Where Goes the Virginia GOP in a Post-Trump Presidency?

Kirk Cox. (Photo credit: Roanoke Times.)

by James A. Bacon

In the aftermath of the mob action at the U.S. Capitol two days ago, establishment Republicans have decisively condemned not only the rioters but President Trump for firing them up with assertions that the 2020 election was stolen. As best I can tell, hard-core Trump supporters seem unrepentant. They still think the election was stolen, they’re more convinced than ever that the system has failed them, and they feel no regrets for taking their protest into the halls of Congress.

Although divisions in the Republican Party start at the top, the fissures extend deep into every state. Here in Virginia, the contrast between establishment figure Del. Kirk Cox, R-Colonial Beach, a former Speaker of the House, and Sen. Amanda Chase, R-Chesterfield, a die-hard Trump supporter, could not be more stark. Cox condemned the Capitol riot in no uncertain terms. Chase, who attended the rally in Washington, defended the protesters. Indeed, she portrayed them as the victims, highlighting in a tweet the fact that Capitol Police shot and killed Ashli Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran from California who was among a group of people forcing entry through a door.

I don’t know how this division heals. Unless it does, I see no way for Republicans to create an effective counterweight to the Democrats in Virginia. Democratic ascendancy in Richmond seems assured for the foreseeable future.

Can Republicans achieve a rapprochement between the two wings of the party? Is such a rapprochement even desirable?

Before I address those questions, permit me a brief aside. The mob assault on the Capitol was an assault on our democratic institutions. There are no acceptable excuses for what took place. Appropriate punishments need to be meted out, heads must roll. But let’s keep things in perspective. It is absurd to call the event a “coup d’etat,” as University of Virginia pundit Larry Sabato termed it. It is equally nuts to call the rioters “terrorists,” as President-elect Biden labeled them. The riot was a mindless venting of frustration and rage designed to disrupt government, not overthrow it. The only person killed in the mayhem was Babbitt. (Two Trumpistas died of apparent heart attacks, which should serve as a warning to middle-age people pondering whether or not to join a riot.) The mob didn’t attack anyone. It didn’t hold anyone hostage. It didn’t issue threats. It didn’t present a list of demands. And in the end, it was easily dispersed.

And therein lies part of the dilemma. When politically mainstream figures like Biden and Sabato are so over-the-top with their rhetoric — had Trump said similar things, he would have been denounced as reckless, divisive, and a threat to all that was holy — I understand the rioters’ sense of alienation, even if I can never condone their actions.

Democratic hyperbole aside, the assault on the Capitol still represents a new low for American democracy. And if Trump remains active in politics, no reconciliation between the establishment GOP and his electoral base will be possible. Trump is a narcissist. It’s all about him. Moreover, he’s a vindictive narcissist. He lashes out at everyone crosses him, which now is just about everyone in the establishment wing of the GOP, including even his vice president. As a human wrecking ball, he will be more inclined to settle scores within the party than settle differences. Only if he feels chastened enough to retire from the public scene will Republican divisions have a chance to heal.

I’m not optimistic that will happen. Trump is too addicted to the need for approval and acclaim to leave the public eye. As long as he can stay the center of attention, he will continue to stir up trouble.

Where does that leave traditional Main Street wing of the GOP? Strategically, the party has two broad options. The first is to try to patch over what looks like an irreparable schism in the hope maintaining the Republican electoral coalition in place long enough for Democrats to overreach and swing public opinion back in favor of the Republicans.

The other option here in Virginia is for the establishment GOP to let Amanda Chase and other Trump fanboys and fangirls hive off as a populist right-wing party and stake out a position as the party of moderation. As the Democratic Party races to the left with its embrace of labor unions, social justice (as defined by critical race theory), mass forgiveness of criminals, climate-change zealotry, and more, it surely will overreach, and just as surely it will alienate large swaths of the electorate. Moderate, pro-business Democrats might find they share more common ground with moderate, establishment Republicans than with the left wing of their party.

I have tried to articulate an “opportunity agenda” that downplays the victimhood and grievance politics that defines the Democratic Party and the Trump wing of the Republican Party. I’ve seen the GOP as the natural champion of such an agenda, but perhaps the opportunity agenda could provide the glue for a centrist party, whether under the Republican banner or, should the Trumpistas take control of the GOP, some other.

I’m not advocating such a thing, just trying to open up peoples’ minds to possibilities they might not have considered.

There are currently no comments highlighted.

157 responses to “Where Goes the Virginia GOP in a Post-Trump Presidency?

  1. Well, the all-time low in American politics bottomed out at Cemetery Ridge, but this week has been appalling. I understand Chase’s Facebook account has now been suspended, which will only make her a greater hero to some. To return to a Civil War idiom, she must be suppressed. She has her headquarters where her hindquarters ought to be.

    There is a mass in the middle waiting to be gathered into a movement, center left and center right, appalled by the violence on both ends. I do expect such a coalition to emerge and strengthen in Congress. I worry the Republican brand is tainted for good, but everybody tends to forget the November election did not reject the policies. Had Trump behaved differently in the past three weeks, the Georgia elections could have gone the other way — certainly Perdue.

    And there was at least one additional death, a Capitol Police officer who had his head bashed in. I have no problem with the terrorism label for some of those individuals — their web traffic is no better than AntiFa or Al Queda. My Patrick Henry history teacher Mrs. Haley had a wonderful argument with our class John Bircher and pointed out that the far left and far fight looked very similar to her….would have been about 1970.

    • All these Social Media companies are just begging to repel of section 230 and regulation.

      That and none of them remember Counterspeech Doctrine.

    • The past is a foreign land; they do things differently there.

      Waxing nostalgic?

    • James Wyatt Whitehead V

      “Well, the all-time low in American politics bottomed out at Cemetery Ridge” That maybe true but it was also the first chapter to a new beginning. The question is will noon January 20th be a new beginning?

      Headquarters in the saddle! That was Major General John Pope’s slogan in the 2nd Manassas campaign. Private James Sullivan of the 6th Wisconsin quipped the comeback of Pope not knowing his headquarters from his hindquarters. Pope’s bombast was known as “Pope’s Bull”. The rank and file usually had it right about the abilities of commanding officers.

  2. Politics in America is in a state of uncertainty and transition — to what, who knows? The Federalists and the Whigs were major American political parties that fell apart. There is no guarantee that the Republicans or Democrats are immune from a similar fate — the divisions in both parties today are major and not likely to be easily overcome, if at all.

    I doubt anyone is in a position to predict how things will turn out — although there will be plenty of pundits trying to make such predictions. Only time will tell how the American people respond to the political turmoil.

