Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran’s runoff election victory over his primary challenger on Tuesday sure has brought the ugly from the Tea Party. Not only has Chris McDaniel, the Tea Party’s candidate, been taking the loss like a spoiled child, but the entire far-right radio/blogosphere is having fits. Here are the highlights I have come across.
First, the loser himself. “There is something a bit strange, there is something a bit unusual about a Republican primary that’s decided by liberal Democrats.” These are words from McDaniel’s non-concession speech in which he repeatedly accused the Republican Party of losing its conscious. This from a man who’s supporters broke into a courthouse.
Next up, with three hours a day to bloviate, you know you’re going to find some gems from Rush Limbaugh. Liberal detractors have seized on his ill-advised (unadvised?) choice to refer to the black turnout in favor of Cochran as “Uncle Tom voters.” In context, Limbaugh was playing off a routine slur hurled at conservative blacks, but it still doesn’t play well.
Beyond riffing on liberal prejudices, Limbaugh has characterized the support Cochran received from black, most likely Democrat voters in Mississippi as somehow illegitimate. I don’t like open primaries myself, but Limbaugh’s comments had easy racial overtones that were a little uncertain even to me, a longtime listener.
Other radio personalities, such as Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, were quick to dismiss their own influence on elections. Suddenly, they weren’t interested in the elections they were so deeply invested in the day before. Now they just care about “the culture.”
Sarah Palin chimed in, calling Cochran’s aggressive door-to-door get-out-the-vote campaign “shenanigans.” (Incidentally, this flies in the face of claims that Cochran won via a media carpet-bomb campaign.) Again, the overtone is that Cochran had no business courting black voters. Palin also took issue with Cochran campaigning on things he’s done for his state’s benefit, like securing relief following Hurricane Katrina and getting funds for special education. In Palin’s book, that’s running on the Big Government ticket.
Ted Cruz echoed a different theme also heard on talk-radio—that the McDaniel loss is actually a victory. By this reasoning, if you take out the Democrats, then McDaniel won amongst Republicans. This form of analysis is again rife with racial implications. Besides, both candidates knew the rules going in. Only one actively courted the black vote in the runoff.
In addition to these incautious statements, most of the tea-party-sphere has launched into the usual theories about the establishment and the mainstream media that get more conspiratorial sounding each time they are repeated. This can only help to make the GOP look sane in comparison. With the Tea Party to triangulate against as well as the current administration’s incompetence, this looks like good news for the GOP this fall.
"Palin also took issue with Cochran campaigning on things he’s done for his state’s benefit, like securing relief following Hurricane Katrina and getting funds for special education."
ReplyDeleteKatrina relief, apparently Palin needs to take a look at those states post-Katrina. It was disastrous. Here is Gulfport: LINK
The latter, eh, would prefer that kind of stuff to come from the state but in one as poor as Mississippi, its far from the worst thing for a Senator to get federal money for. But I would have to know more about what specifically he got funds for in that area and how they were applied.
Thanks for the article, tryanmax. This has been a bad weekend for the fringe. They've really disgraced themselves... lots of racism, hypocrisy and intense stupidity.
ReplyDeleteHannity, by the way, is accusing Cochran of racism for appealing to blacks. Unbelievable. He's also dug up some flyer someone found which they claim was created by Cochran to scare blacks into voting for him when it obviously wasn't created by a campaign.
Palin spent the weekend continuing to threaten to leave the party. My response is: "Stop being a coward and leave you moron." She won't though because without the GOP, she's completely forgotten.
Talk radio spent the weekend saying that they didn't actually expect to influence anyone because somethingsomething can't hold us responsible for our failures.
In any event, losing in Mississippi is about the most damning loss the fringe can suffer... after McConnell of course.
Kit, I'll admit to not checking specifics before including the bit about special ed, but as a sped parent, I can tell you that most programs are federally mandated, many in typically unfunded fashion. So you can at least look at it as making the Fed pay for what it has required. Either way, though, it's poor politics to openly oppose special education as McDaniel's campaign had.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, the Mississippi runoff is ripe for analysis as the fringe just keeps digging. National Review called it a "two faced victory" because Cochran didn't deliver a single message to all audiences. They also suggest that support from the chamber of commerce now makes that organization suspect.
