Posts

Posted on

A Plea for Rational Republican Voices

US Capitol House representative MAGA extremists

The concept of normalcy seems a distant memory in our current political landscape. The nation currently faces a situation where a handful of partisan MAGA extremists possess disproportionate power. The House of Representatives, with a slim Republican majority, is at a crucial juncture, where merely five Republicans out of 222 have the capability to scuttle legislation and plunge the US economy into uncertainty through a government shutdown.

However, the dilemma extends beyond any five individuals. The entire Republican faction of 222 members appears to have pledged allegiance to a controversial and polarizing figure—twice impeached and quadruple indicted, who continues to command the MAGA movement. Whether this unwavering loyalty stems from genuine affinity, apprehension of repercussions from extremist followers, or a prioritization of individual political ambition over national interests, the unity observed within the Republican party is palpable.

The prevailing narrative showcases a party bound by allegiance, enabling a minority to wield substantial influence and shape Congressional dynamics. This scenario calls for a reassessment and reflection within the Republican party. It is an appeal for the emergence of rational voices and patriotic stances that can steer the party and, consequently, the nation, away from the brink of internal destruction.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, along with his Republican colleagues, is at the forefront of this transformative opportunity. The path to normalcy necessitates cooperation and dialogue across the aisle, embracing democratic principles and eschewing the dictates of extremism. Five individuals with extremist viewpoints have showcased their potential to bring governmental processes to a halt, underscoring the urgency of addressing this imbalance.

However, this situation also presents an opportunity and a glimmer of hope. It signifies that the emergence of just five rational, courageous Republicans can alter the course of the narrative. These individuals, by taking a stand against extremism and prioritizing the welfare of the nation, can send a powerful message that the United States will not succumb to the whims of extremists.

The path to normalcy is undoubtedly fraught with challenges, yet it is not unattainable. The first step entails recognizing the magnitude of the situation and acknowledging the detrimental impact of allowing a minority to dictate the nation’s trajectory. Rational Republicans must rise above the divisive rhetoric and engage in constructive dialogue with Democrats to address pressing issues and foster bipartisan solutions.

This plea for sanity and rationality extends beyond party lines. It is a call for unity and a collective effort to safeguard democratic values and institutions. The American people, irrespective of their political affiliations, have a stake in the preservation of a functioning government and the prevention of a descent into chaos. Public discourse should encourage and celebrate those who prioritize the greater good over partisan interests.

The power dynamics within the House of Representatives serve as a microcosm of the broader political landscape. The actions and decisions of a few can reverberate across the nation, shaping public opinion and influencing future generations. In this context, the emergence of rational voices within the Republican party is not just a necessity but a moral imperative.

The time for reflection and introspection is now. The Republican party, and indeed the nation, stand at a crossroads. The choices made today will determine the legacy of this generation of political leaders and shape the future of American democracy. The pursuit of normalcy and stability necessitates courage, conviction, and a commitment to democratic principles.

I’m not holding my breath. I’m not confident there are enough Republicans with the moral compass necessary to put the nation above their own aspirations. But, it would take remarkably few to change the course of history and restore democracy—the same number it takes to disrupt and destroy democracy from within. We just need 5 who are as committed to preserving democracy as the minority extremists are to destroying it.

Posted on

Choosing to Forget: A Crucial Error for Liberalism

MAGA cult extremists attempted a violent coup on January 6, 2021.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. This oft-repeated phrase is as powerful as it is succinct, encapsulating the cyclical nature of human error. But while many focus on the unintentional act of forgetting, there is an even more troubling trend: the willful choice to forget or ignore history, which only aids those who consciously opt to duplicate it.

It is more fitting, then, to say: “Those who CHOOSE to forget the past are condemned to suffer at the hands of those who CHOOSE to repeat it.”

Consider the contemporary political landscape. Liberals, with their idealistic and often forgiving nature, seek to move on swiftly, embracing peace, unity, and the prospect of a brighter future. They are eager to appease and return to the status quo, a tranquil rhythm where the challenges of the past are left behind. However, this mindset, while noble, is also their Achilles’ heel.

Contrarily, Conservatives appear to remember history more fervently. Events like the Wilmington Insurrection of 1898 or the Veterans’ Riot in Paris in 1934 are not merely historical footnotes for them. These aren’t events to be glanced over in shame; they are milestones, each carrying a lesson, a tactic, and a strategy. Such events are studied, analyzed, and sometimes even idealized.

