Yesterday, many states held primary elections where candidates within political parties competed for whose name would appear on the ballot this coming November. One of the states holding such elections was Kentucky, where incumbent Thomas Massie has served since 2012. Massie belongs to the libertarian-leaning wing of the Republican party, meaning he advocates for limited government power, budget restraint, non-interventionist foreign policy, and strict construction of the Constitution.
When I was becoming aware of politics in the 1990s, and Bill Clinton was President, this was essentially the mainstream Republican platform, or at least the rhetorical position they took. However, between the excesses of the Global War on Terror starting with George W. Bush and the insanity of Donald Trump, it became quite obvious that "limited government" was only a slogan to most in the party leadership. Outliers like Massie now, or Ron Paul in the past, were merely tolerated despite actions which the party supposedly celebrated.
Trump and Massie had a contentious relationship through the former's first term, although that seemed to have smoothed over with Massie standing up for Trump against some of the more outrageous accusations made by the Democrats. Trump endorsed Massie in 2022, and Massie endorsed Trump in 2024.
That swiftly collapsed.
Massie took Trump's campaign promise of Epstein file transparency and pushed it through, despite sudden disinterest and opposition from Trump and his crowd after inauguration day.
He dared oppose the "Big Beautiful Bill" when the rest of the party set aside fiscal conservatism.
He sought a Congressional war resolution on Iran when the party decided to ignore the clear Constitutional mandate for Congress to declare war instead of the President.
The war party, AIPAC, and arguably the Epstein lobby, responded by pouring money into support for his opponent. This was the most expensive U.S. House primary ever, with more than $32 million reportedly spent on ads by various political action committees (PACs), all for a small Kentucky district with one representative who didn't toe the party line. Fox News, AIPAC, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Trump himself all lined up to back upstart Ed Gallrein, a man who didn't even show up for a single public debate and avoided serious media interviews.
So, what does this all mean? Do we blame the Baby Boomer Fox News Republicans? Young folks who didn't vote hard enough this time? Israel? the Military-Industrial Complex? The media?
No.
The root problem is not who holds the office. I'm only interested in the race because Massie is the closest there is anymore to a voice for restraint in Republican politics, not because I think he's some kind of political savior. This race is interesting because now it should be beyond a shadow of doubt that politics has nothing to do with protecting our interests, and everything to do with consolidating power in the hands of a few dishonest, greedy bastards who consider us pawns in their games.
I saw this happen before during the Ron Paul campaigns in 2008 and 2012. I saw Republicans abandon their principles again and again to chase whichever politician the party presented as their new prospective leader in every election cycle, and movements like the TEA Party either be subsumed by the machine or marginalized out of the discussion altogether. I have seen deep corruption and petty tyranny in Idaho and Washington local politics. It's not just a Republican problem, either. The Democrats are transparent in how they rig elections at a national level, and their local politicians don't give a damn about principles either.
Politics isn't about finding the best person for the job who will make the best long-term decisions to defend our liberties, it's about political plunder. It always has been, and always will be, even if the occasional outsider gets elected. Trump campaigned as one such outsider, but his actions demonstrated otherwise to anyone willing to see. For Republicans, the pitch is always some variation on "returning to the ideals of our founders," and "eliminating waste," at least when there are cmapaign ads to run. Democrats similarly proclaim their respect for peace, diversity, and protecting the underdog on the campaign trail before legislating for war, suppression of dissent, and crippling taxation which disproportionately burdens the working class no matter how it is portrayed as, "this time the rich will pay their fair share, we promise."
There is no salvation through politics. We cannot vote our way to freedom and prosperity. Government exists to violate our rights, not defend them. The challenge is finding ways to thrive and build in spite of their nterference, and without their permission. Our rights do not come from "democracy." As the old saying goes, if voting could actually change anything, it would be illegal. No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in. Have you learned that lesson yet?
