OAN Commentary by: Larry Ward
Friday, June 27, 2025
The cancer of divisiveness is eating away at the Republican Party, and it’s time we acknowledged an uncomfortable truth: social media has polluted our movement with the very collectivist thinking we once rejected. We’ve become so obsessed with ideological conformity that we’re destroying the beautiful diversity of thought that makes the GOP a party of individuals, not Borg-like creatures reading from the same script.
Consider what happened when President Trump weighed military action against Iran earlier this month. The moment he suggested potential U.S. involvement in Israel’s conflict with Tehran, battle lines formed not between Republicans and Democrats, but within our own ranks. Tucker Carlson, who had been one of Trump’s most loyal defenders, suddenly found himself labeled “kooky” by the president himself. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the epitome of MAGA loyalty sporting her signature red cap, publicly sided with Carlson against Trump. Steve Bannon warned that military action would “blow up the coalition.”
Was any of this betrayal? Hardly. This was principle in action.
Trump’s position on Iran flows from his core belief that America must project strength and that nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranian regime pose a threat to Americans. Trump has never been an ideological purist. He has strong instincts against nation building and drawn-out “forever wars,” but he is not a strict non-interventionist. His position on Iran reflects this nuanced approach – weighing America’s interests, listening to his options, and remaining willing to take bold action when circumstances demand it. His willingness to consider military action, even when it costs him political capital with his base, demonstrates the kind of leadership he has consistently shown: he listens to his options, weighs his decision, and takes bold action.
Tucker Carlson’s opposition comes from an equally principled place. Having watched America bleed treasure and blood in endless Middle Eastern conflicts, he sees the Iran situation through the lens of hard-learned lessons about the costs of intervention. His deep thinking about complex geopolitical issues and his extraordinary communication skills allow him to articulate what millions of Americans feel in their gut – that we’ve been the world’s policeman for too long.
Meanwhile, Congressman Thomas Massie cast the lone Republican vote against Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” the massive $1.6 trillion legislation that extends tax cuts. Trump called him a “grandstander” and threatened to lead the charge to oust him from office. But Massie, the MIT graduate and constitutional conservative, saw something different in the bill – what he called a “ticking debt bomb” that represented “Biden-level spending and increased deficits.” His opposition wasn’t about Trump; it was about the Constitution and the fiscal responsibility that brought him to Congress in the first place.
We cheered Massie, when he was called “a dangerous nuisance” by Nancy Pelosi and had John Kerry declare he “tested positive for being an asshole” when he demanded a recorded vote on COVID relief. The man doesn’t bend to political pressure from either party because he serves a higher master – the Constitution and the taxpayers who sent him to Washington.
Senator Rand Paul operates from a similar position. He has moved Trump’s nominees quickly through committee as chairman of Homeland Security, and was one of the President’s strongest defenders from the wild Russiagate attacks. However, he was one of only two Republicans to oppose the Senate’s budget outline for the Big Beautiful Bill. His liberty-first philosophy puts him at odds with both parties when it comes to spending, surveillance, and foreign intervention. Yet Paul has maintained his principles while still working constructively within the Trump administration’s framework.
This is exactly how our system was designed to work. The Founders didn’t create a parliamentary system where party discipline reigns supreme. They created a republic built on tension, debate, and the collision of different ideas. What do we think checks and balances actually mean? It means one branch checking another, one faction checking another, one principle checking another.
Think of it like hockey. Checking is when a player drives their shoulder, hip, and arm into an opponent to separate them from the puck, using their body to knock them against the boards or onto the ice. It’s physical, it’s aggressive, and it looks violent to the uninitiated. But it’s played within a set of rules, and at the end of the game, players shake hands, recognize they’re all part of the same sport, and prepare for the next contest.
Politics is a bloodsport when it works the way it was intended. You get bloody, but you shake hands afterward, recognize we’re all Americans, and prepare for the next fight.
Some believe America First means non-interventionism – that we should focus inward and let the world sort itself out. Others believe America First means we must save America from our spending addiction to reduce debt and deficit. Some are practical dealmakers who want to get the best deal possible at the moment a deal is being made. Others want to adhere to the Constitution as written, regardless of political convenience.
We have room for all of them. In fact, we need all of them.
We need anchors like Massie and Rand Paul tethered to the Constitution, ensuring that our movement doesn’t drift from its moorings in limited government and fiscal responsibility. We need President Trump as an anchor to common sense America First policies that put American workers and American interests ahead of global elite preferences. We need Tucker’s intellect, his deep thinking about complex issues, and his extraordinary communication skills to articulate the principles that drive our movement.
The alternative – demanding lockstep agreement on every issue – is the path to intellectual death. Do we really want politicians who agree with the mob 100 percent of the time, or do we want representatives who hold firm to what they believe is right even when it’s unpopular? Can it make you angry? Absolutely. Getting mad is your right. But divisiveness is a sin because it destroys and eats away at any organization the way cancer eats the body.
The Democrats have their own version of this disease. They excommunicate members who stray from orthodoxy on issues ranging from Israel to transgender policies. They’ve created a party where independent thought is punished and conformity is rewarded. The result is a movement that has lost touch with working Americans and increasingly serves the interests of elite donors and activist groups.
Republicans must resist this temptation. Our strength comes from being a party of individual ideas, of true diversity of thought. We are not collectivists. We don’t march in lockstep. We debate, we argue, we sometimes fight, but we do so in service of principles larger than any individual politician or personality.
The moment we start demanding America First purity tests is the moment we stop being the party of Reagan’s big tent and become just another faction of rigid ideologues. The moment we exile principled conservatives like Massie for voting their conscience is the moment we lose the moral authority to criticize the left for their cancel culture.
Embrace the tension. Appreciate the freedom to speak and vote according to conscience. Celebrate the fact that our movement is strong enough to contain multitudes. Don’t let MAGA turn into a purity test that destroys the very principles it claims to defend.
The republic works best when it includes voices like Trump’s pragmatic deal-making, Tucker’s intellectual rigor, Massie’s constitutional anchor, and Paul’s libertarian conscience. These aren’t competing visions of America – they’re complementary strengths that, when combined, create a movement capable of governing a diverse nation of 330 million people.
We can disagree without being disagreeable. We can debate without destroying. We can check each other without checking out of the game entirely. That’s not weakness – that’s American strength. That’s how republics survive and thrive.
It’s time to end the purity tests and embrace the beautiful complexity of principled disagreement. Our movement is strong enough to handle the tension. The question is whether we’re mature enough to appreciate it.
(Views expressed by guest commentators may not reflect the views of OAN or its affiliates.)
Short Bio
Larry Ward serves as President of Political Media, Inc. & Chairman of Constitutional Rights PAC, bringing over two decades of political advocacy and strategic communications expertise to the defense of America’s founding principles. As President of Political Media, Inc. since 2002, Ward has influenced hundreds of political contests while pioneering digital campaign strategies, and has led major constitutional advocacy efforts including Gun Appreciation Day in 2009 and the Million Vet March in 2013. You can follow him @thatLarryWard on X.