Jim Gilmore and "Wingnut Welfare"

Kyle Blankenship believes that Jim Gilmore's appointment as head of the Alexandria-based "Free Congress Foundation" is an example of "Wingnut Welfare." It's a catchy phrase, and it almost certainly applies to Gilmore. The "Welfare" part is self explanatory. As to the "Wingnut" part, let's just say that Gilmore could only be considered a moderate by the "Sideshow Bob" Marshall/Ken Kookinelli wing of the Republican Party. Thus, as governor of Virginia, Gilmore "signed into law legislation establishing a 24-hour waiting period and informed consent for women seeking an abortion" and "went to court to try to prevent the removal of a feeding tube of coma victim Hugh Finn." In addition, Gilmore's your standard-issue right-wingnut in terms of environmental issues ("drill baby drill!"), unions (opposes making it easier for people to join them), and something he calls "government-run health care" (apparently, Gilmore wants to eliminate Medicare and ditch Tricare), etc., etc.

Given all this, you'd think that Gilmore would fit in at the Free Congress Foundation, but I wonder if that organization might prove too wingnutty even for Gilmore:

FCF has also been willing to spark controversy on other fronts. It rejects what it calls Political Correctness, dubbing it "cultural Marxism" and blaming it on the Frankfurt School of left-wing thinkers. Accordingly, it has been more willing than many other conservative groups to endorse or entertain views that some, especially on the left, would consider offensive and evidence of bigotry. It is arguably hostile to Islam as a whole, rather than confining its criticism to extremist Islam or Islamism. With regard to Judaism, in his column of April 13, 2001 (Good Friday) titled Indeed, He is Risen!, Weyrich argued that "Christ was crucified by the Jews.... He was not what the Jews had expected so they considered Him a threat. Thus He was put to death."

Right, well, hmmmm. Anyway, as if all that's not wingnutty enough, FCF has also been opposed to the "War on Terror," the war in Iraq, free trade, arms control, and the USA PATRIOT Act. Does Jim Gilmore agree with all of this, or will he move to shift direction at his new wingnut home? If the latter, will Gilmore's prominent new role "affect the political/ideological landscape of a Republican Party and conservative wing dominated by advocates of an expansive and expensive U.S. military engagement abroad -- for what critics and some advocates call 'nation-building' -- who support a war on 'Islamo-fascism?'" I don't know, but it will be fascinating to watch as Gilmore settles in to his new "Wingnut Welfare" role.

Gilmore Defends Steele Cashing In On RNC Chair Job

For more on this story, see the Washington Times:

Michael S. Steele, Republican National Committee chairman, is using his title to market himself for paid appearances nationwide, personally profiting from speeches with fees of up to $20,000 at colleges, trade associations and other groups - an unusual practice criticized by a string of past party chairmen.

[...]

"Holy mackerel, I never heard of a chairman of either party ever taking money for speeches," said Frank J. Fahrenkopf Jr., RNC chairman under President Reagan and CEO of the American Gaming Association.

"The job of a national chairman is to give speeches. That's what the national party pays him for. We didn't have a rule book back then, but being national chairman was and is a full-time job," Mr. Fahrenkopf said.

Former Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson, who served in that position from 1997 to 2000 and was President George W. Bush's Veterans Affairs secretary from 2005 to 2007, said the job "demands so much of your time that you can work 24/7 and not get everything done, so taking time out to speak for the benefit of one's own bank account is not appropriate."

In contrast to the other ex-RNC chairs, Jim Gilmore believes it's perfectly appropriate for Michael Steele take money for speeches while head of the RNC. I can just imagine what he'd be saying if Tim Kaine were doing that as chair of the DNC.

In Hampton Roads, Partiers Neither Enraged Nor Engaged

Far from the gaggles of the fearful and uninformed, the easily influenced and manipulated minions of the emotional right, the grassroots constitutionalists that are the "mainstream" Libertarians in Hampton Roads are your neighbors rather than the caricatures often depicted. What we have here, are some sincere citizens that have been a mainstay of Hampton Roads politics for a long time. A lot of us of different political bents know each other and respectfully disagree on much but hold the same fundamental hopes, dreams, and aspirations for ourselves and our families. These just weren't paying attention when it mattered most.

I have never been booted from a meeting of the groups of activists who frequent the Virginia Beach Taxpayer Alliance (VBTA) and Libertarian gatherings. In fact, they welcome discourse and are academic; much more than I can say for the Virginia Beach Republicans who regularly demonstrate cloistered paranoia. The hyperbole employed by emotionalists is too often over the top and that discourages constructive debate. Robert Dean, communications director for the VBTA, provides a steady guiding hand at the meetings. Guests always experience courteous hospitality if few softball questions. Shouting and disorderly conduct are unwelcome and never observed though a few tongue in cheek barbs are judiciously hurled. Local politicians have no reasonable trepidation to justifiably dismiss an invitation out of hand. In fact, some, like Virginia Beach Commissioner of the Revenue Phil Kellam, a Democrat, are happy for the opportunity to let the group "review his books."

So it was not surprising that when the Virginia Beach Democratic Committee (VBDC) cancelled Congressman Nye's appearance this past Saturday, in the confusion over "Town Hall or Not Town Hall," Kellam was on the spot. Kellam's record of innovation and management in office have yielded the very kinds of results the VBTA calls for in every area of government. When the Tea Party decided to attend the VBDC breakfast despite the change of speaker, Kellam looked forward to making sure they had the fiscal record straight. He lashed out at Jim Gilmore and the succession of Republican obstructionists in the General Assembly who have blocked progress in Virginia. Unfortunately, of the two dozen or so who did come to the location, none chose to actually come to listen. They remained outside along Holland Road, unengaged.

We've got a lot of energy around here. We've got energy where we are trying to solve problems, on the inside here. And we have energy where we're trying to just call attention to problems, on the outside. Now what's the difference? Real simple difference…We're going to do something about it. – Phil Kellam

The sign toting group Saturday did not include familiar faces from the VBTA and a number of them were not residents of Virginia Beach. In fact, in a group post, Reid Greenmun had debated between attending the VBTA and the VBDC simultaneous events. They were a pleasant enough bunch even though they were remiss to not at least send someone in to hear what was being discussed and make a point if there were one. It is unfortunate that they have taken this long to come to the defense of the constitution, missing the golden opportunities to demand we stay out of two unconstitutional wars and vigorously object to the economic house of cards built by the Bush administration. In a way, they are Johnny come lately to the crisis and the principles they want to apply now amount to noisy regrets rather than solutions. Don't dismiss these as fringe lunatics; recognize their remorse for their failure to stand up when it was eminently important.

Cross posted at VBDems