Brit Hume, on with Bret Baier recently, said Paul Ryan would be a “fool” to take the job of Speaker of the House, as the “Republican caucus is ungovernable.” He referred to the forty or so (I think there are quite a few more) making things so difficult for the establishment as a “Rump Group of Back Bench Members.” That ugly, disrespectful visual was a part of Hume’s commentary. Then began the interview with Baier. Hume suggests, strongly, that the forty are the RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). One of the strangest arguments I’ve ever heard.
Baier explains that the Freedom Caucus feel they need to stand up for the people who voted them into office –– “to do something.”
There are about forty of them and that’s how they feel. There are also about 207 other House Republicans, so when you’re looking at it, who are the true Republicans, and whose wishes should be heeded? The forty or the 207? Which raises this question: These people are fond of calling others RINOs, but if 207 are going in one direction, and forty are going in another, who are the real Republicans In Name Only (RINOs)?
Hume has been around a long time and is steeped in GOP elitism. His attitude fits perfectly. His position that because voters vote you in to do a certain job, and because you campaigned on certain issues, is no reason to do what your constituents want, or to honor what you said you would do.
This makes Congressman Steve King (R-IA) a Rump Back Bencher, in other words, not important enough to be listened to. King has kept a strong voice against illegal immigration, a voice for Rule of Law, and Hume has reduced him to a RINO. King is just one example.
I had lost all respect for Hume about the time Bret Bair took his seat on the Fox Panel.
If you have time, please vote in my presidential poll, top of this page on your right.
If you would like to receive Maggie’s Notebook daily posts direct to your inbox, no ads, no spam, EVER, enter your email address in the box below.
Subscribe to Blog via Email