The Richmond Times Dispatch has an interesting report on the RPV's "advance" (heh, how clever...they don't want to say "retreat" cuz that's bad or something, heh) this past weekend.
Republican leaders talked about unity and a positive message this weekend as they confronted their recent losses.But the talk obscured a party torn by ideological divisions, several leaders said.
"We are caught up in a jihad with each other," former 4th District Chairman Wayne Ozmore of Chester said yesterday. "It's pathetic."
Gotta agree with that one, the RPV certainly is pathetic these days. I DO find it ironic that Ozmore would use the word "jihad," which of course is normally associated with violent Islamic radicalism. Probably just a Freudian slip, let's move on.
"Needless to say, this is a challenging time for our party," said Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who is eyeing a race for governor in 2009.Without forsaking conservative principles, the party needs to "get back to being the party of issues and ideas," Bolling said.
"The party has got to focus on solutions," Ozmore said. "The people want pragmatism, they don't want extremism."
Interesting, Mr. Lt. Governor, so what would those great "issues and ideas" be, exactly? Running up huge budget deficits and trashing the middle class through your brilliant "supply side," "trickle down" economics? Rejecting the very idea of government -- of, by, and for the people -- as a force for the common good? Bashing minorities -- racial, ethnic, religious, sexual orientation? Making corruption, incompetence, and abuse of power at the highest levels your modus operandus? Idolizing violence (you might even call it "jihad") as a means of settling every dispute, foreign and domestic? Turning the clock back to the 1920s? Restricting our freedoms in the name of...uh, freedom? Tarnishing America's image around the world? Trashing the environment? Showering corporate America with huge subsidies, while denying children access to health care (SCHIP)? Criminalizing women and their doctors who make a choice you don't like?
Yeah, I'm sure the public will see these RPV "issues and ideas" as highly admirable. Unless, of course, Wayne Ozmore is correct that "people want pragmatism, they don't want extremism." If Ozmore is correct, then there are two choices for the RPV: 1) move in a pragmatic direction; or 2) continue with the extremism that has become the RPV's calling card in recent years. Either way, while the people of Virginia wait for the RPV to make up its mind, there's already a pragmatic party in Virginia. It's called the Democratic Party of Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, Jim Webb, and Chap Petersen. And it's the party the people of Virginia are turning back towards as the party to move Virginia "forward together," not backwards.
And it was Reagan who thought it would be a good idea to invite the religious-right into the process. So they got what the asked for: a dysfunctional coalition of selfish heathen greedheads, political preachers, and keyboard warriors. The only thing that binds them is a strong-man, and they got none.
However, Eric Cantor telling them to unite and move on...well that's just funny. Does he even believe what he says?
In Spanish "struggle" is "Lucha"
In German "struggle" is "Kampf"
That about exhausts the languages I've ever studied, but I just want to point out that in all three languages, the word for "struggle" is synonymous with "battle" and, to some extent "war". I find it odd that in English we seperate the two. It seems that calling war a "struggle" is more passionate and meaningful. The English singularity of the words for battle and war seem cold and detached. Could it be that - as a result of the fact that since the creation of modern English, no international wars have been fought on British soil - the English see war as a far-off affair that affects only soldiers and their families? I mean no offense to the British - they've bravely fought through some very arduous wars on the continent, but I feel a lot can be said about a culture through their choice of words.
Words affect politics - read George Orwell's appendix to 1984 concerning Newspeak - if you control vocabulary you control expression, and therefore thought. A very frightening proposal!