  3. Honestly, what created Trump wasn’t just Obama and his allies; it was also the refusal of GOP leaders like Boehner, Cantor (which is why he was ousted by Brat), McConnell, and others to actually stand-up for their beliefs. One thing we saw during the Era of Trump is McConnell earn the nickname “Cocaine Mitch,” as he started to stand-up to the democrats and the media. That is what needs to happen; we need to have the guts to stand up to the left, and call the media out for their biases, we just need to do it more professionally than Trump. Kaliegh McEnanny (sp?) is a good model of what this should look like. Combine that with the fact that the GOP excises extremists from our ranks while the DNC puts them on the cover of Time with the Speaker of the House, and people will catch on.

    • Hard to stand from the position of sitting on your head.

      Trump brought the crazies into the fold and now more and more of them are being elected driving out any hope of holding the Republicans together.

      Functionally over the next four years will emerge a mushy middle comprised of members of both parties — a working coalition — and two extreme ends eventually leading to a 3-way split.

      I suspect we are seeing the beginning of the end of the two-party system.

  4. At least Amanda Chase knows how to accessorize. At one Trump rally I saw a woman in a print dress with a cammo assault rifle. Phleeeeze. How gauche.

  5. You misspelled “wither” by the way.

  6. Many Republicans and Trump enablers are getting what they deserve.

    • Excellent! I am neither a republican nor a Trump enabler, so I’ve got nothing to worry about…

      …unless it means I’m going to get something I DON’T deserve – like Joe Biden as my president. Oh, that’s right…

  7. “…establishment Republicans have decisively condemned not only the rioters but President Trump…”

    [citation needed]

    Did they apologize for supporting him the past four years? For playing their part in this horrendous nonsense by grandstanding from the middle of October onward that the election would be/was stolen? No? Then they’re worthless, irresponsible cowards. If someone tells you your dog’s dangerous and you should put it on a leash and the dog then bites you yelling at the dog is no longer a sufficient response.

    Just because a poorly executed coup with no planning carried out by a bunch of ding dongs failed doesn’t mean it wasn’t a coup. They wanted to and tried to stop the transition of power to Joe Biden. Brian Sicknick was beat to death with a fire extinguisher by these people. You think they would have done any less to Nancy Pelosi had they been able to get to her? Sincerely, what is wrong with you? I thought conservatives were supposed to be about personal responsibility, but you stop in the middle of your post to diminishing what was done and say “but really mainstream liberals share some of the blame for their mean words accurately describing what happened.”

    It’s telling that other than DJ, no one here cops to having voted for Trump, much less say “And doing so was a mistake.” We tried to tell you before he was elected that he was dangerous and we were called partisan fear mongers. We tried to tell you after Charlottesville that he was dangerous and were treated to “both sides!” even though only one side murdered someone with a car. We tried to tell you he was dangerous when conservatives stormed the capitols in Michigan and Oregon trying to stop the functioning of government there or when a group was caught conspiring to kidnap governor Whitmer after Trump made her a target and we were fed a bunch of “but BLM attacked a courthouse in the middle of the night when no one was there” and bad jokes.

    We tried to tell you that these people were dangerous when they were assassinating doctors for performing abortions. When they were bombing the Olympics and blowing up a federal building in Oklahoma City. And we were told “No, pay no attention to how much of their rhetoric we borrow, those are fringe extremists and they’ll never make up a meaningful part of our party.”

    And for what gain? What did you get for bringing these people into the party? Some tax cuts. A stranglehold on the federal judiciary you’ll refuse to acknowledge so you can keep pretending to be political victims.

    And to stop what? What is the left asking for that’s so intolerable that these people had to be courted? For police to stop killing unarmed citizens in their parks, their stores, and their very beds? Some acknowledgement that many of our systems are designed for the perpetuation of whites remaining atop the social hierarchy? Less pollution so that the world stops heating up from all the carbon we pulled out of the ground and put back in the atmosphere? Universal health coverage? Worker’s rights? Basically things that might cost some people some money and social status so that everyone else can experience a better quality of life.

    And for that you drag into your party people who would beat a cop to death for trying to stop them from stopping the certification of a free and fair election.

    • “What is the left asking for that’s so intolerable that these people had to be courted? For police to stop killing unarmed citizens in their parks, their stores, and their very beds?”

      I’d like for the left to not be delusional and to stop trying to dismantle the civil society.

      “There is no epidemic of fatal police shootings against unarmed Black Americans”

      https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/03/police-black-killings-homicide-rates-race-injustice-column/3235072001/

      Tragic police shooting occasionally happen, but not only to blacks. Perception, however, does not equal reality.

      The left so desperately wants to find extreme examples of racism that prior to the Floyd video going viral, there were numerous hoaxes. The demand for examples of racism exceeded supply and more had to be manufactured.

      The reality is that everywhere BLM becomes active, the plight of African Americans gets worse, much worse.

      The same is true for the rest of the agenda you support. It may be well meaning, but the net effect is the opposite of the intended result. Detroit is an example of where left leaning policies were implemented to bring about “a better quality of life.” The result was the destruction of what previously had been a major metropolitan area.

      • “There is no epidemic of fatal police shootings against unarmed Black Americans”

        You’re RIGHT! There is, however, an epidemic of VIDEOS showing police shooting Black Americans and other acts of malice and poor training.

        • “You’re RIGHT! There is, however, an epidemic of VIDEOS showing police shooting Black Americans and other acts of malice and poor training.”

          Would you like to see videos of whites being shot? They don’t go viral, but they are every bit as horrific.

          It’s not just “malice and poor training” though those are sometimes factors. There are many factors and each must be taken individually to understand.

          One factor is that some humans are not emotionally capable of dealing with the stress of thinking someone is about to kill them. They panic under pressure.

          • “Would you like to see videos of whites being shot?”

            Yes, yes I would, every last one of them.

            And some are just killers waiting for the chance.

          • Well, if whites are being killed in similar numbers, we don’t see it in those responses that say that and we have quite a few black folks up in arms about it – across the country – so something is wrong if they are mistaken about it in such large numbers.

            no?

          • “And some are just killers waiting for the chance.”

            And in my opinion that kind of cop should be shown no mercy.

          • Nancy_Naive | January 8, 2021 at 3:18 pm |
            “Would you like to see videos of whites being shot?”

            “Yes, yes I would, every last one of them.”

            Here’s one. The man and his girlfriend were playing video games late at night. Someone heard them and reported a violent altercation to 911. The police respond to a perceived emergency.

            The loud video prevents the man from hearing the police announce their presence, but he hears the knock. It’s late so he decides to come to the door armed. The policeman on the other side of the door sees the gun and shoots the man. Please watch the entire video. His girlfriend is understandably traumatized.

