Joe Biden is out (of the race for the 2016 Democratic Presidential nomination) and Paul Ryan is in (sort of…for the contest to replace John Boehner as Speaker of the House).
We cover both breaking stories today on The BradCast before settling in for a related, and at times, very lively, conversation with conservative icon Richard Viguerie about what the hell Republicans and ‘conservatives’ in the so-called Freedom Caucus are thinking at this point, as the GOP Civil War rages over control of the U.S. House and much more.
“I consider myself a conservative, not a Republican,” Viguerie clarifies right off the bat. “I do operate in the Republican Party, but do consider myself a conservative, which is the case with many of my national conservative friends. They think of themselves as conservatives, not Republicans.”
The 82-year old Viguerie is a legend amongst conservatives. He is regarded by many as the ‘funding father’ of the movement, thanks to his roll in the creation of direct mail political fund raising. He continues to play a very influential role among Republicans via his books — such as Takeover: The 100-Year War for the Soul of the GOP and How Conservatives Can Finally Win It
Right now, it seems, neither he nor the others at his Conservative HQ site are willing to agree to Ryan’s newly issued demands to become the next Speaker. So, what are they and fellow Republicans thinking at this point?
Viguerie says he and those in the so-called Freedom Caucus are “looking for a fighter. The grassroots is white hot with anger at the silence and the ineptness of our supposed leaders out there. And that’s what driving this problem with the House Speaker selection right now.”
I did my best to press Viguerie on all matter of related issues, including whether he and his conservative compatriots support the U.S. Government defaulting on our loan payments for the first time in history, as may well be the case in the next several weeks if the “debt ceiling” is not raised and a budget is not passed to keep the government open and operating — which, I tell him, seems very un-conservative to me!
His responses make clear that he is more than willing to take such gambles and has no intention of rolling over for those “Big Government Republicans” that he considers to have sold out the movement. He believes “we are heading towards a cliff,” thanks to overspending and tells me that he is is willing to force spending cuts as “part of a deal” to raise the debt limit, even if that results in default or shutdown. “We need to have a conversation with the American people about our priorities.”
On the hunt for a Presidential candidate, Viguerie insists: “Voters do not like establishment Republicans. They really do reject them across the board. When I talk to Republicans and they say ‘we’ve got to beat Hillary’, I say that’s fine, I understand that, but if you nominate an establishment Republican — a Chris Christie, a Jeb Bush type, a John Kasich — you’re going to lose. The people don’t want an establishment Republican.”
That’s just a taste, of course, of what I’ll call our very spirited conversation on all of the above and much more. Listen to the show below and let me know what you think in comments! Enjoy!…
Download MP3 or listen to complete show online below…
[audio:http://bradblog.com/audio/BradCast_BradFriedman_RichardViguerie_BidenOut_PaulRyanIn_102115.mp3]
(Snail mail support to “Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028” always welcome too!)
|
Your guest’s response on gerrymandering was basically, “It’s OK because the Democrats are just as bad.” I’m hardly surprised a “conservative” would say that. It is the all-purpose excuse, especially if no fact-checking is involved.
Ooh, I just got to the racist part. Ye gods.
I’m not sure what value there was supposed to be in talking to this guy. Does the “Freedom Caucus” need his approval to appoint a Speaker?
Apparently we don’t get enough of the propaganda and internecine battles of the multiple players within the extreme right wing of the Republican Party from billionaire-funded “think tanks,” Fox “News” and the MSM.
Now you devote a full segment of listener sponsored radio to a Richard Viguerie interview?
These guys are lucky not to have grown up in my household. Stamping one’s feet and threatening to hold one’s breath until one turned blue was not rewarded.
The “track conditions” angle here would be, why is there a “debt ceiling” at all? If not raising the debt limit means destroying America, then having a debt limit just means intentionally scheduling a meaningless crisis every few months. What is the purpose here? What was this legislation supposed to accomplish?
Self-styled “conservatives” or “strict constructionists” may want to weigh the words of Article VI and their implications. All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
As Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton observed in a report to the House of Representatives:
If the “original intent,” of which self-styled “conservatives” or “strict constructionists” care so much, was to make our word true, can we now act in a way that makes our word worthless? And why should that even be a consideration?
The Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 raised funds for World War I and introduced the debt ceiling. But if “original intention” has any meaning at all, the debt ceiling is of dubious constitutionality. Article VI makes honoring our commitments, meeting our obligations, being true to our word a duty, not an option. The Congress exercised its second power under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1–“to pay the debts…of the United States”–when the Department of the Treasury was created. (Emphasis added.) Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment reinforces those requirements.