In politics, “civility” is often touted as a virtue that all candidates should uphold. Calls for civil discourse are made by both parties, implying that respect and decorum should guide political debate. However, these calls for civility can sometimes serve as little more than a smokescreen, obscuring underhanded tactics designed to discredit opponents. One of the most egregious examples of this hypocrisy is currently playing out in Wyoming, where Americans for Prosperity (AFP)—a powerful political organization that has publicly demanded civility from its candidates—is simultaneously running some of the most misleading and dirty campaigns in the state’s history.
The Lyndon B. Johnson Playbook
To understand the tactics being used by Americans for Prosperity, one need only look back at the political playbook of Lyndon B. Johnson, the 36th President of the United States. Johnson was notorious for employing ruthless and often underhanded strategies to gain an advantage over his political opponents. One of his most infamous tactics was to accuse his opponent of bestiality, specifically with a pig. The goal was not to prove the accusation true but to force the opponent into a position where they had to deny the claim, associating themselves with the negative behavior regardless of its truth.
The story goes that Johnson, during one of his campaigns, instructed his team to spread a rumor that his opponent had engaged in bestiality. When questioned about the truth of the accusation, Johnson reportedly said he just wanted to “make the son of a bitch deny it.” This tactic was about planting a seed of doubt in voters’ minds; even if the opponent vehemently denied the accusation, the association between them and the heinous act had already been made, damaging their reputation irreparably.
Americans for Prosperity’s Dirty Tricks in Wyoming
Americans for Prosperity has borrowed heavily from the LBJ playbook in its recent campaigns against conservative candidates in Wyoming. Despite their public calls for civility, Americans for Prosperity’s flyers and mailers are filled with misleading accusations and outlandish claims designed to smear candidates like Allen Slagle and Mark Jennings. The accusations are often absurd, painting these candidates as supporters of big government or as proponents of policies that would harm Wyoming families. These claims, much like Johnson’s infamous tactics, are not rooted in fact but are intended to force the candidates into a defensive position, where they must deny the charges and, in doing so, inadvertently associate themselves with the very accusations being leveled against them.
For example, in their campaign against Mark Jennings, Americans for Prosperity has accused him of bringing “Washington, DC’s environmental policies to Wyoming” and supporting “job-killing regulations.” These claims are designed to provoke outrage and concern among voters, even though they distort Jennings’ actual voting record and positions. Similarly, Americans for Prosperity has targeted Allen Slagle with equally misleading attacks, accusing him of opposing parents’ empowerment in their children’s education—an accusation that is false and intended to cast Slagle in a negative light among Wyoming’s conservative voters.
The Media’s Deafening Silence and Bias
The media’s apparent unwillingness to call out Americans for Prosperity’s hypocrisy makes this situation even more troubling. Publications like Cowboy State Daily, which have been quick to criticize other conservative groups for far less, have remained silent on Americans for Prosperity’s dirty tactics. This selective outrage further skews the political landscape, allowing organizations like Americans for Prosperity to operate with impunity while true conservatives are left to fend off baseless attacks on their character and policies.
[Editor’s Note: An hour or so after publishing this, I received word that the Cowboy State Daily is working on a story about AFP actions in this election.]
In addition to this selective coverage, the media frequently employs subtle yet powerful language to portray conservatives as extreme or dangerous. Modifiers and adjectives are routinely added to descriptions of conservative candidates or policies, painting them as “far-right,” “ultra-conservative,” or “firebrand.” Meanwhile, more left-leaning figures are often presented without such labels or with more neutral or positive descriptors. A quick scan of headlines and articles in Cowboy State Daily or any Wyoming newspaper reveals this bias in full effect. Conservative voices are regularly tagged with pejorative labels, while liberal or left-leaning figures escape similar scrutiny, allowing their positions to be presented as more mainstream or acceptable by comparison. This disparity in media treatment contributes to a skewed public perception, making it harder for conservative candidates to be taken seriously without being viewed through the lens of extremism.
Lubnau’s Unfounded Criticism and Media Bias
This biased treatment by the media is not limited to smear campaigns but extends to how conservative figures are criticized without a fair opportunity to defend themselves. A case in point is the recent criticism by Tom Lubnau, a former Speaker of the Wyoming House, who targeted Kathy Russell, an employee of the Wyoming GOP. Lubnau generally accused Russell of lacking integrity but failed to grasp the reality of her role within the party. Russell had no policy-making power as an employee, and the party had already taken proactive steps to prevent a conflict of interest. Specifically, the party ensured that Russell could not affect any candidates adversely.
Despite these facts, Lubnau proceeded with public criticism without seeking clarification from those involved, showcasing a lack of due diligence. To compound the issue, when I submitted a rebuttal to Cowboy State Daily, explaining the truth and defending Russell’s role, the publication chose not to publish it. This omission highlights a clear bias in how the media chooses to report or ignore certain perspectives, particularly when it comes to defending conservative figures against unfounded attacks. The failure to provide a platform for a fair response further demonstrates how the media plays a role in perpetuating these one-sided narratives.
Americans for Prosperity’s Support for the Wyoming Caucus
Adding to the hypocrisy is the fact that Americans for Prosperity largely supports the Wyoming Caucus, which consists of some of the biggest spending and least conservative legislators in the state. Despite their public stance on fiscal responsibility and limited government, Americans for Prosperity has thrown its weight behind politicians who routinely vote for increased government spending. This contradiction between their stated values and political endorsements further undermines their credibility as champions of conservatism.
The True Cost of Hypocrisy in Civility
The cost of this hypocrisy is high. When organizations like Americans for Prosperity demand civility while engaging in the very behavior they condemn, they erode voters’ trust in the political process. Moreover, they undermine the genuine efforts of candidates who seek to engage in honest and respectful debate. By allowing smear tactics to dominate the conversation, Americans for Prosperity and their silent enablers in the media make it increasingly difficult for voters to discern the truth, leading to a more polarized and less informed electorate.
Furthermore, this hypocrisy exacerbates the challenges faced by true conservatives in Wyoming. When right-leaning politicians and voters express their opinions, they are often labeled as “extreme right-wingers” or “ultra-conservatives” by their opponents and the media, even though these positions are widely supported within the state. Over 18 of Wyoming’s 23 county delegations back the conservative platform of the Wyoming GOP, yet those who advocate for these principles are marginalized and dismissed as radicals. This marginalization is fueled by the tactics Americans for Prosperity employ—tactics designed to create division and distrust within the conservative movement.
A Call for True Civility and Accountability
Suppose Wyoming is to move forward with integrity and true civility in its political discourse. In that case, voters and the media must hold organizations like Americans for Prosperity accountable for their actions. Civility cannot be a one-way street, where only certain voices are expected to behave respectfully while others can engage in the most underhanded tactics without consequence. True civility requires honesty, transparency, and a commitment to fair and respectful debate from all sides.
It is time for Wyoming’s media to step up and expose the hypocrisy of those who preach civility while practicing the opposite. It is time for voters to reject the smear campaigns and demand that all candidates and organizations engage in honest, fact-based discourse. Only then can Wyoming’s political process reflect the values of its people and the true spirit of conservatism that so many in the state hold dear.
Ultimately, the battle for civility in politics is not just about the words we use but about the integrity with which we engage in the political process. Wyoming deserves better than the dirty tricks of the past—it’s time to hold all political actors to the same standard of truth and respect, regardless of their affiliation or power.