            “Phoenix police body cam footage shows the shooting of Ryan Whitaker and the aftermath”

        • Generally in cities controlled by Democrats as your own data showed.

          Name any Democratic office holders who condemned Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey for allowing cops with bad records as Thao & Chauvin remained on the police force, despite the constant attacks on the record of his predecessor in office (a Democrat to boot) and promises to the contrary.

          Skip the questions as usual and toss some snarky answer. The other readers know you cannot answer this.

      • I am not familiar with the claim of an epidemic of police shootings against unarmed Black Americans, though I believe that it must exist if others are refuting it. However, my understanding of the primary complaint regarding Black Americans and police violence is that they are killed by police in disproportion to their overall population. From the same USA Today article you linked to: “Black people account for about 23% of those shot and killed by police; they are about 13% of the U.S. population.” So, the concern is that Blacks are only 13% of the U.S. population but 23% of those who are shot and killed by the police. We all are aware that explanations for *why* this is the case differ, and those explanations warrant different solutions. Obviously if you think the disparity is caused by institutional racism, then you would propose a different solution than, say, if you think it is because Blacks are inherently more criminally-inclined than other races.

        The point I’m trying to make here is that there is indeed a reality of Blacks being disproportionately shot and killed as compared to other races. I like to think we can all agree that something is wrong with that, and that something should be done about it, even if we don’t agree on the root causes or appropriate solutions.

        • “Obviously if you think the disparity is caused by institutional racism, then you would propose a different solution than, say, if you think it is because Blacks are inherently more criminally-inclined than other races.”

          Only a complete racist believes that “Blacks are inherently more criminally-inclined than other races.” Superiority or inferiority of any race is by definition racism. (That’s why teaching that whites are more inclined to evil is also racist.)

          To oversimplify, some families are dysfunctional, and some areas are. If someone grows up in that environment, they will struggle and have a much more difficult time in life. Lack of fathers and positive male role models is a big factor.

          Law enforcement doesn’t create the above problem. They primarily just respond to the result. Someone reports a crime, and they must go there. The responding officers can’t choose the race of who’s house it is, or the race of the person who threatens them.

          Do police officers hate males? That disparity makes the black vs. white disparity seem like nothing by comparison. Why do they arrest so many males? Why do they kill so many males?

          If you look carefully at the statistics, the proportion of blacks shot is in line with the proportional to black assaults and murders of police officers.

          Yes, I’m concerned about root causes. That’s why I’ve donated thousands of hours to youth programs. By the time police get involved, it’s often too late. I hate to say that, but statistically it’s true.

          Not to say we give up. I’ve also ministered to people in prison, though not for many years. I may get back to that at some point.

          • You almost got there. If you don’t get to these kids in school, it’s too late for a lot of them. That’s why public education is so important and so important to recognize that some kids don’t have good parents – and blaming the parents won’t fix it.

            It’s sorta the difference between finding and fixing something that is in an engineering drawing or finding it in the final product and trying to fix.

          • “That’s why public education is so important and so important to recognize that some kids don’t have good parents – and blaming the parents won’t fix it.”

            You mention this issue quite often. I agree that blaming the parents won’t fix the problem of trying to educate children who are saddled with absent/neglectful/uncaring parents. What do you think will fix it?

          • re: ” What do you think will fix it?”

            not blaming any/all, calling it failure, and walking away.

            that’s not constructive at all… but it’s the standard pretty much
            in BR and with most pubic school critics.

            Some of the best educated kids in the country receive their education at public schools – some of the worst also, despite the claim that public schools are “failures” because of places like Richmond – but no mention that Henrico also has some of the worst – much less an intelligent analysis as to why.

          • There’s a difference between “blaming” parents and walking away vs honestly making people aware of what most often leads to problems. For most children, it’s practically impossible to overcome the 80% of their time spent at home with the 20% spent at school.

            Years ago, the doctor wasn’t able to get my mother to stop smoking, but she couldn’t get through a single visit without him telling her about it, and how it contributed to her issues. After years and years and years, she finally quit. She will be 92 in May.

            A loving healthy home environment can’t guarantee a child’s success in life, but a seriously dysfunctional home is almost a guarantee of problems.

            We will never make substantive progress without a common understanding of where things typically go wrong.

            And there are many types of dysfunction. If you look at who was actually doing the rioting this past summer, it wasn’t mostly blacks. There are lots of very spoiled white youth out there who have no respect for authority, or other people’s property.

            What percentage of child celebrities live a normal happy life? Percentage wise, very few. Ron Howard is one of the exceptions. From what I can tell, he hasn’t done drugs or become an alcoholic, etc.

          • Nathan – what is your choice?

            Blaming and walking away brings the problem right back at you later, in spades.

            No, you cannot save all of them but portraying it as an all or nothing circumstance just totally ignores what happens downstream if you really give up – even at 20%.

            This is the dilema of public school. It is a lose-lose with the folks who want to walk away – and blame. They don’t have that luxury and really, neither do we.

            Rich people send their kids off to full-time school – no daily parental involvement. Does that fail? Nope.

            Not saying that is the solution but saying that there is no solution without parents is not right either.

          • “…(That’s why teaching that whites are more inclined to evil is also racist.)”

            I would just like to point out Einstein told a class of black college students that racism is a disease of white people.

            I obviously feel it is a generic human weakness, but something to consider.

      • Detroit began its massive out migration during the 50s when Republicans were in control of the city government. Of course, what did happen in 1950 is that the Black population in the city hit 17 percent, but that sounds like white flight, which we all know is SJW CRT Marxist propaganda.

        And forgive me, it’s not an epidemic. Tragic, sure, that police kill unarmed citizens after making them crawl like dogs down hotel hallways, but not worth talking reforms over. But some people got more money than they should have from AFDC so we needed a contract with America to get rid of it.

        Paraphrase Mel Brooks: Tragedy is when my tax dollars go to people whose lives I disapprove of, the cost of doing business is when a 9-year-old girl is shot to death by the cops while she’s asleep on the couch.

    • “What is the left asking for that’s so intolerable…”

      I can only speak for myself, but since you asked, I’m going to tell you the two things which keep me from considering democrat candidates when I cast my votes in statewide and national election:

      1) The democrat party supports the “right” to kill innocent human beings who are fully capable of surviving outside their mothers’ bodies.

      2) The democrat party is obsessed to the point of irrationality with outlawing firearms and taking them away from law abiding citizens.

      If the democrat party would advocate significant restrictions on late-term abortions, and if they would once and for all stop with their anti-gun bullsh!t, then they would stand a good chance of getting my vote, perhaps as often as 50% of the time.

