The prescription for discord? Discourse.
Former Montana lawmaker Dorothy Bradley and former Republican Gov. Marc Racicot embrace at a rally to stop the dozens of constitutional amendment proposals made in the 2023 legislative sessions. Both were keynote speakers at the Feb. 1, 2023, event. (Photo by Blair Miller, Daily Montanan)
On June 22, at the Ellen Theater in Bozeman, Todd Wilkinson, the editor of Yellowstonian, a publication focused on the environmental issues in the Greater Yellowstone, hosted and moderated a discussion between two old political rivals.
In 1992, Republican Marc Racicot and Dorothy Bradley campaigned all over the state, conducting more than 20 joint town halls, where they debated the issues of the day. Racicot won in a very close race, and went on to become one of the most popular governors in Montana, up until he made a fateful decision concerning the deregulation of utilities, a piece of legislation that had a long-term impact and has led many Montanans to never forgive him.
But it's hard to overlook the fact that Racicot is a man who reflects on these things in a way that is not typical of most politicians, especially from his party. When Racicot endorsed Monica Tranel during the 2022 congressional race, the state Republican party decided to censure him, a particularly confounding decision considering that Racicot was, at one time, the chairman of the Republican National Committee after his term as governor. He also managed George Bush's campaign during the 2004 presidential race.
But Racicot never classified himself as a full-on conservative, and he and Bradley both highlighted the fact that during their campaign against each other, they were able to maintain a strong feeling of respect and civility despite their differences. This was one of many issues they pointed to that are contributing to the current political situation. Another was the influx of money, and Bradley pointed out that the maximum donation during their campaign was $35 and they were meticulous about following that.
But one of the most striking revelations during the evening for me was when someone asked Racicot whether any of the current Republican leadership in Montana ever reaches out to him for advice.
'They don't even return my calls,' Racicot answered.
And although it wasn't exactly a surprise, I still found myself kind of amazed that these people would completely dismiss the years of experience of someone like Racicot. It's not hard to imagine that the same holds true for most of the other former office-holders in our state—people like former governors Brian Schweitzer and Steve Bullock, or former congressman Pat Williams, and especially Jon Tester. It's obviously a product of our current political culture, which values winning over all else, that would produce the kind of arrogance that completely dismisses an entire sector of our population without a thought. But how shortsighted is it to believe that only you and those who think like you have all the answers you need? Or, that asking for advice or feedback is some kind of weakness?
People can say that Donald Trump is to blame, but this started way before he descended that golden escalator, back when Newt Gingrich and his cadre of icy collaborators decided that winning at all costs was way more important than worrying about what is important to the voters. This attitude has slowly poisoned the Republican party to the point where they feel completely justified in disowning one of the people who was considered a shining star.
And the most maddening part about it is how gleefully and smugly they continue down this path. It's not hard to imagine why. Because so far, it's working. Because of Project 2025, they are no longer relying on Trump to drive the train, and it puts him in the perfect position as someone who just has to keep yelling 'All aboard' and blowing his own horn. He doesn't even have to worry about steering.
So where does that leave us?
I think Bradley said it best when she pointed out that we are all responsible for where we are, and that we are also responsible for figuring out what to do next.
'Trump is eventually going away,' she pointed out. 'And it's hard to imagine anyone else in his circle having the same sway over the public. So we have to figure out how to proceed once he's gone, and how to repair the damage he's done.'
The same holds true for our state.
Greg Gianforte is serving his last term, and there's no question that people are becoming disillusioned by the lack of access to our political leaders. Our current office-holders have made it their policy to avoid as much contact with the public as possible, and it's not hard to imagine why. Each time they do that, someone tries to hold them accountable for the many decisions they've made that have done untold damage to the citizens of Montana, with the most outrageous being the (still unexplained) increase in property taxes.
