Straggler in the RINO-Alpha war

As usual I’d like to get caught up, and as usual I am falling behind. Not only can’t I fix the country, I can’t even keep up with the debates among those who claim they can. Fortunately, the video of the GOP debate the other night is available for online streaming, and even more fortunately, analysts I respect took the time to sit patiently through (or hey, drunkenly through) and actually live-blog the debate.

The general media consensus is that this was the first showdown between front runners Mitt Romney and Rick Perry, that the former looks more presidential but that the latter looks more “alpha” and won the debate.

I’m not enamored with either Mitt Romney or Rick Perry, although I should point out that I very much liked Rick Perry’s Fed Up! which I just finished reading yesterday. (I liked it a lot more than his other book, which seemed a bit too sanctimoniously communitarian for my taste.)

Perry supporter though I am not, I couldn’t agree more with him on the following question:

Few conversations on this earth are more important than one surrounding the question “Who gets to decide how we live?”

How true. If I had a dollar for every word I have devoted to that topic in this blog over the years, I think I would have enough money to retire happily.

As a small government libertarian federalist type, I liked reading Perry’s strong, even stirring words in support of federalism, and even though some of it is of questionable sincerity, he has so far not thrown medical marijuana under the federal statist bus. I also agree with him on Social Security, the 16th Amendment, and will continue to do so whether he continues to agree with himself or not.

But in a typical irony, those things I most like about Perry seem to be the things that are getting him into the most trouble. His book is being called a treasure trove for foes, and his “biggest challenge” according to Karl Rove. Conservative writer Byron York (whose judgment in these matters I respect almost as much as the guy who linked him) warns that Perry faces “grave danger” because of his Social Security position. (No doubt this is a problem; Social Security has long been called a political third rail — all opinions and facts be damned.)

My biggest complaint about Perry involves an issue obviously considered too minor to merit MSM attention: his outspoken past support for sodomy laws, which he has not retracted, and which I find completely unacceptable. Not because I am worried in the least about sodomy laws being reimposed (they will not be, so in that sense it is irrelevant as presidential campaign issue), but because it indicates a certain intolerance in the man’s character which raises questions about what other areas of private personal behavior he might consider appropriate for government regulation. Gay sex is practiced by a small minority of Americans, but because it touches on larger notions of freedom and privacy, it’s a sort of measuring stick, and you don’t have to be gay or on the political left to think that those who believe homos should be locked up just don’t measure up very well as freedom lovers.

But again, in the big picture it ought not to matter what I think. Nor does it matter what most Republican primary voters think. What ought to matter the most is who has the best chance of beating Barack Obama.

I have not made up my mind on that. Should I? Has this become a two man race between Romney and Perry? Or, if we succumb to the simplistic narrative stereotype, is it a showdown between the Gentleman RINO and the Cowboy Red Meat Alpha?

If I can’t bear taking sides, will the country survive?


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

7 responses to “Straggler in the RINO-Alpha war”

  1. Veeshir Avatar

    I personally that, considering how boned we are, Congress is much more important than the presidency.

    The president doesn’t have all that much power in passing laws, he can suggest and veto, but it’s Congress who actually passes the laws.

    We need so much “reform” that it will take a brave Congress to keep us from drowning in our own debt.

    Considering that the establishment GOPers are as against any meaningful reform as the Dems, we need to get rid of both sets and that won’t be easy.
    That’s why I want 100% in every elective office in the land. From the dog catcher in Podunk, Iowa to POTUS.

    It really sucks, but the area where POTUS’ power is most important these days is in appointing judges.

  2. agimarc Avatar

    Right you are, as congress is the key to unwrapping this whole thing.

    May be easier than you think, as you don’t need a complete remove and replace of the RINOs. All you need is sufficient numbers of Tea Party types in both houses of congress to provide a critical mass of backbone for the insiders, who are all there because they are good politicians. We are nearing that number in the House. Need to inject a like percentage into the senate next year.

    Putting the right team into place will take several elections. Cheers –

  3. Kathy Kinsley Avatar
    Kathy Kinsley

    Just as a total aside… you do know that sodomy laws also apply to heterosexuals? Maybe he just wants a ‘but that’s illegal’ excuse for things he doesn’t want to do…

    Sigh. Statist vs Non-Statist – that’s the fight. And, let’s note that some of the DINOs are worth electing. (That’s the Dem version of RINOs, btw…fiscally conservative, socially liberal-gasp-Democrats). (Or libertarians who won’t admit it.)

  4. Eric Avatar

    Good point Veeshir.

    Kathy, while most sodomy laws apply in theory to heterosexuals, the Texas sodomy law (since declared unconstitutional) says this:

    http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.21.htm#62087.53405

    ***

    (a) A person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex.

    ***

    “Deviate sexual intercourse” is defined this way:

    ***

    (1) “Deviate sexual intercourse” means:

    (A) any contact between any part of the genitals of one person and the mouth or anus of another person; or

    (B) the penetration of the genitals or the anus of another person with an object.

    ***

    The above acts are not prohibited between individuals of the opposite sex.

  5. Jonathan Avatar
    Jonathan

    “Not only can’t I fix the country…”

    I refuse to believe this.

  6. Kathy Kinsley Avatar
    Kathy Kinsley

    Hmm – didn’t realize Texas exempted opposite sex. Most states didn’t.

  7. […] is not bad, and I hope he means what he says. I read his book Fed Up! –  which was very critical of Gonzalez (a states rights disaster with […]