Goodbye Republican Party, It’s YOU Not Me

This is going to be a political post. If that offends you, please click here. For the past 6+ years I have been a member of the Republican Party, but the past few years have really driven me to question if it even made sense anymore. As many Americans know, our political system is broken and my Party is a big part of the problem.

In-fighting is unhealthy on all levels of life and the 24-hour news cycle has turned our political parties into a modern day version of the Hatfields & McCoys, the North and South where they would rather fight to stay apart than do something that We the People want to happen.

Now that is what was the final straw, Nate Bell was. While an Arkansas State Representative has nothing to do with me, his cluelessness embodies the Grand Old Party. This Tweet on Friday (he’s since deleted and must think that makes it OK) was the final straw:

Nate Bell Tweet About Boston Marathon Bombing

Distasteful is all that can be said about the Tweet.

I live in Massachusetts, and I am all for the Second Amendment, but no weapons would help a citizen regardless of political affiliation, conservative or liberal against a terrorist hell bent on escape.  So with that Tweet I say THANK YOU to Nate Bell for helping me decide to turn in my membership card to the Republican Party. I know that this post will fall on deaf ears because I am not a Southern rich white man which is all the party seems to care about these days, but if for some reason anyone reads it, here are some suggestions that a former member would like to see from a party who has clearly lost touch.

Gay Marriage – In all honesty you should not care about who marries who. At the end of the day many of the states that don’t want a man to marry a man or a woman to wed a woman will allow marriage between relatives. Now who is the sick one? We also have a fine line of separation of church and state, which means leave your Bible on the nightstand and away from work.

Gun Control – America has a gun problem. No ONE, I repeat NO ONE short of a member of our military in combat needs a fully automatic assault rifle. Background checks help keep guns out of the hands of evil people.

Scott Brown – despite his failed bid for re-election the party needs more elected officials like Scott Brown who are willing to work across party lines.

Taxes – We need to fix the tax codes. The separation of wealth in our country is a horrible thing, paying more for any period of time can help better our country, Instead of claiming how much you and your donors love and respect this country’s constitution – do something for this country, not just your donors.

Sandbox – how often do all of you scold your children for not playing nice? Probably a lot of you. Now look in the mirror or read your press clippings. Before high-fiving your nearest old white dude, realize that filibustering and stonewalling the other party are doing what you holler at  your kids for.

Again apologies from straying away from the normal fare on this blog, but this had to be said. One idiotic Tweet from an elected official was it for me. Goodbye Grand Old Party and hello unenrolled voting… my ideals have not changed and I haven’t joined the Democratic Party either, but you as a party have let me down, so my checkbook and allegiance are gone.

34 Responses to Goodbye Republican Party, It’s YOU Not Me
  1. AmyVernon
    April 22, 2013 | 8:27 am

    Bravo, Jeff. I applaud you for not straying from your ideals.

  2. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 9:09 am

    AmyVernon Thanks Amy. My Tweet stream at the Arkansas guy was less PC on Friday. At the end of the day I still believe the same thing, but am appalled more and more each day by the stuff that goes on in our capital. Using a terrorist attack to aid a political agenda is bush league no matter who you are and is flat out disrespectful and wrong. Plus the thing about marrying cousins still baffles me as there is science (and laws) around why incest and inter-family marrying is wrong for genetics, but hey I guess if you live in the South nature and science don’t apply to you.

  3. mpace101
    April 22, 2013 | 9:35 am

    jeffespo I have felt the same re: Rep party for the past 6 months. No longer represents me

  4. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 9:35 am

    mpace101 yeah me too… mailing in forms to unenroll tomorrow.

  5. mpace101
    April 22, 2013 | 9:38 am

    jeffespo moved to independent a couple years ago – love politics but fed up w/all at this point

  6. TheAmericanPuls
    April 22, 2013 | 9:45 am

    JackieB3 jeffespo Should authorities use torture to get information from Dzhokhar Tsarnaev? Go Vote@ http://t.co/djfb6Zg3Xj PleaseRetweet

  7. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 9:50 am

    JackieB3 🙂 thanks,.

  8. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 9:51 am

    mpace101 yeah I’ll be official tomorrow when I can mail in papers…

  9. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 9:52 am

    @TheAmericanPuls JackieB3 Nothing more impactful than a shitty spam bot…

  10. TheRedDogInn
    April 22, 2013 | 11:53 am

    jeffespo I’ll continue working from the inside to elect non-knuckleheads. Find myself becoming a libertarian-republican hybrid more & more.

