Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Purging of Jeff Flake
You know, it's
going to be hard for Americans to rush back into the bosoms of the
Republican minority if they
keep doing crap like this.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, who had promised last May that "bad behavior" by House Republicans who voted against their leadership would not be rewarded, announced to a party conference Wednesday that reform Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona was being removed from the Judiciary Committee.
With the change in House control, several Republicans had to be removed from committees. However, Flake was about halfway up the Judiciary panel in seniority, and this was his priority appointment. The decision was made by the Republican Steering Committee, dominated by Appropriations members who resent Flake's vigorous campaign against earmarks.
Boehner later told Flake he was purged because of his verbal attacks on party leaders. Flake was undone by his critical remarks on CBS's "60 Minutes" just before the election.
In case you've forgotten (and sorry, I'm not loaning out my K-Tel Jeff Flake's Greatest Hits compilation), these were Flake's critical remarks.
As they work their way through Congress, earmarks are so shrouded in secrecy you often can’t tell who benefits from them, who sponsors them, or why.
"The vast majority of them we have no idea. Sometimes you’ll see a press release when somebody’s taking a victory lap. Some of them don’t want anyone to know ever that they got that earmark, other than the lobbyist that they got it for," Flake tells Safer.
So, no personal attacks on members... just bemoaning the culture of earmarks, which was one of the reasons the GOP lost. The nerve of that guy! Strike him down!
Flake was far more harsh in his interview for our "libertarian vote" feature before the election (which was conducted before the Foley scandal broke).
Reason: What policies could a GOP-run Congress enact that would appeal to libertarians?
Flake: At this late date? Adjournment.
For what it's worth, Flake claims he lost the Judiciary seat because of his stance on immigration. (He's against tying Mexicans to the hoods of pick-up trucks and driving them into the Rio Grande.)
|1.13.07 @ 1:32PM|#
So, will someone explain again why I, as a libertarian should throw my lot in with this cabal?
|1.13.07 @ 1:35PM|#
I wonder if with this latest kick against him, who Flake would endorse for the Republican nom for prez-his home-state, now-establishment choice Senator or a real maverick congressman from a neighboring state?
VM|1.13.07 @ 1:41PM|#
Issac:
Because Gore would have been worse.
Because Kerry would have been worse.
Because the Democrats are worse.
Didn't you get the boilerplate?
:)
|1.13.07 @ 1:46PM|#
Isn't this actually a good thing? The Republicans continuing to
expose how corrupt they are should be seen as a positive, because
I'd rather see the party completely discredited and built up again
from scratch (perhaps with people who think like Jeff Flake leading
the way) than have them pretend to have any virtue
whatsoever.
Bruce Bartlett had
some thoughts on back when the Dems acted similarly in the wake
of Watergate, and how that was the eventual downfall of the
"permanent" Democratic majority.
Taktix|1.13.07 @ 1:47PM|#
I don't think I can throw my lot in with a party led by a guy named Boehner. I know I'm not the first to make that joke, but to me, that will never stop being funny.
|1.13.07 @ 2:11PM|#
I don't think I can throw my lot in with a party led by a
guy named Boehner.
The real problem is that perpetual tan. It looks too much like
endless junkets, paid for by pigs lining up at the trough.
|1.13.07 @ 2:11PM|#
Oh, right, great antlered one from the boreal forests. I confess
my many errors, and will not sin again.
:o
VM|1.13.07 @ 2:51PM|#
The path to Reindeer-dom is often dark but never pleasant. It is
why we must band together against the throngs of
Twaddlenocks!
JW: sadly enough, this citizen could only guess to which party
you're referring by context. It applies so well to both. Sort of an
all natural peanut butter kinda thing. Sort of apply. Forget. Get
chased by squirrels, attack hamsters, etc.
|1.13.07 @ 4:13PM|#
Link
"...The Pentagon has been using a little-known power to
obtain banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and
others suspected of terrorism or espionage inside the United
States, part of an aggressive expansion by the military into
domestic intelligence gathering.