Today, with the significant shift of the Republican Party towards a white, Christian nationalist patriarchal stance, history appears to be echoing. Movements like the Tea Party and now the MAGA cult (led by the twice-impeached, four times indicted former president–a reality TV star who never had an approval rating above 50% and has never won a popular vote) draw parallels to previous incidents. The tactics, strategies, and even the rhetoric employed during these waves are eerily reminiscent of historical events. Moreover, these echoes from the past are often used to shield or even justify actions that challenge the Constitution or venture into illegal territory.

Meanwhile, Liberals operate under the presumption of normalcy. They approach the political arena as a battleground for ideas, hoping for reasonable dialogue and fruitful negotiation. But when faced with a faction that neither negotiates in good faith nor entertains compromise, the liberal strategy falters. It’s like expecting a civilized game of chess when the opponent is intent on torching the board. As Liberals extend an olive branch, some Conservatives are loading their weapons.

This isn’t a mere difference in political perspectives. It’s a deep-rooted ideological clash. While Liberals view Conservatives as political opponents, a growing faction within the Conservative realm perceives Liberals as enemies–nothing less than existential threats, undermining their vision of a white Christian patriarchy.

For Liberals, the solution isn’t to abandon their principles but to learn from history. The past is replete with examples of movements that embraced extremism, and understanding these movements can provide valuable insights into contemporary challenges. The MAGA movement and its allies within the Republican Party aren’t drawing from a forgotten history; they’re replicating a well-studied past.

The natural inclination to move forward is commendable, yet it is vital to remain grounded in the lessons history offers. Choosing to forget or ignore these lessons not only jeopardizes the present but could also reshape the future in ways we may come to regret.

The past, as they say, is prologue. It’s high time we started reading it.

Posted on

RNC Censure Is Evidence the GOP Is Heading for Extinction

The Republican National Committee (RNC) voted to censure two of its own representatives: Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

United We Stand?

What offense did they commit to earn this rebuke from their own party? Well, they have the audacity to take part in a bipartisan Select Committee to investigate the insurrection and attempt to subvert the will of the people on January 6, 2021. The investigation is ongoing, so we do not yet know the full extent of what they will find, but so far it seems like it will be very uncomfortable for many on the Republican side of the aisle–and may even result in the arrest and prosecution of key Republicans, up to and including the former president himself.

Once the attempted coup was thwarted and the Senate got back to business, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConell stated, “They tried to disrupt our democracy. They failed. They failed. They failed the attempt to obstruct the Congress. This failed insurrection only underscores how crucial the task before us is for our republic.”

He was not alone. On January 6, 2021, and the days immediately following, there was almost universal bipartisan agreement that this was a violent insurrection and an attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. For a brief–very brief–period, we stood as one nation–Americans rather than Democrats and Republicans–united in our commitment to democracy and our alarm that a group of people sought to overthrow it through violence.

You Can’t Do Both

The RNC censure opens with a statement that claims the mission of the party is to elect Republicans who support the United States Constitution and share Republican values. With the unique exceptions of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, this appears to be an oxymoron.

You can’t do both. Everything Republicans have done in the past year–especially as it relates to investigating the January 6 insurrection and holding people accountable–suggests that Republican values are diametrically opposed to the concept of supporting the US Constitution.

If you’re complicit in attempted sedition and guilty of trying to undermine our democracy, it makes sense to not want to look too hard or connect the dots to see who orchestrated the insurrection. If you are not, there is no logical reason why you would oppose the investigation or attempt to obstruct the quest for answers.

As an individual whose own life was at risk as an unhinged mob stormed the Capitol Building, and an individual who swore an oath to solemnly swear (or affirm) to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; and bear true faith and allegiance to the same, you would expect unanimous bipartisan support for the investigation and conviction to hold those responsible accountable.

But, no.

Which seems to suggest that most Republicans fall into one of two…maybe three camps. Either they are directly involved and responsible for the January 6 insurrection, or they are afraid of what the MAGA cult will do to them if they stand against it, or they simply care more about power at all costs than they do about the country or the principles it was founded on.

