Hurling invectives.

This may seem like a strange thing to put up for Easter Morning, but maybe it isn't.

One of our major elected office holders in this state is a Catholic.  And yet, in spite of that, he makes vile accusations against entire classes of people constantly.  Other members of the "Freedom Caucus" claim to be Christian, but their speech sure doesn't indicate it.  One, the session before last, who claimed in her native state of Illinois that Muslims worship a different God than Christians (they don't, Allah is simply the Arabic word for "God", and while they may understand God's nature differently than we do, they worship the same God) claimed that "we are not our brother's keeper".  The hard populist right around here frequently cites to religion, even if they are not all the same religion.  

Christ could be angry, as his chasing the money changers out of the Temple indicates.  We have to wonder what will occur to a Presidential candidate, whose connection with Christianity is paper thin, will receive in the next life for hawking Bibles as part of his campaign. But for now, we can wonder how a group of people who claim to be the representatives of the culture can behave so badly.

People who do this routinely are not speaking intelligently, and in fact are attempting to distract from intelligent debate.

You should consider that when listening to public figures.

We live in an age in which intelligent debate has declined to an all-time low.  In its place, we have now what the Nazis and the Communist had, insulters who scream, while saying very little that's intelligent or worth considering. Their goal is to inspire hatred, as if love for an idea won't be forthcoming, hatred of a demonized class will do.

Politicians and figures who routinely insert words like "radical", "leftist", "fascist", "Marxist", and "Communist" into their speech are not arguing points, they're trying to inspire hatred and avoiding thought.   

For days, I've been getting emails from a figure I at least somewhat respected, and have voted for in the past, accusing the current administration of being "radical", sometimes in the most absurd ways.  One such missive asserts the Democrats are intentionally out to make things worse for Americans, which is flat out absurd.  It's constant.  The contest locally, right now, is in the GOP itself, and given that, as I'm still reluctantly registered as a Republican, I'll be struggling in regard to my vote in the primary, with the question being whether I should cast a vote at all.  I likely will, but come the general election, I'm going to weigh this behavior.

A current state office holder who is a co religious cannot speak without speaking of his opponents as "Radical leftists and liberal elites", whipping up ire towards imagined categories that simply really aren't here.  There are no Red bands roaming the prairies around Cheyenne.

For that matter, being an "elite" is a good thing.  In this context, "elite" implies highly educated and successful.  If the highly educated and successful think your position is dimwitted, it probably is.

More than one Populist, who are not Conservatives, now run around constantly accusing Governor Gordon of being a Democrat, by which they mean not a Populist. We're teetering on the brink of RINO meaning "not a fascist".  It already darned near means that the speaker is a Southern Populist with ideas that are not native to this state, and which are being spouted in an unthinking manner.

Taking it nationally, the former President, who apparently has so little grasp of political categories that he doesn't understand the difference between communism and fascism (Wharton School of Business. . . why are you respected?) recently stated “We pledge to you that we will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country that lie and steal and cheat on elections”.

A person who links all those categories together is, frankly, is either ignorant or bizarrely deluded.  People who swallow this up, are really ignorant.

Now, let's be honest.  At one time, particularly in the 60s and 70s, the far left did the same thing.  Everyone who opposed them or who wasn't with them was a "fascist".  And in more modern times, the far left progressives have done the same, often with really bizarro accusations that everyone who isn't with them is part of a widespread "white" and "male" conspiracy.  

But that's the point.  To a large degree, nobody really take the far left in the United States seriously, usually, because they are clowns.  Recently they have been successful, however, in a gender bending effort, which is helping to give rise to the Populist far right.

But both sides are anti-natural, anti-scientific, swimming in the toddler section movements.  They're unthinking.

And as we have real problems, we need real thought, now.

And at any rate, running around that your opponent must be a Communist, Marxist, Monarchist, Anarchist, Pedophile, Audiophile, Anglophile, RINO is not dignified. 

And for those who claim to be Christian, well you should reconsider your presentation. 

You might want to reconsider your personal lives also, particularly if you are one of the numerous members of the Christian Nationalist camp whom St. Paul might have a few things to address them about.

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 63d Edition. Strange Bedfellows.

 

Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.

William Shakespeare, The Tempest

The environmental populists?

Politics, as they say, makes for strange bedfellows.  But how strange, nonetheless still surprises.

Wyoming Secretary of State Chuck Gray, who rose to that position by pitching to the populist far right, which dominates the politics of the GOP right now, and which appears to be on the verge of bringing the party down nationally, has tacked in the wind in a very surprising direction.  He appeared this past week at a meeting in Natrona County to oppose a proposed gravel pit project at the foot of Casper Mountain.  He actually pitched for the upset residents in the area to mobilize and take their fight to Cheyenne, stating:

We have a very delicate ecosystem, the fragility up there, the fragility of the flows … the proximity to domestic water uses. All of those things should have led to a distinct treatment by the Office of State Lands, and that did not happen.

I am, frankly, stunned.  

I frankly never really expected Mr. Gray to darken visage of the Pole Stripper monument on the east side of Casper's gateway, which you pass by on the road in from Cheyenne again, as he's not from here and doesn't really have a very strong connection to the state, although in fairness that connection would have been to Casper, where he was employed by his father's radio station and where he apparently spent the summers growing up (in an unhappy state of mind, according to one interview of somebody who knew him then).  Gray pretty obviously always had a political career in mind and campaigned from the hard populist right from day one, attempting at first to displace a conservative house member unsuccessfully.

We have a post coming up which deals with the nature of populism, and how it in fact isn't conservatism.  Gray was part of the populist rise in the GOP, even though his background would more naturally have put him in the conservative camp, not the populist one.  But opportunity was found with populists, who now control the GOP state organization.  The hallmark of populism, as we'll explore elsewhere, is a belief in the "wisdom of the people", which is its major failing, and why it tends to be heavily anti-scientific and very strongly vested in occupations that people are used to, but which are undergoing massive stress.  In Wyoming that's expressed itself with a diehard attitude that nothing is going on with the climate and that fossil fuels will be, must have, and are going to dominate the state's economy forever.   The months leading up to the recent legislative session, and the legislative session itself, demonstrated this with Governor Gordon taking criticism for supporting anything to address carbon concerns.  Put fairly bluntly, because a large percentage of Wyoming's rank and file workers depend on the oil and gas industry, and things related to it, any questioning on anything tends to be taken as an attack on "the people".

Natrona County has had a gravel supply problem for quite a while and what the potential miner seeks to do here is basically, through the way our economy works, address it.  There would be every reason to suspect that all of the state's politicians who ran to the far right would support this, and strongly.  But they aren't.

The fact that Gray is not, and is citing environmental concerns, comes as a huge surprise.  But as noted, given his background, he's probably considerably more conservative than populist, but has acted as politicians do, and taken aid and comfort where it was offered.  Tara Nethercott ran as a conservative and lost for the same office.

But here's the thing.

That gravel is exactly the sort of thing that populists, if they're true to what they maintain they stand for, ought to support.  It's good for industry, and the only reason to oppose the mining is that 1) it's in a bad place in terms of the neighbors and 2) legitimate environmental concerns, if there are any.  But that's exactly the point.  You really can't demand that the old ways carry on, until they're in your backyard.  

Truth be known, given their nature, a lot of big environmental concerns are in everyone's backyard right now.

