Home Blog Page 2325

Cuccinelli’s Crazy, Extremist Donors: Larry Pratt (Part 2 of a Series)

By
lowkell
-
0

In Part 1 of this series, we looked at Ken Cuccinelli donor Foster Friess, who gave Cuccinelli $25,000 in early 2013, who has “a long history funding Islamophobic organizations,” and who claimed that  liberals were somehow to blame for the Columbine shooting. He also, infamously, told told Andrea Mitchell: “this contraceptive thing, my gosh, it’s so – it’s such – inexpensive, you know, back in my days, they used Bayer Aspirin for contraception. The gals put it between their knees and it wasn’t that costly.”  In other words, he’s a raving, right-wing extremist nutjob. And a big Cuccinelli supporter. But I repeat myself. 🙂

Anyway, today our focus turns to Gun Owners of America (GOA) President Larry Pratt, who Think Progress described as “Fringe Gun Rights Advocate With Ties To White Supremacists Helped Build Up ALEC.”

…In the early 1980s, Pratt and the GOA were outspoken supporters of the white rulers in South Africa during apartheid...In 1990, Pratt wrote a book titled “Armed People Victorious” based on his study of death squads in Guatemala and the Philippines, and advocated for similar “citizen defense patrols” in the United States. The idea reportedly caught on in 1992, when Pratt addressed a three-day meeting of neo-Nazis and Christian Adherents organized by white supremacist Pete Peters. He shared the stage with a former Ku Klux Klan leader and an Aryan Nation official.

Pratt also held leadership roles in ALEC for many years…When Pratt was elected to the Virginia State Legislature in 1981, he took a leadership position in ALEC. He sat on ALEC’s board even after he left the legislature, serving as its treasurer into the 1990s.

Meanwhile, the organization Pratt helped lead shared his passion for relaxing guns laws…including not only bills that may protect vigilante shooters but that also lead to more armed people on the streets who may cite laws like Florida’s so-called Stand Your Ground or “Kill at Will” bill…Even though GOA left ALEC years ago, it was a long-time member and leader. GOA leapt to the defense of Florida’s law, ratified by ALEC, in the wake of the shooting of unarmed high school student Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman.

GOA’s Larry Pratt hit the airwaves in defense of Zimmerman, the 28-year-old man who shot and killed Martin. Pratt branded 17-year-old Martin as “an aggressor,” based on the account of an alleged eyewitness who would only identify himself as “John,” and described Martin as having knocked down his attacker and Zimmerman acting in self-defense…

…Consider this, Pratt’s long-standing ties to white supremacists forced him to step down from his role as co-chairman of Pat Buchanan’s 1996 presidential campaign. Too radical for Pat Buchanan? That’s all we need to know.

But wait, there’s more! Pratt also has been profiled by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which writes:

Larry Pratt, a gun rights absolutist whose Gun Owners of America (GOA) has been described as “eight lanes to the right” of the National Rifle Association, may well be the person who brought the concept of citizen militias to the radical right.

In 1990, Pratt wrote a book, Armed People Victorious, based on his study of “citizen defense patrols” used in Guatemala and the Philippines against Communist rebels – patrols that came to be known as death squads for their murderous brutality.

Picturing these groups in rosy terms, Pratt advocated similar militias in the United States – an idea that finally caught on when he was invited for a meeting of 160 extremists, including many famous white supremacists, in 1992.

It was at that meeting, hosted in Colorado by white supremacist minister Pete Peters, that the contours of the militia movement were laid out.

Pratt, whose GOA has grown since its 1975 founding to some 150,000 members today, hit the headlines in a big way when his associations with Peters and other professional racists were revealed, convincing arch-conservative Pat Buchanan to eject him as a national co-chair of Buchanan’s 1996 presidential campaign.

The same year, it emerged that Pratt was a contributing editor to a periodical of the anti-Semitic United Sovereigns of America, and that his GOA had donated money to a white supremacist attorney’s group.

Pratt is today close to the extremist Constitution Party and its radical theology.

Horrible, right? No sane politician would ever be caught in the presence of this guy, let alone take money from him (or from his organization, Gun Owners of America)? Well, guess what: Ken Cuccinelli has done all of those things. Photo? Check (see above, courtesy of The Liberty Lamp – the two of them look like old pals, don’t they?). Money from Pratt and GOA? Check, see VPAP here and here for the thousands of dollars Cuccinelli’s received from this guy. The scary thing, this is just par for the course for Cuccinelli, whose campaign has one of the leading “Swift Boat” dudes as its top strategist. It also receives large sums of money from the likes of the Koch brothers and CONSOL Energy (see here for some video on that subject), in addition to Foster Friess and Larry Pratt. It’s truly a cesspool, truly astonishing that this dangerous extremist has gotten as far as he has in his career. The thing is, Cooch’s an extremist, but he’s also a slick, smooth-talking politician, and he’s apparently managed to fool a lot of people over the years. Of course, it helps that the media hasn’t done its job and exposed Cuccinelli’s unsavory connections, but that would require the “journalists” to do…wait for it…actual work! I know, what a concept.

