As a Republican by Inertia Only (I declared my Republicanism at 16, which made my Democratic union official grandfather literally drag me to a bar to have a beer with him to explain myself), I am disgusted by the effervescent smells wafting from various back rooms.
For the oft-referenced “Republican Establishment”, Donald J. Trump’s head is the catch of the day. Nothing else will do. Someone, anyone, must replace Trump at the top of the ticket. Trump cannot be controlled by anyone, least of all himself, so the Republican establishment is out for every drop of his blood.
"We The People” who have taken a liking to the Trump candidacy have done so for several reasons. His detachment from government operation, his roller coaster ride in business, his raw ability to communicate political un-correctness and his willingness to stand toe to toe with fancier world leaders and cry foul in every direction. His willingness to speak of our debt, the damage of our various deficits and the fact we do not wish our nation to be slaughtered by religious extremism are of paramount importance. And from every account, he’s a spectacular father. I think I may respect that most, because it indicates to me that a very ostentatious man is truly grounded where it matters.
I purely dislike Ted Cruz. Nothing about him resonates with me, except poorly. I would imagine shaking Ted’s hand would be just a bit less delightful than stepping in dog mess with bare feet. He has fashioned himself quite a reputation as a well-polished and usually hated pol since his teens, setting his sights on political power by taking well planned, well programmed steps long term to achieve his position.
But Ted Cruz has taken those steps. Ted has been a curious study of the political process nearly since birth, unlocking the myriad matrix of nasty truths which embody how our system’s mechanics function. In doing so, he is now getting a bad reputation for attempting to steal an election which party policies intentionally rigged from the beginning. All Ted is doing is following the rules, and as much as I truly believe he is concentrated walking fraudulence, even I have to give the guy credit for simply working his plan in the system as it is.
Ted Cruz is Hillary Clinton in male form, only marketing a different world view and using God as his copilot. They’re both truly disgusting, but I’m less afraid of Hillary than most. She, like Ted, knows the system as it is. She is a brilliant parliamentarian. She can quote the arcane rules of Senate operation chapter and verse, and despite misplacing various sundries at Rose Law Firm, she’s among the more gifted legal minds of our time. She can navigate the cloudiest of political waters with relative ease, and her and Bill’s ability to survive a shocking, lifelong plate of scandal without receiving their meals in prison is prima facie evidence she knows what the heck she is doing. The reason I’m not afraid of Hillary is I believe she is ready for the 3 AM call, and could handle the larger issues of presidency including a firestorm of foreign relations problems which await some lucky soul on 1-20-17. Admittedly imperfect, she isn’t the most terrible option in this election cycle. Note: This election cycle offers us no truly good options. Even Trump, the entertaining, tough-as-nails outsider as he presents himself to be, has serious organizational problems which would haunt a nascent presidency.
Those organizational problems are precisely why I wrote this, perhaps as a reminder to myself that gross examples of political slime (aka: Cruz) are simply playing the board game according to the rules which were long established before their arrival.
This election cycle has seen an outpouring of interest from millions of Americans who have thus far been completely disconnected from the political process. They haven’t voted, they have no idea what the Constitution actually says, they have zero civic understanding and even less comprehension of the hierarchy or mechanics of our three branch system. And they have taken to the streets with a winner-take-all belief that if one person gets one more vote than another person, we live in a majority rules society. Anything else is political thievery and chicanery; anything other than a 50.1 percent victory based on counting of a popular vote is wrong, shameful, deserving of pitchforks and threats.
When I see the great political unwashed taking to the streets with negative understanding of the actual processes or why they exist, I have two thoughts in parallel. First, thanks. You’re late to the party. Glad you could come. Sorry you don’t know jack, but I sure am pleased you put down the iPad and stepped away from World of Warcraft or the crack pipe long enough to give some opinion on something other than Justin Bieber’s latest haircut or Caitlyn Jenner’s gender.
Second, I think: Yep, here’s the result of an entrenched National Education Association. Here’s the end game for No School Left Accountable, absentee parents and giving awards equally to everyone. This is what happens when dodgeball and picking teams become the enemy, and everyone is told the lie that they are special. Without reality infused in youth, you build a nation full of adults with neither foot planted in reality. If I have any remaining gasps of Republicanism, it’s my belief that the Democratic Party started in the 1940’s going long on the concept of creating a nation of voting automatons paid off with social programs. They succeeded. Nevertheless, the results are in the streets in large numbers with the basic understanding that our nation is broken. On that point, they are very correct.
