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.
Who Is the Real Hero in Utah?
Utah’s governor is receiving praise from many sources for signing a bill that bans puberty blockers and transgender surgeries for minors. At this point, something is better than nothing, a popular topic on another current Ricochet post by @robbindin. Governor Cox has not acted with the same level of foresight in his past judgments related to the cultural changes leading to this decision.
My understanding is that the rate of regret among “transitioners” is exceptionally high. The surgical and chemical damage done is permanent and inappropriate for minors.
The real heroes in Utah on this are state senator Dr. Mike Kennedy, who introduced the bill, and the Utah state senate Republicans who passed it (all the state Democrats voted against the bill). Kennedy is also a real doctor of medicine in family practice who has eight children, not a doctor of education, the actual source of the misunderstanding of this problem and others today in our society.
Now, many here at Ricochet may not know that Dr. Kennedy was the Utah Republican Party Convention preferred candidate for the Senate seat won in 2018 by Mitt Romney, the “carpetbagger” from Massachusetts and nemeses to all efforts to restore American greatness.
My hope is that in this next election, we can get someone of Dr. Kennedy’s character, perhaps him, with an understanding of the issues at stake to primary Senator Romney and, with the record Romney has established supporting Democrat initiatives in Congress, displace him as the Republican candidate for Utah senator in 2024.
Published in General
For the cultural battle and the fight to keep our republic to be won, or at least at this point turn back toward keeping it, there has to more and more Dr. Kennedys to force the hand of those like Cox – and to replace the likes of the Romneys
Mitt Romney is the worst Republican thing to happen to this country since G.H.W. Bush.
Doesn’t the Utah governor have pronouns in his bio? Big thanks to Dr. Kennedy.
It was my impression back when he was running for president that Mitt Romney should stay out of politics and do what he does best . . . making money. And I don’t say this as a swipe against venture capitalists. People who invest are a necessary component of the capitalist system and it sounds like Romney was good at it. At politics, not so good.
Cox is clearly a weather-vane Republican like Romney. He brings shame upon the good people of Utah.
Cox is not the hero here.
Bob, thanks for the post, and I agree with just about everything.
I have a major disagreement with this part:
My disagreement is with the last two words. These changes are inappropriate for anyone.
I think that the case against childhood mutilation breaks down, once you concede adult mutilation.
The idea is to allow someone to supposedly “change” their “gender.” This is impossible, of course, as the change sought is to their “sex,” which is immutable. It is immutable down to the subcellular level, in the very DNA.
If it is legitimate to surgically and chemically castrate a person to supposedly “change” their sex, then it is problematic to withhold such change until adulthood, as irreversible changes will occur during the teenage years.
The only solution is to reject the idea of ever allowing such chemical and surgical mutilation. I do suspect that even more insane (or demon possessed) people who want such mutilation will give up their desire, if it is plainly off the table.
The laws banning these “transition” surgeries are a serious departure from the usual rule. The usual rule, for minors, is that the parents get to decide. Sometimes, provisions are made for a different guardian to decide.
I support the bill banning this surgical and chemical mutilation among children. I think that we should be careful not to approve this horrible and barbaric practice among adults, either.
Absolutely. In that race in 2018 Romney had a national reputation for having been successful in business and some political success as Republican Governor of a liberal northeastern state. And he had a good reputation for his efforts in Utah to save the Winter Olympics two decades ago. His father was governor of Michigan and ran for President in the sixties. But the family, as far as I can see, had little background in Utah. I think earlier Romney’s were in Arizona or even Mexico as refugees from the outlawing of polygamy in Utah as practiced by LDS members earlier. So statewide he mostly had a good image but it was not local to Utah beyond his religious affiliation.
Mike Kennedy, on the other hand, is local (actually to my neighborhood as is Mike Lee), a real Utah resident with a medical degree and a law degree, attended BYU and has several years service in the Utah legislature. So in the 2018 convention he was well known to delegates but Romney’s national reputation carried him to a win in the statewide primary where Kennedy was not as well known. Maybe this will change some minds.
@arizonapatriot Jerry, I agree with you. I see no reason to have these as approved medical procedures for anyone. Minors should also not be allowed to make such decisions even where for adults it might be legal.
Might I suggest that you work to unify the Republican Party in opposition to the Trans Advocates, instead of taking a gratuitous swipe at Mitt Romney. There was absolutely no need for your fourth paragraph. It weakens the strength of the rest of your post.
If you are absolutely compelled to take a swipe at Romney, might I suggest that you create a separate post for that, or to at least put your point in a comment.
The question is what is more important to you, attacking the Trans Advocates or taking a swipe at Romney. I suggest that you are burying the lede by including your fourth paragraph.
Gary, are you seriously suggesting that it is inappropriate for someone to write a post that takes a swipe at a Republican politician? Do you want to sit down and think about that for a minute? Furthermore, it’s Bob’s post. He can cover two unrelated topics if he wants to, but in this case it is a post about Utah Republican politicians.
I know your position but it was not a gratuitous swipe at Romney. It is pertinent because under any normally occurring circumstances in Utah elections, Kennedy would have been nominated in the Republican convention and would now be Utah’s senator in Washington. I am with the people and the people want Romney out.
Gary Opine on another state’s politics without a clue? Oh pshaw man.
I second Bob’s comment here. My understanding of the post was that it was primarily intended to extol the virtues of Mr. Kennedy as a superior Senate choice to Mr. Romney, and did so using the “trans” issue as an example.