Eugene Resnick, UVA Class of 2010: University of Virginia’s Board of Visitors Have Learned Nothing

By
iamnotaloan
-
4

( – promoted by lowkell)

As the campaign to restore funding for AccessUVa (the University of Virginia's financial aid program) turns up the heat this week, I AM NOT A LOAN will be posting stories and comments from those who have benefited from the program directly. Today's story is by Eugene Resnick, who graduated from the University of Virginia in 2010:

I am a 2010 graduate of the College of Arts and Sciences, and served as a College Representative on the Student Council in 2009-2010. I was an Echols Scholar and Distinguished Major having received a full 100% grant from AccessUVA. Without it, it would have been impossible to attend a university as expensive and prestigious as UVA without graduating with massive amounts of debt that would have haunted me and my family for a lifetime. I was one of the first classes of AccessUVA recipients.

It is thanks to AccessUVA grants that allowed me to pursue a UVA education, opened the door for me to study abroad in Denmark and India, intern abroad in Ireland, partake in multiple ASB trips to Ecuador and Peru, and so much more in the four years I spent in Charlottesville. It made me the person I am today and I am deeply disappointed by the Board of Governor's decision. I am shocked, and baffled to hear that the University is now going backwards when we made so much progress in the 2006-2010 period that I was there.

I thank AccessUVA and UVA in general for giving me the inspiration to pursue a Master's at one of the most prestigious universities in the world, the London School of Economics, where I completed an MSc in 2011. I currently still live in London, working in communications and public relations for corporate clients. All of this would not have been possible without AccessUVA. The Board of Visitors has clearly learned nothing and it is a shame to see what has happened to UVA since I graduated in 2010. I am deeply disappointed especially as my main motivation for donating to the University was targeted towards helping others in AccessUVa.

—  Eugene Resnick, CLASS of 2010, AccessUVA Recipient, Echols Scholar

To show your support for students, please sign the petition telling the Board of Visitors to restore full funding for the AccessUVa program.

Video, Press Call: Mark Obenshain’s and EW Jackson’s Views Identical on Women’s Health Issues

By
lowkell
-
1

I just got off a conference call with DPVA Executive Director Lauren Harmon and State Senator Barbara Favola, discussing Mark Obenshain’s extreme record on women’s health. But first, check out the video, of EW Jackson lauding Mark Obenshain for his far-right-wing views on women’s health and reproductive freedom (or lack thereof, in these guys’ cases). At the 2011 Valley Family Forum’s annual “Salute To The Family” dinner, extremist nutjob EW Jackson warmed up the crowd for Obenshain, saying, “I know [Mark Obenshain], I know his work, I can’t think of anybody more deserving of the Wilberforce Award.” Great, huh? Kinda gives you a warm, fuzzy feeling? No, didn’t think so.

And what, you ask, is the Valley Family Forum (the group that gives out the Wilberforce Award), you ask? Well, among other things, they believe that “Abortion is America’s holocaust, and Roe v. Wade should be overturned.” They’re also closely affiliated with David Barton, an “evangelical historian” who “argues that the United States was founded as a Christian nation and must return to those roots.” Barton was totally discredited in 2012, “with the publication in April 2012 of his book ‘The Jefferson Lies,’ which portrays Thomas Jefferson as an orthodox Christian who saw no need to separate church and state.” The book was so bad that “Christian scholars tore apart the new book, pointing out a bevy of errors and distortion,” and it was even “voted ‘the least credible history book in print‘ in an online poll by the History News Network.” Anyway, this is the same guy closely connected with the group that had EW Jackson praising Mark Obenshain, and which awarded Obenshain an award for his extremist work over the years.

Speaking of which, why exactly DID Mark Obenshain receive the Wilberforce Award? According to the Valley Family Forum, it’s for Obenshain’s sponsorship of legislation like: the “Right to Life Act,” a “Ban on Abortion Services in Health Care Exchanges,” the anti-LGBT “Marriage Amendment,” and also (of course) “school choice.” And that’s not even mentioning Obenshain’s sponsorship of a bill that would have criminalized miscarriages, and for his support of “personhood” legislation that would effectively make all abortions (including in cases of rape, incest, or the life/health of the mother) equivalent to murder, while banning many forms of contraception, in-vitro fertilization, and embryonic stem cell research. Yeah, Obenshain’s a frightening guy, with even more frightening friends. And perhaps most frightening of all is that he doesn’t necessarily come across like an EW Jackson or Ken Cuccinelli-level raving lunatic, so a lot of people think he’s not. But he very much is. In fact, I’d argue he’s actually MORE dangerous than Cuccinelli and Jackson, because he’s quieter and therefore more insidious.

With that, here are a few highlights from the DPVA conference call.

*Lauren Harmon said “frankly, EW Jackson is scary,” particularly on women’s health issues. Harmon reminded us of Jackson’s comments claiming Planned Parenthood has been far worse than the KKK, and comparing abortion to slavery.

*Harmon noted that Obenshain votes “like EW Jackson talks,” and in fact was awarded for those views by the Valley Family Forum. The bottom line, in Harmon’s views, is that Jackson’s and Obenshain’s views on women’s health issues “are the same.”

*Sen. Favola said it’s “very important we peel back the onion and tell voters…what the candidates stand for and what their actions stand for.”

