Posted on 07/07/2015 8:50:40 AM PDT by newgeezer
Behind every great man, there’s an incredibly astonished woman. And if you’re a Republican politician, the odds are pretty good she’s not on board with everything in your agenda. Along those lines, social conservatives have a new reason to worry about Scott Walker: Tonette Walker.
In an interview with the Washington Post, Wisconsin’s first lady publicly distanced herself from her husband over the issue of gay marriage. What is more, it’s clear that Scott Walker’s views are out of step with his entire family on the issue.
Consider this excerpt regarding the Supreme Court’s same-sex marriage ruling:
“That was a hard one,” Tonette said, pausing and choosing her words carefully. “Our sons were disappointed. . . . I was torn. I have children who are very passionate [in favor of same-sex marriage], and Scott was on his side very passionate.”
“It’s hard for me because I have a cousin who I love dearly — she is like a sister to me — who is married to a woman, her partner of 18 years,” she said.
(Walker’s son acted as a witness to the gay marriage of Walker’s wife’s cousin.)
There are a couple ways to look at this. On one hand, we could be witnessing the case of one family member showing daylight with her husband. It wouldn’t be the first time this issue has proven divisive within a family (see Liz vs. Mary Cheney).
On the other hand, why publicize the disagreement? Nothing happens in politics by accident. Walker has a professional comms shop. Could this be an intentional signal to more socially moderate opinion leaders that Walker isn’t really some neanderthal (regardless of what he has to say to win conservative votes in Iowa)?
Regardless, for social conservatives who already feel like they’re on the ropes, this revelation is even more serious than you might think. For obvious reasons, social conservative leaders have little interest in alienating Walker, but even before this most recent interview came out, one leading socon told me his rule of thumb for evaluating candidates: The trick is to always look at the wife when gauging whether or not a male politician will hold true to his stated social values.
This is a lesson they learned the hard way. From Betty Ford to Laura Bush, we’ve never had a pro-life first lady in the post-Roe v. Wade world. And — the theory goes — it’s not much of a coincidence that, despite all the rhetoric around election time, social conservatives have relatively little legislative progress to show for the many Republican electoral victories that accrued in the last four decades.
Now, as the issue of the moment seems to be gay marriage, we see a similar dynamic where houses are divided against themselves — where, on this issue, at least, Republican politicians and their wives are unequally yoked. It’s hard to be outnumbered in your own family. They may not flip on the issue, but pols seem less likely to champion an issue when the people closest to them vehemently oppose it.
The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world — and not just because it influences future generations.
There are examples that seem to buttress this. Take, for example, Sen. Barry Goldwater’s leftward lurch toward the end of his career. In a 1994 Washington Post article, Lloyd Grove writes about Goldwater’s second wife, Susan:
They met soon after the death of Goldwater’s first wife, Peggy, when she came to take his blood pressure. Some, like John McCain, attribute much of Goldwater’s outspoken contrariness, which occasionally makes him sound like a raving liberal, to Susan Goldwater’s influence.
You won’t hear this mentioned in polite company, but it is similarly thought that Ted Olson wouldn’t have come to support gay marriage, had his conservative wife Barbara Olson not been murdered on 9-11. Olson subsequently married a “lifelong Democrat.”
Consider this from a 2013 LA Times piece:
It is a matter of considerable discussion in Washington how much Olson has changed since his marriage to Lady Booth — who is named after an aunt — and whether it has anything to do with his apostasy on gay marriage.
“I think everybody thinks she’s changed Ted,” said Rosalie Blair, the eye surgeon in Washington who introduced them. “She’s certainly made him a little bit — people will say — a kinder, gentler Ted.”
If nothing else, this simply raises more questions. Scott Walker’s campaign already feels schizophrenic. He’s sending mixed signals on a variety of issues (see his reported “I’m not going nativist” comments to Steven Moore). If you’re a social conservative who cares deeply about the gay marriage issue, it is perhaps wise to consider the maxim which says, If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.
UPDATE: The Guardian’s Ben Jacobs reports that Rick Santorum made this same point on Sunday.
Note: And speaking of wives, the author’s wife advises Rick Perry and previously consulted for Ted Cruz’s Senate campaign.
Where does Jindal fail your test?
Yes, we homeschooled too....
Mine survived college...so far....still one with a few years yet, but he’s the most conservative of them all. Has a Gadsen Flag tattoo.
And I remember Glenn talking about some liberal beliefs his kids had...years ago....when they were much younger than college. I was appalled then.
When Scott Walker took office, labor participation was at 69%. Now it is at 68%, not a big loss, but it demonstrates that nothing much has changed there. Just as it is nationally, the unemployment rate looks better than it actually is because so many have stopped looking.
Minnesota has a lower unemployment rate at about 3.5%.
Wages have fallen in Wisconsin and there is alarm at the rapid loss of the middle class. In May, Wisconsin lost more jobs than any other state. When a states private sector job creation goes from 11th to 44th, their is something wrong policy wise. It is not coincidental.
The 156,800 jobs that you cite is jobs created during Walker’s entire time in office. He promised 250,000 jobs in his first term and fell far short and into his second term is still far short.
There are several more-or-less conservative commentators who have picked up this “it’s-not-about-right-and-left-it’s-about-right-and wrong” nonsense.
The Left is for slicing and dicing babies, counterfeit money, open borders, sodomy, treason, confiscatory taxation, etc., etc.
When these “it’s-not-about-right-and-left-it’s-about-right-and wrong” morons can show me the Democrat politicians who are pro-life, against fiat money, against open borders, against sodomy, against treason, against confiscatory taxation, etc., etc., then maybe I will consider the claim that “there are good people on both sides of the aisle.”
I don’t even know what “it’s-not-about-right-and-left-it’s-about-right-and wrong” is supposed to MEAN. What do those who push “it’s-not-about-right-and-left-it’s-about-right-and wrong” hope to gain? Who is it they are trying to ingratiate themselves with?
Goldwater was a star on the big, splashy TV special that kicked off “People for the American Way,” which was pro-abortion and pro-sodomy. Robin Williams made a pitch for killing babies. Rod Steiger played an old gay dude. “All I ask is to be treated with respect!” Right.
A “conservative” politician with a lefty wife will turn out to be whipped at least 99% of the time.
No one votes for the wife... unless they’re braindead...
So was Glenn. Look at Sam Walton's spawn.
No. Rather, it suggests that he may not be who he says he is. Walker wouldn't be the first candidate to fake a hard right turn to gain some traction in the (early) caucuses and primaries. That may or may not be the case here. But, it seems either he and his wife are very far apart on some fundamental issues, or his wife was unwilling to swallow the long-acting social-conservative pill.Perhaps, but he's given no indication of making any hard right turns - he came into the governorship looking like who he has continued to look like.
Not odd for husbands and wives to have different viewpoints on some issues - look at James Carville and Mary Matalin who have been together for 20+ years despite him being a vociferous Lefty and her being a Conservative.
Boogeymen may exist, but we seem to be more akin to the Salem Witch Hunters than we are at finding and focusing on real problems - then, we become the real problems by defaming/accusing/destroying our own best hopes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.