The RNC this week is attempting to put together a resolution condemning the support of "socialist" policies by president Bush and some members of the House and Senate. The resolution is a chance for the RNC to stand on record against the bailouts and possible future 'stimulus packages'. But what of it? Is this a signal that the RNC will start taking back policy control of a party that has been hijacked for the last eight (if not 12) years by power brokers and religious zealots? Or is this simply what it appears to be; a non-binding statement attempting to shed blame for the actions that so clearly cost them control of the country?
This may very well be a solid step in the right direction for the RNC but I can't imagine it making even the remotest splash if it is limited to the bailout votes and to future inevitable 'stimulus'. If the RNC wants to get it's feet back on the ground and it's cards back in the game it must start with a complete and full scale disavowal of the anti-liberty policies of the Bush administration. They cannot in good conscience pretend to be outraged at the 'socialism' of the current economic situation, when they were never outraged at "No Child Left Behind", or the Patriot Act, or the largest expansion of non-military federal spending by any administration in the history of the world. It's ridiculous.
I have to applaud the RNC for this attempt to take back control of the Republican party from the power-hungry celebretards that have been in the drivers seat. But I can't applaud much, this gesture might have meant something at say, the convention. Now broken, beaten and out of power this simply looks like a weak attempt to shrug off blame for the mistakes for which they have been consciously complicit all along.