*According to Favola, Obenshain has been “running a stealth campaign, where he really has not come forward and told voters the truth” about his record on women’s health care, reproductive freedom, and other issues.

*Favola: “Mark Obenshain has introduced bills” (e.g., “personhood,” criminalizing miscarriage, transvaginal ultrasound) and “taken votes that very much support EW Jackson’s rhetoric. It is very frightening.”

*”These votes indicate true values…what he thinks and where he places his emphasis.” They are not one-time votes, they are repeated, over many years and many votes a “consistent pattern.”

*Bottom line: Obenshain “has a clear record of trying to impose his [extreme] ideology on others…if he is elected Attorney General, he very much will take his social agenda to the Attorney General’s office, [just as we saw under Ken Cuccinelli].”

Obama Will NOT LOSE War Vote

By
Goldmanusa
-
1

by Paul Goldman

200-proof goes out on this limb, despite all the vote counters. When all is said and done, President Obama will NOT lose a vote on whether or not to authorize the Commander-in-Chief to use military force to protect American interests in Syria. Notice, I didn’t say he would WIN, but rather not lose: there is a big difference. And at the same time, a big upside for The Prez. Well, maybe not big, but big enough to send Assad and his posse the required message.

Why go out on this limb? Let me count the reasons. A Democratically controlled Senate will pass a resolution authorizing the President to use military force in Syria. It is likely to be the most unprecedented pro-war resolution in the history of the Senate, with restrictions and whatever forcing historians to re-write their books. But it will qualify as a pro-use-of-force resolution.

Then it goes to the House. Will the House pass the Senate version? Whatever the vote count NOW, the chess board gets scrambled once the Senate actually votes to go to war. By then, there will be more evidence as regards the chemical warfare in Syria, more time for Assad and his posse to calculate future actions, more time for the international community to play the “what if” scenarios, and more time for everyone to think through this and that.

It cuts both ways, admittedly. But net, net: The President should be in a stronger, not weaker position, in terms of demanding the House DO SOMETHING.  

 

Remember this: The President, at all times, can decide to shift strategy in one direction or another. This is his ultimate asset. The same for Assad – he can make sudden moves as well, even totally unpredictable ones.

Don’t forget: Assad doesn’t want the U.S. to attack him. He will go to great lengths to avoid it. The man isn’t Saddam Hussein, daring us to enter the war zone. Assad CAN NOT survive if we provide military backing to the rebels directly or indirectly by degrading the Syrian President’s army and air force.

Assad isn’t delusional like Hussein: all Assad wants, in the end, is to control some part of Syria where he can hope to live without fear of assassination, at least by the enemy. The Syrian Civil War isn’t going to end with Assad back in control of what we call Syria. That country is gone, to the extent it ever existed except at the point of a gun. The Kurds ain’t giving the land they now control back. Same for the rebels. And Assad has neither the ability nor the international financial backing from its sponsors to take it back.  

Assad’s best case is a decent negotiated stand-still type of deal, a land for peace type of thing, a fig leaf perhaps but it is workable. America can, and ultimately will, badly degrade his armed forces if he insists on daring us. He has to figure that, as do his Russian, Iranian and other backers.

THE POINT BEING: A credible threat of even a small U.S. strike against Assad’s government is big time scary to the Syrian regime. The same for Russia and Iran, they can’t afford him to be beaten, and they can’t afford the treasure it will take to keep him in power under US attack.  

Thus: A credible threat of an attack is worth a lot to the President. So my bottom line scenario for the debate over the President’s War Dance goes like this. The Democratic Senate, with the aid of Senator McCain’s hawkish posse, will give the President a pro-war resolution. In turn, the President will promise in secret that he will only use it as a last resort, that he understands the voter backlash risk given the polls.

I have no proof of such a quid pro quo, but it makes logical political and military sense. Why? It is difficult to see the political math adding up to an authorization for something other than what will be sold to a distrusting public as a “limited” strike, aimed at not getting the U.S. into war but rather only to punish Assad for the use of chemical weapons (I assume the U.N. report on the incident will support the President’s narrative, for if not, then the whole thing becomes a certified political debacle no Democrat wants to contemplate).

SO: The Democratic Senate gives the President want he needs even if it isn’t what he ideally would like. But a win is a win.

OVER IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, they are now faced with a very sticky Republican dilemma. So far, the GOP side in the House is safe because the Democratic side is likewise vocally anti-war. Thus the GOP can not be labeled as putting their anti-Obama feelings ahead of what is good for the country. But once the Senate passes a pro-war resolution, the GOP is going to realize that House Democrats will not want to take responsibility for voting NO and, thus doing what commentators will label as badly damaging the President. Moreover,- under my scenario – the rest of the world is likewise moving toward the view requiring some action indicating disapproval of the use of chemical weapons. They too don’t want to see the President take a beating from his own party. This creates instability.

MEANING: If President Obama can nudge House Democrats towards a compromise with the Senate – or even supporting the Senate version if it has been tweaked with said deal in mind – on the question of NOT MAKING HIM LOSE A WAR VOTE, then the GOP is in a box.

