Tag: integrity argument

"Oh, I am heartily tired of hearing about what Lee is going to do.  Some of you always seem to think he is suddenly going to turn a double somersault, and land in our rear and on both of our flanks at the same time.  Go back to your command, and try to think what we are going to do ourselves, instead of what Lee is going to do." - Lt.Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, to an unnamed Union field commander, on the evening of May 6th, 1864, during the Battle of the Wilderness.

In sports, a key to keeping one's opponent off the scoreboard is to keep their defense off the field (or to significantly disrupt their offensive rhythm).  Matt Stafford, Calvin Johnson, and Reggie Bush can't do the Lions much good if they can't get off the sidelines; nor can Miguel Cabrera and Prince Fielder do the Tigers much good if they can't get into the batter's box; nor can Henrik Zetterberg and Pavel Datsyuk do the Red Wings much good if they can't inside the opponent's blue line.

Similarly, in war, both strategic and tactical success is often determined by whichever side can maintain the initiative, denying the enemy forces the operational latitude to dictate the time, location, and conditions of any engagement more significant than an isolated skirmish.  Doing so keeps the enemy reactive, instead of proactive, and denies them the opportunity to accomplish their objectives, while allowing friendly forces to achieve theirs.

In regard to maintaining the initiative, politics is no different from either sports or war.  Keep the opposition responding to your actions, or keep them just disorganized enough that they can't do anything productive, and the next thing they know, the election's been won before a single vote gets tabulated.

Me?  I think the truth is somewhere in the middle of all of that.  I also think that these various characterizations dance around an interesting finding of the iCaucus Michigan survey, but which wasn't referred to in the press release in a way that would draw attention, and which by itself explains why a top-down approach to Michigan Republican Party unity is never going to work.

Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself.
Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.

Solomon's words of wisdom here have been quite helpful this past week and a half, when I've had the sense to heed them.  Further relevant advice comes from my dad (a Mustang pilot during WW2) and one of my elementary school teachers (a Mitchell navigator during WW2):  If you're not drawing fire, then you're not over your target.

Judging by some of the flak I've been catching since Labor Day, I'd say I've discovered a target the value of which neither the blueblooded old guard party elites nor the Snyder-Calley "nerd herd" want as public knowledge.

Truthfully, I am not sure if it has ever happened.  In 2014 it would likely succeed, according to polling by iCaucus that was completed on Friday and finalized this weekend. The scientific polling was done over a week targeting a specific group that will decide who is the GOP flag bearer going forward; active, educated and engaged republican delegates.

As a foreshadowing through early results had revealed, there is little question of where folks are at this point in time, and on the eve of Snyder signing Obamacare capitulation into law in Michigan.  The polling shows Rick Snyder in disfavor with delegates, and unwelcome to nearly half. Less than 40% would NOT like to see a primary challenge.

Not surprisingly to this writer, the results are not as clear with Lt Governor Brian Calley, who has results that are within the margin of error.  Outside of the polling there is a sense that many conservatives still find the problem to be with the governor himself, and Calley to be more incidental and possibly holding the governor to more conservative positions than he would be otherwise.

Nevertheless, I was kinda hoping that it'd be more than 48 hours before someone went shooting their mouth off to the press.  (62 days or so sounded like a really good number.)  Apparently, I shouldn't underestimate some people's ability to attract reporters.

Just in case the bluebloods weren't paying attention, the August 2010 State Convention, the May 2012 State Convention, and the February 2013 State Convention sent a pretty consistent message that the rank and file are beyond fed up with party leadership (both internal and publicly elected) behaving like their priority is staying in power rather than in delivering results consistent with the party platform.  However, what came out of the State Committee (specifically, the Policy Committee) over the weekend didn't do anything to advance a détente.  Realistically, the net result may have been to provide the liberty-minded network with a primary target that heretofore wasn't even on the radar.

It would appear, however, that the GoverNerd never learned the same lessons.  If you can tolerate listening to all of the logical fallacies and factual misrepresentations, the money quotes start at about 5:01, 11:17, 21:47, 22:24, and 23:19.