The C.I.A. has also been issuing what are known as national
security letters to gain access to financial records from American
companies,..."
|1.13.07 @ 4:32PM|#
Maybe Reason missed it but the Republicans don't control Congress anymore. Why is this a story? Isn't the more important story now majority leader Harry Reid killing off earmark reorm in the Senate? Of course we don't get that, we get some inside baseball story about some guy few have ever heard of in a post straight off of the Corner. Reason's sell out to the DNC continues.
Roy Bean|1.13.07 @ 5:08PM|#
Have the Democrats ever appointed a libertarian leaning judge......ever?
|1.13.07 @ 5:52PM|#
"Isn't the more important story now majority leader Harry Reid
killing off earmark reorm in the Senate?"
That would be an important story if it had actually happened. But
his motion to block it was defeated, and if you already know about
the final Senate vote then the much bigger story is that you've got
a time machine.
"Maybe Reason missed it but the Republicans don't control Congress
anymore. Why is this a story?"
You don't think it's a legitimate story on a libertarian blog when
one of a handful of libertarianesque congressmen gets smacked down
for his libertarianesque (or at least non-party flack)
behavior?
"Reason's sell out to the DNC continues."
As does your record of unintentionally funny posts.
thoreau|1.13.07 @ 6:25PM|#
Like Sparky said, Jeff Flake is one of the few more or less
libertarian members of Congress, so anything related to him is
news.
Also, some of us were hoping to teach the GOP a lesson when we
voted them out of power. Apparently, they have a lot of learning to
do. And this makes me sad, because I was kind of hoping we'd see
some vetos and filibusters and all that good stuff, as a sign that
the GOP is relearning some of its better instincts.
Robert|1.13.07 @ 6:43PM|#
"So, will someone explain again why I, as a libertarian should
throw my lot in with this cabal?"
Because it's a lot better to have someone in Congress without a
particular committee position than to have nobody in Congress at
all. Why was that hard to figure out?
|1.13.07 @ 7:47PM|#
Flake/Paul in '08
===========================
Let's do Paul/Flake in '08 instead. This guy's doing good work, but
Ron Paul is a rockstar.
|1.13.07 @ 7:50PM|#
Maybe Reason missed it but the Republicans don't control
Congress anymore. Why is this a story?
Well, maybe because it speaks to how the elephants will act when
they are in the majority again. Hate the donkeys all you will (and
I instictively do too) but the fact that there is now a donkey
majority is a pretty sure indication that the electorate was
generally dissatisfied with the GOP way of doing things.
Looks to me like the Republican leadership is utterly tone deaf to
the tune that vox populi is singing.
The path to Reindeer-dom is often dark but never pleasant. It
is why we must band together against the throngs of
Twaddlenocks!
I am forever willing to make whatever sacrifice is called for in
the struggle against Twaddlenockerism. The survival of civilzation
is at stake, after all.
|1.13.07 @ 7:53PM|#
So, will someone explain again why I, as a
libertarian should throw my lot in with this cabal?"
Because it's a lot better to have someone in Congress without a
particular committee position than to have nobody in Congress at
all. Why was that hard to figure out?
Reread what you wrote there and get back to me if it made any sense
to you.
lovecat|1.13.07 @ 9:01PM|#
We got a Pres. who orders an attack in Africa to get 3 "El
Qaeda" leaders, but, according to the foreign press, killed 70
nomads instead. (While missing the bad guys)
This Govt. has gone so far down hill morally and ethically, Flake
should be proud he was kicked out of it.
barneca|1.13.07 @ 9:06PM|#
I am forever willing to make whatever sacrifice is called
for in the struggle against Twaddlenockerism. The survival of
civilzation is at stake, after all.
some things are worth dying for.