To repeat: On a military and geopolitical basis, a Congressional resolution that allows the Commander-in-Chief to protect American national interests, albeit his options are restricted more than any other President in history, is NOT A LOSS for the White House. It might not be a pro-War resolution in the classic sense – or in regards to previous congressional approvals – but as long as it allows the President to hit back in his judgment when such “hitting back” is required, this is not a loss for the President. Even if he has some secret side deal, this still is not a loss.

As I read the polls, Americans are not opposed to sending a forceful message discouraging the use of chemical weapons, or defending national security interests when threatened in Syria. Rather, they are skeptical of what we can do to benefit America in that war zone, fearful whatever we do will be a net-minus, indeed risk getting us bogged down in another senseless war effort where the promised gain will again morph into yet another loss of life, treasurer and trust in our political system.

If it were simply an either/or go to war/don’t go to war choice, then I think the President is “up against” some powerful domestic forces presenting him with a lose-lose equation. But I don’t read the menu this way at all. In political talk, he “wins” by not “losing.” And “losing” is defined as refusing to change course and thus winding up with nothing but a NO vote from the Congress in the final analysis.

Why would the White House allow this to happen, what’s the politics here?

Bottom line: Since the President doesn’t have to win the pro-war vote, but rather Not Lose it, my bet is on the Congress and Mr. Obama coming to a mutually agreed peace settlement, shaky perhaps but good enough for government work.

That’s my story and I am sticking to it, at least for today.

Virginia News Headlines: Monday Morning

By
lowkell
-
7

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Monday, September 9. Also, check out the new ad by Tom Steyer providing some important information about the Keystone XL Canadian tar sands export pipeline.

*Obama prepares for final push on Syria strike (“The president takes to the airwaves and will lobby Congress as it returns to Washington, but some advisers say action may be too little, too late.”)

*Hillary Clinton plans to address Syria at the White House Monday

*Our New Isolationism (I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently, having also just read the book “1940” by Susan Dunn. Although I think this country naturally tends towards isolationism, I think that’s almost always a big – even disastrous – mistake.)

*Elizabeth Warren assails Supreme Court as too far right (This is Reason #1 why we need to keep winning the White House, because if we don’t, it’s going to be a far-right-wing court for the rest of our lives, with untold damage to our country.)

*Virginian-Pilot: Northam for lieutenant governor (“Norfolk’s Ralph Northam is far and away the better choice for Virginia. Indeed, he is the best candidate running for statewide office this November.” This one’s the no-brainer of all no-brainers.)

*GOP strategist Boyd Marcus’s move to McAuliffe campaign seen as sign of party rift (“Democrats and even some Republicans see Marcus’s move as emblematic of a deep rift within the party: Marcus had been aligned with pragmatic establishment figures and repelled by the resolute tea party style embraced by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II, the Republican nominee.”)

*Syria puts our system on trial (“I bring this up only to remind Republicans opposing Obama on Syria – and I’m not talking about the consistent anti-interventionist libertarians – that some in their party are making arguments now that they condemned Democrats for making not very long ago. Can we ever break this cycle of recrimination?”)

*The dangerous effects of global warming (“One thing NOAA is clear about, though, is that continued warming will increase the frequency and severity of certain events, which will require humans to adapt. Then there are the long-term consequences that are harder to predict. These knowns and unknowns are why humans shouldn’t just adapt but head off excessive future warming by reducing greenhouse-gas emissions now.”)

*Editorial: Know nothing (“Congressional Republicans have bolted to a dismal start. Since the election they have further alienated Hispanics, African-Americans and gays (and heterosexuals who accept homosexuals as human beings). And some of them are threatening a government shutdown. Catastrophe looms. The Boston session heard a presentation by Gingrich. A party that takes him seriously is not a party to be taken seriously.”)

*Terry McAuliffe-Ken Cuccinelli tax plan sparks local revolts (The only thing I’ll say in defense of T-Mac on this one is that his plan is less damaging than Cuccinelli’s, which would force localities to crank up property taxes, etc. to compensate for the lost revenue.)

*Cuccinelli: Private, faith schools can get public funds for security (Cooch: We don’t need no stinkin’ separation of church and state – screw the Constitution in this case, and in any others where I don’t agree with it!)

*Cuccinelli’s attack on McAuliffe’s Global Crossing investment (Three “Pinocchios” for that one.)

*Jeb Bush to attend Ken Cuccinelli event (So much for Jeb Bush being in any way “moderate.”)

*13,000 Va. state workers’ personal info disclosed

*Virginia’s dispiriting election (Silly editorial, bemoaning – gasp! – candidates going after each other hard, after 2012, 2008, etc, etc. Whatever.)

*Aiming higher  for higher education (“Cuccinelli and McAuliffe should support a comprehensive approach to college access.”)

*Wednesday’s court date is last stop for tunnel tolls lawsuit

*Washington, D.C. weather forecast: Refreshing today, midweek heat

*Ryan Zimmerman, Stephen Strasburg lift Washington Nationals over Miami Marlins, 6-4

Flashback: Mark Obenshain Muses on “Nullification,” “Forceful Measures” Against Federal Government

By
lowkell
-
2

Democratic Attorney General nominee Mark Herring and others have been pointing out for months that Virginia GOP Attorney General nominee Mark “Criminalize Miscarriages” Obenshain is just as extreme as Ken Cuccinelli and EW Jackson, but that he hides it better than they do (hence, the line, “Mark Obenshain votes like Ken Cuccinelli and EW Jackson talk”). And that’s exactly what this slippery, professional, life-long (he brags on his website that he “has been politically active practically his entire life”) politician has been doing – trying hard to “Etch-a-Sketch” his record, make people think that he’s not the right-wing extremist that he is.

