Early Friday morning on Capitol Hill, phones buzzed incessantly with the latest political news. This is nothing out of the ordinary for politickers. Yet on that particular morning, politicians and aides had to stop and understand the weight of what they were reading. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) had just announced his resignation as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Boehner had served as speaker ever since the Republicans regained power following the tea party wave of 2010. Yet, even though he was elected as their leader, Boehner was never fully embraced by this combative, conservative wing of the Republican Party. He was seen as the essence of the establishment, and he was branded a "Republican in Name Only" for his willingness to compromise with liberal elements within Congress in order to maintain a functional government.
It was this reasonable approach to politics that led to open disdain within the tea party rank and file, and eventually to the very real threat of a bloody and prolonged leadership fight. Boehner, as he had done so often, set aside his pride and did what needed to be done. He resigned his post as the third most powerful man in the country.
A sincere desire to find a compromise among all parties has become a dangerous trait for politicians to hold in this day and age. Politicians are expected to hold onto and advocate their political stances as a street preacher might shout the scripture, entrenching their selves further into their core beliefs at even the slightest challenge.
While many Americans have come of age in a time when this political posturing is nothing of the ordinary, it is far from the historical norm in our nation. Over much of the past 227 years, compromise has formed a vital part in the framework of our government. Political history is littered with politicians putting aside their own beliefs for the greater good of our nation and its government and taking pride in compromise. Yet with the resignation of Boehner this is clearly no longer the case.
The far right elements of the Republican Party have seized its future for their own purposes. In their eyes, it is no longer acceptable for any leader within their ranks to bend even the most insignificant and illogical ideal. To them, the Democrats are not their partners in governance, and they are certainly not to be worked with. To those who have taken control of the GOP for their own uses, the Democrats are the enemy, they are there to be beaten, and God willing, destroyed.
To all of those on the outside looking in, the only possible conclusion is this: this is no longer the party of Reagan and Eisenhower. This is an entirely new beast.
It seems as though the inmates have taken over the asylum.