      • I could agree with you on abortion, but not on guns. So, I guess I would not get your vote.

        • Your feelings about guns are just that – feelings. It’s a simplistic attempt to solve a complex problem.

          In my youth in the country guns were always present. They were necessary to protect livestock for one thing. Nobody ever shot someone, or even pointed a gun in the wrong direction. There are quite literally hundreds of dangerous things on a farm ranging from guns, knives, chain saws, gasoline, etc.

          If people want to kill each other, there are going to be problems. You can pass all the gun laws you want, but it won’t make life good for angry souls bent on destruction. It will, however, take liberty from everyone else.

          It will also leave people who are physically smaller or weaker at the mercy of those who would do them harm.

          • Not every person is qualified to have a gun , much less a full automatic weapon or bazooka or other “arms”.

            We don’t allow them on planes, in courtrooms, polling places, and other… for good and rational reasons…

            It’s not all yes or all no – like the Constitution saying all for rights for “arms”.

          • Larry,

            You are right. Guns are heavily regulated. That is why I do not think they need additional regulation.

            Our new president and our new vice president both strongly favor banning (and confiscating from current owners) the single most popular rifle that has ever been produced in the United States. Why? The percentage of murders in this country in which a rifle of any kind is used (not just this most popular type of rifle, but ALL rifles of ALL kinds) is so small that if all of these murders were somehow prevented, there would be virtually no drop in the murder rate.

            So, Larry, can you tell me why these people are so intent on banning and confiscating this particular type of rifle from law-abiding citizens?

          • Wayne – regulation has to keep pace with technology – as with many other things.

            We seem to have drawn a line in the sand that no matter what, we can’t do anything else. Is that smart?

            Do we agree that fully-automatic weapons with high capacity magasine should not be available to everyone that wants one?

            In terms of what you “think” Biden and others want, I can’t say I share your thinking. A full auto weapon with a high capacity magazine is a military combat weapon designed to kill as many people as possible. That weapon in the hands of a deranged or otherwise unfit individual makes no sense.

            I have no problem what-so-ever with hunting, long rifles and hand guns for home protection. I do not want to see everyone in Walmart with a weapon… nor in the doctors office or a polling place or an aircraft or a school, or a government facilith, etc, etc, etc..

        • What is it you do not like about guns?

          • Like any deadly weapon or device. The same reason I don’t want everyone to pilot an airliner or people that habitually drive drunk or recklessly are dealt with.

            Yes , driving is a privledge but so is gun ownership because we cannot own any/all kinds of “arms” as laid out in the Constitution. We are restricted from owning all manner of “arms” and for good and rational reasons.

            I no more want folks boarding airliners with guns than I want someone outside the airport with a stinger missile.

            This is not “hatred of guns”. It’s a rational awareness that guns are weapons and there is a wide array of “weapons”that can easily be called “arms” – and we all know there are boundaries and rules… restrictions if you will.

            We argue as if there are none or should not be any but the realit is there are and there should be and even pro-gun folks accept some restrictions but oppose others.

          • Larry,

            I DEFY you to find one comment I have made on this blog, or anywhere else for that matter, in which I said, implied or indicated that I think there should be NO gun laws.

            And by the way, your response did not in any way answer my question, which was actually directed at Mr. Hall-Sizemore, and which was a genuine and serious question. I am always interested in why a person whose opinion I respect is so adamantly opposed to guns.

          • where did I say that?

          • “We argue as if there are none or should not be any [restrictions]…”

            No, I don’t.

            Jesus Christ, Larry I’m not ACTUALLY a sociopath – it was a joke.

          • This always freaks people out and I’m 3 Mimosas into a 4 Mimosa run so…
            8th grade Health and PE Norfolk had a 6-week course on gun safety. It really was really only 3 weeks when the boys were in classrooms while the girls had the gym. Anyway, we were instructed in gun handling, cleaning, hunting laws, etc., etc. The last week, those of us with 22s were allowed to bring our rifles to class, we mounted buses, and off we went to the NPD range for target shooting.

            GREAT IDEA!

            And I’m an advocate for the Aussie Plan.

          • You know what, Larry, I’m finished trying to have a rational discussion with you on this issue. You will not stay on topic. You construct giant strawmen out of fully automatic rifles, bazookas and missile launchers any time someone tries to seriously discuss gun laws.

            You’re like an eight year old child.

          • You were allowed on buses with guns and ammo?

            Wayne – when I say “we” , it may not include you -your mileage may vary!

            😉

            “We” is we as a society – that sentiment is present in the discussions.

          • N_N

            I think it is a fantastic idea. People tend to have less fear of something once they have a basic understanding of it.

          • No wayne, I refuse to go by your wants and needs.. sorry

            We say Constitutional Right – that passage says “arms” and not abridged.

            In theory – it’s a guaranteed right to all.

            in reality, it is not.

            Some folks have trouble with that and get frustrated when confronted with it and shout foolishness and ad homs like 8 yr old. That’s your excuse for doing it?

            Grow up.

          • “You were allowed on buses with guns and ammo?”

            Yes. At least my high school ROTC rifle team was.

          • And finally, Larry, I guarantee that I am more rationally aware of how dangerous a firearm is than you are.

            I guarantee it.

          • Damn, dude, maybe it’s YOU who is the sociopath. No self-awareness whatsoever.

          • Okay, cool it. (That’s what boomers say. I know that ’cause Jim says it… more lately than he should have to).

            Yes, they were school buses, which were rare in 1966. For the most part students rode city buses to school in those days. Yep, rifles in cases. Teachers with ammo. Of course, the range day was less of a big deal than just 3 weeks of gun safety.

            It is, in my opinion, that everyone should receive safe handling training. It is also my opinion that ownership should be licensed. No one, not the owners I know, has a problem with CWPs and the training that goes with the permit. Just extend it to ownership. No cost, lifetime permit, but you must pass basic safety training.

            It demystifies it.

            Nah Wayne, Larry’s not a sociopath. I know. We are.

  8. Clearly opinions will differ – as highlighted by Steve’s earlier comments – on how “absurd [it is] to call the event a “coup d’etat,” as University of Virginia pundit Larry Sabato termed it” and whether it is “equally nuts to call the rioters “terrorists,” as President-elect Biden labeled them.” Mitch McConnell – certainly not any type of Democrat – described it as a “failed insurrection.” CNN provided a helpful guide to understanding the differences between the words coup, insurrection, and sedition, and I would say that what happened in the capitol on Wednesday could certainly be described accurately as a (disorganized, ham-handed) coup attempt. (CNN link here: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/07/us/insurrection-coup-sedition-meaning-trnd/index.html).