There is certainly ample evidence of this third option across the country as Republican state legislatures seek to disenfranchise voters and limit or restrict the ability of citizens to vote. They know they can’t win a free and fair election, so they are working vigilantly to ensure future elections are anything but free or fair.

Replace Liberty with Socialism

The second part of the RNC censure makes a lot of ridiculous and intentionally incendiary claims–claims that go beyond political differences of opinion and fall squarely on the side of demonizing political rivals and painting more than half of the nation (as evidenced by the results of the 2020 election) as “un-American”. One of them is the assertion that Democrats in Congress have embarked on a systematic effort to replace liberty with socialism.

That is silly on a number of levels. First, I am not sure Republicans actually know what socialism is. In Republican double-speak, “socialism” generally refers to anything that might help or benefit people of color, or–more broadly–anything that doesn’t align with their agenda. It’s a convenient bogeyman to distract and confuse a gullible base of voters.

That said, socialism itself is not a “bad word”. The idea that we should all get our panties in a bunch over the word socialism reminds me of when Barack Obama was running for President in 2008 and there were rumors and accusations that he is Muslim.

Many debated the issue and there were attempts to clarify his Christian faith and verify that he was, in fact, not Muslim. My take was, who fucking cares? Dignifying the speculation with a defense was completely irrelevant. What if he is a Muslim? That is not disqualifying. A Muslim can be President if that is who a majority of the people vote for.

Is Congress trying to implement Socialism, the actual political ideology, or socialism, the Republican bastardization that just refers to anything that helps American citizens? Yes. Maybe. There are a lot of people in Congress and they span the political spectrum. I am sure there are those who want Socialism, and many more who favor and support socialism.

And?…

The point is, are they the majority? Did a majority of American citizens elect people who support an agenda of Socialism/socialism? Is there sufficient support in Congress to win the votes necessary to pass Socialist/socialist policies? Then that is fine. Better than fine–that is perfect and it is the way things are supposed to work in a democracy.

I’m sure it sucks if you’re in the minority and you’re adamantly opposed to those things. Too fucking bad. Come up with better policies and better ideas that a majority of voters support and you can shift things in another direction.

However, Republicans don’t have a monopoly on patriotism or “being American”. On the contrary, it often seems they barely understand what either of those things mean. Policies and views that run counter to the Republican platform are not “un-American,’ they’re simply “un-Republican.”

I don’t doubt that Republicans would like to elect Republicans and have the power and the votes to pursue their agenda. Unfortunately for them, that requires having good ideas that are popular enough to win elections.

Censuring the only people in the party willing to uphold the oaths they swore, defending a violent attempt to overthrow the government, standing by the incompetent former President while evidence appears to suggest he was directly involved in the attempted coup, showing more allegiance to Russia than our allies, and working to ensure as few people vote as possible are not winning strategies. They simple demonstrate how far the party has fallen and why it is more important than ever in this nation’s history for people to stand up and show up and remove these people from our government.

Posted on

I Disagree with Taya Kyle–and That’s OK

Nike Kaepernick #TakeAKnee

I have read Taya Kyle’s statement in response to the new Nike ad campaign with Colin Kaepernick. It is eloquent.

She is entitled to her opinion. I disagree with her.

First–much of the premise of her opinion is based on the racist fallacy that Colin Kapernick or other NFL players are protesting or disrespecting the flag itself, or the national anthem, or the military. That is wrong at face value, so it diminishes the credibility I give her opinion right off the bat. She is still entitled to it–but I don’t respect it.

Second–I don’t idolize and deify the military the way many do. There is certainly some degree of nobility in voluntarily swearing an oath to defend the Constitution even if it means your own death. The vast majority of those who serve, however, are not there out of a sense of honor or duty and don’t honestly believe their lives will ever be threatened. Most are there because they had few–if any–other options, and it’s a way to learn some skills and get money for college. I had other options–but I joined the military primarily to do something different and see the world. I am proud of my service, but I am also honest enough to know that it wasn’t heroic or noble in and of itself.

It is a marketing campaign. Is Ford the “Best in Texas”? Does Red Bull “give you wings”? Is there really NO substitute for a Porsche? Is being a fascist white supremacist who alienates allies and kisses the boots of enemies really making America great again? Objectively, these are all false claims made in marketing slogans.

