The ouster of Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House has given the MSM another story to crow about as it continues its campaign to distract Americans from the awfulness of the Biden administration. They are gleefully celebrating that the Republican party is in disarray and is ill-prepared to govern. That may be true, but it isn’t because McCarthy was voted out. It’s because the Republican party is compromised by ideological cracks. The party hasn’t decided what it stands for.
The party includes both new conservatives and the old establishment. The conservatives want a return to small government, fiscally responsible founding principles. The old establishment likes the perks of office, but doesn’t bring any core principles to their “public service.” The conservatives define success as preserving freedom and ensuring the long-term viability of our union. The establishment defines success as compromising with radicals to pass legislation with their names on it – in the hope that the inevitable collapse doesn’t happen until they’ve left office. The conservatives want a balanced budget. The establishment is okay with a $2 trillion deficit in lieu of a $5 trillion deficit. The conservatives want our 2nd amendment rights protected. The establishment is fine with small encroachments on our God-given rights, if it gets good coverage on CNN.
Conservatives have tended to vote Republican, not because they consider themselves Republicans, but because voting for proponents of socialism is unthinkable. Their Republican vote is a choice for the lesser of two evils. Because of that, the Republican party has become associated with conservatism, even though its leadership hasn’t endorsed conservatism since Ronald Reagan left office.
Conservatives started getting disturbed to the point of action during the regime of Barack Obama – with his government expansion and “fundamentally change America” agenda. He never articulated what he meant by “fundamentally change” in a free country of self-governed people. However, conservatives understood it to be the advancement of socialism and government control at the expense of individual rights. They were right.
The Tea Party movement formed in reaction to President “We are the change.” But rather than embracing the electoral energy of the Tea Party, the Republican establishment distanced themselves from the movement, and cracks formed. Remember when John McCain called the Tea Party a bunch of “wacko birds”? That exposed a crack in the party wall. It acknowledged a fundamental difference between their agenda and his.
The party establishment wasn’t interested in riding the Tea Party wave to electoral success. It was interested in maintaining the status quo – the status quo that had been facilitating creeping socialism for the past 60 years.
Throughout the Obama administration, the Republican party failed to arrive at any unifying objective around which conservative and establishment members could rally. The party’s mission remained undefined and the cracks remained unfilled. As the Tea Party managed to elect conservative Republicans, the crack forming tensions within the party increased.
Then the tectonic event of Donald Trump’s election happened. His MAGA movement injected even more conservatives into the party. The Republican establishment flew into a blind panic, openly attacking those associated with MAGA politics. The “Never Trump” contingent even advocated the election of radical socialists over principled conservatives – if those conservatives were in any way associated with the MAGA moniker. It turns out the conservative principles of the “Never Trump” contingent were somewhat malleable. They were willing to trade what they claimed were their core beliefs to protect the status quo from interlopers with red hats. The intraparty tensions pulling the cracks open increased exponentially.
Now, the cracks within the party have grown to canyon sized faults as the establishment Republicans have accepted the characterization of their MAGA brethren as semi-fascist radicals – simply because they are offended by the personality of a man who promised conservatism and then delivered on his promises.
The problems have continued to fester since Trump left office. In reaction to creeping government corruption, conservative concern for the country has skyrocketed. Yet the establishment has remained concerned about comity with those seeking to destroy America. The cracks have continued to widen.
In the past, we just slapped a fresh layer of wallpaper over the cracks and pretended they weren’t there. It was a pleasant façade, but an unhealthy avoidance of structural defects. However, the cracks have become so pronounced that they can no longer be hidden with cosmetics.
The removal of McCarthy didn’t create the cracks, but it may have stripped the wallpaper and exposed a few of them. A low-grade civil war is indeed underway within the Republican party – and that is a good thing. There needs to be a reconning. Avoidance of a discussion about fundamental principles cannot continue. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger were two of the first casualties of the fight. There need to be more as the party decides what it represents. Will it be the party of freedom – standing against the forces wishing to convert America into Venezuela (rich in potential yet destitute in reality)? Or will it become the party of Wayne and Garth – partying on until the music stops?
I’m not saying the battle over who will be our next Speaker will resolve the issue. But it will facilitate a few punches in a fight the Republicans need to have. We don’t know what the outcome will be. But the fight will at least give Americans a clearer choice going into the next election. Will Republicans offer American renewal or continued compromise with radicals? We don’t know the answer yet. But if the party coalesces around being true to founding principles, the left will surely regret that this fight ever happened.
Author Bio: John Green is a political refugee from Minnesota, now residing in Idaho. He has written for American Thinker, and American Free News Network. He can be followed on Facebook or reached at greenjeg@gmail.com.
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN. If you’d like to become a citizen contributor for AFNN, contact us at managingeditor@afnn.us Help keep us ad-free by donating here.
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
Parler: https://parler.com/AFNNUSA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
I think the identification of the two ‘conservative’ groups as preservers of freedom vs establishmentarians doesn’t provide us with a path to a resolution.
I’d like to think that the two senses of what a ‘conservative’ is (political vs personality type) does, in some small way, does present us with something like a path.
(i) Politically, a conservative… well, the sense that the author discusses… is: “of or constituting a political party professing the principles of conservatism, including Constitutionalism“.
(ii) Personality type, conservative includes: “marked by moderation or caution” or “marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners“. This sense of ‘conservative’ is marked, in large part, by a timidity to take bold steps, including the bold steps needed to solve a dysfunctional or non-performing system of governance.
From a leadership point of view, at least where it applies to the GOP, we should never put Type (ii) conservatives in positions of power because they will see to preserve the status quo, even if it is an unworkable condition.
We can talk all we want about the GOP’s leadership being establishmentarians but what they really are are Type (ii) conservatives and unfit to hold office in today’s dysfunctional DC scene.