    All the pedantry aside, I do think that the use of the coup and terrorist terminology highlights the current arms race of rhetoric between the left and right. Each side feels the need to one up the other by using more and more extreme language. The foundation for this race was laid, of course, by Trump himself, who has normalized this kind of rhetoric by publicly using it on a regular basis. Now all parties participate, because no one wants to lose.

    • Okay, UpAgnstTheWall definitely put it better than me in their earlier comment, “Just because a poorly executed coup with no planning carried out by a bunch of ding dongs failed doesn’t mean it wasn’t a coup.”

      • …attempt. A coup attempt.

        A coup, by definition, is successful.

        • This one was successful. It all depends on your POV.

        • WayneS – you’re correct! I should have amended UpAgnstTheWall’s comment to read, “Just because a poorly executed coup with no planning carried out by a bunch of ding dongs failed doesn’t mean it wasn’t a coup attempt.”

          Fellow pedants welcome!

          • I am sure that if you read my comments regularly you will find many opportunities to correct my grammar and usage. Please feel free to do so, it will not offend me…

            …unless you add “you dumbass” to the end of your correction, of course. That might offend me. Nancy_Naive is the only person at BR who gets to call me a dumbass with impunity. You have to EARN that right 🙂

          • re: ” Nancy_Naive is the only person at BR who gets to call me a dumbass with impunity”

            super envious.. 😉

          • Patience, Larry, patience. Your day will come…

          • Wait! I called you a dumbass? I guess at that moment I had more fondness for you than I recall. So, whacha doin’ later?

    • That’s why bank robbery and attempted bank roobery are both crimes.

    • I’m sorry, but this is a one-way street. We’re accurately describing events and the other side isn’t. I don’t care about winning, I care about an honest assessment of reality.

      • “UpAgnstTheWall | January 8, 2021 at 2:11 pm | Reply
        I’m sorry, but this is a one-way street. We’re accurately describing events and the other side isn’t. I don’t care about winning, I care about an honest assessment of reality.”

        When you’ve misconstrued events in an attempt to shape a narrative, you’re not dealing with reality. You’re dealing in propaganda.

      • UpAgnstTheWall – I think you’re referring to my comment above about not wanting to lose a rhetorical arms race, but if not, please feel free to ignore. I think my other comments make it clear that I think the use of the term “coup” is appropriate when qualified with the word “failed” or “attempted.”

        I’m not sold on the use of the word “terrorist” in this context, but that’s because I’m no longer convinced that the words “terrorist” and “domestic terrorism” represent concepts that are adequate or useful for talking about some of the things they are being used to describe.

        There has been a push on the left to describe white supremacist and other far right violence as “domestic terrorism” because for too long those words have been primarily reserved to describe foreigners and American people of color. While I sympathize with the motivations behind this push, I’m not convinced that it’s the correct approach to solving the problem of us not coming down hard enough as a society on ideological violence perpetrated by White Americans.

        I think the push I mention above is actually part of that rhetorical arms race – “Oh, they want to call everyone on the far left antifa? Well, we will call them domestic terrorists when they commit violent acts.”

        • It’s a drag race towards a preverbal “Godwin’s Law”.

        • Except they are terrorists. They planted bombs at the RNC and DNC HQ and the Capitol. Dylann Roof murdered nine Black Americans in a church because he had the political aim of starting a race war. Robert Gregory Bowers killed 11 Jewish Americans because he thought not enough was being down to combat the Jew menace. James Alex Fields killed Heather Heyer and attempted to kill others because he disagreed with their politics. These are terrorist actions. They are designed to intimidate or punish political and ethnic enemies into submission. Not calling them what they are does a disservice to their victims and to the truth.

          • Virginia Martin

            To clarify my comments regarding the use of the words “terrorist” and “domestic terrorist” to describe far right violence in the US, I was thinking specifically of this week’s attack on Congress and the Christmas Day bombing in Nashville, for which no ideological motive was as of yet known before people started describing it as domestic terrorism. Many people who argued that it should be labeled terrorism pointed out that if he were a Muslim, we would have labeled it terrorism right away. I don’t debate that that is likely, but I don’t know if it’s a good reason to call violence without clear ideological motive terrorism.

            It was not my intention to assert that all such violence should never be described as terrorism, and I agree that Dylann Roof and Robert Gregory Bowers’ are aptly described as domestic terrorists. I am less certain about applying the term to James Alex Fields, who indeed committed despicable and unjustifiable actions. I’m just not sure they were terrorism.

            I am sorry that you think that I am doing a disservice to the victims of these attacks by not agreeing with you. I think the greater disservice is being done by the people who support, condone, and offer justifications for their actions, which I certainly am not doing.

          • UpAgnstTheWall

            They planted bombs. They beat a cop to death with a fire extinguisher. They stopped their political enemies from functioning as a government. Where does that fall short of the definition of terrorism?

            James Alex Fields is an avowed Neo-Nazi who drove his car into a crowd of his political enemies with the intent to kill them. Lest you accuse me of leftist escalation of rhetoric, Jeff Sessions and FBI director Christopher Wray (both Republicans) defined this as an act of domestic terrorism.

          • Virginia Martin

            I do not have any desire to accuse you of leftist escalation of rhetoric. You believe that calling the attacks on Congress and James Alex Fields’ attacks terrorism is appropriate, and I have been expressing uncertainty about doing so. I know that there is a legal definition of domestic terrorism, and if Jeff Sessions and Christopher Wray called James Alex Fields a domestic terrorist, then I think it can be safely assumed that he fits that definition. So, I concede that he is indeed appropriately labeled a terrorist and will rescind my qualifiers of uncertainty of its appropriateness.

            Reading the FBI’s definition of domestic terrorism, I see that it is defined as, “Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.” In this case, yes, the attempted coup also fits the definition of domestic terrorism.

            So I guess we can say that a group of domestic terrorists attempted a coup on the United States government. And while that is true by the legal definitions of the words, I guess I just don’t feel like it satisfactorily captures what happened. NPR is going with “pro-Trump extremists” and calling what they’re doing “insurrection.” I like the “pro-Trump extremists” term because it highlights their ideology better than just “domestic terrorist,” which is broad. I am happy with both “insurrection” and “coup.”

            Anyway, not using the word “terrorist” isn’t some attempt at trying to mitigate or minimize what happened, which I think you think is what I’m trying to accomplish. Here are the motivations behind my comments:

            1) discussing whether “terrorism” and “domestic terrorism” are useful / the best words to understand and describe some particular acts of violence by White Americans (not to argue whether these acts fit the legal or popular definition, though I did get into that with you some). I wonder if perhaps we need more and better words to describe these kinds of actions.