  11. Blisser
    April 22, 2013 | 11:53 am

    I curiously clicked on the link to your post after seeing someone I respect a great deal RT it this morning (Too, the title spurred me). Your post speaks to many of the frustrations I have had with the Republican Party in the last 5-10 years. I take a little of issue with your analysis of the Same-Sex marriage points, though, but not for the usual reasons. 
    A. Post-Clinton, it seems when an anti-gay marriage Democrat sets their sights on the Presidency they change their stance on marriage equality. (See Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, etc.). I struggle with this, almost as much as those who stand defiantly against it (with a seeming majority in their party). 
    B. In the response above you say, “Plus the thing about marrying cousins still baffles me as there is science (and laws) around why incest and inter-family marrying is wrong for genetics, but hey I guess if you live in the South nature and science don’t apply to you”. It seems as if your argument against kissing cousins is that they shouldn’t have babies because of possible nature complications. Well, what does genetics/nature have to say about a same sexes? 
    I don’t think this point holds, and speaks against what one of the main points from the marriage equality movement makes: it is not about being able to reproduce together, it is about finding someone you love and can happily be with, while enjoying the rights all others enjoy.  
    Otherwise, I agree with your post, and am considering doing the same.

  12. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 11:56 am

    TheRedDogInn 🙂 me too… I just was done this weekend.

  13. HighTalk
    April 22, 2013 | 12:13 pm

    Welcome to reality.  You should also mention that the Republican party is the only political party in the developed world with political stances against: climate change and evolution.

  14. TheRedDogInn
    April 22, 2013 | 12:30 pm

    jeffespo that was truly a stupid comment. We deserve better.

  15. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 12:50 pm

    TheRedDogInn yup… it is what it is and embodies the way they’ve been moving

  16. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 12:50 pm

    geoffliving TY sir

  17. geoffliving
    April 22, 2013 | 1:13 pm

    jeffespo Anytime. I voted for Bush in 2000. The wars ended it for me.

  18. juliepippert
    April 22, 2013 | 1:16 pm

    Well done and well said. I think it shows tremendous courage and courage of conviction to stick to your morals, ethics and ideals rather than compromising to fit with a group. Good for you so calmly and matter of factly explaining why, too.

  19. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 1:26 pm

    Blisser Thanks for dropping by Dan. Sorry if I struck a cord, it is healthy to have a disagreeing point of view. I see both points, and can disagree, but that’s fine. And point A is more damning than most.

  20. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 1:27 pm

    HighTalk George I think you could go on with the list in all honesty. But would also argue that in that case a lobby has a strong part in that as well…

  21. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 1:28 pm

    juliepippert you know I have no morals Julie. Overall it won’t change how I really vote, but will make me think twice about folks.

  22. juliepippert
    April 22, 2013 | 1:30 pm

    juliepippert Trying to flesh out your imaginary character – so pop that bubble why don’t you LOL. 😉 I think you have to take each candidate on merit and choose by position and record. I’ve never straight party ticket voted in my life.

  23. juliepippert
    April 22, 2013 | 1:32 pm

    jeffespo AmyVernon I am in the South and am pretty sure nature and science apply to me but I am not a man so that may be why. Heh

  24. Blisser
    April 22, 2013 | 2:18 pm

    @jeffespo Not sure I follow…

    In part A, I was taking issue with the fact that Democrats who set their sights on the office of the President somehow have an epiphany and change their view on Gay Marriage. Obama (http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/images/publications/wct/2009-01-14/current.pdf, http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/images/publications/wct/2009-01-21/current.pdf) was against it. He wavered on the issue several occasions (see: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/11/obama-on-mtv-i/, http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html, and http://www.rrstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070213/NEWS/102130025/1004/NEWS) depending on how close an election was. Finally, he officially stated in an ABC interview on May 9, 2012, that he supports gay marriage.
    While the then wavering Senator seemed confused on the issue, Vice President Cheney was coming out in support of Gay Marriage: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/06/cheney-backs-gay-marriage/
    I can give you similar progression for Hillary Clinton, if you would like. I guess what I am wonderfing is where you disagree with me on this one….
    In Point B, I was discussing how when you state that Marrying Family goes against nature, it made me wonder, “How do incestuous relationships differ in the view of nature/genetics to Gay Marriage…”  Not in the eyes of society, or with regards to morality. 
    I am curious to read your response(s)…

  25. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 3:20 pm

    Blisser ON point A, I don’t need dissertations. Your initial comments were vague and thought you were referring to something else. On B, look up the gene issues with the old royal families who inbred to keep the power in the family. The comment I stated was pointed towards states like Arkansas, who bring the religious aspect into the argument, but allow you to marry a close relative.