The old GOP would have recognized that nationally, and wouldn't be spending all sorts of time back in DC complaining about electric vehicles.  And if people are comfortable with things being destructive elsewhere, they ought to be comfortable with them being destructive right here.  If we aren't, we ought to be pretty careful about it everywhere.

There actually is some precedent for this, FWIW.  A hallmark of Appalachian populism was the lamenting of what had happened to their region due to coal mining.  John Prine's "Paradise" in some ways could be an environmental populist anthem.

Hard to feel sorry.

Far right goofball Candace Owens was fired from the Daily Wire. She stated that she "cannot be silenced", but frankly the gadfly has gone from sort of being a token black populist to a has been already.

That no doubt sounds extremely harsh, but frankly it's true. Owens went from being sort of a snarky populist commenter to writing some real wack job stuff, at which time her popularity dropped off.  Part of her popularity was because she was black, and we don't think of populists being African American, although some are.  Once again, black conservatives and black populists are not the same thing.  Her status as a rare black populist, and a highly attractive woman at that, didn't hurt in her getting attention. 

I don't know what her fan base is, but this is all a sort of tragedy.  Always abrasive and controversial, her early commentary was not completely without merit.  She's really dropped off in the recent year or years and probably won't really revive.  She's sort of like Tucker Carlson that way, being a person of obvious high intelligence who really went down a rabbit hole.  Carlson looked like a complete fool with his recent trip to Russia. We hope that Owens has a legitimate conservative revival, or at least isn't touring North Korea to get a one up on Carlson.

The Dead Elephants.

There was an Irish street gang in New York at one time that bore the name The Dead Rabbits.  The House GOP is rapidly becoming The Dead Elephants.

Something is really going on.

Filled with disgust, some Republicans in the House are abandoning the House well before their terms are up. In doing that, they're setting themselves free from something. That something might just be failure, but at this rate, it suggests something else.  They almost seem set on sabotaging their party, except their party isn't a party.

In 1944 when it became obvious to those who cared to see, and many simply did not, that Germany was going down in defeat, not only did conservative German army officers but a few, albeit very few, members of the SS began to plot against him.  It's notable that the cover the July 20 bombing was given was that it was an attempted assassination by the SS.  At least one member of the SS was actually part of the plot, and the head of the Berlin police was far from a liberal democrat.  Right at the end of the war Himmler was conspiring against Hitler and notably didn't take a place among the suicides at the bunker.

The point is that when people who have been part of a movement begin bailing out, they sense defeat and don't want to be associated with it.

An added point is that with Donald Trump the effective Speaker of the House, and Marjorie Taylor Green acting as the Howler Monkey Sergeant at Arms, Trump's destructiveness has reached a new level.  Republicans lost the Oval Office in 2020 and the Senate in 2022.  Their House representation declined to perilous levels in the same time period. They were supposed to do well throughout it.  Now, not only is Trump causing the GOP to lose at the ballot box, he's causing Republicans to abandon their posts. 

In only one more Republicans leaves, the House will be deadlocked and Mike Johnson out the door.  If two leave, the Democrats are in control.  There will be replacements, but there's no guarantee that they'll be Republicans.

The Conservatives v. The Populists

While, once again, we'll have more on this later, we'll note here that the primary race in the state this year is really shaping up to be a fight between two parties, the Conservatives and the Populists, all of whom register as Republicans.  

Some Conservatives have registered to try to displace Populists, and some Populists are doing the same in regard to Conservatives.  Of note, the importation of out of state Populists is becoming really obvious, that having been a barely noticed aspect of it until very recently.

Populists are going to be howling that their Republican contenders are "RINO"s in short order, when in fact it's really the other way around, and the Populists are a sort of Neo Dixiecrat.  Republicans are late in rising to their challenge, but they are doing it.  

The primary may be quite interesting.

Last prior edition:

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 62nd Edition. The trowel and musket edition.

Apostolic Christianity, Catholic, Donald Trump, Education, homosexuality, Israeli Hamas War, law, Mormon, Pope Francis, religion, Sex, theology, Zeitgeist

The Grand Old Party. 1854 to 2024.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2024 Election, Part XIV. Wishful Thinking.:

March 12, 2024

North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Michael Whatley was chosen by the RNC to serve as the party's new Trump sycophantic head, and Trump's daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, as co-chair in unanimous votes.

The Republican Party has died, which makes up my mind in my earlier "shall I stay or shall I go" question I posed here.

Positions with the RNC are being slashed as the party merges with the Trump campaign organization so that it can more effectively apply the Führerprinzip.

The Republican Party, founded on March 20, 1854, nearly 170 years ago, has died.  Donald Trump killed it.  Ronald Reagan, who was a Republican, and Newt Gingrich, who was too, gave him the weapons and ammunition to do so.

The GOP was founded as a left wing progressive party that embraced Federalism and the economic thoughts of the American System.  It opposed a party, the Democrats, that was racist, nativist and provincial.  The GOP used the absence of the Democrats during the Civil War to expand the nation's railroads and agriculture through direct government involvement.  It retained its essential views through the Taft Administration, after which it entered the political wilderness and stood for "business".  It became isolationist during the Great Depression, but returned to its traditional views, which it retained throughout the Cold War, at the start of World War Two.

It became, in the post Taft era, the conservative party due to in part its economic views, which were not laissez-faire, and in part due to its social views.  The social views became much more paramount following the Democratic Party's lurch to the left starting in 1968, causing the rise of Ronald Reagan, who obtained the Presidency by making a deal with Southern Democrats, bringing them and their laissez-faire, extreme populists, ideas into the party.

Though a combination of factors, which we have dealt with elsewhere, that wing of the party has now supplanted the party itself.  Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, Hoover, and Eisenhower couldn't recognize this party, nor would they wish to be part of it.

With the co-opting of the RNC, there's no going back.  The current Republican Party doesn't resemble the party of old at all.  It's more Francoist than Buckleyite.  

If Trump fails to win the Oval Office in the Fall, it'll destroy the new GOP.  It's already throwing itself apart.  If he does win, that'll destroy the GOP, as the next four years will be ones of totally unpredictable turmoil.  Nobody really knows what Trump believes in, other than himself.  His followers apply the Führerprinzip to what they believe he reflects in their beliefs and belief that he reflects them back.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 61st Edition. Illiberal Democracy. . . coming soon to a republic near you and boosting the birth rate.

 

"Mothers, fight for your children". World War Two German posters.  Prior to the war you can find quite a few posers of fawning mothers with babies, including the ever popular large breasted young woman breastfeeding babies.  The Nazi Party was freakishly pro natalist, even though the country was very densely populated.  While I can't find it, a Nazi informational cartoon even exists lamenting a woman's increasing first childbirth age, taking it back to a point at which it was in the early teens.

There’s nobody that’s better, smarter or a better leader than Viktor Orban. He’s fantastic…He’s a non-controversial figure because he says, ‘This is the way it’s going to be,’ and that’s the end of it. Right? He’s the boss. No, he’s a great leader.

Donald Trump on Viktor Orbán, yesterday.

What the crap? 

Right wing fawning over Viktor Orbán is really getting over the top.  Why?

Well, I know why, it's because of his philosophy of "Illiberal Democracy", which will be coming soon to a large North American republic near you.

And while you are enjoying being told how exactly to think, you can get back to work on birthin' dem babies.

