politicians to tilt at windmills all the time will not get you the results you want. Sticking with and supporting the party is what might do it.”
Fair point. But does that mean we have to recruit “steel-eyed killers” wholesale as our representatives? We have just gone through an experience where we recruited one but were unable to protect him from the Administrative State and his fellow party-members.
I’ve sometimes wondered if we need to reverse how we run political campaigns. What if we formed small local groups that constructed a list of priorities and positions–in the form of, frankly, a job description. Then we hired the person who was qualified, capable, and interested to do that job. If he or she let us down, we would find someone else. The major national parties would simply be at the top of the pyramid of local and state organizations. That’s kind of what we have now, but we are a little lax in the job description area.
I am not sure that we are good political supporters in terms of giving recognition and making requests or demands. Perhaps we have to learn how to be better managers.
There’s a real divide in politics. On one side are those who think that politicians should vote their conscience once elected. There’s merit in that concept. Once elected, politicians will confront situations that could not have been anticipated in the job description. On the other side are those who think politicians should do the bidding of their party constituents. We need to pick one, I think.
And there’s the dealmaking aspects of politics and government. If our guy can give in on something today that will garner votes for something tremendously important to us tomorrow, then we need to allow him or her that flexibility.
And there’s the conundrum all politicians face. If I win this on this one issue at the expense of others and I get voted out of office because of my extreme position, I will give up a vote on the other 99 issues on my desk because I won’t be in office to cast those votes.
It would be great to have conferences in which the voters and campaigners meet with their elected officials and candidates to work out these procedural issues and philosophies and priorities.
And we need to do a good job of thanking our representatives when they do what we wanted done. That’s really important too. They need to know they have our support through thick and thin.
Maybe we need to create “civilian” controlled PACs. And we “thank” them by making a contribution to the PAC with the expectation that the PAC will help finance the representatives’ next campaign so long as they continue to perform to expectations.
You have one RINO Senator to thank for that . . .
Politics has become less serious and more performative. We need to reverse that and make it more serious, less performative, and more about getting solutions to issues. Problem is the performative stuff is what energizes people at the moment. What we have is a lot of emotion driving our choices. In a sense this makes sense because the type of politician that is working legislator is the same group that has been selling us out for years, but we are getting people with a lot of earnest passion and rage, and I fear not much capability for getting stuff done. Ordinarily I would be fine with this because not getting stuff done in Washington use to be an unalloyed good. Now however we need to actively work to roll back the administrative state. That is going to take serious sober people who can get stuff done.
Sure. Where are the serious, sober people who are interested in doing this?
How do you think we got to passion and rage?
Believe me I understand the problem. The process isn’t working and hasn’t for quite sometime. I think there are a few but I am not sure we reward them for what they actually accomplish. We reward them for the sound bites. That is part of the problem. Also the process to get elected is so completely messed up that no sane person would want to run.
Since the majority of Republican politicians stuck with corrupt, Industry-Beholden “public health experts” & went along with their hoax, that is further proof of how out of touch they are.
The same hoax under a different name played out in California in 1997 to 1999.
This hoax had a different result, because of various incredible instances of honesty, integrity and true leadership, all of which have been lacking as far as COVID.
The issue involved MTBE, a product touted by quasi-Dem-in-name but actually Republican Diane Feinstein as being an environmental solution to automobile and truck pollution. It had quickly been mandated by CA legislature to be included in each gallon of gasoline sold, at a 9% level.
State Senator Mountjoy, R, saw through the farce early on. So did the Republican base.
Eventually over 15 months, Dems who were good at science saw through the MTBE hoax as well. Were we really to ensure our aquifers would be polluted beyond repair for the sake of a toxin that was supposed to purify car emissions but in reality did not?
Gov Davis, D, listened to the actual scientists and not at all to the bureaucratic cow manure “health experts” at the Calif Air resources Board. He assembled a Blue Ribbon Panel under the purview of organic chemist and researcher John Froines, the panel began to investigate.
The Blue Ribbon Panel came out w/ a final review that MTBE was “all risk & zero benefit.” (BTW, this indie study faced off against over 900 studies & clinical trials done by industry-sponsored funding. Those studies said MTBE helped the environment and was totally safe for humans.)
Gov Davis then saw to it the mandate of the CA’s gasoline products to carry 9% by weight MTBE was immediately lifted, saving countless lives & the aquifers from this pollutant.