-cab
|1.13.07 @ 9:59PM|#
What are the chances we can we get my li'l homie Jeff "Flake" into the United States Senate after that redolent buffoon John McCain slips on his enormous ego and falls on his cynical ass in the upcoming Presidential election?
Godfrey|1.14.07 @ 5:10AM|#
"Unfortunately, a guy named Flake is unelectable as
President."
How is "Flake" any worse than "Bush" or "Gore"?
If his name was Fagg you might have a
point.
Eric Dondero|1.14.07 @ 9:20AM|#
Where are all the Libertarians to defend Flake? They always
scream that Ron Paul is the only Libertarian in Congress. That Ron
Paul is a fluke. They have completely ignored Jeff Flake and other
libertarian Republicans like Tom Feeney of Florida, and Dana
Rohrabacher of California.
Maybe this will serve to wake the skeptical Libertarian Party
people up that there are actually other libertarian Republicans in
Congress besides just Ron Paul.
|1.14.07 @ 9:46AM|#
Yea, demote the conservative Flake, and keep the corrupt, earmark loving Jerry Lewis as ranking member on appropriations. That's the way to win our limited government hearts back. I'll be cheering when Lewis is hauled off to jail.
|1.14.07 @ 10:20AM|#
Where are all the Libertarians to defend Flake?
That's a remarkably odd question to ask on a thread that is about
what a good guy Jeff Flake is and what a raw deal he is
getting.
Nobody is denying that there are good libertarian Republicans. You
don't seem to notice that they are marginalized by the current GOP
leadership.
The GOP power brokers have abandoned any semblance of fiscal
responsibility and the only way libertarian Republicans have been
able to promote anything in opposition to the war on drugs is to
team up with evil Democrats. Needless to say the establishment of
both parties have shot them down there too.
Jennifer|1.14.07 @ 10:34AM|#
I agree with Eric Dondero: it's a shame, the way the Reasonoids
harp on Ron Paul and just totally ignore great guys like Jeff
Flake.
But, hark! I heard there's this guy named David Weigel who works
for Reason magazine. Maybe (just maybe) if Eric Dondero told Weigel
what a great guy this Jeff Flake is, Weigel might start a Hit and
Run thread about it. "Man, it sucks the way the GOP is treating
Jeff Flake," might be the theme of this hypothetical thread Weigel
might start.
I mean, I wouldn't hold my breath or anything, but it's certainly
possible. Eric, if you don't e-mail Weigel with news of this Flake
guy, I'll do it myself. SOMEBODY has to let him know, dammit.
barneca|1.14.07 @ 12:58PM|#
in dondero's defense, i think he might have meant libertarian
party people, not libertarians or reasonoids in general.
-cab
|1.14.07 @ 1:43PM|#
I think barneca is correct, as Mr. Dondero did use the big "L",
and reference the Libertarian Party.
It's MLK weekend, can't we all just get along?
|1.14.07 @ 1:46PM|#
There are many reasons that Ron Paul's name is a household word
for libertarians while Jeff Flake is a relative unknown.
First RP has about a twenty year head start.
Second Ron Paul has cultivated a "libertarian" image and has
promoted it and himself relentlessly*. What with the newsletter and
a deliberate hand out to the LP (including the presidential run) he
has the closest thing in libertarianland to a political
machine.
Those who know of Jeff Flake are well aware of his bonafides but
face it he has not yet built a national reputation.
Less hard to understand is Dana Rohrabacher's status. I think this
might have something to do with the fact that while he is most
certainly among the original libertarians he has become
increasingly (and unfairly) become identified with the GOP
establishment. It's too bad. He's probably the most influential
libertarian sympathizer in the House. But I suspect he has paid a
price for that position.
I live next to Tom Feeney's district (my CONgressMAN is the
perfectly awful John Mica). Every time I see anything about him he
is either pandering to the religious right or bragging about some
program that will cost billions and benefit (typically for a
CONgressMAN the benefit is not obvious) for his district. These are
hardly libertarian qualities. Ric Keller is about the same. To his
credit Mica doesn't even pretend to be a libertarian.
