How wingnut welfare is killing the GOP

Filed in National by on March 19, 2015

This Kim Messick piece in Salon is great. It discusses the GOP’s love letter to Iran in terms of the rise of the GOP’s congressional fanaticism. But I found this brief description of how wingnut welfare is playing into the destruction of the GOP as a legitimate national political party particularly insightful.

Also relevant is the entrepreneurial environment GOP politicians inhabit nowadays. The proliferation of media outlets, PACs, and “policy” centers on the right has changed the calculus for many of its office-holders. They know an alternate career path is out there, one potentially more lucrative and less burdensome than government employment. A conservative politician who is fast on his or her feet, looks good in a suit, and adheres closely enough to right-wing dogma can trade public service for the private sector and make out like a bandit. The pioneer here, of course, is Sarah Palin, who ditched the governorship of Alaska for media celebrity after her ride on the Straight Talk Express in 2008. Her example is surely not lost on the likes of Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton. As such people grow more and more detached from actual governing, the norms that enable and define successful governance matter less and less to them.

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (23)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. pandora says:

    It’s like serving in Congress is simply their audition. Give a good (crazy) congressional performance and a more lucrative job awaits you.

  2. Jason330 says:

    Aaron Schock’s quick exit from congress makes more sense. Jim DeMint leaving the Senate for the Heritage Foundation, Mike Huckabee selling dietary supplements WHILE being a Fox News contributor and a candidate for the Republican nomination….

    The idea that you enter Republican politics to govern is laughable. And yet, we have John Carney and Tom Carper who continue to say that Republicans are trustworthy partners.

  3. Dorian Gray says:

    I think about this every time I see the Ben Carson clown face on my moving picture screens.

    A black guy or a woman willing to sellout can back up the truck and shovel out the dough from Fox, CPAC, et al. Lots of opportunities to get up there and be the token court jester. It actually fucking disgusting…

    On the other hand it’s so transparently sleazy I’m suprised anybody takes it seriously. It really goes to show just how thoughtless and empty-headed the majority of people are. They don’t care and they don’t want to care. They just want the human head on the TV to be as inane and stupid as they are.

    Much of national politics is a casting call for reality TV. And some people wonder why voter turnout blows. Many people are put off by the pretense that a power-hungry media whore will be capable of doing government business.

  4. pandora says:

    But there are a lot of non-crazy people who think a woman can’t be sexist and a minority can’t be racist. Not. Kidding.

    So… if sexist and racist statements/deeds are uttered/done by a woman or a minority then it doesn’t count as sexism or racism – because… women and minorities can’t be sexist/racist toward women and minorities? I know. It makes my head hurt. And don’t underestimate how many non-crazy people buy into this crap.

  5. kavips says:

    Who watches TV anymore? That is so 2008.

  6. mouse says:

    If I don’t like white men, am I a racist?

  7. Robberbaron says:

    The primary difference is Republicans generally are successful before entering politics, as opposed to the Democrats that depend on politics to make them successful. For every Ben Carson, et al, I give you Obama, the Clintons, Biden, Carper, etc.

  8. Jason330 says:

    Where are you guys hiding all the Ben Carsons?

  9. SussexAnon says:

    “The primary difference is Republicans generally are successful before entering politics, as opposed to the Democrats that depend on politics to make them successful.”

    Which proves that just because you are “successful” in one arena, it doesn’t mean you will be successful (or even qualified) in another.

  10. Bill says:

    @dorian-why do you think no one takes the current administration seriously. Our leader is hand in hand with Al….who has been backing the truck up for decades. ..seems to be working out ok for both of them. I think that is fucking disgusting.

  11. Jason330 says:

    Al who?

  12. bamboozer says:

    And now to get back on the topic: Politicians selling out for big bucks in the private sector. This has been going on for a long time, the art has merely been perfected and expedited. Let’s evaluate. Shock? Sell used cars, mo’ money and no one wants him. Cotton? Nearly the same deal. As for being “successful” some are and some are not, goes for both parties. Hilary was the highest paid lawyer in Arkansas, for what it’s worth. Cotton and Ernst served in the military, see previous. Politicians remain a source of many problems in America, I say anything that gets them out the door can’t be all bad, close, but not completely.

  13. cassandra m says:

    For every Ben Carson, I give you Sarah Palin, Sam Brownback, Louis Gohmert, and hey — Aaron Schrock.

  14. Dorian Gray says:

    Bill asked me a question, I think. The sentence begins with the word “why” but there’s no question mark and the syntax is indecipherable. And I don’t know who Al is either.

    I never stated that nobody takes the administration seriously.

    Sounds like some conspiracy theory he cooked up that nobody else is privvy to. I’m guessing he listens to a lot of talk radio.

    Anyway, the idea that Republicans are more “successful” before they enter public office is one of the more ridiculous comments of the week. I’d say 95% of Members of Congress are marketing hucksters that run little offices hand-in-hand with think tanks and special interest groups. Maybe 5% of them are intellectually equiped to have a conversation with me. This goes for both sides.

    They sell themselves for money to get re-elected, hawk terrible ghost-written books and pander to the majority of their gerrymander districts. The entire idea that one party is different than the other in this respect is childish or insane.

  15. Anonymous says:

    @ Dorian Gray; Totally agree. Term Limits???

  16. Dorian Gray says:

    So the group of 538 people who benefit (both financially and egotistically) from no term limits will decide to codify Congressional term limits? I’m not optimistic.

    A Member of the US Congress is basically a bore. A person you’d ignore at a party as long as you’re not a star-fucker. They have a “famous” name regionally (think Kim Kardashian, Dale Earnhardt Jr, Adam Sandler) and the party’s money and they can perform like an organ grinding monkey. Hence the party runs them. They manage a staff of sycophants based on bullet points and white papers they’ve read from friendly think tanks then decide what is politically feasible. And let’s not forget the TV appearances!