ReplyDelete"Either way, though, it's poor politics to openly oppose special education as McDaniel's campaign had."
ReplyDeleteAgreed. It puts you in the Ebenezer "kick the orphans" Scrooge category of human being.
tryanmax, I should find it amazing that they would consider the idea of appealing to people outside the base (i.e. blacks) as "cheating," but then, they've exposed their desires for a small "pure" party for a long time now. So I'm not surprised.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the Chamber of Commerce, they've become the biggest weapon against the fringe in terms of financing.
One of the more interesting things I saw this weekend was talk radio trying to simultaneously claim that they were driving these elections toward the fringe and were on the verge of some great victory for the fringe, while at the same time trying to disclaim any responsibility for the defeat of guys like McDaniel... apparently, they only get involved with victories. You really have to be an idiot to believe anything they tell you at this point.
I think Rush's shot a blacks is harmless. Stupid, but its a game conservatives and liberals (of all colors) love to play with blacks who vote for the other side.
ReplyDeleteIt does reinforce my belief that the Fluke thing (turning a person who gave a speech I doubt five people in the room remembered into a major electoral asset for the other side) taught the talk radio crowd nothing. Those who don't learn from history...
I must admit, I have successfully avoided keeping on top of this one. The radical wings of both parties have, in my opinion, always been over the top, but the changes in communications media (cable, political talk radio, and the internet makes those voices seem particularly loud, and gives plenty of "ammo" to the other side.
ReplyDeleteThat said, as I have mentioned before, I think primaries should only permit registered party members to participate. You cannot vote in a primary unless you have maintained a legal residence, and have registered within 30 days. The only election law should be that you cannot participate in any primary as an independent, and you can only vote in one primary. My rationale is that a primary is not an actual election for office, merely which candidate will be put on the ballot as a candidate from a political party. There is no inate right to vote in a primary
Jed, I would agree about closing primaries, but keep three things in mind. First, if these guys can't win in Mississippi, then forget them. They should have won this by 30% no matter who helped Cochran.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, they weren't screaming so loudly about outside voters when the Democrats helped these genuine 'merikans unseat Eric Cantor.
Third, it really doesn't help the party's image to have these bozos running around acting offended that a Republican would dare to try to win over blacks. That's pretty strong confirmation to the public of leftists claims about the party being racist.
Anthony, I think it does hurt. How do you welcome blacks into the party when all these "important" people like Rush and Palin are running around basically screaming bloody murder because a Republican dared to appeal to blacks? That sends a very clear signal that blacks are not wanted.
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court had ruled for Hobby Lobby. And like that, the liberal feminist hope for Obamacare goes down in flames.
ReplyDeleteI can finally say that I think the Tea Party movement has finally moved onto the Occupy territory of fringe crazy. My only fear is that they will form a temporary Perot-esque third party for 2016.
ReplyDeleteSCOTUS has ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby. But the ruling is limited to closely held corporations not large publicly traded ones. According to SCOTUSBlog.
ReplyDeleteThey have also dealt a blow to union by ruling that public sector unions cannot compell non-union members to pay dues.
A good weekend at the Supreme Court, if I do say so myself!
Jed, I feel the same way you do about open primaries. But as it relates to what happened in this runoff, both sides knew the rules going in. To claim something as unfair that was clearly within bounds is just whining.
ReplyDeleteAnthony, I think Rush's statement reinforces a meme that Democrats push. However, in the changing political climate, you may be right that it's harmless to the GOP, and it may even be helpful. For years, Dems have held Republicans responsible for the words of talk radio and the GOP hasn't pushed back. Now they are in a big, obvious way, which means that trick won't work anymore. Now if the Republicans can just hold the Dems responsible for what's said on MSNBC...
ReplyDeleteAnother blow to the President/Professor Constitution and a win for conscientious objectors of all persuasions. Liberals will one thank Hobby Lobby.
ReplyDeleteBev, Obama seems to know the constitution about as well as my dog.
ReplyDeleteAgreed on the Tea Party. They have really gone off the deep end. In terms of forming a third party, I actually think that would be helpful as it would separate friend from foe and make it easy for the Republicans to redirect themselves back toward conservatism.
I'm waiting until the SCOTUSBlog's "Plain English" summary of the Hobby Lobby and Union rulings.