Eh?

Ah yes, has any notices that there's growing far right obsession on increasing the birth rate.  It's one thing to support families, but that's not what I mean.  If you listen carefully, there's suddenly a genuine "we need more babies" movement going on in the far right.

This has long been the case in Russia, which has crashing demographics, so it probably makes sense.  If they don't arrest this trend, irrespective of how much Vlad Putin expands the borders of the country, sooner or later China is going to help itself to a large portion of Siberia.  So its been going on there for a while, but appears to be picking up.

Vlad delivered a message on this in Russia yesterday, for International Women's Day, something that actually isn't about babies.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Dear women,

From the bottom of my heart, I wish you all the best on International Women’s Day.

We always look forward to this wonderful spring day with pleasure and excitement, preparing for it well in advance. Today, in every home and every family, Russians are expressing their most tender and loving wishes for their mothers, wives, daughters, grandmothers and girlfriends.

Dear women, you certainly have the power to improve this world with your beauty, wisdom and generosity, but above all, thanks to the greatest gift that nature has endowed you with – the bearing of children. Motherhood is a glorious mission for women. A difficult and critically important mission, but also a source of so much joy and happiness.

Family remains the most important thing for any woman, no matter what career path she chooses or what professional heights she attains. Her family, relatives, friends, her tireless concern for her children, their health and education, teaching them what is right and making sure they grow up to be decent and successful people is what matters most.

This year is dedicated to the family in Russia. The meaning, the essence of the family is primarily about the continuation of life, the continuation of the lineage, of the story of each family and our entire country. The family is the bond that has ensured continuity from generation to generation, and consideration and respect for women and motherhood are an integral part of our traditions.

The family, its interests and needs are in the spotlight and an absolute priority in Russia today. We will certainly do everything we can to ensure that families with children, including large and young families, young mothers, feel supported and assisted by the state.

I would like to specifically address the women who are serving in the special military operation now, carrying out combat missions, as well as to others who are now separated from their family members, waiting for our heroes to come home, inspiring them with their love, cheer and support, worrying about every soldier, helping them on the front line, in hospitals, and in numerous volunteer organisations. Again and again, you prove that a woman’s heart is truly an irresistible force, providing an example of perseverance and confidence that good and truth are on our side.

Dear women!

You take on extremely difficult challenges, achieving success and impressive results in a variety of fields. We, men, often feel amazed at your ability to get things done quickly and efficiently, yet thoroughly, seeing to every detail. You handle an endless succession of problems and burdens without losing your charm and allure. It is impossible not to admire you.

I would like to wish you genuine mutual understanding with those you hold dear, as many truly happy moments in your lives as possible, and success in everything that is important to you.

All the best to you. Happy International Women’s Day!

Tsar Vlad has spoken.  Get to work on those babies.

Tim Scott, who recently sold his dignity to fawn over Don Trump, said a line like this just the other day in an interview where it wasn't subtle.  It doesn't seem to have been picked up in the press, which doesn't seem to have picked up on this at all, but he said something like "we need more babies".  I can't, however, recall the context.

This has really started to appear now that the topic of IVF has come up.  I'm a Catholic, and frankly I fully agree with the Church's position that IVF is immoral, in part because it creates people to be wasted.  That this has turned into a controversy, however, was predictable.  Interestingly, however, some of the language that now appears is along these lines. Republicans are declaring that they're in support of IVF as we need more babies.

This showed up a bit in some odd way in the State of the Union address rebuttal by Sen. Katie Britt.  Frankly, State of the Union addresses have become almost completely pointless since the introduction of television for the most part.  Joe Biden's was a bit of an exception, and there are others, but usually the President declares the State of the Union to be great, hands out kittens, and leaves.  In the rebuttal, the opposing party comes in and declares puppies to be great, but kittens to be a menace.

This year Sen. Britt, a youngish Alabaman Senator, delivered the rebuttal from her kitchen. Some thought the scene of a woman delivering a message from a kitchen to be an ironic accident.  

I doubt it.

I think the message was intentional.  Women's primary duties are in the kitchen. . . and maybe the bedroom.

Her speech

Good evening, America. My name is Katie Britt, and I have the honor of serving the people of the great state of Alabama in the United States Senate. However, that’s not the job that matters most. I am a proud wife and mom of two school age kids. My daughter Bennett and my son Ridgeway are why I ran for the Senate.

I’m worried about their future and the future of children in every corner of our nation, and that’s why I invited you into our home tonight. Like so many families across America, my husband Wesley and I just watched President Biden’s State of the Union address from our living room. And what we saw was the performance of a permanent politician who has actually been in office for longer than I’ve been alive.

One thing was quite clear, though. President Biden just doesn’t get it. He’s out of touch. Under his administration, families are worse off, our communities are less safe, and our country is less secure. I just wish he understood what real families are facing around kitchen tables just like this one. You know, this is where our family has tough conversations.

It’s where we make hard decisions. It’s where we share the good, the bad, and the ugly of our days. It’s where we laugh together, and it’s where we hold each other’s hands and pray for God’s guidance. And many nights, to be honest, it’s where Wesley and I worry. I know we’re not alone. And so tonight, the American family needs to have a tough conversation, because the truth is we’re all worried about the future of our nation.

The country we know and love seems to be slipping away, and it feels like the next generation will have fewer opportunities and less freedoms than we did. I worry my own children may not even get a shot at living their American dreams. My American dream allowed me, the daughter of two small business owners from rural Enterprise, Alabama, to be elected to the United States Senate at the age of 40. Growing up sweeping the floor at my dad’s hardware store and cleaning the bathroom at my mom’s dance studio, I never could have imagined what my story would entail.

To think about what the American Dream can do across just one generation in just one lifetime, it’s truly breathtaking. But right now, the American dream has turned into a nightmare for so many families. The true unvarnished state of our union begins and ends with this. Our families are hurting. Our country can do better.

And you don’t have to look any further than the crisis at our southern border to see it. President Biden inherited the most secure border of all time. But minutes after taking office, he suspended all deportations, he halted construction of the border wall, and he announced a plan to give amnesty to millions.

We know that President Biden didn’t just create this border crisis. He invited it with 94 executive actions in his first 100 days. When I took office, I took a different approach. I traveled to the Del Rio sector of Texas. That’s where I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. She told me not just that she was raped every day, but how many times a day she was raped.

The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoebox of a room, and they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end. We wouldn’t be ok with this happening in a third world country. This is the United States of America, and it is past time, in my opinion, that we start acting like it. President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.

This crisis is despicable, and the truth is it is almost entirely preventable. From fentanyl poisonings to horrific murders, there are empty chairs tonight at kitchen tables just like this one because of President Biden’s senseless border policies. Just think about Laken Riley. In my neighboring state of Georgia, this beautiful 22 year old nursing student went out on a jog one morning, but she never got the opportunity to return home.

She was brutally murdered by one of the millions of illegal border crossers President Biden chose to release into our homeland. Y’all, as a mom, I can’t quit thinking about this. I mean, this could have been my daughter. This could have been yours. And tonight, President Biden finally said her name, but he refused to take responsibility for his own actions.

Mr. president, enough is enough. Innocent Americans are dying, and you only have yourself to blame. Fulfill your oath of office, reverse your policies, end this crisis, and stop the suffering. Sadly, we know that President Biden’s failures don’t stop there. His reckless spending dug our economy into a hole and sent the cost of living through the roof.