Todd Wilkinson and I are starting a new podcast soon, affiliated with Yellowstonian, and one of our first episodes is going to be a discussion about this conversation between Bradley and Racicot. But as a brief preview, I can tell you that most of the solutions they offered were ones we've heard before, and that we will certainly hear again. We need to continue to speak up, gather, make our voices heard, and of course vote. But it was nice to see people with different views coming together to discuss how we got here. And I suspect we will see more of that.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
New Texas law requires 10 Commandments to be posted in every public school classroom
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas will require all public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments under a new law that will make the state the nation's largest to attempt to impose such a mandate. Gov. Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he signed the bill, which is expected to draw a legal challenge from critics who consider it an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state. A similar law in Louisiana was blocked when a federal appeals court ruled Friday that it was unconstitutional. Arkansas also has a similar law that has been challenged in federal court. The Texas measure easily passed in the Republican-controlled state House and Senate in the legislative session that ended June 2. 'The focus of this bill is to look at what is historically important to our nation educationally and judicially,' Republican state representative Candy Noble, a co-sponsor of the bill, said when it passed the House. Abbott also signed a bill that allows school districts to provide students and staff a daily voluntary period of prayer or time to read a religious text during school hours. The Ten Commandments laws are among efforts, mainly in conservative-led states, to insert religion into public schools. Texas' law requires public schools to post in classrooms a 16-by-20-inch poster or framed copy of a specific English version of the commandments, even though translations and interpretations vary across denominations, faiths and languages and may differ in homes and houses of worship. Supporters say the Ten Commandments are part of the foundation of the United States' judicial and educational systems and should be displayed. Opponents, including some Christian and other faith leaders, say the Ten Commandments and prayer measures infringe on others' religious freedom. A letter signed this year by dozens of Christian and Jewish faith leaders opposing the bill noted that Texas has thousands of students of other faiths who might have no connection to the Ten Commandments. Texas has nearly 6 million students in about 9,100 public schools. In 2005, Abbott, who was state attorney general at the time, successfully argued before the Supreme Court that Texas could keep a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of its Capitol. Louisiana's law has twice been ruled unconstitutional by federal courts, first by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles and then again by a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which also considers cases from Texas. State Attorney General Liz Murrell said she would appeal and pledged to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
In his own words: Trump's Iran strike tests his rhetoric on ending wars
Here's a look at some of Trump's rhetoric before his announcement Saturday about the strikes: 2024 campaign Trump often drew lines of contrasts with his Republican primary opponents. In January 2024, at a New Hampshire rally, he referred to former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who was U.N. ambassador during Trump's first term, as a 'warmonger' whose mentality on foreign policy is, 'Let's kill people all over the place and let's make a lot of money for those people that make the messes.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up During a Jan. 6, 2024, rally before the Iowa caucuses, Trump told supporters that returning him to the White House would allow the country to 'turn the page forever on those foolish, stupid days of never-ending wars. They never ended.' Advertisement Rolling out his foreign policy priorities during that campaign — something Trump's orbit called " Agenda 47 " — he posted a video online in which he talked of how he was 'the only president in generations who didn't start a war.' Advertisement In that video, Trump called himself 'the only president who rejected the catastrophic advice of many of Washington's Generals, bureaucrats, and the so-called diplomats who only know how to get us into conflict, but they don't know how to get us out.' First term In his first term, Trump often referenced his anti-interventionist pledge. During his 2019 State of the Union address, he said, 'As a candidate for president, I loudly pledged a new approach. Great nations do not fight endless wars.' There were frequent clashes with some of his advisers over whether or not the United States should take a more involved stance abroad. That included his hawkish national security adviser John Bolton, with whom Trump had strong disagreements on Iran, Afghanistan and other global challenges. As Turkey launched a military operation into Syria targeting Kurdish forces, Trump in October 2019 posted a series of tweets citing his anti-interventionist stance. 'Turkey has been planning to attack the Kurds for a long time. They have been fighting forever,' Trump posted Oct. 10, 2019, on the platform then known as Twitter. 