And let’s face it, there are pretty strong incentives to pick a “Tea Party” or “Establishment” side and make that a part of your brand or approach to the world. If you’re “Tea Party,” you get authenticity points. You’re part of the Real America outside of the Beltway. You get to proclaim you’re standing on principle. You get to believe that you’re saving this country from a corrupt class of insiders running it into the ground. You’re the Rebel Alliance, the plucky underdogs fighting for all that’s right who will someday overcome overwhelming odds.
If you’re “Establishment,” you get to be reasonable and sensible. Democrats and/or MSNBC may like you or praise you for your willingness to compromise and focus on getting results. You get to believe that you’re serious, and dealing with the facts as they are, instead of living in a make-believe world of imminent revolution. You’re the professional, who knows how to get actual results, as opposed to the amateur who dresses up and pretends to understand politics and government.
Our country has fewer people focused on solving the outrageous problem and more people focused on monetizing the outrage over the problem.
Okay, let’s go to the tape.
In 1952 the FDR era ended, and the GOP establishment came into power again. At that time the party was dominated by the so-called “country-club Republicans,” and the power center of the party rested in the northeastern states and the middle and upper classes.
By 1972, that had changed, and the formerly Solid (Democrat) South had become a GOP feifdom, while the New Left continued to make inroads in the northeastern and western coastal enclaves. At any rate, with the exception of Ronald Reagan, the GOP has been dominated by the same forces that controlled it in 1952 – and they even forced Reagan to take George H. W. Bush on his ticket, knowing that Reagan would be gone after four or eight years, and the next nominee would be their man Bush.
These people are the “party pros,” the Establishment, the practical people, the people “who know how to get actual results, as opposed to the amateur who dresses up and pretends to understand politics and government.”
So, let’s take a look: After 62 years, how have these “pros” done in terms of advancing the basic principles of the party they claim to espouse?
1. Have they managed to lower the cost of government in any way, or has the cost of government exploded during their tenure?
2. Have they lessened the size and scope of government in any way, or has the power and control of government over our lives been vastly expanded?
3. Have they lowered taxes, spending, and borrowing, or have all three become unimaginably huge?
4. Have they lowered the national debt, both on and off the books, in any way, or are both rising uncontrollably and driving us inexorably toward the cliffs of bankruptcy?
5. Have they managed to impede the Democrats’s Marxist social welfare agenda in any way, or have they aided and abetted in its advance?
The answer to all of this is that, on the issue of supporting and advancinIfg the supposed principles of the Republican Party, the establishment Republican leadership has failed, and failed miserably, for the last 62 years.
So. If pointing this out and working for a different leadership that actually will support the principles they’ve claimed to hold makes us “unprofessional,” then I guess we’re unprofessional, and proudly so. Of course, “professional” isn’t always a complimentary term, especially in the world’s two oldest occupations, sex and politics.
As for the “people “who know how to get actual results,” all I ask is that you take a long, hard look at the actual results they’ve managed to get, and then ask yourselves if those are the results you want them to get.