ReplyDeleteSo now the MSM-left is trying to rally around a 63 page "blistering" attack Ginsberg wrote on the majority opinion in Hobby Lobby. Yawn. It's still a loser. Doesn't matter how much you like it... has zero legal effect.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of losers, McDaniels is determine to invalidate the vote by "casting enough doubt on it" that they need to do it again. It's funny how much reel 'merikanism begins to look like liberalism when things go wrong.
So is McDaniel going to request a recount? By hand?
ReplyDelete;-)
A McDaniel aide is blaming the Mayfield suicide on the Thad Cochran campaign.
ReplyDeleteLINK
The aide, Keith Plunkett, tweeted:
"A good man is gone today [because] of a campaign to destroy lives"
"To all ‘so called’ Republican leaders who joined lockstep: I WILL NOT REST!"
He deleted the second tweet after people accused him of trying to exploit a tragedy for political gain.
What I find interesting about the whole thing is McDaniel's response. He has confirmed what the voters suspected: he is not fit to govern.
ReplyDeleteKoshcat,
ReplyDeleteAgreed. His response has been the exact opposite of "class" and "grace".
Koshcat and Kit, Let me point this out. McDaniel's supporters don't actually want someone who is fit to govern. They want someone who will act as a wrecking ball and break the system. So what he's doing now fits perfectly with what they were hoping for.
ReplyDeleteAlso, interestingly, Obama is looking for money and a legal change to let him deport all those kids. It doesn't surprise me because the optics on this are bad for the Democrats.
ReplyDelete"They want someone who will act as a wrecking ball and break the system."
ReplyDeleteOh... yeah... right. (Face palm)
How exactly are the optics bad for Obama on the immigrant kids thing?
Kit, several ways...
ReplyDelete1. The public wants the issue solved. This goes in the wrong direction.
2. While the public is willing to create a path to citizenship, they don't love the idea (necessary evil) and they see this as an affront to their good natures. This is an abuse to something they already feel has been forced upon them.
3. This exposes our border as nowhere near safe. Bad timing given Iraq.
4. The public has to decide if they trust the Democrats enough to trade a border fix for citizenship. If Obama gives up now and lets in another 50k kids, that will make it very hard for the public to believe Obama is serious about the border. Basically, he needs to deport them to keep the public's trust.
Hillary jumped on this too and said they all need to be deported. I think the Democrats (other than Pelosi) see the danger to themselves.
Pelosi? She's been saying they should be greeted with open arms, hasn't she?
ReplyDeleteYes, she's been out there making a fool of herself. But like I said, she's standing alone. The rest are starting to back deportation because they see the danger.
ReplyDeleteIronically, both the far left and far rights are unwilling too help Obama deport them. The left opposes deportation and the right opposes anything Obama wants. So we'll see how this goes.
What is the Far Right's logic for opposing the deportations?
ReplyDeleteSo far, what I've read can be summed up by this near quote from Congressman Goodlatte: "Obama wants a blank check and I ain't given him no blank check."
ReplyDeleteThe left can be summarized with: "Think about the children!"
So the choice between a Rep and Dem when it comes to "reaching out to black voters" is to pander and claim that all the bennies will be taken away if the "Tea Party" guy wins? Now that's a heckuva stratgery.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you just state that in order to get black voters you must lump them all together as on welfare, greedy and needing their massa's help in order to survive? And the "Tea Party" guy opposes this and is a "racist."
Cochran expected to win easily in the primary and when he didn't and had to have a runoff, then he then decided to reach out to black voters by claiming the above. He will place black voters back where he found them now that he's won. I believe that's the issue the "Tea Partiers" have a problem with. The same problem they have with Dems. Treating black voters as an issue when they need their votes and ignoring them otherwise.
I'm surprised McDaniel even made it this far, what with the "shenanigans" his campaign ran on.
As far as this being a definitive race to base the demise of the "radical Tea Party" candidates on, it's just another race that shows the difference between Reps who want conservative government (follow the law) and Reps who want the status quo (whatever it takes) as long as they benefit from it.