For instance, just this morning in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Obenshain was quoted as claiming – laughably, for anyone who knows ANYTHING about this guy’s record! – that “the principles and policy positions that I have laid out in the course of my campaign are mainstream Virginia principles and values”. Well, sorry, but that’s just not true. As Larry Sabato puts it in that same article, what Obenshain’s been doing has been “breathtaking, if you look at Obenshain’s voting record…His rhetoric has become kinder and gentler, but his Senate floor and committee votes have been very conservative, pretty close to Cuccinelli’s stands, in fact.” (note: in the same RTD interview, Obenshain tries to distance himself from Cuccinelli, who he has previously called a model he’d follow in the AG’s office). Sabato’s being diplomatic, because he doesn’t want to use the word “liar.” But we will. Mark Obenshain is an outright liar (aka, “Etch-a-Sketching” like Romney). And it’s time to start systematically calling out on it.

So today, we kick off a series of posts on Mark Obenshain, one that likely will involve a post every day on this chameleon, to show how he’s no different, really, than EW Jackson and Ken Cuccinelli, either in terms of his positions on the issues or even in terms of his rhetoric. He just hides it a bit better, but it’s all there, if you know where to look. Fortunately, we do. 🙂

To kick off our series, let’s focus on Mark Obenshain’s musings on the idea of violently overthrowing the federal government. What? Seriously? I must be kidding, right? Well, no…sadly I’m not. Check this out, from January 2013.

In the Q & A session nullification was brought up. It is still an option [Mark Obenshain] said but “Am I ready to declare the republic dead – absolutely not.” However, he was not ready to let the federal government roll over the states either. “There has to be a middle ground.” He stands with Cuccinelli in finding ways to challenge in court the constitutionality of illegal acts. The next option is to “throw the bums out.” However, he concluded that it is possible that sometime far into the future if something didn’t change more forceful measures might be an option. “Am I going to set up barriers on interstates 66 and 95 – no I’m not there yet,” said Obenshain. “I think a Governor Cuccinelli and an Attorney General Obenshain can make some mischief and get some great things done … one of the problems we have is top down leadership.”

So, let’s get this straight. According to Mark Obenshain, who wants to be Virginia’s chief lawyer, there’s a ladder of measures he’d advocate to fight the federal government, up to and apparently including “nullification” and/or “more forceful measures.” Does this type of rhetoric sound familiar coming from extreme right-wing Republicans? It might not, because very few Republicans would say such a thing out loud, even if they think it. One who did say so was the “ballot box”/”bullet box” candidate, Catherine Crabill, who was lambasted around the country for her treasonous lunacy. Another was this Republican Congressional candidate in Texas, who “stunned his party…saying he would not rule out violent overthrow of the government if elections did not produce a change in leadership.” And then of course there’s crazy Michele Bachmann, who “compared Washington, D.C. to ‘enemy lines’ and urged her supporters to become ‘armed and dangerous’ and fight a ‘revolution’ against cap and trade legislation.” That’s about as extreme as you can get in this country, yet that’s exactly what Mark Obenshain was happily musing about in Roanoke back in January. No wonder he’s trying hard to make his past statements – and actions, as we’ll detail in future posts – disappear from the view of voters (aka, to mislead/fool them). After all – to paraphrase Willard “Mitt” Romney, another pathologically lying “Etch a Sketch” Republican – he’s got an election to try and win, for Pete’s sake!

Warner, McAuliffe Right To Fear Syrian War Vote

By
Goldmanusa
-
0

by Paul Goldman

In business, the “customer is always right.” If they won’t buy what you are selling, you either change inventory, or file Chapter 13. This is also true in politics. But the “road not taken,” as Robert Frost might say, has far more twists and turns. Politically speaking in Virginia, there now exists possible conversion on the road to Damascus. St. Paul’s conversion was religious. Here in Virginia, it would be far more secular and far more surprising.  

About the same time Terry McAuliffe began crushing Ken Cuccinelli with political advertisements on his refusal to give back gifts from Jonnie Williams, the folks running the Syrian government were being charged with using nerve gas to kill their own people. “All politics is local” famously observed beloved House Speaker “Tip” O’Neill. No voter in Virginia connected the Governor’s race to the Syrian gas attack. The 2014 Senate race loomed too far into the future for any such mental connection either among even the handful of voters thinking over a year ahead.

Three weeks later, Republicans still have no home-grown substantive issue capable of defeating Terry McAuliffe or Mark Warner. In turn, this creates a campaign narrative slowly drying into political cement. We at 200-proof have offered since the spring the substantive and statistical narrative pointing toward a Democratic sweep this coming November. The GOP ticket has proven to be incredibly inept at politics this year, while the party has no one serious willing to run against Mark Warner next year. The Democrats, as an electoral matter, have not had this good a shot at holding every statewide elected office since 1966, before the Republican Party posed a viable threat in any Southern state.