He paid for this necessary ban on MTBE with the loss of his governorship.
Coming back to current day: With the exception of deSantis & a few others, few Republicans cared to fight back against the COVID hoax. Had more done so, by now there would be aggravated murder charges against Fauci, Collins, Ralph Baric, every single hospital administrator who had the actual remedies withheld from COV patients while insisting their bodies be slammed with fentanyl, rocephin, remdesivir.
The actual remedies may well have been employed. Trump obviously knew some indie scientists so he brought forward the idea that HCQ and zinc worked. But he decided to do politics rather than leadership, unlike Gov Davis. The nation is still reeling from his failure of leadership.
Just curious. Do you live in Maryland?
In other words, give up because we will never win. Pathetic.
I agree with all you say but this. I know too many good men who were killed or maimed for this country and our freedom and our way of life. I don’t give a ____ about someone who won’t do the right thing just because they might lose perks or a cushy job.
I don’t think it was a reference to perks or a cushy job. The issue was, if single-issue voters vote someone out because they voted “wrong” on some single issue, that person doesn’t get to make the “right” vote on 99 (or however many) other issues, including those which may be more important to other voters, or in combination might even be more important to those same single-issue voters. Especially if they get replaced by someone – e.g., from the opposition party – who might vote “wrong” not only on that single-issue, but also on one or more of the others.
Limiting government and limiting spending go hand in hand.
So instead we don’t get 1, nor 99. Because it always comes back to the same equation: “If I vote for freedom, I lose my seat, so I’ll never vote for freedom.”
How about instead they vote for what’s right and then campaign on it and get re-elected? Stop being a victim and do the right thing, and I’ll bet in most cases the people will see it the right way. A good salesman could sell ice to eskimos and a good politician should have the same skills of persuasion.
No, the “instead we don’t get 1, nor 99” is what happens if you vote out someone who votes the way you want on the 99, but not the 1, and they get replaced by someone who doesn’t vote the way you want on ANYTHING.
Do you really want the best salespeople as your government representatives?
I would be happy if we got one sometime. I think politicians have been paying too much attention to polls instead of driving polls.
Yes. Why wouldn’t we? Salesmen create wealth. Besides, that is most of their job whether you like it or not. They sell themselves as a politician.
Salespeople also sell lemons, and phony investments, and vacation timeshares, etc, all the time.
And your point? We shouldn’t have politicians who are convincing?
Seems to me that honesty is more important and more valuable than convincing. Shouldn’t we be able to tell if they deserve our support/votes or not, by how they perform in office?
Two things I find strange: First, you infer that being a salesman means being dishonest. Second, you think politicians aren’t expected to be liars.
Agree with 90% of yr statements.
However part of the Grand Pol Pot-ization of Western societies involves keeping the US southern border open, and ensuring fabulous benefits being given to the new arrivals, at the same time the average American is wildly struggling to keep up with massive inflation across all spheres of life. Additionally with foreign firms and BlackRock have purchased so much housing at such inflated prices, renters are looking at 141% rent increases. This translates into homelessness for many.
Meanwhile, while ignoring the legal need to make this happen through Congress, the Biden administration has beefed up Health and Human services’ budget in a preposterous fashion. That way, the newly arrived immigrants have every aspect of their lives paid for.The immigrants arriving along the border are being bused and even flown all across the nation.
You view simply leaving Calif to stew in its supposedly self-created predicament as a logical step, but one billion people, or even one tenth of that number, pushing and shoving their way through the southern border may mean every place on the US map will soon be Californicated.
Reminds me of a Trump-ism: “Where we go one, we go all.”
Yes, but I’ll bet we have different definitions of “best.”
Those are the worst salespeople, not the best.
But selling ice to eskimos is somehow good?
As I’ve noted before on this platform, there is no party in favor of limited government anymore. Only conservative individuals.
Didn’t say that, did I?
I’ve met and worked with a lot of sales people. I know which ones are good and which ones are not. For example, the guy who calls me every week pretending to be my best friend and trying to sell me on “technology that will help me conveniently syndicate e-business wins and energistically negotiate client-centric bandwidth while proactively supplying front-end storage” (But what does it do?) is not my friend.
The best ones passed beyond the veil years ago.
No, but Skyler did, and I was responding to Skyler.
It’s an idiom and you read too much into it. Please try to use some sense.