            2) Highlighting that the now more common use of extreme rhetoric by both left and right is a rhetorical arms race enabled by Trump and the effects of his behavior on American political culture. Even if some of these actions are accurately described as terrorism by the legal definition, there is clearly now much more reluctance to openly label it as such on the left. Some on the left would argue that it is a good thing. I think that there are costs and benefits to this, both politically and morally, and that some of the political benefits are at times moral costs and vice versa.

          • Virginia Martin

            Yikes. In my last paragraph (too late to edit!) I meant “Even if some of these actions are accurately described as terrorism by the legal definition, there is clearly now much LESS reluctance to openly label it as such on the left.” Big difference in meaning there.

            Also, the reason I believe Jeff Sessions and Christopher Wray is not because they are Republicans and I support their views, but because I know as Republicans they are more reluctant to call white supremacist violence domestic terrorists. If they’re willing to do it, then it must fit the legal definition pretty clearly.

          • The KKK has been around for a long time, but it’s only recently been designated a terrorist group. I know this is Trash Trump week, but facts are facts.

            “Trump to designate KKK, Antifa as terrorist groups in black empowerment plan”

            “President Trump unveiled an economic empowerment plan for black Americans in Atlanta on Friday that will designate both Antifa and the Ku Klux Klan as terrorist organizations.”

            https://nypost.com/2020/09/25/trump-to-designate-kkk-antifa-as-terrorist-groups-in-black-empowerment-plan/

    • Virginia, welcome to the blog! Where have you been? Hope to see you commenting more in the future.

  9. In the late 1980s we st Business Week in New York knew Trump was dangerous. I have been writing about this at BR and all I get are personal putdowns

  10. Put it back, Jim, put it back. It was funnier! Plus, there are those who use accessibility tools, like text to speech!

  11. First they came for the Trump supporters, and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and thought such were bad people

    Then they came for the cities and business, and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I thought they were aggrieved and I wanted to respect their feelings and have them like and accept us.

    Then they came for our police and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I thought they were aggrieved and wanted to respect their feelings and have them like and accept us.

    Then they came for the suburbs, and I did not speak out— because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I thought they were aggrieved and wanted to respect their feelings and have them like and accept us.

    Then they came for statues and pictures of past heroes and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I wanted to respect their feelings and have them like and accept us.

    Then they came for revered books and literature and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I wanted to respect their feelings and have them like and accept us.

    Then they came for media which challenged them and I did not speak out— because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I did not like those media either.

    Then they came for anyone who did not comply with their ideas of social distancing and public safety and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and I was afraid of the virus and thought everyone without similar fear should be disciplined by the government.

    Then they came for our Constitution to enact illegal voting practices and procedures and I did not speak out—because Trump is Orangeman Bad and they told me it would correct social injustice and produce a fairer result

    Then they came for …….Trump supporters are crazies and loons and…

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

  12. HEY DJ! YOU’RE SAFE!

    Preventing an Unhinged President From Using the Nuclear Codes: This morning, I spoke to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike. The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy.

    https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/1821-0

    • Talk about a “sedition”. The speaker of the House usurping the authority of the Office of the President in conjunction with the Military.

      There will be far more precedents set in the next 13 days than most people will care to know, they aren’t going to be good precedents either.

    • Oh neat, a military coup. Fun times we’re living in. Fun, fun times.

      • Precedence:
        Defense Secretary James Schlesinger recalled years later that in the final days of the Nixon presidency he had issued an unprecedented set of orders: If the president gave any nuclear launch order, military commanders should check with either him or Secretary of State Henry Kissinger before executing them. Schlesinger feared that the president, who seemed depressed and was drinking heavily, might order Armageddon.

        https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/11/donald-trump-nuclear-weapons-richard-nixon-215478

        Trump doesn’t drink. He’s just drunk naturally.

        • Let me make it clear that I don’t misunderstand the threat, nor do I think not circumventing the chain of military command is some Kantian imperative.

          But push comes to shove, overruling the president’s lawful powers dictates a coup.

          • The Chairman of the JCoS is the military. At this point, we do not know if Pelosi is interfering with the chain of command, or merely clarifying the definition of a “legal order”.

            It truly is nuanced.

    • The Speaker is not in the chain of the National Command Authority. Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate the military and declare war (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8). But, the Speaker is not authorized to speak for Congress as a whole. Unilateral “I’m in charge” interventions are not consistent with the rule of law. (Perhaps Speaker Pelosi is channeling French King Louis XIV’s “Etat c’est moi” conceit.) But, Speaker Pelosi does not seem to particularly care about the U.S. Constitution or the limits of her authority.

      • I have to agree with you here. Pelosi is treading on shaky ground. She needs to back off some. Maybe Biden will calm her down some.

        • Dems are way out in front of their skis, AGAIN!

          • Bill O'Keefe

            Will someone explain why inciting insurrection and sedition is not worthy of impeachment. He did nothing to keep the mob peaceful. Actions have consequences.

        • I think if this happened some months ago, like during the election itself, it would have been no contest.

          He deserves it, no question, but it’s not going to happen in such a short timeframe and makes the Dems look vindictive and trying to rush the process.

          There are some folks in the Dem party that are, in my view, too far left for many Americans and the GOP exploits it to theie advantage to scare people to vote for the GOP … The Dems lost votes in the election from Hispanics and others because they were effectively portrayed as “socialists”.

          but I digress……..

  13. As Dan Rather pointed out on Tonite Show the other day, Biden needs to decide if his strategy is healing/reducing divisiveness or pushing ahead with the progressive Liberal agenda.

    And I suppose we could put Virginia’s McAuliffe/Cox and other gov candidates in the same predicament. I do not know much about Cox but McAuliffe is pretty good at middle road if he wants to be.

    Somebody needs to be brave enough to tell the progressives to get off of their extremist demands, or else I do not see much hope. But I do see some hope, now that progressives have the baton, all of a sudden they seem a little less divisive, and a little more aware why Trump got in.

    • McAuliffe will be whatever the “lettuce” asks him to be.

      Also, I have no idea how he’d be so popular with the I-66 fiasco and the astronomical tolls. (Well I suppose I do, the people who will still vote for him have their employers pay the toll)

  14. In the end, Trump cost the Republicans the House, Senate, and the Presidency. The SOB did it. He made America great again!