Ted Cruz is being beaten up for using party mechanics to “steal” an election from Donald Trump. While I think Cruz’ methods stink because they don’t give me my desired result, they are very legal and have piles upon piles of concrete historic precedence. Conversely, Donald Trump is equally wrong for decrying those very mechanics which have existed for a couple hundred years - give or take several decades.
Okay, here goes: Neither is the United States of America a democracy, nor is either party a democracy. Anyone who says our country is a democracy, or either party is based upon the fundamentals of democratic process is wrong.
What? Surprisingly, this is a surprise to millions. It is thought that “We the People” rule, choose our destiny based upon the purity of mathematical majority and directly elect our leaders. Not only is that a big “no”, it’s a big “nooooooooooooo.”
Our Founding Fathers were, correctly, particularly afraid of the throngs who are taking to the streets today. And they were right to be. Even though I’m personally okay with the concept of a Trump presidency shaking every building in Washington D.C. to the point structural cracks in various foundations erupt, I am aware a number of real problems will result should he become president. I’m willing to take that chance, because both our domestic and international issues are too bleak to hand the next four years to the same teams who operated DC for the last 50. I firmly believe portions of our government must break in order to be saved, and numerous pieces of our government at the federal level are no longer functional and should be disbanded.
The widely ridiculed electoral college is perhaps the best example of how smart our Founding Fathers really were. While we can directly elect our local and state politicians all day long, the founders were particularly allergic to popular vote election of the rudder of our national government: they considered the presidency and Senate to be off limits for direct election. They had good reasons. When you start reading the biographies of these men and their purpose, it becomes clear that no smarter operational group has ever been assembled. They had their flaws and conflicts of interest, to be sure. But their collective reputations were entirely on the line, and the result of a very purposeful Revolution was the Constitution upon which our nation has operated these past couple of centuries. It would be wise for us to take more, not less, from this document as we face a nation in need of serious repair.
The U.S. Presidency and Senate had a built in check, perhaps in some cases a relief valve, to assure a barricade existed between periods of national foolishness and our highest levels of government operation. It was perfectly okay for the founders to set up a House of Representatives where folks could scream, yell, shoot one another and face the political gallows every two years back in home district. They knew we needed a peanut gallery inexorably tied to the will of the people and the contemporary anger of the population. From that mess would come legislation for review by more studied, stable minds a bit less capable of sway by political winds.
The founders also knew the Presidency and Senate needed a guaranteed number of adults in the room. That’s why the original plan was for the electoral college to stand in place of direct election for the Presidency, with state legislatures standing in place of direct election for the U.S. Senate. One of our worst mistakes was changing the second part of that plan, as Senators were not ever designed to report directly to the people to earn their vote.
The original design was not to keep the people away from their elected representatives and public servants. In the case of the presidency, the founders wanted to assure we didn’t go hog wild and elect someone truly stark raving mad. People do that. The electoral college could serve as a very valuable switch in such a case, some saying Trump is just such an example. I firmly disagree.
The Senate’s election by state legislatures is even smarter. While the members of the state legislatures are directly elected by the people, an extremely wise filtering process would exist where state governments have direct influence on the federal government. Losing that ability was among the original nails-in-coffin for state’s rights. If any amendment needs repealing, it’s the seventeenth.
As political parties developed, the same type of concepts infused them. The people, whose will should be represented, must not have the capability to overthrow the processes without some level of check and balance. This is where you get the concept of state legislative election of senators, an electoral college to seat presidents and complex delegations which choose party candidates.
We have to remember the Republican and Democratic parties are not government organizations. They are private organizations which serve to promote their political views by offering candidates for public office based upon committee-determined platforms. When an outsider, like Trump, files for election attached to a party, that party’s structure does have the right to invoke various rules and processes which would favor candidates adherent to the party’s reputed purpose.
As much as I do not like Ted Cruz and could not bring myself to vote for him on any day, for any office, I have to admit he is not attempting to steal an election by utilizing the features built into our political party system.
Ted’s just following the rules, whether I like them today or not.
At times, the very fact we do not like our political mechanics is all the more reason for us to fight for and defend them. As inconvenient as they may be from time to time, they do make us the greatest country on earth. And that is one statement I firmly believe, best described in the words of my hero Benjamin Frankin: Upon emerging from Independence Hall on 9/18/1787, Benjamin Franklin was asked to summarize the Constitutional Convention by a woman. “Well doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” “A republic, madam - if you can keep it."
Jason (Kibby) Walker
Chattanooga