    What’s the last creative policy idea you’ve heard get any traction in Congress? If the Enlightenment thinkers that gave us these ideas about government met the drooling made-for-TV dolts barfing out one platitudinous talking point after another they kill themselves.

    The idea that the dredges on this site would make it into a Republican versus Democrat argument proves my point. Now I will say that for whatever reason there is a bit more sickness on the right. If there is a national network of Marxist/Socialist radio programmes like there is for “Conservative” racist gun-nuts, I am unaware of it (and I’d like to think I’d be aware of it). And I don’t think there’s an MSNBC host who has been or would be a political candidate (see Palin, Huckabee, Carson, et al.). So the original point Jason made does stand.

  17. Jean-Jacques Rousseau says:

    “If the Enlightenment thinkers that gave us these ideas about government met the drooling made-for-TV dolts barfing out one platitudinous talking point after another they kill themselves.”

    C’est vrai

  18. Geezer says:

    I believe “Al” is Sharpton.

    Term limits are yet another idea hatched by people who are convinced that other people are too stupid to make intelligent decisions by themselves. They might be right, but it’s hardly a small-d democratic position to take.

  19. Jason330 says:

    Dorian, send me your email address.

  20. Dorian Gray says:

    Geezer – I agree with you in theory, but once you bake in gerrymandered districts, the incredible networks of dirty money needed to run, and all the rest of it I’m not sure the people get a fair opportunity to make real decisions, whether they are capable or not.

    If we could abolish TV campaign ads, unlimited super PAC money and districts that look like a two-year old’s attempt at Tetris, the idea of Congressional term limits would become superfluous.

  21. Republican David says:

    Doriin Gray, the fact is that your screed about 95% blah, blah has no basis in fact. The average time of service in the House is around 8 years and the Senate less than 10.
    http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43869.pdf

    A closer look at the prior occupations and previously held public offices of Members of the
    House and Senate at the beginning of the 114th Congress, as listed in their CQ Roll Call Member
    Profiles,
    8
    also shows the following:
    • 53 Senators with previous House service;
    • 100 Members who have worked in education, including teachers, professors,
    instructors, school fundraisers, counselors, administrators, or coaches (85 in the
    House, 15 in the Senate);
    • three physicians in the Senate, 15 physicians in the House, plus three dentists and
    three veterinarians;9
    • three psychologists (all in the House), an optometrist (in the Senate), a
    pharmacist (in the House), and four nurses (all in the House);
    • seven ordained ministers, all in the House;
    • 39 former mayors (31 in the House, eight in the Senate);
    • 10 former state governors (nine in the Senate, one in the House) and eight
    lieutenant governors (four in the Senate, four in the House, including one
    Delegate);
    • 15 former judges (all but one in the House) and 43 prosecutors (11 in the Senate,
    32 in the House) who have served in city, county, state, federal, or military
    capacities;
    • one former Cabinet Secretary (in the Senate), and three ambassadors (one in
    267 state or territorial legislators (44 in the Senate, 223 in the House);11
    • at least 102 congressional staffers (21 in the Senate, 81 in the House), as well as
    seven congressional pages (three in the House and four in the Senate);12
    • two sheriffs and one deputy sheriff (all in the House), two police officers in the
    House and one in the Senate, one firefighter in the House, and one CIA agent in
    the House;
    • four Peace Corps volunteers, all in the House;
    • one physicist, one microbiologist, one chemist, and eight engineers (all in the
    House, with the exception of one Senator who is an engineer);
    • 22 public relations or communications professionals (two in the Senate, 20 in the
    House), and 10 accountants (two in the Senate and eight in the House);
    • five software company executives in the House and two in the Senate;
    • 14 management consultants (four in the Senate, 10 in the House), six car
    dealership owners (all in the House), and two venture capitalists (one in each
    chamber);
    • 18 bankers or bank executives (four in the Senate, 14 in the House), 36 veterans
    of the real estate industry (five in the Senate, 31 in the House), and 16 Members
    who have worked in the construction industry (two in the Senate, 14 in the
    House);
    • two social workers in the Senate and six in the House and four union
    representatives (all in the House);
    • six radio talk show hosts (one Senate, five House); eight radio or television
    broadcasters, managers, or owners (two Senate, six House); nine reporters or
    journalists (two Senate, seven House); and a public television producer in the
    House;
    • 19 insurance agents or executives (four Senate, 15 House) and three stockbrokers
    (two in the Senate, one in the House);
    • one screenwriter and comedian, and one documentary filmmaker (both in the
    Senate) and an artist in the House;
    • 29 farmers, ranchers, or cattle farm owners (four in the Senate, 25 in the House);
    • two almond orchard owners in the House, as well as two vintners; and
    • 10 current members of the military reserves (eight House, two Senate) and seven
    current members of the National Guard (six House, one Senate).

  22. Jason330 says:

    Aside from Franken and the optometrist, (a man who’s father was a career politician) that’s a long list of people who have never done anything but accept government checks.

    And yes, I include farmers and ranchers in that that group. They are the biggest welfare queens of them all.

  23. Dorian Gray says:

    I wasn’t even supporting term limits, first of all. I said “politicians” are mostly boring people who play a role like a spokesperson and none of them, left, right or centre, are interesting people or creative thinkers. It doesn’t matter whether they’ve served 6 months or 45 years. They are just characters and figureheads for factions of big moneyed supporters and think tanks.

    I greatly appreciate all the demographic information you’ve cut and pasted into the comments. I don’t know what it proves other than my suspicion that you also are an incredible fucking bore.