And to lump them all derisively as "reel merikkans" who are all racist and blindly follow Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh is insulting to those who are sick and tired of higher taxes and trillion dollar deficits (the real reason the Tea Party exists by the way). It appears the commenters on this site are happy to pat each other on the back (figuratively speaking) and agree on how enlightened you each are, rather than appreciate the vast discontent that exists in this country, by quite a few Americans of all backgrounds, with legitimate disagreements on what they see occurring by both parties.
Tell me, why is it a "Far Right" craziness to think that Obama is just mouthing off when he claims he wants to deport these illegal immigrants?
Dissenter, I have a few points to respond with.
ReplyDeleteFirst, you're deflecting the crux of the article, which is that the Tea Party got real ugly after McDaniel lost, throwing tantrums, spinning conspiracy theories, claiming unfair tactics when the rules were known and--most importantly--denigrating the black vote regardless what party it came from, which is political idiocy. They've basically confirmed everyone's worst suspicions about them as being a racist, purist, small tent party.
Second, everything the Tea Party is saying about pandering to black voters is actually viewed in reverse by the general electorate. They see McDaniels dismissing black voters as greedy welfare plantation negroes. (see above) Further, the TP is playing both sides by saying Cochran will shrug off blacks later when they also criticize his record as "bringing home the bacon" to blacks in the past.
Third, blacks may get treated as political pawns by the Dems, but the Tea Party is flat out telling blacks they don't want 'em or need 'em. That's no way to get people to listen to your fiscal message because you've already framed it as finance for whitey.
Fourth, you've put a lot of words in my mouth. I've never called this race the definitive anything. But it does contribute to a larger pattern of Tea Party flame-outs followed by childish tantrums and tirades about practically everything except taxes and deficits. So don't tell me that's the real reason for the Tea Party. It may be where it started, but that ship sailed a long time ago and you missed the boarding call.
As an aside, I don't know much firsthand about Cochran, but he has reasonably high marks from several report card issuing conservative groups. The TP dismisses all of this, claiming themselves the arbiters of purity. Conversely, the NAACP gives him a flat zero despite a record of supporting black causes. Who does the TP look more like?
And finally, far from back-patting, you're the one who has failed to appreciate how discontent WE are with the far right sabotaging at every turn the only party with a prayer of ending the century of damage the Democrats have inflicted upon our political system, not to mention the country.
Dissenter, on the deportations, I don't see anyone here who said Obama was doing anything other than mouthing off. He's never publicly backed deportations before, so clearly this is some kind of political bluff. And both sides are calling it, it looks like. However, you are so keen for an argument you'll take on folks who agree with you.
ReplyDeleteI'm disgusted by both candidates to be honest but I think it's a stretch to accuse McDaniel of what three of his followers did, unless there's evidence he knew and approved of it.
ReplyDeleteAs for Cochran I don't think democrats voted for him because of his obvious, democrat-like pandering to them, but because he would be easier to beat in the general election
I'm also taking a wait and see attitude about alleged fraud in the runoff. If those allegations prove true then I will have a slightly higher opinion of McDaniels but only slightly.
ReplyDeleteI think we also need some new definitions. Clearly, their are different sects who claim the mantle of Tea Party and I don't believe they all are fringers.
ReplyDeleteSome no doubt are, but I do think it's dismissive to lump them all together.
There's still quite a few Tea Partiers who have stuck with the original purpose and want fiscal sanity first and foremost.
tryanmax, I doubt your friend is coming back, but let me add a couple points.
ReplyDelete1. I have to laugh at the idea that I invented the "reel 'merikan" slur. That was created by the fringers themselves, who call themselves the only "real"or "genuine" Americans as a way to make themselves sound superior to everyone else and to dismiss everyone else as not worthy of being listened too. I'm just mocking the delusion behind that name.
2. Clone Dissenter's views of how this race went down are self-serving and false, but typical of the fringe hive mind. Just like liberals, the fringe distorts reality over and over to avoid facing truths they don't like. That how they can claim Tea Party candidates aren't really Tea Party candidates when they lose, how they can ignore brutal losses, etc. Declaring that McDaniels did as good as can be expected in deeply Tea Party Mississippi is delusional. This should have been their easiest race. This should have been a blow out. And if they can't win here, then they aren't relevant anywhere.
