Dear editor:

The Republican Party has always been strongest when it has stood for order, responsibility, and a seriousness of purpose that sets it apart from the noise of political theater. For generations, Republicans have prided themselves on being the party of principle, the party that trusts reason and order over emotional displays or civil disruption. In our tradition, the truth of a statement, the strength of an argument and the calm persistence of a leader have always carried more weight than loud gestures or boorish rhetoric. We have believed that if we are steady, clear and disciplined, the truth will speak for itself. 

A Republican should be known for measured words and a willingness to let reason win the day. The person who leads with calm clarity shows respect for the people he serves. When we replace decorum with theatrics, we lose credibility, and the result is self-inflicted weakness and hypocrisy. 

History provides us with examples of how Republicans have embodied this virtue. Theodore Roosevelt was known for his energy, his boldness and his willingness to confront entrenched interests. Yet even in his most forceful moments, he did not need to rely on tantrums or civil disobedience. He commanded respect because his arguments were clear and because he believed deeply in the principles he advanced. Roosevelt’s force was in his inexorable will and the discipline with which he carried it out. 

Dwight Eisenhower, another Republican giant, displayed the same commitment to restraint and discipline. A man who had commanded armies and carried the weight of victory in Europe knew that leadership did not come from chest-thumping displays. It came from calm authority and the ability to inspire confidence through steadiness. Eisenhower guided the nation through a turbulent decade with composure, never needing to shout to be heard. His very demeanor taught Americans that Republican leadership meant competence, order and respect. 

What Roosevelt and Eisenhower demonstrated, each in their own way, is that leadership means standing for what is true and guiding people toward it, even when that path is not the easiest. They did not present themselves as men who would simply echo the voices of the crowd or promise endlessly to “fight” on behalf of their constituents. Instead, they exercised the harder and nobler task of persuasion, showing their countrymen what was right and leading them there with reason and order. True Republican leadership has never been about mirroring the anxieties of the moment, but about offering the steady hand that directs those anxieties toward order and truth. 

George Washington embodied this same vision of leadership by grounding his authority in truth and restraint rather than theatrics. Washington governed himself before governing others, maintaining a careful reserve in speech and action so that reason and principle could shape the course of debate. Even when urged to seize greater power, he refused, believing that the lasting survival of the Republic depended on leaders who would model discipline, decorum and fidelity to truth. His example taught the nation that self-control and measured words were the enduring marks of a statesman. 

Here in Wyoming, we are witnessing a breakdown of the very principles that once defined the Republican Party. House District 58 Rep. Bill Allemand recently embodied this failure by arguing not only to defund the police in the town of Bar Nunn but to prevent them from ever being funded in the first place. Only a few years ago, this defund rhetoric was a hallmark of the Democratic Party, and to see it taken up by a Republican is hypocrisy in plain view. Further, for generations Republicans have championed small, local governance as a safeguard of municipal liberty, yet Allemand brought state-level political gamesmanship to strong-arm Bar Nunn’s town council. Worse still, he chose to bow to the fears of a portion of his constituency rather than lead them toward truth. 

Washington, Roosevelt and Eisenhower guided their people by persuasion and principle; Allemand prefers to follow the crowd while serving his own pride. Having already spoken once, as permitted under the well-established rules of Bar Nunn’s council, he deliberately defied order by taking a second turn. He then crumpled up his prepared remarks and launched into a soapbox speech meant to stir passions rather than make arguments. When the presiding mayor rightly asked him to stop, he shouted over the chair, and when he was told to sit down or be removed, he received exactly what he wanted, a spectacle.

Leadership is not measured by the polls of the moment but by fidelity to truth. A leader should acknowledge the fears of his constituents, but he should not amplify them for personal gain. He should direct those constituents toward what is reasonable and right. That is the duty of leadership, and that is the standard Bill Allemand failed to meet. 

William Wallace

Casper