Shot in the Dark

MCCL: PLINOs?

For years – longer than just about anyone – I’ve been writing about “Minnesota Gun Rights”, a group from Iowa whose “business” model is to raise money on ignorance about gun control legislation. 

The usual cycle is a little like this: 

  1. They raise a hysterical alarm about some piece of legislation that may or may not be moving in the legislature.  
  2. They accuse Republicans of going soft on guns.  Given that no Minnesota Republican has voted “yea” on a final bill supporting any sort of gun control in almost thirty years, these are usually lies – in one case, accusing Republicans they’d endorsed (inevitably in safe districts) who’s been 100% pro-2nd Amendment with ‘betrayal’.  Because “betrayal” is a nice inflammatory take that promotes hysterical fundraising. 
  3. For whatever reason, they are silent about Democrats.  
  4. They go back to Iowa and spend the money.  

“Action For Liberty” seems to have a pretty similar business model.  The group is a byproduct of the Tea Party, and started out as a fairly run of the mill conservative group.

But somewhere along the way, it started walking, talking and quacking like Minnesota Gun Rights.  

The problem with the MNGOP, according to A4L, isn’t losing elections – it was “RINOs”.   A Republican In Name Only – the definition of which is any Republican, elected, appointed or hired, who’s ever had to try to get anything done with Democrats.  

Remember the old Reagan saying – someone who agrees with you 70% isn’t your 30% enemy?  To A4L, being a 90% friend makes you a 100% enemy. 

Because “betrayal” sells. 

This has been the top story in intraparty politics this past few weeks.  The last MNGOP State Central meeting elected a slate of leadership that are, if not A4L sympathizers, at least very amenable to rapprochement.  (I just used a French word.  Maybe that makes me a RINO?)

Case in point:  over the past few weeks, A4L has been attacking Republicans for voting for the Health and Human Services Omnibus bill, which includes a contribution to Medicaid, which pays for abortions.  Abortion is bad. 

Stipulated in advance – Omnibus bills need to be banned.   If we ever get a GOP trifecta, in fact, we need to demand it.

But that’s life.  Omnibus bills are inevitably s**t sandwiches, full of “poison pills” to be lorded over the other party in the next election. 

But in the case of the HHS omnibus bill, the problem would be the same if it were a clean single-subject bill;  court decisions hamstring the state; the Medicaid money has to pay for abortions.  States have no say in the matters. 

But Action For Liberty knows as well as you do that that’s a pretty abstruse fact, and not hard at all to spin as “BETRAYAL!”. 

And so we’ve been feted (there’s another French word.  Maybe I’m turning into David French?) with the absurdity of A4L calling solid conservatives like Mary Franson, Walter Hudson, Jim Nash and Elliot Engen “RINOs”.  

And I’m gonna guess they’re going to call Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL) “PLINOs” after this broadside:

Image

I try to be “Switzerland” when it comes to intra-party politics – but if someone can make a case that Action For Liberty doesn’t run off of monetizing cynicism and ignorance, I’m doing to take some convincing.

Have your people call my people. 


Posted

in

,

by

Tags:

Comments

3 responses to “MCCL: PLINOs?”

  1. justplainangry Avatar
    justplainangry

    Your definition of a RINO is dead wrong. Case in point – based on your definition, Rand Paul is a RINO because he does not side with GOP 100% and even votes against them. Does that make him a RINO? Would you put Collins and Paul in the same category?

  2. John "Bigman" Jones Avatar
    John “Bigman” Jones

    You can’t say RINO anymore, it makes people feel bad. Republicans don’t make people feel bad. That’s not who we are.

    I’ve been searching for a word that means “People who campaign on the Republican Party Platform to get elected but then fail to work boldly to enact it.” TROMBONES was too long. Woke Lite carries too much baggage. Still searching.

    Don’t say RINO. That’s just hurtful.

  3. John "Bigman" Jones Avatar
    John “Bigman” Jones

    Mitch says: “A Republican In Name Only – the definition of which is any Republican, elected, appointed or hired, who’s ever had to try to get anything done with Democrats.”

    Well, there’s your problem, right there. Republicans can never get things done with Democrats – on a voluntary basis – but only by bold, decisive action running roughshod over Democrats to achieve Republican goals.

    For decades, I’ve been hearing: “We can’t take bold decisive action to enact our principles now, because we are in the minority. Give us more money and donate more time to get more Republicans elected so we can take bold decisive action. Okay, we got more Republicans elected and we are in a position to take bold decisive action to enact our principles, but if we do, the media will call us names and we won’t get re-elected. We will lose our power to take bold decisive action to enact our principles.”

    So basically, we can never take bold decisive action to enact our principles? “Betrayal” is a strong word. “Compromise” sounds much better. Or “reasonable,” that’s a good one, too.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.