  15. I think that hoping for or trying for rapprochement between the two wings of the Republican Party is a triumph of hope over experience. Trump’s radical right have no interest in finding common ground or the rule of law. They are at least border line anarchists. Republicans made their first mistake in tying themselves to Trump and being subservient. Who stood on principle in Congress?
    If the Republican Party wants to rebuild itself into a competitive party, it should start first with a set of clear principles about what it means to be a republican–small government, fiscal responsibility, strong national defense, equal treatment under the law, etc. If it can’t appeal to the center right, it will go the way of the dinosaurs. I consider myself a Reagan Republican who got left by the party. I am sure that there are many like me who will not adopt the republican banner until major changes are made and leaders show political courage.

    • We can’t reconcile our position on Climate change, but in this and several other posts you spoke in – I’m much more with you than against you.

      I’ve voted Republican in the past, when they were moderate and rational and had the principles you speak of and most important – were willing to compromise to move things forward.

    • O’Keefe makes the point of how it is done: A charismatic leader who can unite enough of the factions around a few shared issues. Reagan was such a candidate. At the end of the day it is always about the candidates and how they match up with the opposition. I remember when the party was dead for good after Watergate. Then….Reagan!

      Enjoying The Crown on Netflix and Gillian Anderson’s take on Maggie Thatcher is also just riveting….Spare me the BS about Republicans being misogynists. Someone like her would win the nomination in a heartbeat.

      • You’re only saying that because of W&M.

        A messiah? But that was Trump. He drew in the deplorables, you know, those you’ve been watching for two days.

        You’re going to have a tough time pulling in the conservative middle from the left of center when the candidates who can appeal to them are primaried by a Chase-like characters.

        But, I believe that we are on the crusp of the 3rd party birth, a 40% middle.

        I actually see a day when you and I will vote for the same candidate as members of the same party. Of course, we will want to get back to the home for pudding immediately afterwards.

        • A friend of mine in college and I formed a political party – “The Sociopathic Libertarian Constitutionalist Party”.

          As far as I know I am still the vice-chairman and recording secretary but we haven’t had an official meeting since that night when…

          …you know what, never mind.

          • Curious? Blue or yellow?

          • Black and slightly darker black.

          • Ah, I forgot you’re in the kiddy pool. It was a reference to my generation’s “50 Shades” series, a widely distributed and screened X-rated movie, even prior to “Midnight Cowboy”.

            Two Swedish productions entitled “I Am Curious (Blue)” and “I Am Curious (Yellow)” that would be rated PG-13 today, maybe even just G.

      • Ha! The way things went with Trump, the Republicans may very well have to offshore for their next best hope!

      • Haner. Your grasping for relevance notwithstanding, I covered a Margaret Thatcher press conference and found her persona electrifying. Laser. Memorable.

    • Bill O’Keefe says:
      “Trump’s radical right have no interest in finding common ground or the rule of law. They are at least border line anarchists.”

      I agree with Bill, but suggest that I suspect that Trumps’ radical right in far smaller and far less powerful and ideological in Republican Party than Democratic Party’s Progressive radical left. I think this is self evident in fact, given Democratic Party’s stated agenda for next 4 years nationally, and the radical change the Democratic Party has brought in Virginia in the last five years. The great tragedy here is now that the Democratic left has means to distract the American people from these facts. And will elements of Republican Party fall in line to protect the selfish interests of certain leaders in safe seats? That is one big question. I predict that many will, and that many will be disenfranchised as a result.

      • Translated: expect a full blown attack on Trumps base, which is majority of Republican’s 75 million voters in last presidential election. As Steve rightly points out, only a strong, talented, charismatic national leader can save the Republican Party nationally now. The GOP needs a Ronald Reagan, or his ilk, to save the party nationally. And in my view, the nation needs such a GOP leader too to save America as we know it historically and under the US constitution as well. Absent that we are looking at revolutionary change to one party leftist rule in America, change such as we have seen in California, New York, New Jersey, and now Virginia.

        • Sorry–don’t see a Ronald Reagan on the horizon. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley are aiming to be Trump-lite. Pence is certainly not charismatic. Maybe Rubio.

          • James Wyatt Whitehead V

            Perhaps a born again outsider? Wait that was 1976. 2024 would be an opportune moment for a little known politician to advance. Maybe Tim Scott or N. Haley? Not a fan of Haley but I do like Scott.

          • I think you’re correct. People seem to forget that the 2016 GOP field was over a dozen candidates, and Trump defeated all of them. That doesn’t exactly speak to the strength of the party.

            The GOP is weak. It has won the popular vote one time since the 1988 election, and that win was tiny and was with the power of incumbency against a very poor candidate and campaign (John Kerry).

            Virginia went blue (and stayed blue) in 2008. Georgia went blue this year (And is now a purple state). Why? Because both states have a sizeable number of ethnic minority voters AND their white electorates are quickly becoming college educated. That combination is what sent California blue in the late 1990s as well. The next Southern state to follow Virginia and Georgia is North Carolina. The demographics are there, and I suspect the D’s will carry it in 2024. The bottom line is this: The current GOP can’t win the nat’l popular vote, and the electoral college/popular vote mismatches in 2000 and 2016 aren’t likely to happen again as Georgia becomes purple along with North Carolina.

  16. My favorite is Russia’s Anarcho- Syndicalist Party. I want to know more about them.

    • As our resident journalist familiar with all things Russia, have you ever read this book about Putin? I found it rather scary. I really wouldn’t want to live in Russia and get on his bad side.

      The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin Paperback – March 5, 2013
      by Masha Gessen

  17. Murkowski to leave the party? Here it comes! The Birth of a Party.

    Could you vote for her, Steve? Hurry up and answer; pudding’s on.

    • Murkowski’s summation of Trump is astounding:

      “He’s either been golfing or he’s been inside the Oval Office fuming and throwing every single person who has been loyal and faithful to him under the bus, starting with the vice president. He doesn’t want to stay there. He only wants to stay there for the title. He only wants to stay there for his ego. He needs to get out. He needs to do the good thing, but I don’t think he’s capable of doing a good thing.”

      • It’s concerning she’s the only one. I fear the Trumplicans run deeper than we think. I would be heartened to see, oh say, five or six more with her. It would be nice to see some 10% of the Republican Party who are not alright with what happened and feel compelled to clean the parlor.

        Even here, they only wring their hands when Amanda gets her gun.

        • Sasse, Romney, and Collins would be with her.

          • And there you have it, the answer to both “Where Goes the Virginia GOP in a Post-Trump Presidency?” and “Why Trump in the first place”. One can not dismiss the effect of both establishment Republicans (past and present) and the disaffected conservative base.

            The GOP and RPV brought this upon themselves by not riding herd on candidates, elected officials and the nominating process. It is a problem that Virginia Republican “leadership” exemplifies at the local, state and national level.