3. Finally, note how he keeps going back to the original purpose of the Tea Party. I see this a lot when you start arguing with them. "Oh, so you oppose us and our goal of fiscal sanity?!" No. I would support you if that was what you cared about... but you don't. I opposed your desire for fiscal anarchy, purposelessly shutting down the government, your mindless opposition to all things, your forays into the lunatic land fighting common core and a half dozen other conspiracy theories, and your never-ending war against the GOP. It's funny how those things get ignored when they run up the victim flag.
Ben, I see no reason why I should bother sorting out the few sane Tea Party people from the crazies. They didn't purge themselves of the crazies. They let the crazies take over. At this point, if they want to be heard, the onus is on them to leave crazytown and to start acting like mature, responsible adults again. We have many ex-Tea Party people here, whose goals haven't changed, but who recognize how warped the Tea Party has become.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Democrats voting for Cochran, I don't really care. But I think it's hypocritical that the Tea Party people would embrace Democrats when they helped bring down Cantor, but now act like this is cheating. It's either/or in my book.
In terms of the three guys, I don't blame McDaniels for that, except that (1) his own people keep dredging it up -- one of his people stunningly blamed the suicide on Cochran this week, and (2) people like Hannity seem content to blame every rumor he is mongering on some evil secret plan by Cochran.
Andrew, how is every local Tea Party organization supposed to stop takeovers of other Tea Party organizations by people who may agree withlowering taxes and limiting govt. but who also have their own agendas?
ReplyDeleteI've read and heard plentyof Tea Partiers warning that many of these agendas, mostly populist in nature hurts the Tea Party and the original intent of it. Sadly, Tea Party is now a saturated phrase that has been poisoned by fringers on the right and the left.
It's like blaming mainstream Christian churches for what the Westboro idiots have done.
As for McDaniel's people going off the rails I concur. But I think Cochranes many race-baiting ads are even worse for blaming McDaniels and the Tea Party of racism
It sounded exactly like what Pelosi or Reid has said.
I have heard no Tea Parties of any stripe, even the fringers condoning racism nor have I heard McDaniels making any racist comments.
This not only hurts Tea Parties but it hurts conservatism by giving credence to the lie that conservatives are racist and wanna take everything away from poor minorities.
Again, I wanna be clear I dislike McDaniels but I now loathe Cochrane for what he has done.
It would've been nice if theyboth juststuck to the issues and let the voters decide.
Be thatas it may, if I were in Miss. I would still vote for Cochrane only because it's imperative that the GOP wins the Senate.
Providing that the allegations of fraud levelled at Cochrane aren't proven, that is.
Unfortunately, because of Cochrane's racebaiting I will be surprised if he does win but I still hope he does despite being the reprehensible person he has turned out to be.
PS, I don't think Cochrane has any evil secret plan, I think he only used the race baiting ads because power means more to him than telling the truth, and he obviously has no qualms about hurting his own party to hold on to that power.
ReplyDeleteThen again, maybe he really believes that fiscal sanity and limiting a bloated govt. is racist. Certainly many leftists believe that, but it's not true.
It would be akin to me accusing the left of racism because they wanna take more of our liberties away for the "greater good," and make govt. even bigger so they can take care of us.
It's a bad idea but it ain't racist.
Also, to be fair, McDaniels has bad ideas too, but he isn't a racist based on anything I have seen or heard.
ReplyDeleteTryanmax, don't disagree with most of your points. However, my disagreements come from the generalization of "Tea Partiers." Where does someone sign up to be a member of this party? Can we register as a member of the Tea Party? Just because a Palin or Limbaugh support you, does not mean you are a member of the Tea Party. What I find is most TP'ers are small r Repubs or right leaning Libertarians. They are mainly Repubs running as Repubs, and are labelled as TP'ers if they oppose the status quo in the R party.
ReplyDeleteSo to lump everything bad that happens in any election as being from the TP candidate is ridiculous. I am not a TP'er. I think some of the candidates that have appropriated the TP label and run have been loons. Just as some R and D candidates are loons.
My point is....Who are the TP'ers? The label has been successfully co-opted by many that now the default position of the TP is racist, crazy shut the gov't down lunatics. How does one get rid of a label that they never wanted? Is Palin or Limbaugh the head of the Tea Party? I think a lot of people that are sick and disgusted by both R's and D's status quo is labelled a TP'er. The TP is a frame of mind...a mind-set. Someone disgusted by politics, lying politicians and the ever growing government. They can be R's, D's or I's. But they can't be a TP. There is no Tea Party. Only those who want a scapegoat for their version of government.