Did Kaepernick sacrifice “everything”? Perhaps not. That is both a subjective and a semantic argument and one that I can’t make because I am not Colin Kaepernick. Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and countless others sacrificed their lives–and they weren’t even believing in or standing for anything. They were just trying to exist.

I served my country. I did not join to be a hero. I did not sign up out of a sense of honor. However, I am proud of my time in the military because—regardless of my intentions in joining—I did, in fact, swear an oath to defend the Constitution and what it stands for. To me, that includes protecting the rights conveyed by the Constitution for all Americans. That includes defending the right of Colin Kaepernick and NFL players to take a knee as a symbol of peaceful protest. Exercising the rights and freedoms the military fights and dies to defend is not disrespectful or un-American. It is the most respectful and most American thing you can do.

I support Colin Kaepernick and other NFL players who #TakeAKnee. That is just my opinion. Taya Kyle is welcome to hers. You are welcome to yours. Beto O’Rourke said it best, “Reasonable people can disagree on this issue…and it makes them no less American to come down on a different conclusion on this issue.”

Posted on

We Need a New Strategy to Reach the Masses

Trump smoking gun

Here’s the problem we need to overcome. I’m making these numbers up, but–in my opinion–roughly 25 percent of voters follow the smoke and understand there’s probably a fire there. Possibly a big one. Another 25 percent, however–the white nationalist, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh audience of the world–would believe that Trump was born on the back of a unicorn next to the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow if it was reported from a fake news source.

That leaves 50 percent, though. Half of the country isn’t so gullible that they believe everything Breitbart and Infowars say, but they also aren’t engaged or interested enough to tell fact from fiction. Many of my friends and family honestly believe that BOTH sides are engaged in intentional misinformation, and when they see mounting evidence of collusion and treason with Russia, they shake their heads and just say they’re so tired of all the “partisan bickering”.

What baffles me is that many of the same people who had no issue buying into fabricated controversies like Behngazi-gate or Hillary’s email despite any actual facts and evidence, are more than willing to shrug off a mounting pile of both hard and circumstantial evidence from credible sources that suggest Trump and his team are working hand-in-hand with Russia. I mean, at this point it’s almost like catching someone next to a dead body with a bullet through his forehead and a man standing next to him literally holding the smoking gun while a puddle of blood forms around his feet, and saying “Well, that’s what that dead guy wants us to believe–but how do we know this is the guy who actually killed him?”

We need to figure out how to educate that 50 percent. How do we help people understand the difference between facts and “alternative facts”, between credible news and “fake news”, between partisan politics and treason?

I believe the first step is to educate them about the fact that Breitbart, Infowars, Fox News and similar fake news sources are not credible. They are purely conspiracy theory machines. They fabricate and distribute propaganda–with just enough real news to provide a hint of credibility.

CNN is largely to blame as well, though, as far as I’m concerned. Why? Well, everyone pretty much accepts that Fox is Right Wing / Conservative and MSNBC is Left Wing / Liberal–and that if you watch those channels you will get ostensibly credible information viewed through a biased lens. CNN, however, was the middle ground–the referee. In an effort to appear fair and balanced, though, it continues to hire blatant partisan hacks to represent the Conservative point of view and allow them to spew obvious lies on air on the same panel where credible sources are sharing valid information. It creates a false equivalency that makes the viewing audience feel both perspectives are equal but opposite, when the reality often is that one is right and one is a brazen lie.

Start with this chart. Share it. Share it on social media. Share it with your coworkers. Share it with your in-laws who insist that all of this Russia stuff is just nonsense invented by the left. Do what you have to do to convince more people to listen to and trust the sources in the top middle of this chart, and to absolutely reject and ignore anything beyond “skews” in either direction.

News Sources

Again, you won’t ever convince the 25 percent who are part of the Trump cult. When Trump said, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” those are the people he was talking about–and he’s right. But we have to find a way to educate and reach that 50 percent that is sane and rational and does care, but just wants to live in peace and lacks the energy to be politically engaged.

I’m not suggesting that politics doesn’t have a shady side, or that morals and ethics aren’t compromised on both sides of the aisle to some extent. But, as long as a significant percentage of the population buys into the false equivalency that everything is bad and both sides are dirty, they will simply remain on the sidelines shrugging their shoulders while a band of morons cash in as treasonous oligarchs for selling out our democracy to Russia.

Follow by Email
Facebook
Twitter