I think Bob is entirely correct.
It is absolutely Bob’s post. The question is what point he wants to make. If it is to promote Dr. Kennedy’s protection of children, then the fourth paragraph is distracting. If it is to both promote Dr. Kennedy and take a swipe at Romney, then that is his prerogative. My suggestion as an [editor] is that an author must decide what point they want to make. Is it to promote Dr. Kennedy or to both promote Dr. Kennedy and attack Mitt Romney.
I write book reviews and human interest posts from time to time. You will note that while I have strong beliefs about “the existential danger to the Republic and the Republican Party” I carefully avoid any references to DJT lest it take the post off of the rails.
So my question as an editor is what Bob’s goal is. Is it to promote Dr. Kennedy, or is it equally to promote Dr. Kennedy and take a swipe at Mitt Romney? If it is the former, then as an editor, I would suggest that he omit the fourth paragraph. If it is the latter, I would change the title of his post to include an attack on Mitt Romney.
I see little hope of unifying the Republican Party on much of anything since many have abandoned the people in their quest for money and power. This applies to Romney and his election by the people of Utah was a mistake. I hope it gets corrected.
Of course, what I express here is my opinion.
Then I would suggest that you change the title of your post to promote an attack on Mitt Romney. It is your post; my suggestion is not based on policy, but is an editorial suggestion.
PS
This is exactly the kind of post I think we need to simultaneously support the GOP and improve it. It doesn’t call for abandoning the GOP, but rather suggests that, next time around, we should choose a better candidate than the disappointing (to put it in the mildest possible terms) Romney.
With the rarest of exceptions, I believe that Republicans should vote for whichever man or woman gets the Republican nomination, but that doesn’t mean that poor examples of conservatism shouldn’t be replaced by better ones at the earliest opportunity, nor that flagrantly bad representatives shouldn’t be criticized — even harshly criticized — for their poor performance.
I look forward to Romney (for whom I voted when he was a presidential candidate) being retired from the Senate, and a better Republican taking his place.
When did you get on this publishing and editing kick? First time I’ve seen it. Are you trying to augment Ricochet rules for posting articles and comments? What is a distraction is to attack the structure of the post rather than the substance.
I don’t recall ever seeing a Ricochet Editor telling anyone how they should write their post. They may make some edits if a post is promoted to the Main Feed, but they usually aren’t tutoring people in the Member Feed. Secondly, have you been hired on as an editor? Congratulations. People might think that we moderators are informed about staffing changes, but we’re practically never told anything.
@garyrobbins Your performance here will not get you high marks from me on your acumen as an editor. Of course, I’m in no position to grade you so no effect anyway.
My purpose in this post is to express my opinion that Cox and Romney are not the kinds of Republican representatives that I see as representing well the people of Utah and to express my conviction that Kennedy is probably a much better choice than Romney, who I consider a mistake made by Utah voters. Kennedy’s moves on the transgender issues show this and Cox has an earlier record that diminishes his current act as one of courage. Romney has been a disaster for Republicans and Americans in his failures to contest Democrat actions to move us towards socialism by ruining the American economy.
I’ll beg Bob’s tolerance as I continue the distraction from the substance of his excellent post to comment on the meta-topic of unsolicited editorial input.
As a Ricochet member, Gary of course has every right to offer helpful (or otherwise) criticism of a post. Certainly we all appreciate constructive criticism of our writing. (That’s a bald-faced lie. Yes, yes it is: I don’t even like it when the editors capitalize the first letter following a colon in one of my posts during post promotion, as they almost always do.)
Gary has that right. However, since Gary has chosen to self-identify as “[an] Editor” in support of his comment, I think it’s reasonable to expect him to make an effort to live up to editorial standards. In this particular instance, I don’t think he has. Gary’s well-established position as a defender of those within the Republican Party who are most stridently anti-Trump should, in my opinion, have caused him to recuse himself as (self-appointed) editor in this instance, since it is impossible for many of us to read his comment without believing it to be (as I certainly believe it to be) politically motivated, rather than unbiased editorial advice.
Even if Gary believed his comment to be neutral editorial advice, a moment of self-reflection should have made it obvious that it would be perceived as being a defense of Mitt Romney (and, hence, a continuation of Gary’s ongoing campaign against President Trump and his supporters).
While I think Gary’s comment was, from a purely editorial standpoint, weak, I think publishing at all was a lapse of editorial judgment on his part — a lapse that I would probably ignore were Gary not a self-professed editor.
I especially love the capital E here. 😂😂😂
Making editorial comments from time to time does not make one an editor. :) :) :)
It takes slogging it out with cantankerous authors to get one’s editor’s wings. :) :) :)
Thank you, Henry, I should just leave this part to you.
I am a much better editor than I am a writer. If you only saw the first draft of my posts!
Bob, you are entitled to your point of view. My only gentle suggestion is that you decide what is most important to you, and either go full on against the trans folks, or elevate your distance to Romney to equal standing.
Lord knows, I am not the “Ricochet Editor.” But being a good editor is a critical skill.
I appreciate your point of view. We shall see what happens next.
Gary, you just don’t get it. My stance on elected representation is that I prefer those who represent the people’s view. Kennedy had that all along, Romney never did.
Kennedy’s rise to the occasion with his introduction of the transgender bill provided me with an excellent opportunity to extol his virtues in making this case.
That was a mistake that I corrected. I am an “editor” not an “Editor.” My bad. I could have used an editor there myself!