We have the worst inflation in 40 years and the highest credit card debt in our nation’s history. Let that sink in. Hard working families are struggling to make ends meet today. And with soaring mortgage rates and sky high childcare costs, they’re also struggling to how to plan for tomorrow. The American people are scraping by while President Biden proudly proclaims that Bidenomics is working.

Goodness, y’all. Bless his heart. We know better. I’ll never forget stopping at a gas station in Chilton County one evening. The gentleman working the counter told me that after retiring he had to pick up a job in his 70s so that he didn’t have to choose between going hungry or going without his medication.

He said I did everything right. I did everything I was told to do. I worked hard. I saved. I was responsible. He’s not alone. I hear similar concerns from fellow parents, whether I am walking with my friends or whether I’m at my kid’s games. But let’s be honest, it’s been a minute since Joe Biden pumped gas, ran a carpool, or even pushed a grocery cart.

Meanwhile, the rest of us see our dollar, and we know it doesn’t go as far. We see it every day. And despite what he tells you, our communities are not safer. For years, the left has coddled criminals and defunded the police, all while letting repeat offenders walk free. The result is tragic but foreseeable.

From our small towns to America’s most iconic city streets, life is getting more and more dangerous. And unfortunately, President Biden’s weakness isn’t just hurting families here at home. He is making us a punchline on the world stage. Look, where I’m from, your word is your bond. But for three years, the president has demonstrated that America’s word doesn’t mean what it used to. From abandoning our allies in his disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan to desperately pushing another dangerous deal with Iran, President Biden has failed.

We’ve become a nation in retreat. And the enemies of freedom, they see an opportunity. Putin’s brutal aggression in Europe has put our allies on the brink. Iran’s terrorist proxies have slaughtered Israeli Jews and American citizens. They’ve targeted commercial shipping and they’ve attacked our troops nearly 200 times since October, killing three US soldiers and two Navy Seals. Meanwhile, the Chinese Communist Party is undercutting America’s workers. China is buying up our farmland, spying on our military installations and spreading propaganda through the likes of TikTok. You see, the CCP knows that if it conquers the minds of our next generation, it conquers America.

And what does President Biden do? Well, he bans TikTok for government employees, but creates an account for his own campaign. Y’all, you can’t make this stuff up. Look, we all recall when presidents faced national security threats with strength and resolve; that seems like ancient history. Right now, our commander in chief is not in command.

The free world deserves better than a dithering and diminished leader. America deserves leaders who recognize that secure borders, stable prices, safe streets, and a strong defense are actually the cornerstones of a great nation. Just ask yourself, are you better off now than you were three years ago? There’s no doubt we’re at a crossroads and it doesn’t have to be this way.

We all feel it. But here’s the good news. We the people are still in the driver’s seat. We get to decide whether our future will grow brighter or whether we’ll settle for an America in decline. Well, I know which choice our children deserve and I know the choice the Republican Party is fighting for. We are the party of hard working parents and families and we want to give you and your children the opportunities to thrive and we want families to grow.

It’s why we strongly support continued nationwide access to in-vitro fertilization. We want to help loving moms and dads bring precious life into this world. Wesley and I believe there is no greater blessing in life than our children. And that’s why tonight I want to make a direct appeal to the parents out there and in particular to my fellow moms, many of whom I know will be up tossing and turning at 2:00 am wondering how you’re going to be in three places at once and then somehow still get dinner on the table?

First of all, we see you, we hear you, and we stand with you. I know you’re frustrated. I know you’re probably disgusted by most of what you see going on in Washington. And I’ll be really honest with you, you’re not wrong for feeling that way. Look, I get it. The task in front of us isn’t an easy one, but I can promise you one thing.

It is worth it. So I am asking you for the sake of your kids and your grandkids, get into the arena. Every generation has been called to do hard things. American greatness rests in the fact that we always answer that call. It’s who we are. Never forget we are steeped in the blood of patriots who overthrew the most powerful empire in the world.

We walk in the footsteps of pioneers who tamed the wild. We now carry forward the same flame of freedom as the liberators of an oppressed Europe. We continue to draw courage from those who bent the moral arc of the universe. And when we gaze upon the heavens, never forget that our DNA contains the same ingenuity that put man on the moon.

America has been tested before and every single time we’ve emerged unbowed and unbroken. Our history has been written with the grit of men and women who got knocked down, but we know their stories because they did not stay down. We are here because they stood back up. So now it’s our turn our moment to stand up and prove ourselves worthy of protecting the American Dream.

Together, we can reawaken the heroic spirit of a great nation because America, we don’t just have a rendezvous with destiny, we take destiny’s hand and we lead it. Our future starts around kitchen tables just like this, with moms and dads just like you. And you are why I believe with every fiber of my being that despite the current state of our union, our best days are still ahead.

May God bless you, and may God continue to bless the United States of America.

Okay, this speech wasn't Vlad's "how's that baby making going?" speech, but there's some interesting subtle messages in it.  Delivered from a kitchen, with lots of references to kiddo's.  You know, y'all? 

As an aside, this was just about the most affected Southern style of speech ever by somebody who is really Southern.  I can't recall a political speech with so many "y'all's".  And the "Bless his heart" line. Do Southerners realize that other Americans either don't know why Southerners say this, or find it weird?  No wonder this speech has been so widely lampooned.

Anyhow, I want to be very careful here as I'm certainly not against married couples having children, (note I inserted married in there) and I'm a proponent, perhaps a radical one, of traditional values, but neo pro natalism is a little weird.

Pro natalism?

Yes.

Consider Pronatalist.org.

There's a movement going on and the founders of Pronatalist.org, Simone and Malcolm Collins, are sort of at the point of the spear of it.  And in a way, while I'm not accusing them of anything, the message is pretty clear.  Populations are collapsing, they argue, and having babies is the counter to it.

Well, if that's correct, that's an obvious solution, but the added subtly to it is that the right kind of people aren't having babies.

All the other problems before us in this country, important though they may be, are as nothing compared with the problem of the diminishing birth rate and all that it implies.

Theodore Roosevelt.

Hardly remembered now, a big concern of the early 20th Century, in some quarters, was "race suicide".  Basically, whites had a declining birth rate, even before pharmaceutical birth control, and African Americans didn't.

I'm not stating that this is exactly what the neo pro natalists are concerned about. Rather, what I think some are concerned about is that the declining birth rate in Western and Westernized nations is falling.  Actually, the birth rate (and, FWIW, sperm count in males) is falling all over the globe.  But like a lot of issues, once it's notice, the actual nature of the problem, if there is a problem, is usually past its peak, although certainly isn't always the case.

There are some things here which are real problems, as well.  The decline in Western nations is a symptom of something, and that something isn't good, whatever it is.

But the added problem here is that it's easy to cross from concern into being creepy, and far right and far left movements do that, and have done that on this very issue in the past.

Consider the efforts in the 2023 legislature to oppose banning child marriages, which we posted on at the time. Some of our comments.:

I've been waiting for the opposition to happen.

This bill sailed through the house and is in the Senate, and I'm frankly surprised that the opposition didn't appear before now. Not because the bill is a bad idea.  It's a good one, and it should pass.  Marriages lower than 16 years old are a hideous idea, and frankly marriage below 18 sure a good one.  Nonetheless, a similar attempt at banning such marriages failed last year.