  26. Blisser
    April 22, 2013 | 3:33 pm

    jeffespo Thought I would be more clear on Point A.
    B. I understand your reference of “Inbreeding” but my point is that “breeding” shouldn’t be a reason to argue for or against marriage. Those arguing against gay marriage are using the fact that they can not produce a baby as an argument for why they shouldn’t be able to marry. Isn’t that the same argument you are using here?

  27. StaceyHood
    April 22, 2013 | 3:57 pm

    Welcome to the dark side, Jeff. I’m glad that you stepped up and stated this. I’m like Geoff, voted for Bush in 2000, lost me when the wars started and it’s been downhill since. Your list of why, just barely skims the surface.

  28. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 4:25 pm

    Blisser Makes sense. I see both sides to your question but still think that it is a different issue on the inbreeding as there are known genetic defects that can happen by slimming said gene pool. But I am no scientist and it is more of a cutting hair argument.

  29. jeffespo
    April 22, 2013 | 4:27 pm

    StaceyHood There are plenty more but these are the main ones that are important to me… mostly the reaching across the aisle… I mentioned a good one here that Washington did use… http://jeffesposito.com/2010/02/26/im-featured-on-cnns-the-situation-room/

  30. mdbarber
    April 23, 2013 | 5:58 pm

    I hear you Jeff. I became independent last August over a similar situation in my locale. But I had been a registered R for 36 years! Like you, the party left me; I did not leave it. I posted the change on my Facebook page and was amazed at the thoughtful and insightful comments from friends on both sides of the aisle. It made me feel better about the decision. Welcome to the crowd of “independents.” Together we will change the world…or at least our corners of the US.

  31. jeffespo
    April 23, 2013 | 9:05 pm

    mdbarber 🙂 Who knows, it is just a shame the way things have devolved. I really feel that Tweet represents a lot of what the party wants to do… find a scapegoat for their cause.

  32. mdbarber
    April 23, 2013 | 9:53 pm

    I don’t know that they even know who they want to be the scapegoat either. That’s part of the issue. Reince says something and then another faction says something completely opposite. It’s really a mess. I’m all for a third party — or just avote where the top two candidates move on to the general…but then we’d have to get rid of the Electoral College. That’s another post.

  33. vanhoosear
    April 26, 2013 | 10:54 am

    Jeff, I never thought I’d agree with you on every political point you’d make in an argument, but I do here! Left unasked is: so who then? Is Scott Brown, or another Scott Brown, unelectable thanks to his own core?

  34. jeffespo
    April 26, 2013 | 11:58 am

    vanhoosear That is a first Todd 😉 Overall I think we can take Brown’s loss in the MA race as a measuring stick. His first win was in a grass-roots everyman campaign with little funding from the GOP or lobbies for the party, the Democrats in that election also over-spent (but learned from it) with anti-republican ads. Fast forward two years and the GOP goes into hate-mongering ads and the Dems flipped their scrip painting Warren as the everyman candidate. Him not running this year indicates that he’s probably realized that the party ideals and their campaign tactics just won’t work. 
    While MA is a special snowflake of sorts, I think it really applies nation-wide. Someone like Brown will show up in the race for the GOP nomination, but will lose to someone who leans more right than center – getting key Bible Belt support and then getting fringe buy in from the rest of the base. Unless they get someone to come in who is anti-party-but-kinda-there like a Bloomberg, they will lose out in the next election cycle. I just think that the Republican Party has two separate factions – reasonable Americans who believe in fiscal responsibility, but are more progressive in thought and those who stay stuck in the past (as evident of many of their state flags) and would rather thump and puff their chests to no avail. In the last election I voted for the Libertarian candidate to see if they could get 5% of the vote to make them an official alternative.
    Overall I haven’t voted for a Dem in a national election, but voted for Mumbles the two times I was able to while living in Boston. From a pragmatic perspective I didn’t vote for Obama either time and while I don’t agree with what he’s done or is doing, I don’t think he’s done an awful job and really was the only choice in the past election. 
    In looking back at Brown before closing out, I would hope someone like him (or Warren for that matter) would take a step back before throwing their hat into the presidential ring next cycle. I think looking at Obama in his second term, he learned more about how Washington works and is more grounded in his promises, which is a good thing, and could he have has 2 similar terms probably, but I feel seasoning would have helped.

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?

Trackback URL http://jeffesposito.com/2013/04/22/goodbye-republican-party-its-not-me/trackback/

Google