Dr. Shanker was responding to a (sadly) typical Ron Fournier, pox-on-both-houses complaint.
Here’s my response to Dr. Shanker, which got me started on a bit of a little rant :
As I went on to point out, the same people who celebrate “even-handed” condemnation of both parties also oppose the Tea Party.
Why is that?
Here’s a common explanation/complaint:
To which I reply:
I don’t get the idea that my friend likes Cruz a lot, so he has no reply.
Here’s the question, at least for me: Is the GOP its establishment or or its future leadership (the insurgency)?
I think we need to start differentiating, don’t you?
Is the heart of the Republican Party its aging, reactionary leaders in Congress?
Or the new generation of warrior/teachers fighting to reform it?
A Twitter friend a few weeks ago, tweeted this:
Ignoring for a moment the feverish tone of this tweet, and setting aside whether Cruz is doing the bidding of various nefarious groups, I can’t really argue with the core assertion:
I believe Cruz (and Rubio and Lee and several other cohorts) are indeed seeking to hollow out the GOP brand and replace with something else.
The difference is that I think the effort is a good thing.
The question is, who represents the GOP?
The entrenched leadership who have ruined the brand?
Or the insurgents who have yet to wrestle away the levers of power?
My answer is neither.
And while that’s true, let’s not pretend there is only the Munchhausen by proxy Democratic Party and the long-in-the-tooth, enabling Republican Party to choose from.