Justin Amash

Primary Challengers Circling Around Justin Amash


It's lonely at the top if you wanna rock & roll. |||

The Washington Post has an article today about primary challenges against House Tea Party conservatives, best exemplified by Liberty Movement darling Rep. Justin Amash (R-Grand Rapids):

Within Grand Rapids' powerful business establishment, patience is running low with Amash's ideological agenda and tactics. Some business leaders are recruiting a Republican primary challenger who they hope will serve the old-fashioned way — by working the inside game and playing nice to gain influence and solve problems for the district. They are tired of tea party governance, as exemplified by the budget fight that led to the shutdown and threatens a first-ever U.S. credit default. […]

Some prominent business leaders are lining up behind investment manager Brian Ellis, according to several GOP operatives here. […]

State Sen. Mark C. Jansen, seen as a pragmatic Republican, also is weighing a challenge to Amash, said Deb Drick, his chief of staff. "We get frequent calls from people encouraging Senator Jansen to run," Drick said. "There's got to be a reason he's being approached so much."

Meg Goebel, president of the Paul Goebel Group, an insurance agency, said she is "really, really unhappy" with the leading role Amash has played in tying the health-care law to overall government funding.

"I don't see him as a collaborator, and I think that's a huge problem," Goebel, a former chair of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce, said. "People used to say, 'I don't like the Congress, but I like my congressman.' I don't think that's the case anymore." […]

Here in Amash's Grand Rapids district, several well-known executives who are said to have promised their support to Ellis did not respond to requests for interviews. But Katie Packer Gage, a former senior aide to [Mitt] Romney and a Michigan GOP operative, said, "The business community in Grand Rapids has been completely disenchanted with Amash."

Amash spokesman Will Adams told the Post, "We're not worried." More on the subject from Detroit News columnist Nolan Finley. Amash's position on the government shutdown, by the way, is that a

"Clean CR" spends ~$20B more than authorized under #sequester for fiscal year. Rs will accept Ds' spending if they'll compromise elsewhere.

Reason on Amash here, including this Nick Gillespie interview:

NEXT: Kerry: Libya Raid Against "Legal And Appropriate Target"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. old-fashioned way ? by working the inside game and playing nice to gain influence and solve problems for the district

    We are well and truly fucked.

    1. Nah. Amash is a rock star. Libertarians are anything but legion but we have enough organizational oomph + cold, hard cash to keep Amash in power. [/famous last words]

      1. Amash will get some support from out the district, and needs to run a campaign that everyone knows about. I’m in the district, Ellis is known, and has been in the party awhile.

        1. Hell, I live in Texas and sent him some money at the end of September. There are a handful of people in Congress who aren’t weaselly fucks and he appears to be one of them.

          Fuck Goebel and the rest of the Republicans who want Congress to be about how much they can loot.

        2. How’s his “constituent service”? I haven’t done a literature review but I strongly suspect that’s the bread-and-butter of cementing your incumbency (to mix a metaphor).

      2. Unseating an incumbent is hard enough, unseating an incumbent to install a milquetoast RINO to reconnect disaffected (R) cronies to the gravy train is going to be an uphill battle at best… *cough* Romney *cough*

      3. I wasn’t really specifically referring to the Amash primary, but to how utterly unprincipled people are. And how the government has grown to such a powerful place that even business people, who should be as in favor of free markets as anyone, think they can only be successful with government intervention, and demand special treatment from their representatives.

        We’re fucked, I tell you.

        1. Free market: noun \?fr??m?r-k?t\

          A system of imposing ones goods or services through the imposition of law, with the goal of impeding competition and forcing unwilling participants into an artificial system of no competing choices. See: Cronyism

        2. Regulatory capture is easier, cheaper, and provides a better return than operating in a free market.

          1. ^THIS^

            Established businesspeople are some of the least pro free market types there are. Afterall, having to compete and win new and repeat business by offering superior goods or services than your competition is hard. Using cronyism to keep your competetion out of the market in the first place is easier. It only requires a little cold hard cash slipped into the right people’s hands.

          2. I know this. Again, this is why we’re royally fucked.

  2. You’re not supposed to really mean what you say during campaigns.

    Actually doing like what you said you were going to do, obviously that can’t go unpunished.

    1. That’s why Amash will roll through them easily. Any criticism of his performance in Congress with automatically position his opponents to his left – not the place to be in a Republican primary.

      1. I hope you’re right.

  3. “I don’t see him as a collaborator, and I think that’s a huge problem,” Goebel, a former chair of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce,”

    So says Vidkun Quisling’s grand daughter.

    1. Goddamit, you beat me to it.

      1. Me tooo……

    2. This dumb, uncultured cunt has no idea about the historical connotations of the word “collaborator.”

      If we lose to these shit-stains, even my jaded eyes will be shocked and disappointed.

      Don’t let me down, fellow-libertarians.

    3. Creech scores a direct hit, right at the waterline!

      Too bad that Goebel probably won’t even see the irony of using the “c” word.

  4. It’s terrible when you can’t use government to game the system for yourself. Amash apparently wasn’t handing out the favors they expected.

    1. This attitude in MI may explain why Amash & others are seen as a-holes by other Rs in DC: they won’t play the insider game which means they must automatically be a-holes.

  5. alt-text epic fail

    1. Truth.

  6. Cronies gonna crony.

    But Katie Packer Gage, a former senior aide to [Mitt] Romney and a Michigan GOP operative, said, “The business community in Grand Rapids has been completely disenchanted with Amash.”

    The gift that keeps on giving. The Stupid Party strikes again!

  7. “”I don’t see him as a collaborator, and I think that’s a huge problem,” Goebel a former chair of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce, said.”