But suddenly, President Obama, not a factor in Virginia’s Governor’s race this time (he was a big factor last time), has hit a political nerve in Virginia, along with the rest of America.

Remember: Here at 200-proof, we don’t judge. Gay or straight, conservative or liberal, right or wrong politically, men or women, black, white, brown, yellow, red and green (there is no proof they don’t exist, right?, we take it as it lies, analyze the politics of the matter without passion or prejudice, as they say in the law. So for us, the President’s self-evident desire to retaliate militarily against Syria is easy to analyze: it is all upside for Ken Cuccinelli if he knows what do. That’s a big “if”, and as readers of this column will note, 200-proof doubts the GOP gubernatorial guy will get it right.

But that is to be shown in the future. For today, the following is clear: a Democratic U.S. Senate is first up to vote Yes or No on a Democratic President’s decision to go to war against the overwhelming wishes of the people of Virginia, along with the country. It may be that in the next week or so, the President’s speech tomorrow night, along with arm-twisting by the nation’s leaders and powerful interest groups, will convince the people to be more favorable toward a military attack on the Syrian regime. However, the gut instincts of the American people are not going to change in Virginia, unless something happens around the global to require altering their opinion. This may happen. At the same time, events might occur to reinforce their basic instinct.

Bottom line: Right now, 200-proof politics concludes that for a dying political man, Syria is the best news of the campaign for Ken Cuccinelli. Why? Because it is the first event this year that has gotten the attention of the voters where he isn’t on the defensive in one form or fashion. This makes it the biggest issue with the most energy where he is the one clearly on the popular side.

But you say: “Paul, what does the international situation in Syria have to do with governing Virginia, or the race for Governor in the public’s mind?”  My answer: “You are right, absolutely nothing IF THE ISSUE WERE ONLY ABOUT SYRIA.” But the real  issue, in terms of “all things being local” is this: a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate defying the wishes of the voters. Framed in that perspective, the political issue in 2013 is not about Syria, but rather about whom will be responsive to the voters as opposed to other forces. I have co-written an op-ed on this general angle for national publication, and it should be published soon, although the timing is out of my hands.

Because the Democratic Senate has to vote first, the politics of the issue work to Cuccinelli’s advantage on paper as of right now. But Cuccinelli’s initial statement on the issue missed the mark, as he got into the substance of whether to attack or not. Terry played it much smarter by saying nothing. Cuccinelli and his campaign continue to show a “we know best” arrogance not supported by their record. But in terms of whether you identify with the people of Virginia or the politicians in Washington, that is a bread and butter Virginia campaign issue.  

Here at 200-proof, we see the 2013 politics on the matter clearly: the people of Virginia are plenty smart, plenty savvy, and they have been right on these policy decisions far more than our leaders in Washington in recent years. The Iraq War was premised on either an outright lie or an outright mistake of monumental proportions, or somewhere in between. Americans had a gut feel of it then, but got fooled by the Bush boys. As for Afghanistan, we were promised our mission was to find Osama bin Laden and his crew, not stay forever in a country that has been a proven quagmire for all foreigners since Alexander the Great.

But Washington still thinks it knows best: We have been warned about possibly having to go to war to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. We were promised a military strike on Libya would get us a new ally. We were told our policy toward Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries would lead to a whole new day in that part of the world, the now laughable “Arab Spring.”

Earth to everyone: When 2/3 of the people of this country are opposed to the President and the Pentagon, who in turn are backed by every popular figure in the country, on a matter they claim is vital to the national interest, then Americans are sending a message WAY beyond Syria. Add to this the fact NO ONE is talking about sending in troops – heck, we might not even use bombers. We are talking about the most sanitized war machine in terms of history, reducing casualties to a seeming minimum. And yet, the people are saying NO.

Why? My take: Washington is out of touch with the people of this country on several gut levels. My co-authored op-ed lays it out, albeit briefly given the word constraint. “How many ears does it take before you hear people cry?” is the words, or nearly so, from a famous song chronicling the fight to end segregation is America.

Conclusion: The voters of Virginia, like America, are tired of being taken for granted, fed-up with a stalemated political system. Underdogs like Cuccinelli don’t win while the political cement is hardening.  They only have a chance when it refuses to dry. The odds of him figuring out how to tap into this situation – and then executing such figuring – are slim and none based on the past.

So 200-proof’s prediction of a sweep remains. But as we have also written, the threat to the sweep analysis is an existing issue taking hold that doesn’t need any explaining, and finds the key swing voters already leaning your way. Cuccinelli clearly doesn’t have the political skill or the campaign advisors to create anything new at this point.  But a backlash against a “Democratic War” is not impossible by election day. Like it or not, the public saw the Korean War as a “Democratic War,” Vietnam as a “Democratic War” (that’s how Nixon could win a landslide by claiming a false victory), the Iranian Hostage Crisis as caused by a Democratic President (as if Carter had anything to do with it), the Iraq War and the Afghanistan Wars as those of a Republican President (and they remained sufficiently popular to allow Bush 43 to eke out re-election, but an albatross for McCain, seen as Bush’s biggest hawkish ally).