So while I agree with Eric Dondero that we need to look beyond Ron
Paul for libertarian sympathizers I say we need to look beyond the
GOP.
It's perfectly true that Barney Frank's positions on Social
Security and gun control are utterly unacceptable to libertarians.
But the same can be said for Tom Feeney's stands on abortion, gay
rights and the Patriot Act.
*I believe it is a mistake to take the mild-mannered, humble doctor
persona to literally. In my opinion Ron Paul is that major rarity
in libertarian circles, a serious and aggressive political
animal.
|1.14.07 @ 4:13PM|#
Maybe this will serve to wake the skeptical Libertarian
Party people up that there are actually other libertarian
Republicans in Congress besides just Ron Paul.
I'm getting the impression Dondero doesn't actually read the posts
and comments in H&R, if he thinks it's dominated by LP
members.
For that matter, he might not read his own remarks, as a more
sensible person might suggest that this will serve to wake up
libertarians and let them realize how thoroughly hated
they are in the GOP.
Robert|1.14.07 @ 5:48PM|#
So, will someone explain again why I, as a libertarian should
throw my lot in with this cabal?"
Because it's a lot better to have someone in Congress without a
particular committee position than to have nobody in Congress at
all. Why was that hard to figure out?
Reread what you wrote there and get back to me if it made any sense
to you.
*********************
"This cabal" refers to the GOP, right? The GOP gave Jeff Flake
their nomination for US House, right? The GOP nomination got, or
very much helped get, Jeff Flake the election to that office,
right? They put him on the Judiciary Committee, didn't they? If
they hadn't done those things first, he wouldn't even have been
position to have that assignment taken away from him.
So you ask why you should throw your lot in with that cabal. Let's
see, the cabal got Jeff Flake into Congress, and got him a
committee position for a certain amount of time. You think somehow
that cabal had a net negative effect, or even just no effect?
Would the world be better off without Jeff Flake in Congress? Or
are you just saying you have nothing good to contribute to a
political organiz'n?
And Eric, the 05.b, if libertarians are so hated among Republicans,
then why do they do so much better among Republicans than they do
with the gen'l public?
|1.14.07 @ 7:17PM|#
if libertarians are so hated among Republicans, then why do they
do so much better among Republicans than they do with the gen'l
public?
===============================
Because the democrats get panicky and irrational whenever socialism
is questioned. That doesn't make the Libs closer to the GOP than to
the Democrats, it just means that they have a longer history of
hatred with the conventional left.
|1.15.07 @ 1:23AM|#
Well, considering that Flake is from my state, and he's about as
libertarian as you can get from the two major parties (and no, I'm
not forgetting Dr Paul), I've been touting Flake's bona fides for
quite some time now.
Yes, he's a Mormon, but at least the dude puts his money where his
mouth is.
I'm with lovecat in thinking that Flake should be proud that those
jackals have turned on him.
|1.15.07 @ 2:50AM|#
if libertarians are so hated among Republicans, then why do
they do so much better among Republicans than they do with the
gen'l public?
Wow, you really haven't been paying attention the last several
years.
thoreau|1.15.07 @ 8:45AM|#
I would totally vote for a Hagel/Flake ticket. Yeah, I know, those who want to can find things to dislike about both of them, but compared to Hillary? Please.
thoreau|1.15.07 @ 8:45AM|#
Hell, compared to just about any other Republican (except Ron Paul, of course, but he can't win) Hagel/Flake would kick ass.
Jennifer|1.15.07 @ 11:17AM|#
And Eric, the 05.b, if libertarians are so hated among
Republicans, then why do they do so much better among Republicans
than they do with the gen'l public?