So to label everyone who disagrees with the status quo a TP'er is a cheap out.
Where does one go to get their reputation back? Especially if that reputation was crafted by those who disagree.
I say take each race as it comes. If a Cantor loses that is not evidence of a TP win. He lost to an R. If a McDaniel loses in MS, that is not evidence of a TP loss. He lost as an R to an R. And son on across the country. I see these folks as people who want to change the status quo. Perhaps it's too big, too entrenched to change. At least some are trying to fight the system from within the system. Just don't label them all as TP'ers. It's too easy a way out to slur them as racist.
Lone Dissenter, I think I now see where the problem with the Tea Party lies.
ReplyDeleteEvery political movement, the Republican and Democrat parties included, claims to be disgusted with the status quo. (Dems have it to a science, they are routinely disgusted with their own legacy.) If the Tea Party is defined only as being against the status quo, then they really have no ground under their feet and it's no wonder they were taken over by every populist, malcontent power-grabber who wandered into their midst. It also kinda explains how TP got ironically saddled with being a pro-status quo movement. If you don't stand for something, you'll not only fall for anything, you'll get painted with everything, too.
How does one get one's reputation back? The short answer is, don't lose it in the first place. One of the problems with being an unstructured movement is there is no way to keep the crazies out or protect a reputation. But for TP, it wasn't just that. In the early days, TP was so eager to pick up momentum that it embraced every crazy that donned a tri-corn hat and quoted a founding father. Worse, the radio cheerleaders, who were in something of a position to foster a good reputation for TP, instead chased ratings and backed the biggest firebrands they could find. Thus a movement is defined.
So you can disagree all you want with my generalizations about TP, but I'll continue to generalize. Even if there is no sign-up sheet, they are recognized as a group who share certain ideals and objectives. The onus is now on those who no longer share them to get out. And lest we forget, there is no high barrier to signing up as R or D.
Let me also add that you certainly don't repair a reputation by saying things that sound racist or otherwise inflammatory and throwing tantrums when you lose a race.
My advice, if anyone wants to start a fiscal reform movement, boring as it sounds, they should call themselves fiscal reformers. Then it's in the name and it makes it really hard to co-opt. I guarantee you, most people outside the movement never know that T.E.A. stood for Taxed Enough Already. (Which sounds far too much like "The Rent Is Too Damn High" anyway.) Think about it, the most successful political movements in this country have always just called themselves what they are:the abolitionists, the prohibitionists, the suffragists, the civil rights movement. It's an easy formula that TP failed to follow.
Ben, Sorry for the delay, it's been a rough couple days.
ReplyDeleteThe Westboro analogy you give isn't accurate. That's the problem. A better analogy might be the communists. Yes, there are good communists, but you wouldn't know it from their leaders. That's the same thing here. A party exists through the words and deeds of its prominent members and representatives. The Tea Party never appointed official spokesmen, so that left a vacuum into which the likes of all of lunatic talk radio and every right-wing opportunist, e.g. Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz and Tea Party Express, etc., have crept. These people claim to speak for the TP, they push various issues as TP issues, they endorse for the TP, TP voters seem to back their endorsements in the primaries, and TP people come out of the woodwork to defend these lunatics when they get called out for being hateful morons.
In those circumstances, it's wishful thinking to ask people to assume that the TP is something other than what it appears to be and to ask people to separate "the Tea Party" from that which presents itself as the Tea Party. In fact, it rings a lot like communists saying "communism has never been tried before!"
And the problem is that that which presents itself as the Tea Party is a bunch of hateful lunatics whose sole purpose in existing these days is to destroy the GOP in the name of some phantom majority that won't show itself in any way. In fact, as poll after poll and election after election show strong repudiations of the what the TP thinks the public secretly stands for, the TP has refused to accept reality and has instead proclaimed that there is some vast center-wing conspiracy to keep us all from knowing the truth and to intimidate average people into acting against their own beliefs. That's called paranoia.
To be clear, I know there are some good TP people left, but they are riding a political corpse that has been chewed to the bone by their leaders.