Virginia is one week away from a Republican Primary contest featuring several important races. This article will focus on two of these races.
The first, the US Senate race between former Governor and Senator George Allen, State Delegate Bob Marshall and two political newcomers Bishop E.W. Jackson and Jamie Radtke.
The second race will look at is a US Congressional Primary race between incumbent Congressman Eric Cantor and Independent turned Republican Floyd Bayne in the 7th Congressional District.
Most people are familiar with Allen and Cantor. Both have been in the public eye for a while and are well liked by Virginians. These are the front runners in their respective races and the odds on favorite to win the primary. Delegate Marshall is a capable legislator and a bit less well known, although he is well known among us political junkies. And last but not least, Bishop Jackson who is easily the most charismatic of the lot.
But the headline of this post, “Radicals, Revolution and the Virginia Republican Primary” refers to a similar dynamic that is happening in the Senate race between Allen and Radtke and the Congressional race between Cantor and Bayne. The similarities here are very interesting.
In both cases, we have a well known, successful politician pitted against a newcomer. And in both cases, the newcomers are far behind in the polls and have resorted to personal destructive negative tactics. Yet while the underdogs are wallowing in the mud, both of the leading candidates are pretty much ignoring the ankle biting, shooing them off like flies at a picnic.
Both Radtke and Bayne have similar platforms. Their opponent is Satan and has destroyed the planet, caused all of the problems facing America and is personally responsible for Global Warming, flesh eating zombies and the passing of ObamaCare.
Ok, I admit the Global Warming and zombies are hyperbole, but Radtke actually blames Allen for ObamaCare. If only he had not lost his seat, so ObamaCare is all Allen’s fault.
That is singularly the most illogical and off the wall statement I have heard a Republican Candidate make, and one more befitting of a Debbie Wasserman-Schultz or Nancy Pelosi than a conservative. And it smacks of desperation.
And while Bayne has not been quite as “off the wall” unhinged as Radtke, the rhetoric from Camp Bayne has been no less vitriolic.
But don’t get me wrong. I totally agree with pretty much everything Floyd Bayne stands for and, up until Radtke totally lost her poise and direction, her beliefs as well. She seems to have melted under the pressure.
But they are right. Eric Cantor and George Allen have a history of voting for things that, while they seemed logical at the time, given today’s renewed emphasis on the once forgotten US Constitution, are totally out of touch with the founder’s vision and framework. America has drifted so far to the left that we are in jeopardy of seeing the country crash and burn.
And most of us failed to notice the drift. And our silence convinced our elected leaders that we were all on-board with the leftward movement.
But credit Barack Obama for waking us up. The Progressives have been behind the subtle drift and have used Saul Alinsky’s book “Rules for Radicals” as a blueprint to overthrow the government – quietly.
I have found that most of my Conservative friends have not actually read the Alinsky book. Not that the Marxist, Socialist, Communist, Progressive author was someone to be admired for his ideology – far from it. But his astute observations and his knowledge of what people will accept was remarkable. The 1971 “Rules for Radicals” book was aimed at the radical and dangerous groups that demanded change and demanded it NOW!
Alinsky knew that Americans would never accept a radical and rapid move to the left. He said that people will easily accept change in small increments, and it is more readily accepted if you give them something good to go along with the change. And if you wondered where Obama’s “Hope and Change” slogan came from, there it is!
And shortly after the book began circulating, the radical left began studying the methods and words and adopted it, quite successfully, as a road-map to slowly drift the country to the left. He showed them a way to use gradual and slow change that people will allow instead of the bombs and riots of the 1960′s and 1970′s.
And he urged patience.
If they moved too far too quickly they run the risk of a counterrevolution. People hate rapid change.
And after grabbing power in 2006 and 2008, the Progressives like Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and the people pulling their strings believed it was over and that they had won. They could do anything they wanted and get away with it. The government could take over Health Care, unions could once again rule the industrial world and the Progressive movement was in power forever.
Yep. They got cocky and failed to heed Alinsky’s warning about going too far too fast. And the counterrevolution he predicted came to pass and called themselves the TEA Party as the Progressives rammed one Socialist Program after another down American’s throats and we all choked on ObamaCare. And the push back began.
(And if you were curious about how the left could embrace the Occupy movement and hold the TEA Party in contempt, Rules for Radicals makes that clear. The Occupy people are just a second wave of the radicals of the 60′s and 70′s, they have just not evolved into Alinskyites – or Progressives. And the TEA Party is the counterrevolution they all fear.)
Now the TEA Party must realize that while they are the counterrevolution, the Progressive Revolution is nearly complete. The country is as far to the left as it has ever been. And any move to return us to the Constitution and to the country the founders envisioned is radical. My kind of radical, to be sure. But anyone demanding a smaller, fiscally responsible, Constitutional government must realize that we are a long way off from that goal.
And while Alinsky was a disastrous “philosopher”, his blueprint for effecting change works in reverse as well.
The rapid and immediate change that Radtke and Bayne demand are as radical a change today as the Students for a Democratic Society - the SDS – and their offshoot the Weather Underground, espoused in the 60′s and 70′s. Just in the opposite direction. And while I happen to agree with the destination these two want to go, America will no more accept their rapid change than it did the kind of change Bill Ayres wanted.
While Radtke and Bayne attack Allen and Cantor for being left wing “liberals” and see an immediate hard turn to the right as the only answer, the fact that almost half of Americans see Allen and Cantor as far right wing “radicals” that are out of touch with most of America, and consider them radical Conservatives ought to give the Virginia challengers a clue. While the rhetoric Radtke and Bayne use plays well to the less than 10% of Americans who are with them on the far right, it scares the hell out of 90% of the rest of America because it is too far too fast.
And the campaign run by both Bayne and Radtke shows that they are incapable of playing well with others. During one presidential debate, then Candidate Rick Santorum said politics was a team sport. It almost sunk his campaign, if not for a second wind. And while he was criticized for daring to say such a thing, he was absolutely right. Politics in D.C. is a team sport. You can join the team or you can sit on the bench. Radtke and Bayne would be on the bench, completely ineffective, shunned by Republicans and Democrats alike.
And it’s sad that these two runners up are seen as a far right fringe. In 1776, both would have been seen as centrists, smack dab in the center of the political spectrum. And that is the America we need to restore. But radical change is never going to be accepted. We must get back the same way we got this far to the left – slow and steady.
We have had a lot of success because the left miscalculated and pushed too far. Since 2008, conservatives have made remarkable strides. If anything, we have gained too much too fast.
Candidates like Radtke and Bayne understand the destination, but they are clueless on how to get there. While I don’t envision either of them turning to violence like Ayers and the left wing radicals of days gone by, they are dangerous candidates in the sense that if they were successful, the progress we have made would be at risk. The counterrevolution – or perhaps the counter-counterrevolution – would surely rise from the ashes of defeat.
Alinsky was right about the TEA Party. We are now running the Alinsky plan in reverse. We need to back out slow and steady or we will never get out of this mess at all.
Patience and wisdom are required. Lashing out in the darkness with emotional fits of rage is not going to get it done. It will take years to get back to the founders vision. It’s the only way.