Yeah, among the general public Libertarians get point-five percent
of the vote, whereas among Republicans Libertarians will get as
much as point-seven. Take that, Eric the
fifty-one-hundredths of a Bee!
wingnutx|1.15.07 @ 11:53AM|#
So, will someone explain again why I, as a libertarian
should throw my lot in with this cabal?
Perhaps to get more Jeff Flake types in office, or maybe a Janice
Rogers-Brown on the SCOTUS.
I'm not saying it will happen, but that's the general idea.
We're going to get the shaft from either major party. Personally
I'll just cherry-pick and support whoever is most libertarian in a
particular race. Sometimes that will be a Democrat, sometimes a
Republican.
wingnutx|1.15.07 @ 11:55AM|#
Republican true believers tend to hate Libertarians because we
syphon more votes from them than we do from the Democrats.
Also, more authoritarian Reps see us as promoting drug use,
homosexuality, and everything else that they would like keep under
their boot.
|1.15.07 @ 1:05PM|#
"Isn't the more important story now majority leader Harry Reid
killing off earmark reorm in the Senate?" - John
Isn't it amazing? The Republicans launch an offensive by sponsoring
an amendment to the Democrats' ethics bill, in the hope that it
will be shot down in the standard First-100-hours style, and then
spend the day trumpeting the assumed Democratic rejection of the
amendment. And as that media campaign is going on, John shows up on
a completely unrelated thread and proclaims exactly the line that
the RNC is trying to get out, and that house organs like National
Review are so helpfully trumpeting.
I would assume that this was merely a coincidence, if it weren't
for one little problem: they story the RNC is reporting, and that
John so helpfully passes on to us, isn't true. Not only that, but
John reports exactly the same incorrect information that the GOP
house organs report.
John, are you getting paid to do this? Or are you a volunteer?
Which is it, hack - corrupt, or pathetic?
|1.15.07 @ 5:36PM|#
joe,
Will you be thanking the Republicans, particularly Jim Demint, any
time soon for forcing Reid to adopt the stricter amended bill?
|1.15.07 @ 5:38PM|#
And, while I'm demanding that credit be given where it is due
A motion to delay consideration of the amendment was voted down by a 51-46 margin -- including "no" votes from Democratic senators as Barack Obama of Illinois and John Kerry of Massachusetts, as well as Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.
From a CNSNews report. Senator Obama has gained a bit more respect from me. Maybe he is some sort of "new breed" of Democrat that actually takes seriously his responsibility to the American people.
Robert|1.15.07 @ 7:00PM|#
"Republican true believers tend to hate Libertarians because we
syphon more votes from them than we do from the Democrats."
To the extent that's true, it shows that libertarians
do do better among Republicans than among the
gen'l public (which includes Democrats).
Anita Dickens-Hyde|1.15.07 @ 8:59PM|#
Taktix, you have a point about a politician named Boehner.
However, former Rep. William H. Boner (D-Tenn. 1979-1987), while
never having held a leadership position in Congress, was elected
mayor of Nashville during the first year of his fifth Congressional
term.
During his single term of office, Mayor Boner divorced his third
wife to marry a younger nightclub singer, who stated to a reporter
for the now-defunct Nashville Banner that the mayor was
capable of passion for "seven continuous hours".
Keeping in mind that this was before Viagra, Cialis, etc. came on
the market, perhaps there is something to rising to the
expectations of an unfortunate name.
|1.16.07 @ 9:38AM|#
jf,
"Will you be thanking the Republicans, particularly Jim Demint, any
time soon for forcing Reid to adopt the stricter amended
bill?"
I'll have the same warm place in my heart for them as for the guy
who added "sex" to the Civil Rights Act in hopes of sinking
it.
It's good that the Democratic leadership is being walked back from
the "my way or the highway" inflexibility of the "First 100 Hours"
strategy. Consideration of legitimate, meaningful amendments can
only improve the process. The message of November 7 was not "Go on
like before, but change places."
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245