'We have no soldiers or Military anywhere near the attack area. I am trying to end the ENDLESS WARS.' A week later, he reiterated his position: 'I was elected on getting out of these ridiculous endless wars, where our great Military functions as a policing operation to the benefit of people who don't even like the USA.' 2016 campaign Candidate Trump was vociferous in his disdain for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, calling them both mistakes. 'We made a terrible mistake getting involved there in the first place,' Trump told CNN in October 2015, referencing Afghanistan. Advertisement 'We spent $2 trillion, thousands of lives, we don't even have the oil,' he said of the Iraq War during a March 2016 town hall hosted by the same network. During a primary debate, Trump engaged in a terse exchange with Jeb Bush particularly over U.S. military action in Iraq, launched by President George W. Bush, the Florida governor's brother. 'We should have never been in Iraq,' Trump said in February 2016. 'They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none and they knew that there were none.' What about earlier? Trump's press secretary said Wednesday that the president's beliefs that Iran should not achieve nuclear armament predated his time in politics. And his earlier writings indicate that, while candidate Trump has said he opposed the Iraq War, those sentiments were different before the conflict began. In his 2000 book 'The America We Deserve,' the businessman wrote that he felt a military strike on Iraq might be needed, given the unknown status of that nation's nuclear capabilities. 'I'm no warmonger,' Trump wrote. 'But the fact is, if we decide a strike against Iraq is necessary, it is madness not to carry the mission to its conclusion. When we don't, we have the worst of all worlds: Iraq remains a threat, and now has more incentive than ever to attack us.'
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Some lawmakers in both parties question the legality of Trump's Iran strikes
WASHINGTON — Several members of Congress in both parties Saturday questioned the legality of President Donald Trump's move to launch military strikes on Iran. While Republican leaders and many rank-and-file members stood by Trump's decision to bomb Iran's major nuclear enrichment facilities, at least two GOP lawmakers joined Democrats across the party spectrum in suggesting it was unconstitutional for him to bomb Iran without approval from Congress. "While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional," Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, who usually aligns with Trump, said on X. "I look forward to his remarks tonight." Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said in response to Trump's social media post announcing the strikes: "This is not Constitutional." Massie introduced a bipartisan resolution this week seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran "unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran" passed by Congress. In brief remarks from the White House on Saturday night, Trump defended the strikes but did not mention the basis of his legal authority to launch them without Congress' having given him that power. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., reacted in real time during a speech in Tulsa, Oklahoma, slamming Trump's actions as "grossly unconstitutional." "The only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right," Sanders told the crowd, which broke out in "no more war!" chants. Some Democrats called it an impeachable offense for the president to bomb Iran without approval from Congress. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said Trump's move is "absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." "The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers," she said on X. "He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations." Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., said on social media: "This is not about the merits of Iran's nuclear program. No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense." Casten called on House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to "grow a spine" and protect the war powers reserved for Congress. Johnson said Trump respects the Constitution as he sought to lay the groundwork to defend his decision to act unilaterally. "The President fully respects the Article I power of Congress, and tonight's necessary, limited, and targeted strike follows the history and tradition of similar military actions under presidents of both parties," he said in a statement. Johnson's remarks, along with support for Trump's move offered by Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., indicate that Trump may have sufficient political cover to avoid blowback from the Republican-controlled Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Trump "failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East." But he stopped short of labeling the military action illegal or unconstitutional. House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., was more direct on the legal question. "The power to declare war resides solely with Congress. Donald Trump's unilateral decision to attack Iran is unauthorized and unconstitutional," said Clark, the No. 2 Democrat. "In doing so, the President has exposed our military and diplomatic personnel in the region to the risk of further escalation." Appearing Saturday night on MSNBC, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who co-authored the resolution with Massie, wondered whether the anti-war voters who support Trump would back his move. "This is the first true crack in the MAGA base," he said, noting that Trump's rise in the 2016 primaries was aided by his move to slam President George W. Bush for the Iraq war.