The reason I thought it would fail is that there's some silent opposition from at least the members of one religion in the state, and I thought it might arise there.  But, it didn't.  The objections to have a religious tinge to them, but not from the expected quarter.

But it's also taken on a rather creepy tone.

Apparently the email, which wasn't published in full by the press, stated the following:

This bill may seem harmless, but there are concerns about constitutional rights that you need to form your own opinions about

And then it linked to a blog post which it endorses, stating that it's a succinct analysis..

The blog post is easy to find.  And it provides, in its entirety, the following (complete with photo):

HB0007 - Underage marriage-amendments

HB0007 - Underage marriage-amendments

Sponsored By: Representative(s) Zwonitzer, Dn and Oakley and Senator(s) Case and Furphy

ESSENCE: "No person shall marry who is under the age of sixteen (16) years." PERIOD. END OF STORY. AND "Marriages contracted in Wyoming are void without any decree of divorce:... When either party is under sixteen (16) years of age at the time of contracting the marriage."

ACTION:

Write the members of the Senate and ask them to vote "NO" when HB 7 comes up on Monday's 2nd Reading.

Jim.Anderson@wyoleg.gov; Fred.Baldwin@wyoleg.gov; Eric.Barlow@wyoleg.gov; Bo.Biteman@wyoleg.gov; Brian.Boner@wyoleg.gov; Anthony.Bouchard@wyoleg.gov; Evie.Brennan@wyoleg.gov; Cale.Case@wyoleg.gov; Ed.Cooper@wyoleg.gov; Dan.Dockstader@wyoleg.gov; Ogden.Driskill@wyoleg.gov; Affie.Ellis@wyoleg.gov; Tim.French@wyoleg.gov; Dan.Furphy@wyoleg.gov; Larry.Hicks@wyoleg.gov; Lynn.Hutchings@wyoleg.gov; Bob.Ide@wyoleg.gov; Stacy.Jones@wyoleg.gov; Dave.Kinskey@wyoleg.gov; John.Kolb@wyoleg.gov; Bill.Landen@wyoleg.gov; Dan.Laursen@wyoleg.gov; Troy.McKeown@wyoleg.gov; Tara.Nethercott@wyoleg.gov; Stephan.Pappas@wyoleg.gov; Tim.Salazar@wyoleg.gov; Wendy.Schuler@wyoleg.gov; Charles.Scott@wyoleg.gov; Cheri.Steinmetz@wyoleg.gov

CONCERNS:

HB 7 denies the fundamental purpose of marriage:

Marriage is the only institution in Wyoming Statute designed to keep a child's father and mother living under the same roof and cooperating in the raising of any children that they, together, conceive. This is the NATURAL RIGHT of every child. As such, it is protected in the Wyoming Constitution (see. Art. 1, Sec. 3 and 23). Since young men and women may be physically capable of begetting and bearing children prior to the age of 16, marriage MUST remain open to them for the sake of those children. 

The sad fact that physical maturity often does not match emotional and intellectual maturity is an indictment of our modern educational system. That is a problem that should be addressed. But we should not use it as an excuse to instantiate bad law.

HB 7 denies parental rights.

Parents, by virtue of their right to conceive children, have the pre-political (i.e. God-given) responsibility to raise their own children. This right and responsibility includes guiding their own maturing children into the estate of Holy Matrimony. HB 7 strips parents of their right to consent to properly desired and well-ordered marriages when they are below an arbitrary age. Moreover, this arbitrary age limit is demonstrably lower than the historical norm of millennia of human existence. 

It is true that some perverse religions and cultures COERCE children to marry young, against their wishes. Sometimes, as in the case of human trafficking, this coercion comes from outside the family. Sometimes, it comes from the parents themselves. The Constitutional rights of children require that side-boards be in place to prevent such perversions. But those side-boards already exist in the form of written parental consent and judicial review of that consent. HB 7 removes those side-boards and replaces them with an arbitrary number that has no organic or essential impetus behind it. 

Comparison with other states:

Nearly all (49 out of 50 states) set the minimum age of legal consent at 18--just exactly as Wyoming does. Also like Wyoming, 46 of 50 allow people to get married below the minimum age if their parents give permission. Of these, 37 set the lowest age of marriage with parental consent at 16, while four (IN, NE, OR, WA) set it at 17, two set it at 15 (HI and MO), one (NH) sets it at 13, and two (CA and MS) have no minimum age for parental consent. 

In addition to CA and MS, 12 other states (AK, GA, HI, KS, MD, MA, NM, NC, OK, RI, UT, WV, WY) have judicial mechanisms that allow exceptions to the minimum age with parental consent. Some of these exceptions specifically name pregnancy, some prohibit age-differentials between the bride and groom more than four years. The sponsor testified that "Wyoming is one of eight states remaining, I believe, that do not have a minimum marriage age in statute" (AK, CA, MA, NM, NC, OK, RI, WV, WY and Puerto Rico). (Only California has both NO minimum age, and NO judicial mechanism.) The remaining 42 states set the absolute minimum age at 13 (NH), 15 (HI and MO), 17 (IN, NE, OR, WA) and 18 (KY and LA) and 16. HB 7 wipes away Wyoming's current mechanism for taking into account ANY special circumstances.

Testimony: 

Additionally, the bringers of HB 7 offer no evidence that Wyoming is facing any statistical uptick of coerced marriages. In the House committee, there was no testimony weighing the trade-off of parental rights over against any “significant issue” with child marriage in Wyoming. To the contrary, the sponsor of the bill openly admitted that “it is not what we would call a problem in this state.” On average 20 marriages per year under 18 and under in Wyoming. There was no testimony about the factual number under 16. Nor was there any testimony about why under 16 years old there should be no judicial exceptions.

Rather, the sponsor openly testified that the reason for bringing the bill is to “keep up with the Jones’” (i.e. 42 other states have put arbitrary age restrictions on marriage. After this dubious motivation, the testimony given in committee was fraught with hypothetical harms. For instance: “if a minor wants a divorce, she can’t hire of lawyer.” Or, “Minors might be coerced into marriage.” Or, “Minors, are not mature enough to marry.” All these cautions are already covered by current law that requires a judge to investigate whether or not the person is being coerced into marriage if that person is mature enough to legally consent. It is rather insulting to say that Wyoming judges are not up to the task that has been given them by law. But, that could be remedied by giving them legislative guidance or additional help. The responsibility does not need to be taken away altogether.

HB 7 violates the right of Wyoming citizens to marry.

Only a generation ago, people were regularly ready for marriage by the age of 15, not 16, and still today many Wyoming couples are celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary after having been married prior to 15. Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is pertinent, here. "1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. 2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. 3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State." As evidenced by the wide differences between states, the age of 16 is an arbitrary limitation that may serve as a general rule, but cannot be absolutely enforced without violating the "full age" standard of Article 16. HB 7 would arbitrarily strip away that right from people who actually have a legitimate reason to marry, and who desire to give their child a stable and loving home. This is unjust both to child and parents. 