    I could of sworn there was another Goebel that sought to dispose of those who wouldn’t collaborate, but I can’t quite put my finger on it…

    1. The only thing about Meg and her statement that would have been better is if that last name had another b and was pluralized.

    2. George Gobel never collaborated with the rest of the Hollywood Squares.

      1. No..no..noo, I think this guy was an administration press secretary for some European shithole back in the stone age. Every other word out of his mouth was bullshit, and he was slightly more anti-Semitic than Helen Thomas…

        1. Fun Fact: Go-balls had a PhD in 19th Century literature. Heidelburg U. didn’t have an established Gender Studies program at the time.

          1. Fat lot of good it did him, they canned his ass back in the late 40’s, he didn’t appeal to the emerging demographics, and had far too many gaffes to overlook…

  8. It’s lonely at A LONG WAY TO the top if you want to rock & roll.


    1. I KNEW it sounded funny. My heavy metal internal jukebox apparently doesn’t work well before 10 AM….

      1. Gettin’ had
        Gettin’ took
        I tell you folks
        It’s harder than it looks

      2. Plus, there’s no way in hell AC-DC at that time (or ever, unless you squint really hard at parts of Highway to Hell, Back in Black, and For Those About to Rock) was heavy metal.

        1. Compared to Barry Manilow…

        2. They were understood as such at the time, which is good enough for this KNAC listener!

          1. we considered them the pinnacle of pub rock, actually

            1. I think that might be the most accurate label. Though with a dash of Satan!

              1. It was glam.

                The glam people were fascinated with the rock and roll of the ’50s. It showed up in all of their sets–more so than the star man motif.

                Eddie from Rocky Horror, David Bowie did it, Suzi Quattro and Gary Glitter were all about nostalgia for rock and roll…

                They were glam.

                That was glam’s connection to punk rock, by the way. Just like a “hippie” was a “young hipster”, a “punk rocker” was a “rocker” who is young.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocker_(subculture) #Origins


                All the early punks were covering glam bands and listening to ’50s rock and roll. If you ever listened to Steve Jones’ radio show in LA, I bet he mostly played glam.

                And those early punks jumped all over AC/DC when they were in London for that reason.

                ’cause AC/DC was a glam band that emphasized the rocker side of the equation.

          2. I hate to quote Wikipedia here, but…

            As described above, there are arguments about whether these and other early bands truly qualify as “heavy metal” or simply as “hard rock”. Those closer to the music’s blues roots or placing greater emphasis on melody are now commonly ascribed the latter label. AC/DC, which debuted with High Voltage in 1975, is a prime example. The 1983 Rolling Stone encyclopedia entry begins, “Australian heavy-metal band AC/DC…”[108] Rock historian Clinton Walker writes, “Calling AC/DC a heavy metal band in the seventies was as inaccurate as it is today…. [They] were a rock ‘n’ roll band that just happened to be heavy enough for metal.”[109] The issue is not only one of shifting definitions, but also a persistent distinction between musical style and audience identification: Ian Christe describes how the band “became the stepping-stone that led huge numbers of hard rock fans into heavy metal perdition.”[110]


            1. Im not sure that counters Matt’s point at all.

              1. It just means we’re splitting hairs. ACDC is heavy metal or hard rock, depending upon who you ask.

        3. If Led Zeppelin and Alice Cooper were heavy metal, then AC/DC was heavy metal.

          1. This is the first time I’ve seen anyone even imply that Alice Cooper was heavy metal. I’m not saying no one’s done it before, but wow.

            I could see an argument for Zeppelin, I suppose, but I doubt even AC-DC would say they were anything other than hard rockers.

            1. If you’re into Metallica and Megadeth, then AC/DC is hard rock. If you’re into the Beatles and the Stones, then AC/DC is heavy metal.

              1. I like Megadeth and the Rolling Stones. And Avenged Sevenfold and Boston.

                I can see an argument that some of the stuff from Highway to Hell through For Those About to Rock was heavy metal, particular at the time it came out. There’s just no fucking way they were even arguably metal before that and anyone who says different it wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Wrong. And none of your attempts at common sense compromise can change that.

                1. You like Boston? Ugh. So much for your opinion on music meaning anything.

                2. And none of your attempts at common sense compromise can change that.

                  You’re like the Justin Amash of Rock ‘n’ Roll.

          2. You are correct. And they weren’t.

        4. You know, I blame Sammy Hagar for this.

    2. For some reason the Pat Boone version comes to mind…

  9. One of the moderates they quoted was an insk
    Urance executive? No conflict of interest there re an opponent of obamacare.

  10. Within Grand Rapids’ powerful business establishment, patience is running low with Amash’s ideological agenda and tactics.

    “Ideology is nice, and all, but it don’t put food on my table, if you know what I mean.”

    1. Deals were not cut, palm were not greased, kick-backs were not kicked… Unacceptable!

  11. “I don’t see him as a collaborator, and I think that’s a huge problem,”


    Evidently not a History major.

  12. The establishment republicans tried this against Ron Paul year after year after year.

  13. I don’t usually give to politicians, but if they try and oust Amash he’ll receive a check(at least a small one), and the RNC will receive an angry letter.

  14. State Sen. Mark C. Jansen, seen as a pragmatic Republican,

    There’s that word again. Maybe they should just replace it with “Machiavellian” and quit the charade.

    1. I guess they use “pragmatic” in the same sense that Tony always uses it: “will rollover for Democrats on command”.

      1. Just like “Compassionate Conservative.”

  15. Another commenter said how these “moderate” Republicans get denounced in the media as corporate shills…except when they’re criticizing conservative Republicans, when suddenly they become pragmatic business-oriented moderates.

    I guess being a pawn of corporate interests is OK after all.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.