Like Libya, what happens in Syria goes with the presidential territory. Because the President has decided to seek the approval of Congress, and because the Senate goes first, Democrats per se risk owning the Syria thing far more than might otherwise be the case. Right now, the 2013 governor’s race is proof of Newton’s Law, that a body stays in motion headed the same way – to victory at the polls – unless hit over the head by a political 2 X 4. Depending on how things go on Syria between now and election day, a protest vote could emerge. Logic suggests it would be a net plus for Republican statewide candidates. Jackson is beyond help and thankfully so. But Cuccinelli and Obenshain are only Dead Candidates Walking, and there is this scientist claiming he has a new therapy that can bring people back from the dead if not too much time hasn’t elapsed. If he is looking for guinea pigs, Ken and Mark would be wise to sign up.  

As for Senator Warner, he is safe in 2014 unless his vote on Syria comes back to haunt him the way Hillary’s vote on the Iraq War boomeranged her quest for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Right now, as Emerson wrote, “events are in the saddle and they ride mankind.” I was once riding a horse that got spooked. So don’t expect me to be playing Paul Revere in any historical documentary anytime soon. But it was a wild ride.  

Cuccinelli’s Trust Problem

By
lowkell
-
0

From the McAuliffe for Governor campaign: 

To: Interested Parties



From: Josh Schwerin, Press Secretary for McAuliffe for Governor



Memo: Cuccinelli’s Trust Problem
Date: September 8, 2013
 
“One thing that even my staunchest opponents will concede is that I am a straight shooter, and I am a man of my word. And when this race is over, I will still be able to say that.” – Ken Cuccinelli, 3/14/13 CPAC Remarks

Ken Cuccinelli has a trust problem.  After premising his campaign on the idea that he was a straight shooter, Cuccinelli has seen scandal after scandal and an increasingly false and negative campaign destroy his credibility as a messenger.  This progression was capped off this week when it was revealed the Cuccinelli campaign had tricked people into appearing in his false and misleading attack ad. Unfortunately for Cuccinelli, this is hardly the first time that his inability to play by the rules has come into play in this election.

Star Scientific

By now we all know about Ken Cuccinelli’s involvement with Star Scientific and it’s CEO Jonnie Williams.  Virginia voters have heard about Cuccinelli’s role in the scandal in more than 400 broadcast news stories across the state.  Here’s a small sampling of what editorial boards have had to say:

Richmond Times-Dispatch Editorial: “Cuccinelli has now withdrawn from the case and brought in outside counsel to handle it. Yet he did not do so until after the relationship was revealed and considerable public pressure was brought to bear.” 

News Leader Editorial: “Cuccinelli managed to get mixed up in the Star Scientific gift scandal that has embroiled McDonnell in legal trouble. Another $53,000 in state money down the drain, all to provide lawyers to do what Cuccinelli couldn't do because of his conflict of interest.”

Virginian-Pilot Editorial: “Troy represented the governor – at a cost to taxpayers of $54,000 over five weeks – because current Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli had no choice but to recuse himself. Cuccinelli, now running to succeed McDonnell, has himself accepted $18,000 in gifts from Williams, including a vacation that the attorney general solicited and neglected to report. Predictably, Cuccinelli's campaign has been frantically attempting to deflect any suggestion that he acted inappropriately by attacking Democratic opponent Terry McAuliffe, a naked effort to distract voters from examining Cuccinelli's relationship with Williams.”

Gas Royalties Scandal

Ever since a federal judge wrote that she was shocked that Ken Cuccinelli’s office was helping out-of-state energy companies, one of which had given him more than $100,000, in their fight against Southwest Virginia landowners, Cuccinelli has been grasping at straws to excuse his office's conduct.  That has not gone over well with Virginia’s editorial boards:

Richmond Times-Dispatch Editorial: Cuccinelli’s excuse is “hard to swallow.”

Bristol Herald-Courier Editorial: “Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has insisted that his office has played a limited and necessary role by intervening in a federal lawsuit over natural gas royalties in Southwest Virginia. But the Bristol Herald-Courier reported Wednesday that Cuccinelli’s office opposed a property owners’ motion to obtain the emails between an assistant attorney general and lawyers from EQT Production Co. and CNX. Many were sent months after a senior judge ruled on the constitutional challenge that was the basis of the state’s interest.”

Virginian-Pilot Editorial: “The level of involvement by Cuccinelli’s office in the current case is clearly inappropriate. It is, perhaps, eclipsed only by Cuccinelli’s explanation, which is itself worthy of rejection. In the strongest possible terms.” 

Washington Post Editorial:  ”‘Shockingly’ was the word employed by the judge. But, given Mr. Cuccinelli’s track record in office, it was not entirely unexpected.”

Trouble with the Truth

One of Ken Cuccinelli’s latest ads is called “Facts” but here’s what fact checkers had to say about it:

  • Politifact: “we rate his ad claim False.” 
  • Factcheck.org: “deceitful,” “not true,” “another claim without a factual foundation,” “bends reality 180 degrees.”