FOR FURTHER READING:

Cowboy State Daily, Bill Banning Teens Younger Than 16 To Marry Passes Unanimously Through Senate Committee

Jonathan Lange, UNICEF Comes to Wyoming: Ham-handed uniformity oppresses the human family

PROGRESS:

1/13/2023 H Introduced and Referred to H03 - Revenue

1/17/2023 H03 - Revenue:Recommend Do Pass 6-3-0-0-0

Ayes:  Representative(s) Byron, Harshman, Northrup, Oakley, Storer, Zwonitzer

Nays:  Representative(s) Bear, Locke, Strock

1/18/2023 H COW:Passed / 1/19/2023 H 2nd Reading:Passed

1/20/2023 H 3rd Reading:Passed 36-25-1-0-0

Ayes:  Representative(s) Andrew, Berger, Brown, Burkhart, Jr, Byron, Chadwick, Chestek, Clouston, Conrad, Crago, Eklund, Harshman, Henderson, Larsen, Lloyd, Larson, Jt, Lawley, Nicholas, Niemiec, Northrup, Oakley, Obermueller, O'hearn, Olsen, Provenza, Sherwood, Speaker Sommers, Stith, Storer, Trujillo, Walters, Washut, Western, Wylie, Yin, Zwonitzer, Dan, Zwonitzer, Dave

Nays:  Representative(s) Allemand, Allred, Angelos, Banks, Bear, Davis, Haroldson, Heiner, Hornok, Jennings, Knapp, Locke, Neiman, Ottman, Pendergraft, Penn, Rodriguez-Williams, Singh, Slagle, Smith, Strock, Styvar, Tarver, Ward, Winter

Excused:  Representative Newsome

2/2/2023 S Introduced and Referred to S07 - Corporations

2/9/2023 S07 - Corporations:Recommend Do Pass 4-0-1-0-0

Ayes:  Senator(s) Barlow, Boner, Case, Scott

Excused:  Senator Landen

2/9/2023 S COW: Passed 15-12 (standing vote)

Aye: Case, Cooper, Anderson, Boner, Scott, Jones, Pappas, Geireau, Ellis, Schuler, Barlow, Landen, Rothfuss, Furphy, Bouchard

Nay: Dockstader, Baldwin, Kinsky, Hicks, Steinmetz, Biteman, Salazar, Ide, French, Kolb, Hutchings, McKeown

Absent: Nethercott, Brennen (chair), Driskill, Laurson

Note the photograph, presumably representing a teenage girl, was in the original,  I didn't put it up there.

The gist of the argument is several fold as being presented here and elsewhere, which is.

1.  The bill will make it impossible for girls younger than 16 to get married if they get pregnant.

2.  In the past such marriages were common and its only through the operation of negative modern societal institutions that they aren't now.

3.  There are lots of examples of such marriages working out.

All of these are pretty bad arguments.

Which, in a lot of ways, defines the far right in general right now.  It's taking a genuine concern, and morphing it into something.

I.e., a concern over the loss of existential, and frankly Christian based, values and culture, doesn't need to morph into fawning over Viktor Orbán and imagining that Donald Trump is Cyrus the Great.

Last prior edition:

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 60th Edition. Catching some z's.

Choosing to lose.

Al Smith, the 1928 Democratic candidate for President.  He was honest, and Catholic, which made him unelectable.

Kamala Harris says when she talks to parents on the campaign trail, one of their top concerns is that their daughters won't have access to abortion in college

Charlie Spiering, summarizing a recent Kamal Harris interview.

I come from a sufficiently well-educated family such that my grandmother, Agnes, on my mother's side, had attended and graduated from university.

If you consider that she was born in 1891, that's quite the feat.

Now, I'll admit that my father was the first one to attend university on his side of the family, but his father, and his grandfather, and his great-grandfather, had all been successful businessmen at a time at which you didn't need a college education to be one, or even a high school education for that matter.  My father's father, who I never met, was universally regarded by those who knew him as extremely smart.

Indeed, I once was stopped on the sidewalk by an elderly lawyer who knew my father and his father, who asked about the family.  My son must have been in high school at the time, and the odd question "is he extremely smart. . . " like all of the members of the family.

I often, frankly, feel that I'm on the bottom end of the family intelligence pool compared to my own father and my kids.

No real college parents anywhere have, as one of their top concerns, that their daughters won't be able to commit infanticide, unless they've drunk so deeply of the left wing Kool-Aid they're perusing brochures from The Young Pioneers.

Democratic campaigns for the Oval Office, or Democratic campaigns in general, are not smart.  

They're about as dumb as can be.

From 1914 until 1980 the Democrats were masters at coalition building.  The party kept hardhat workers, urban Irish Catholics, Hispanics, and the entire South together, which was frankly quite a feat.  It supported unions and working class families, and generally was pretty pro farmer.  It had a left wing, but it also had a conservative one as well.  Starting in 1968, when it embraced American battlefield defeat to a degree, and then in 1973, when it took the bloody abortionist hand, it took a turn toward the left, and as it did that, it dumped democracy like a hot rock in favor of an imagined Platonic body of robed elders who would tell the people what to do, and they'd like it.

Absolutely everything about the current Democratic message is wrong, including some things that shouldn't be regarded as wrong, but which are in the current political atmosphere.  One thing that's definitely wrong is the concept that infanticide is a winning ticket.  It isn't. The Democrats have read single issue matters on ballots here incorrectly.  Maybe in that'st the only thing on a ballot, you get the voters only concerned about that to come out.  Otherwise, people aren't going to vote that way.

Moreover, if Harris is really being told this by the parents of college women, it's because she's talking to the most liberal parents imaginable, and they're going to say crap like that no matter what.  Moreover, the college educated are largely voting for Biden already.  Biden/Harris need to get votes that they don't already have.  The college educated have largely already left the GOP.

What's left of the electorate that is in the GOP is made up of the working class, small business owners (some college educated), and residents of rural regions (including quite a few well-educated ones in those areas).  They don't believe "diversity is strength", they aren't interested in tolerating non "Judeo-Christian" religions, or gender mutilation, and they feel that their lives and livelihoods are threatened by out of control illegal immigration.  They love their regions, but they're largely incapable of believing in climate change in spite of the evidence.  They quit listening to scientist and social scientist of all types because they were lied to about some things, and therefore don't believe any of it.  They listen to Evangelical pastors who tell them what they want to hear, and who make their massive departures from Christian doctrine irrelevant by not mentioning them (ever hear any of them criticize Trump for living in an adulterous relationship, which by conventional Christianity he is?  Or of an Evangelical Church refusing to marry two people who have been married before?)

When I first started practicing law, a firm partner, a true Christian gentleman, told me about litigation that "this isn't a nice game".  It isn't.  Politics is even less so, and you have to be smart about it.

There's 0 reason that the Biden/Harris ticket needs to mention abortion at all.  Where that's been an issue, they had no role in it. And they're driving Democrats away right now who are Catholic, which includes the Hispanic voters they imagine they'll be gaining.  And their absolute incompetence on the border is in fact a good reason to vote against them.  A competent ticket would shut up on abortion and would make a very serious effort on the border.  

Obama, it might be noted, had a very controlled border.  And while he was President before Dobbs, he didn't say much about abortion either.

He won twice.

Pointing out that more IRS agents punishes the wealthy, not the middle class, would help too.  Pointing out that Trump has been a personally immoral man, might as well.  Pointing out that he was the one who surrendered to the Taliban would as well. 

And parking Harris somewhere would be a good idea, if not dumping her entirely.

And that's where you have to say thing that re uncomfortable.

