I must admit, that on or around the end of November, it seemed pretty clear that Rick Snyder was either NOT going to run, or he would see a challenge from a more conservative participant. (we have our suspicions of whom it might have been)  What seemed so clear to us, must have been a wake up call for Rick Snyder. Perhaps a desire for continued power and influence, coupled with a tweaked response to the labor led initiatives brought about his conversion from ambivalent onlooker in the Right-To-Work debate, to active participant? Maybe a simple year's end epiphany? Either way, he did the right thing.

It was enough for many conservative activists.

Willing to tolerate the picking of winners his type of governance breeds, there was no question that some of us lessened our own questioning rhetoric.  Not completely dissatisfied with a change in Michigan's tax policy, the big win for working folks kept some of the governor's conservative detractors at bay and pacified. Even the obsession for a DRIC bridge, and a failed state run health care exchange idea didn't ruin the apparent RTW Honeymoon.  All seemed to be going very well. So much so, that any thought of a challenge from a Republican became not only remote, but out of the question.

Then more little clues where we are going, began to appear.

A123 systems taxpayer subsidized sale of technology to the Chinese did not elicit the condemnation for taxpayer abuse that it was, LG Chem as well, remains apparently off of the Governor's radar.  Though both of these failures in public policy come from an MEDC beginning, its clear that the MEDC will likely never face any scorn from the man who invented it.  Not because Republicans support crony capitalism, but because Republicans will follow Rick Snyder by allowing him to continue carrying the flag for Republicans, and HE supports crony capitalism.

Can anyone honestly argue that if Rick Snyder had a D next to his name, Republicans would tolerate the serious departures from principle without offering SOME scathing commentary?

Allow me to offer a few sample quotes of what we would see regularly by the Republican Chair Bobby Schostak and other Republican leadership under such a circumstance:

• On the battery company failures - "Rick Snyder demonstrates what is wrong with Democrats and the failure to allow free markets determine their own viability.  We call upon the Michigan Democrat party to get control of its governor and remind him how the money spent picking winners could have been better used rebuilding our roads and critical infrastructure".
  
• On the Health Care exchanges - "The Michigan Republican Party stands in opposition to any implementation of Obamacare in our state.  We have consistently taken a position against socializing of medicine because of the damage it will ultimately cause to such a critical part of our economy, and the imposition on our liberties it requires for implementation.  Democrats like Governor Rick Snyder repeatedly assume that a bigger government is better, while Republicans recognize that a government big enough to give you everything, is also big enough to take it all away.   We hold that the implementation of the ACA in Michigan reflect an unsustainable model, and is backed up by a federal bureaucracy that has yet to live up to the social promises made.
  
• On Higher Gas taxes - "Why is it that Democrats like Governor Rick Snyder always go for higher taxes before looking at the money being wasted or inappropriately misdirected? We call upon the Democrats and their flag bearer to consider the additional sales tax and gasoline taxes off limits until all of the additional costs buried into the gasoline revenue formula are directed solely to the roads and re-aligned with Public Act 51 of 1951."
  
• On SB59 (gun zones) - "The Governor held true to his partisan position alongside other Democrats in his rejection of defensive options for those who are now employed in the current gun-free zones; our schools. Like his fellow Democrats, Rick Snyder is wrong in opposing the right of self defense in our schools."
  
• On Transparency - "The key to responsive and responsible governance requires transparency and openness.  The failure of Governor Rick Snyder to sign HB4116 which passed the Michigan House and Senate unanimously, speaks volumes for the hidden agendas that Democrats like Rick Snyder entertain.  Fortunately however, House speaker Jase Bolger has invoked unanimous procedure overturning his veto.

Is it that our party's objections become nullified as the messenger of the objectionable is a Republican? How is it possible to have so many clearly identifiable issues that run in conflict with Republican principles associated with the sitting governor, and not have him challenged from within?  How can we speak to such principles and promote conservatism, when our own standard bearer through his actions refutes them?  Doesn't it then clearly say that we are for partisanship over principle in our policy?

Adding to this, Rick Snyder was politically absent in the 2012 general election process; showing up only for his own pet issues (Yes on 1, no on the rest) and bus tour stops, searching for support throughout the state for his position on certain ballot issues.  He generally ignored our statewide candidates when they could have used a little push.  Its likely he only came home on the RTW issue as a desire to serve another term.

So I wonder.  Is that all it takes?

Where would our fights concentrate if the label that this governor chose was instead that of the jackass?  What measure of tolerance might we see at that point, from those who proudly proclaim themselves to be smaller-government Republicans?  Would there be more gridlock?  Would the federal takeover of our most personal decision making be accepted through the Republican dominated legislature if a Democrat occupied the executive branch?

In the end the nagging question remains. Are our representatives in the legislature better, or worse off, with Rick Snyder in the executive office as a Republican?