Hubris

There’s a song I love which I’ve posted a few times, like here, “It’s Not Where You Start, It’s Where You Finish,” from the musical Seesaw.  And while it’s a wonderful sentiment, and pretty close to spot on most of the time, there are times when “where you start” sets the table and explains what your intentions are.

And the Republican Party has apparently chosen to join that club bigtime.  I thought about holding off writing this article for a while until more examples crop up, which they undoubtedly will, but since this is about where they start, I decided that it’s just to jump in at the starting gate, and so have picked three prime examples.

For some reason, Republicans like to squeak in with a narrow victory and think it gives them a “mandate.”  George W. Bush sneaked in for his second term, beating John Kerry with 50.7% of the votes and winning the Electoral College by just 286-251 – and famously said “I've earned capital in this election, and I'm going to spend it.”  It didn’t work out well for him – he left office with a 34% approval.

This past election, Republicans did win back the House – but they were expecting a “Red Wave” and winning 60-70 seats.  Instead, they barely won a majority and have such a small margin that they can only afford to lose four votes out of 435.  And they not only didn’t win control of the Senate, they lost a seat.  Yet not only do House Republicans seem to be acting like they won a mandate and “earned capital,” but so too do Republicans outside of Washington.

It starts with House Republicans, who for no sane reason known to Man, stunningly passed as one of their very first official pieces of business, two anti-abortion bills.  Passing one would have been enough to question their sanity, but…two?  Clearly, of course, this was just to appease their base – after all, they know it won't pass the Senate and will go nowhere.  It probably won’t even get brought up for a vote in the Senate.  So, of course, we get that.  The thing is, what they also know – for absolute certain – is that the public hated the GOP anti-abortion stance SO MUCH that it, perhaps more than any single issue, helped crush the Republican Party in the Mid-terms.  Even before the Mid-terms, Republicans had an anti-abortion state law proposal on the ballot in a special election for Red state Kansas – and it lost, badly.  Yet here are House Republicans, overflowing with hubris, passing two anti-abortion bills in one of the first acts to identify who they are and say, “Here, World!  Take a look at us!  This is what we stand for!  Bring it on!”  As the expression goes, be careful what you with for, you might get it.  If Republicans think that women (sorry, I mean, “the womenfolk”) aren’t going to notice this or will notice, but totally forget it, yipes, the GOP was not paying attention.

As I said, though, this hubris was not limited to Republicans in Washington.  No, no, Missouri Republicans tried their best to top that.  They didn’t – it’s pretty hard to top abortion when a political party wants to mess up women’s lives – but they did a great job coming close on pure, meaningless, small-minded, unnecessary stupidity.

That’s because the Missouri state legislature passed a ban on women (sorry, I mean, “the womenfolk”)  wearing clothes on the House floor that exposes their bare arms.  (Apparently women’s arms are okay in the Missouri Senate, since they didn’t pass the same rule.)  Democrat Pete Merideth ridiculed Republicans for even bring this up as a topic of discussion, let alone passing it.  He noted how the Republican caucus “that lost their minds over the suggestion that they should wear masks during a pandemic to respect the safety of others is now spending its time focusing on the fine details of what women have to wear (and specifically how many layers must cover their arms) to show respect in this chamber.”

The new rule says, “Proper attire for women shall be business attire, including jackets worn with dresses, skirts, or slacks, and dress shoes or boots. For the purposes of this rule, ‘jacket’ shall include blazers, cardigans, and knit blazers.”  No word on what colors are appropriate depending on the season, and how the legislature staff should respond if any of the elected female representatives get the vapors

What’s inexplicable is Republicans thinking this rule not only was actually needed, but that it wouldn’t offend well-over half the electorate and make the GOP look Neanderthal.  Ostensibly, the reason given for the new rule is that there is a current rule for what men must wear on the Missouri House floor (starting with a coat and tie), and Republicans wanted to balance matters. But the thing is, there already is a rule for women, and it was perfectly clear -- basically it said, "dress professionally."  Which one would think is enough.  It's that they're adding, "Cover your arms, ladies" that's make their level of swaggering look pathetic.  What I would love is for women to come on the House floor in a cardigan – without sleeves.

But the hubris winner in the “No, seriously, what are you thinking???” Category among this new crop of Republicans has to go to newly-elected Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders in Arkansas.

In one of her first acts as Arkansas governor, when the state is looking to its leader for the direction of her agenda, on what she believes is most important for dealing with the economy, education, health, the environment and jobs, Sarah Huckabee Sanders decided to play her hubris card and actually ban the use of the word "Latinx" from government use. Latinx!  Banned.  Putting aside that beyond being utterly unnecessary, this action has the slight tinge of racist fascism by determining how women (sorry, I mean “the womenfolk”) of a minority culture must be identified by the state (which, for all I know, was the whole selling point to Ms. Sanders).  

By the way, what might leap out the most is, given that this is Arkansas, I can't imagine the word "Latinx" comes up much in their state government.  Or…well, almost anywhere throughout the state.  Female Hispanic population in Arkansas is a whopping 4%.  (For the rest of the country, it’s four times greater, about 15%.)  So, yes, without question, the “Latinx” name problem is clearly a significant, first-issue matter to sign when taking office.  So, let’s define this minority group for them in Arkansas.

So, yes, this is who today’s Republican Party is.  Loaded with hubris, thinking they’ve earned a mandate, sure they’re on the path to righteousness with the country firmly behind them, making their first actions that they want you to know will define who they are, and what they stand for, mind-numblingly small, petty and hurtful.

And notably, all of them demeaning to women.

Sorry, I mean, “the womenfolk.”

These are all the sort of little, unnecessary things that, while trying to appeal to their base, will infuriate the rest of the country and start to shift attitudes against the GOP.  Not a lot, but enough were 1-2 points because significant.  And subtle enough that Republicans might not see it happening.  And we haven’t even gotten to the Big Things that Republicans have said they’ll dive into – like impeachment of Joe Biden and Anthony Blinken, investigations of Merrick Garland and Dr. Anthon Fauci, hearings on the FBI and CIA – and crashing the world economy by not raising the debt ceiling.

The stupid, mindless, petty little things are just the opening gambit.  It’s not where you finish, it’s where you start.