Al Smith was the Democratic nominee for President in 1928.  He would have won, but he was Catholic.  Yes, that meant a lot of the electorate was bigoted, but it also meant that the Democrats weren't smart in running him.

They would be now, but Smith wouldn't be a Democrat any longer.  He'd likely be an independent.  He wasn't willing to compromise on his Catholicism, like Joe Biden has, and he wasn't a liar of any kind either.

Kamala Harris is like Al Smith in one fashion.  She reminds bigoted voters who they hate.  She's a lawyer (regular people hate lawyers), she's the child of two immigrants (MAGA people don't like immigrants), one of whom was Indian and the other Jamaican, making her a "person of color" (a lot of MAGA people really don't like people of color, let alone immigrant people of color), she's married to an entertainment lawyer (oh, oh) who is Jewish (again, MAGA people like Israel, but Jews. . . ) and the children of the couple are from his first marriage, meaning she has low parent street cred.

Are any of those items a reason not to vote for Harris?  Absolutely not.  Her policies are a reason not to vote for Harris.  But will some MAGA people vote for Trump for these reasons? You bet they will, and in a race this close, in a handful of states that matter, that's a problem.

I don't know who would be a better VP candidate.  Amy Klobuchar strikes me as one who would be better in every fashion.  If you could find an American Christian Levantine politician (and there definitely are some) they'd be absolutely perfect, particularly if the choice was a woman.  But what I am saying is that in a race with democracy itself on the ticket, choosing to go with a candidate this old for President, and a VP who is so disliked, is just dumb.  And emphasizing the aspects of your campaign that the populist right hates, even if they do so wrongly on some of them, and the nervous middle aren't comfortable with, isn't very smart either.  Having the disliked person, even if the dislike is immoral, who people fear might end up President isn't very smart, either.

This isn't a nice game.  Sometimes choices have to be made in the candidates and the strategy that aren't very palatable.  A lot of Republicans will do what Cynthia Lummis admitted to doing in 2016 as to Trump, and "hold her nose and vote".  The Democrats should hold their noses and make some smart choices.

But they will not.

The 2024 Election in Wyoming. Will anyone rise to the challenge, and is there even a point?

Lex Anteinternet: The 2024 Election, Part XI. The Winter of Disconte...: January 4, 2023

Harriet Hageman announced her bid to be reelected with the release of a video:

Harriet Hageman is running for reelection.  This is not a surprise.

John Barrasso is as well. This is also not a surprise.

The difference between the two races, so far, is that Barrasso has drawn a challenger. . . from his own party, in the primary.

Hageman is unlikely to.

Neither candidate, so far, faces a Democrat.

Just the other day, December 28, I had an entry that mentioned Wyoming's Congressman, Teno Roncalio.  On that day, he was one of the overwhelming majority of House of Representatives members who voted for the Endangered Species Act, one of the greatest pieces of legislation in recent history and one of the real achievements of the forever tainted Nixon Administration.

Roncalio, a lawyer from Rock Springs, and a veteran of D-Day, was a Democrat.  

Nearly everyone in Rock Springs was.

At that time, one of our two Senators, Gale McGee, a former University of Wyoming professor, was also a Democrat.

Now, to use the term "Democrat", even in street speech, is slanderous in the state.  It's like calling somebody a wife beater or something.  Republicans vying to be as extreme as possible accuse their fellow Republicans of being Democrats (even though many of those who do that routinely are imports from the South or elsewhere and are really, even if they don't know it, Dixiecrats or Rust Belt Democrats).

Gale McGee was our Senator until 1977, when he was replaced by Malcolm Wallop, a very conservative Wyomingite of English peerage, in a race in which it appeared that McGee didn't really have any interest in running.  McGee was our last Democratic Senator, and he simply gave the race to Wallop.  

Roncalio served in the House in 1978.  He didn't run for reelection.  He was replaced by Dick Cheney in a race that pitted Cheney, fresh out of the Ford Administration, against Cheyenne attorney Bill Bagley.  Cheney won with about 60% of the vote against a lawyer who is now forgotten, but who held on in practice too long.  Interestingly, showing part of how we got to where we are now, one of his county chairs was a then Democrat who would later be in the legislature as a very conservative Republican.  

That's telling, as a whole herd of Democrats who were later conservative Republicans share that history in the state.

No Democrat has gone to Washington from Wyoming since 1978, but the party remained significant and a power well after that.  It twice took the Governor's office and twice reelected Democratic Governors, with the last Democrat leaving Cheyenne in that role as recently as 2011. Either one of the Democratic Governor's could have had a House, and maybe a Senate, seat if they had wanted one.  The Democrats routinely took the Secretary of State's office for much of the 20th Century, with the last Democratic Secretary of State, Kathy Karpan, leaving office in 1995.  Karpan went on to become the director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement in 1997, being the first woman to hold that position, and being unanimously confirmed back when Congress still did its job.  Like Governors Sullivan and Freudenthal, Karpan could have stepped into the House or perhaps the Senate if she had wanted to.  

Freudenthal remains a significant figure in Wyoming politics.

The last really significant Wyomingite to make a serious run for office with a serious chance of success was Mary Thorne, a lawyer who ran against Governor Gordon in 2018.  There have been other real Democrats who have run for office, with Sergio Maldonado for State Superintendent of Education coming to mind, but since the mid 1990s It's become increasingly difficult and many of the Sullivan/Freudenthal Democrats have dropped out of the party, in part because of the Democratic leftward (and anti-democratic) drift, and in part because at some point being a Democrat was pointless and the Republican primary race became the real election.

2022 really demonstrated the direction that the cancer of Donald Trump had brought about.  

In 2022 the Republican Primary became a referendum on Donald Trump, with the Wyoming electorate, influenced by the import of Rust Belt and Dixie immigrants into the state, basically giving the insurrectionist a big wet kiss on the mouth by tossing out Liz Cheney.  The whole thing was more than a little ironic, as Cheney, who had risen to her office late in her occupation of it, really was never a Wyomingite in the first place, but the party dearly loved her, in no small part because it had embraced Dick Cheney, after having elected him cynically originally.  The Cheney's aren't Wyomingites and Dick Cheney had only won as the voters in 1978 were given a choice between somebody who seemed to have influence in Washington, Cheney had been Ford's Chief of Staff, and a Cheyenne lawyer who had, if I recall correctly, held off a challenge from a younger Casper lawyer who later became a Federal judge.  Wyomingites of that era were pretty practical and cynical, and they never developed a love for their politicians like occured later. Cheney seemed to do a good job, so he held office.  Liz Cheney won as the primary split the vote three ways.  Chance are high had that not occured, Tim Stubson would have been our Congressman, and have gone on to suffer the same fate as Cheney by not searing allegiance to the Dear Leader for life.

Hageman was a Cheney acolyte but was good at reading the wind and beat out her former friend.  Her competition was Lynette Grey Bull, a really interesting Democrat who had run twice and who drew 24.4% of the vote in spite of the times, in spite of being a Democrat, and in spite of being a Native American.

Who will run now.