            Consider the following:

            Local Politics, there is no better example than Corey Stewart. He initially achieved public office and Chairman of the County Board as a result of a campaign built on fiscal conservatism and stemming unrestrained growth. Ever the chameleon, he quickly abandoned those principles in favor of whatever headline grabbing position he could grab over the following years, whether he truly believed in the position or not. As a result, Prince William County has an even dumber, unrestrained and fiscally irresponsible board than before, one that can’t agree where the sun rises.

            State Politics Part I, I would point to Del. Kilgore and Sen. Norment as the two prime examples, they care not what their constituents want but rather pull out all stops to appease their Dominion overlords. They are but one example tied to Dominion but there are many others that put campaign donors before the interests of their constituents. Oh, and lest we forget, when irritated by Bob Marshall, leadership ensured he was gerrymandered out of office resulting in Del. Roem. It truly doesn’t pay to irritate the GOP “leadership”.

            State Politics Part II, exemplified by the butt hurt Bill Bolling milquetoast Gillespie and the asshats at Bearing Left. Once defeated or challenged at the primary level, they pull out all the stops to sabotage the party and the nominee, the best example being the Gubernatorial campaign of Cuccinnelli. Republicans, no, the underground wing of centrist Democrats, yes.

            State Politics Part III, the establishment “leadership’s” handling of the candidate selection process for statewide and Congressional seats (see above) and support of the incumbent protection plan; leading to the selection of flawed and subpar candidates (too many to list) as well as an insurance policy for incumbents on both sides of the aisle more interested in protecting their fiefdom than the interests of the Commonwealth.

            National Level Part I, Eric Cantor, need I provide additional examples or an explanation.

            National Level Part II, Mittens Romney and the Ball-Less wonder that was Pre-Trump McConnell. In my estimation there have been none more responsible for the destruction of the GOP and the rise of both the Tea Party and Trump than those two self-important, arrogant Ass Clowns.

            Thus, the answer to both “Where Goes the Virginia GOP in a Post-Trump Presidency?” and “Why Trump in the first place”. The ongoing problem is that absent significant change in the establishment leadership of the GOP at both the National and State level, the GOP is unlikely to learn from its mistakes and continue to sponsor annual circular firing squads.

          • Reed Fawell 3rd

            Excellent summation. And based on current non events in today’s RPV, I see no reason to expect anything different from RPV in the foreseeable future, given its lack of strong, principled, and courageous leaders. I surely wish some would emerge because this can be turned around, given Dems horrible record of failing the people of Virginia.

          • I’ll expect a significant campaign contribution when I lower my standards and seek office in the Imperial Clown Show.

          • Reed Fawell 3rd

            This may be the start of The Reinvention of the Old Dominion.

          • Reed, I must have some mystical powers as almost on cue, a whiny, defensive post by Bolling has appeared on Bearing Left complete with a picture of him, Gillespie and Mittens.

          • Reed Fawell 3rd

            Yup, Mom, I read it, and its dispirited surrounds, all of it very week tea.

            These poor folks are stale and desiccated beyond redemption: lost, battered and adrift souls, shades really, in need of serious and extended professional psychological counseling and testosterone injections, not another furtive round of other peoples’ wasted Republican campaign contributions.

          • Mr. Falwell, please define the characteristics that should define a republican.
            If it doesn’t include support for the rule of law, you need to do more thinking and studying.

          • Reed Fawell 3rd

            Very Weak Tea! (Damn auto spelling correct!)

          • Reed Fawell 3rd

            Ex college President O’Keefe with bow tie, if you want my serious attention you first need to get serious yourself. For example, learn what my name is instead of using someone else’s name, and stop accusing me with trite, banal and dishonest charges because you have not bothered to read with care what I have said here recently, much less been saying here for past decade.

          • You may have to excuse him, his VPAP donor history explains why (forgot about Chris Peace):

            $4,955 Peace for Delegate – Christopher
            $800 McLaughlin for New Kent County Sheriff – John
            $500 Bolling for Governor – Bill
            $500 Gillespie for Governor – Ed
            $500 McDonnell for Governor – Bob
            $150 Brownlee for Attorney General – John
            $100 Norment for Senate – Thomas

  18. re: ” “You were allowed on buses with guns and ammo?”

    Yes. At least my high school ROTC rifle team was.”

    did they allow annoying 8 year olds or did they have rules?

    are we moving the goal posts again?

    in terms of what you know about weapons – and your perception of others, I seriously doubt it … do you think you know it all? That might be an issue you know even with sociopaths!

    geeze… if you really think that – does your cursor work? You can avoid all of this quite easily, right?

  19. Nathan. Of course. Am not a Gessen fan. There are many better and when I get to my desk I will send a list.

  20. Nathan,
    Try these:
    “Putin’s People” by Catherine Belton.

    “The New Czar” by Steve Myers.

    Both are better than Gessen.

  21. Who really cares where the Virginia GOP goes? They are as useless as pedals on a wheelchair.

  22. Forget black and white for a moment. Forget race as the issue.

    If you consider the USCP as a representative sample of civilian police forces throughout the country, then the litmus paper just turned bright red.

    Is it possible they folded like a beach chair in the face of extreme right ideology because they are overwhelmingly staffed with extreme right sympathizers?

    Time and again in places like Wisconsin and Michigan, and now with the Capitol, we have seen the extremists take the state’s houses with bloodless ease and few arrests.

    Maybe this is the Republican’s “time”? Is the iron hot? If you’re going to do it…

  23. A warning to my Republican friends: listen to the song by Judas from Jesus Christ Superstar, “Heaven on Their Minds”.

    First, it’s really cool and an enjoyable song. But then, pay attention to the words. Read the lyrics, “and they’ll hurt you if they think you’ve lied.”

    And then consider they fact that this mob wasn’t just after Pelosi. They were coming for Pence and Graham. They were after Romney. They had zip-ties.

    Reason in the Republican Party is not safe.

  24. re: white folks and racism.

    Perhaps Einstein did not know of Louis Farrakhan or it
    was before his time?

    Racism is not unique to the US Around the world, people of different races and ethinicities hate – and kill each other.

    Our thing is that we claim we are better and have “equal opportunity” for all, “color blind”, etc… but these issues are still with us.

  25. The Virginia GOP should definitely rid itself of the Retrumplicans and this should start with the four US representatives that even as the Capitol building lay ransacked, still voted to support the objection to the electors from AZ and PA. As for Amanda Chase, should video place within the building with the other insurrectionists, then she can expect to be taken into custody Del. Derrick Evans (R) WVa.

  26. Mr. Fawell, I apologize for the misspelling of your name. I asked a question which you did not bother to answer. Instead, you were insulting. Get serious and stop attempting retribution if you want to be taken seriously.

Leave a Reply