To the Editor:
The recent spat between Mitch McConnell and the Republican National Committee over the nature of events on Jan. 6, has parted the curtain on the normally seamless production of the GOP party line.
To review, the RNC recently cracked the whip on two of its own, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, for sitting on the Democrat-dominated Jan. 6, fact finding committee. Their censure was justified by calling that investigation a “persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.”
Senator McConnell could not concur.
He is, after all, somewhat of an expert on the subject having been there that day in person and then taken positions on both sides depending on whether he was currently more afraid for his skin or, as things calmed down, for his political future at the hands of a famously vindictive Donald Trump. The RNC and its head, Ronna McDaniel, calculated that their base could be counted on once more to buy a don’t-believe-your-lying-eyes version of events.
McConnell, recognizing an indefensible position, simply wanted to stop talking about the matter so people would quit associating the GOP with that embarrassing lawlessness and get focused on their next sales pitch.
He didn’t mince his words.
“We saw it happen. It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election, from one administration to the next. That’s what it was.”
He all but hung a bow on his statement and said, “Can I be more clear? Now let’s not mention it again.”
Seeing two GOP heavyweights trip over themselves telling the rank and file what to think points out the great irony of current Republicanism. The party that styles itself as based on tough-minded pragmatism and unfettered freedoms has so given itself over to tribal loyalty that it has become dependent on scripting from its leaders.
A useful lie is viewed more favorably than the truth if it has the official party seal of approval and gains credibility within the wink and nod crowd by straight-faced repetition. Ultimately, however, this begs the question, “What freedoms does anyone have when he forgoes the right to think for himself or demand factuality as the standard of his information?”
Does being on the same side of hatred qualify just anyone as an expert on climate change, racial justice, medical science or anything else?
Does it bestow the ability to call someone a “persecutor” who dares to look for accountability within the violence and mayhem of a day that threatened our very democracy?
Has choosing our news channel and Facebook friends, etc., led us to believe that with unison we can similarly just mold actual reality to our taste?
It’s always been tricky in politics to find the genuine. Many politicians have long been accomplished liars. Now, with the cooperation of a party-wide forfeit of honesty and critical thinking they’ve become “accomplished” liars.