Since 2020 the State's GOP has gone into a civil war, with the old party at war with the "Freedom Caucus", one of whose (California migrant) members wrote an op ed in the Tribune which clearly indicates their intent to wage a second Stalingrad in the 2022 Legislature.  Two county organizations, Natrona and Laramie Counties, are in revolt against the GOP Central Committee who has fully adopted the Meine Ehre heißt Treue ethos.  Hageman hasn't been as noisy as might be expected, in part because she probably correctly read the tea leaves over the trouble that Trump ass-kisser Kevin McCarthy was in for not kissing even more private parts before he fell to a quiet and scary Johnson.  The House of Representatives had done nothing this term, and is on the edge of losing power due to attrition.  Pundits claim that the GOP will gain House seats in 2022, but they claimed that about 2020 as well.  The stench of Trump kept that from happening.

And so we have a non-functioning democracy, locally.

No Democrat can win any office in 2022.  The House and one Senate seat will be up, and both of the Republicans contending for those positions will pledge their true honor to the Leader without question.  Some in the race to come this year will go further with a full-blown Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer appeal.  The Senate primary will see a GOP opportunistic upstart attempting to claim that John Barrasso is a "RINO", which really means that he's not a Dixiecrat or Rust Belt Democrat.  While I've discounted that campaign, I don't really put it past it that it has a chance of success.

Will any Democrats run?

I sure hope so.  And I mean a real Democrat, not the Left Wing Flavor Of  The Month Democrats that the party has been fielding in some races locally.  Putting up somebody who self declares to be a homosexual polyamorus trangendered drag queen Pacific Islander is not going to win any hearts at all, and really isn't believeable (the same people would decarel themselves to be cocker spaniels if that was edgy, or Orthodox starets if that was edgy).  Soembody like Sullivan, Fruendenthal, Karpen, Thorne, or, once again, Grey Bull.

But who can be asked to be a sacrificial lamb.

Well, somebody had to be. 

The state's honor, and the preservation of democracy, require it.  With no choices now, we get further down the road to there being no choices, ever.  

The Democrats are faced with that burden.  What little there is the way of third parties here do as well.  

A modest funding proposal.

Representative Mike Johnson wants to cut funds to the IRS to balance out an appropriation to Israel.  It's a bit disturbing in a number of ways, in the case of Johnson in particular. We'll go into that someplace else.

But as to cutting the IRS, well, that makes no sense to any semi sentient person who is awake and not on medication . . .unless you are part of the group of people who feels that the IRS is theft itself or that the Federal Government needs to be starved.

Well, here's a better idea for the populist dream. Cut Federal Funds to states.

Now, Louisiana is one of the states that's most dependent upon those funds. But so be it.  Cutting funds lets Louisiana be Louisiana, hurricanes and all. After all, there's no reason that people in New Jersey should have to pay for Louisiana's being in a hurricane belt. They didn't put it there, now, did they?  And back in the good ole' days, before all the Federal interference, Louisiana had to get by on its own. Sure, it was desperately poor (and frankly, it still has a lot of that), but people didn't have to see that due to the lack of highways.

Wyoming is also in the top ten on Federal largess, by the way. But hopefully the hard right can end that, and we'll be able to do away with highways also.

Pride and Unintended Consequences.

Yesterday, I ran this item, which noted the following:

Lex Anteinternet: On Pride Month, the nature of Pride, and compellin...: 

All of this fuels part of the counter reaction which is raging in our time.  People wonder how a late septuagenarian serial polygamist with weird bad hair can openly demand to be crowned Emperor and stand a good chance of having it happen, or how a thirty-something single Californian who has never held a real job but who spouts conspiracy theories and cloaks himself in the mantle of true conservatism can win office and be prayed over by college Republicans, or how individuals can be voted onto school boards with the intent to remove books.  Well, an administration that demands you accept the unnatural, a political party that requires you accept the new eugenics, and the stocking of books in school libraries that are openly sexually perverse are a big part of the reason why.

In other words, going from the widely accepted "look, we don't tell you what to do in your bedrooms, so just leave the same sex attracted alone, and they won't bother you", to "you must accept children being taught sodomy" and "you must let gender mutilation of minors occur" is a big part of that.  People on the left might claim that's the manifestation of Christian Nationalism (which it really isn't), but a lot of the reaction is just a species knowing what is biologically correct and reacting to being attacked. 

It wasn't the first time I noted this.

It's sometimes claimed, although I haven't researched it, that the moral descent of Berlin in the 1920s lead in part to people voting for the Nazis in the early 30s.  I.e., their revulsion over what they were seeing lead them to an extreme reaction, it's claimed.  At least one writer has noted:

It seems grotesque in retrospect, but Hitler posed as a moral crusader gallantly battling the forces of iniquity, corruption, and even deceit. Many Germans, horrified by the loosening of moral standards in Germany after World War I, were duped by his promises of moral rejuvenation. Hitler’s project resonated with many who were disgusted by the rampant hedonism and carnality of Weimar high culture and popular culture. Whether one views Hitler and Nazism as a Utopian and technocratic expression of the modernist project, or as an atavistic reaction against modernity, or as some blend of the two (“reactionary modernism” or “conservative revolution”), or as something completely unique, it is clear that Nazism promised a resurrection or awakening of the German people that involved a revival of morality that was in the process of decay and degeneration.

Hitler as Moral Crusader and Liar, Richard Weikart, abstract.

Extreme wealth in upper Russian society certainly contributed to the rise of the Communists in late imperial Russia and the Bolshevik Revolution.

The point of this is this.  While the Southern Populist ethics that have spread into the American middle class country wide (more on this soon) are full of hypocrisies, people do have a limit. Most people don't think night and day about politics, which opens the void to people like Rep. Ward of Casper, whose reaction to a Pride event in Casper lead to this headline:

Wyoming Lawmaker Calls For Boycott Of Businesses That Sponsored Casper Pride Fest

Ward's rise as a legislator in a state that she has almost no connections with stunned me.  She's of the extreme right and has a Weltanschauung that she's imported from the Rust Belt, where she previously lived and politiced. She's associated herself in politics with Christianity, but in a way that suggest she doesn't understand her claimed faith very well.  In Illinois, she showed up associated with some outrage over a school teacher who claimed that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, which in fact they do.  In Wyoming's last legislative session, she made the claim that Christians are not their brother's keeper, and that the story of Cain and Able in the Old Testament really only meant that you just weren't supposed to kill your brother, but otherwise could let him suffer.

Middle Class Germans of the 1920s were heir to a long Christian tradition.  Upper class Germans were as well, and frankly lower class Germans were too, that latter class being the one most vulnerable to Nazi and Communist agitation.  Russia had a long history of Christianity, leading into 1917.  

Wealthy societies produce largess.  Largess produces self-indulgence, and a lot of the self-indulgence will, seemingly almost inevitably, turn into sexual narcissism and individual domination.  Disgust inevitably results by those who don't chose that path, which is, at the end of the day, most people.  But when a society becomes focused on it, those willing to stand most in the opposing spotlight, no matter how extreme they are, will take up most of the opposing light.  

Immoderation leads, inevitably, to immodesty, which leads, almost inevitably, to opposing immoderation.  When toleration becomes a demand for absolutely acceptance, in categories of extremes, those masses simply trying to get through their days will listen to the loudest voices.

Southern Populism gave us what the Southern Strategy took into the GOP.  Losing the moorings on genuine civil rights, amongst other things, gave us a warped left wing view that individualistic self definition is a right, no matter how destructive or delusional.  That latter left wing view is pushing the other, far right populist view, to success, at least temporarily.