What was Ohio state Sen. George Lang thinking? ‘Civil war’ isn’t a fight we want | Opinion

What the hell was George Lang thinking?

The Ohio state senator's "civil war" comment at a rally in Middletown for Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance was irresponsible, reckless and stunningly ignorant in the wake of the recent assassination attempt against former President Donald Trump. It goes without saying that his remarks should be strongly condemned by Republicans, Democrats and, more importantly, voters.

He's an embarrassment.

Unfortunately, corrosive, fear-mongering rhetoric that calls for violence is becoming more frequent in our politics, no matter what some politicians claim about wanting to "unify the country." Lang, who quickly realized that he'd stepped in steaming pile of excrement, offered this apology in a written statement:

"Remarks I made earlier today at a rally in Middletown do not accurately reflect my views. I regret the divisive remarks I made in the excitement of the moment on stage."

Lang's mea culpa only makes him look worse. If the remarks don't accurately reflect his views, then why make them in the first place? Does that mean Lang was simply pandering to the crowd, throwing them the red meat he thought they wanted instead of sticking to his own principles and beliefs? Isn't that the type of gaslighting from politicians most voters claim to hate?

And civil war? Is that what Lang really wants? Is that what he really believes the folks in that Middletown crowd want? I grew up there, senator, and still know many good people in that town. Middletonians don't always agree, but we've always been a community, a family. The good people I know there don't have "civil war" on their minds.

Americans can trust that Kamala Harris would get the job done as president | Opinion

So why say it, then? Lang says he got caught up in "the excitement of the moment," as if he was a five-year-old set loose by his parents in a candy store. It leaves one to wonder what poor governing decisions Lang might have made or might yet make in the "excitement of the moment." Is the proposition of "civil war" something he finds exciting − something to get the crowd revved and juiced up? That's a disappointing and scary thought all at once.

Americans, particularly registered voters, must hold our elected officials to higher standards. Lang's remarks lack statesmanship and are beneath the office he holds. We should want our politicians to be thoughtful, to actually ponder what they are about to say before they get on stage at a rally, in front of a television camera, or before a gaggle of news reporters. I don't know what's worse: to imagine that Lang carefully scripted his "civil war" comment before saying it at the rally, or that he just decided to wing it and spouted that trash off-the-cuff. Either way it gives us some insight into his mindset.

I don't know George Lang personally, and maybe he didn't really mean what he said. Only he knows the truth. But we have to get away from this type of political discourse in our country − the politics of division, demonization and violence. Politics has always been a rough-and-tumble game, but in the past decade, it's become a mean, nasty, no-holds-barred affair with human decency being the biggest casualty. Words like "traitor," treason," and "civil war" weren't uttered in political speeches back in the day, but now they are standard fare. We seem hellbent on convincing each other that our fellow Americans on the other side of the aisle are our enemies, while praising foreign dictators in Russia, China and other places who are the real threats to our country.

Trump signals full embrace of Project 2025 by picking JD Vance as VP. I'm terrified. | Opinion

We've got to stop cheering remarks like these at rallies. They are not applause lines. They should be met with gasps and disdain. Every time we clap, shout or pose for selfies afterward, a politician like George Lang feels empowered to make more dumb and dangerous comments that don't reflect our American values.

Some have called for Vance to apologize, too. Maybe for his decision to put Lang on stage in the first place, but Lang bears the responsibility of his words all by himself. Vance at least had the good sense to leave Lang out of when he thanked other Republicans by name at the rally, but it still would have been good to see him make a stronger statement condemning Lang's comments. Even the suggestion of political violence can never be given comfort or quarter, no matter who it comes from.

I don't believe most Americans want civil war. Only the most twisted, insidious, un-American among us do. Few of us would be prepared if it did arrive on our doorstep tomorrow. Chants to "Fight! Fight! Fight!" are fine so long as the fighting is done within the systems our Founding Fathers designed to settle our political differences versus in the streets.

No matter how much we may disagree with the other side, "civil war" is not the fight we want. So let's stop talking about it.

Opinion and Engagement Editor Kevin S. Aldridge can be reached at kaldridge@enquirer.com. X: @kevaldrid

This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Despite what Lang said at Vance rally, nothing good about ‘civil war'