Cuccinelli has also tried to say his personhood legislation didn’t make contraception illegal (3 Pinnochios from the Washington Post) and conformed to the constitution (False from Politifact)

Cuccinelli was called out for lying in his attacks on Terry regarding the Lincoln Bedroom, right-to-work, and not rolling out any policies.

The Result

After starting the race claiming to be a straight shooter, Ken Cuccinelli will now leave office and be remembered as one of the most scandal-plagued Attorney General's in Virginia history, a man “possessing a rigorous intellect with which he rationalizes an ethical blind spot.” 

Virginia News Headlines: Sunday Morning

By
lowkell
-
2

Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines, political and otherwise, for Sunday, September 8. By the way, it’s good to see the centrist Virginian-Pilot editorial board endorse Terry McAuliffe. Honestly, I can’t even imagine any newspaper that’s to the left of Attila the Hun endorsing Ken Kookinelli (let alone EW “Planned Parenthood=Worse than KKK” Jackson or Mark “Criminalize Miscarriages” Obenshain!).

*Obama to hold Syria interviews with 6 TV networks

*Syria resolution could stall Congress’s work on divisive domestic issues (Not sure anything was going to get done anyway, with the crazy Teapublicans in charge of the House and able to block stuff in the Senate…)

*As the World Watched, Syria Built Up Supply of Nerve Gas (And now we see the results…1,400 dead men, women and children in just one attack. Ugh.)

*Nicholas Kristoff: Pulling the Curtain Back on Syria

*Kaine forges new GOP ties, new role in Senate (“Kaine’s approach is badly needed, his friends say, and could establish him as a leader in transforming an institution that by many accounts is broken.”)

*Virginian Pilot Endorsement: McAuliffe for Virginia governor (“A spokesman for Cuccinelli’s campaign rejected an invitation to talk with this paper’s Editorial Board, making it impossible to know whether his views have evolved since 2009…Cuccinelli’s failure in high-profile legal battles against the federal government have succeeded mostly in giving him a platform to gain an audience with tea party followers, to peddle his book and to magnify partisan division and distrust. In November, Virginia’s voters should free him to pursue such goals full-time. They can do that by voting for McAuliffe.”)

*Do the right thing (“Ethics reform could be linchpin of McDonnell’s legacy in commonwealth”)

*Schapiro: For Cuccinelli, it’s dogma over doctrine (“Taxpayers will be on the hook for another private lawyer for McDonnell. He already has five. So far, they’ve billed the state more than $140,000 to defend McDonnell in Giftgate. Cuccinelli isn’t doing that job because of a conflict of interest.”)

*Herring touts his plan for fighting cybercrime

*Obenshain moderates message in AG battle (Larry Sabato: “It’s a shrewd tactic but also breathtaking, if you look at Obenshain’s voting record. His rhetoric has become kinder and gentler, but his Senate floor and committee votes have been very conservative, pretty close to Cuccinelli’s stands, in fact.”)

*McAuliffe makes final community college stop

*GOP governors group gives Cuccinelli an additional $1M

*Forest Service set to decide on fracking in George Washington National Forest (“The agency’s decision will settle a raging dispute between the oil and gas industry and conservationists.”)

*Mayor tilts toward Shockoe Bottom site for stadium

*Lt. Governor candidate profile | E.W. Jackson (This is very, very kind to Jackson; simply listing a dozen or so of the statements that HE HIMSELF HAS MADE over the years would have been very helpful for voters to know.)

*A campaign for college funding

*Forecast: Warmer today, cooler tomorrow before summer really surges back

*Tanner Roark stars in first major league start as Nationals beat the Marlins, 9-2 (Nice.)

Video: Cuccinelli Disses Jackson, Praises Obenshain as Fighter Against Evil Federal Government

By
lowkell
-
0

Check it out: speaking earlier today, Ken Cuccinelli carefully skips saying the name “EW Jackson,” avoiding it like the plague (even though just a few weeks ago Cuccinelli pledged strong support for Jackson). To the contrary, Cuccinelli looooooves him some Mark “Criminalize Miscarriages” Obenshain (his “former seatmate from the Senate” would be an “absolutely awesome Attorney General”), stating that Obenshain – if (god forbid) he’s elected to succeed Cooch as Virginia Attorney General – would be “continuing the fight whenever it’s needed across the Potomac to fight Washington…one of the greatest threats to liberty in America today is our own government.” Well, alrighty then!

Cooch then proceeds to riff about one of the Tea Party’s pet, paranoid, tinfoil-hat conspiracy theories – “Common-Core Standards” (“The gateway to this dystopian future, which [Glenn] Beck predicted would lead to some portions of the United States embracing Nazism, was President Barack Obama’s controversial push for a new national curriculum known as Common Core. The conspirators are far-ranging. Rupert Murdoch is in on it. So is the American Legislative Exchange Council, Bill and Melinda Gates, and Jeb Bush.”). Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

Anyway, just remember: on November 5, if you want a LOT more of this John Birch Society insanity, not to mention LOTS more waste of Virginia taxpayer money waging losing battles against the federal government, vote for Ken Cuccinelli’s clone, Mark Obenshain. On second thought, don’t!

1...2,3242,3252,326...3,299Page 2,325 of 3,299












EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©