The following endorsements are made in good, snarky, blogger fun. Having said that, there is a grain of seriousness in here, as of course I wish the Republicans will nominate the craziest, most far-right-wing, unelectable people for the general election. Either that, or – paradoxically – let’s hope they nominate someone who is completely unacceptable to the far right wing, prompting them to bolt and support a  third-party candidate, as Laurence Verga campaign manager Bill Hay worries in today’s Washington Post.

Virginia CD #1

Go Catherine “Bullet Box” Crabill!  The deal here is that if Crazy Crabill defeats Rep. Rob Wittman for the Republican nomination on Tuesday, then Democratic nominee Krystal Ball has a shot at winning in November. If not, then Ball – as strong a candidate as she might be – almost certainly won’t win. So, again, go Catherine Crabill, the “blue team” is rooting for you! 🙂

Virginia CD #2

I’ve got to disagree with Bearing Drift on this one. Bert Mizusawa has far, far too impressive a resume — “a Brigadier General in the Army Reserve, and one of the Army’s most highly decorated officers… a Masters in Strategic Studies from the U.S. Army War College and is a graduate of National Defense University’s CAPSTONE program” — to be the Republican nominee in this district. Instead, I strongly endorse Regent University grad, Obama donor (and also Louise Lucas donor), used-car dealer, and “Cash for Clunkers” beneficiary Scott Rigell for the Republican nomination in the 2nd CD. It should be hilarious watching Glenn Nye tear Rigell apart for hypocrisy, among other things.  Go Scott Rigell! Heh.

UPDATE: Also, see Dan Sullivan’s excellent diary on this subject.

Virginia CD #5

On this one, I’ve got to go with the Bearing Drift guys: Feda Morton for Congress!  As far right wing as you can get, Morton also — according to The Hook – is the “traditional family values candidate who once lost custody of her children” and is now “in the news again for alleged plagiarism.” As one commenter wrote at The Hook, “Man. This woman is a disaster.” Exactly, which is why I strongly endorse her for the Republican nomination against the superb Rep. Tom Perriello. I also strongly encourage any and all tea partiers to run as third, fourth, or fifth party candidates this November. The more the merrier, I say!

Virginia CD #8

Who cares, Jim Moran’s going to romp in this rock-solid “blue” district over either Matthew Berry or Patrick Murray. Yawn. Also, as Loudoun Insider at Too Conservative points out, the two Republican candidates are apparently in a “we may lose, but at least we’ll be pure” contest.  The only question is, will that “purity” allow them to break 40% of the vote in Arlington and Alexandria this November? I doubt it, but stay tuned!

Virginia CD #11

I had always assumed that Keith Fimian was the more right wing candidate in this race, but after listening to this past Friday’s WTOP debate between Fimian and Pat Herrity, I’m not so sure anymore. Given this, I guess I’d have to go with Fimian for the Republican nomination, given that he’s already a proven loser (by 12 points in 2008) against Rep. Gerry Connolly.  Plus, there’s the “Real Keith Fimian Story”, and quite a story it is! Heh. With that, I say, go Keith Fimian!

While the 2nd Congressional District establishment candidate sits back and anticpates victory Tuesday, his opponents make every effort to attract voters at the margin. This Republican primary features two retired military flag grade officers, each trying to out Curtis LeMay each other. Only one of the six candidates hasn’t “served.”

Yesterday was a bit telling outside the weekly Virginia Beach Republican breakfast meeting. Apparently only one candidate’s campaign considers the battle within the party still joined. The local committee chose a subject less controversial by featuring Philip Shucet (President/CEO of Hampton Roads Transit) inside. Good there is so much military experience among the aspiring nominees because this group crossed the Rubicon long ago in this campaign. Most of the others are focusing on supporters variously aligned with the local taxpayer alliance, libertarians, and/or tea partiers. And all of them, bar one, have spent much of the campaign trying to close with and destroy Scott Rigell, the McDonnell candidate. Meanwhile the committee’s last chair, Kenny Golden has parted their company to run as an independent.

Bert Mizusawa has released a bevy of negative ads focusing on Rigell, prominently featuring the metamorphisis of rationalization offered for his donation to President Obama’s campaign; from inspired by the campaign to trying to defeat Hillary. Ben Loyola has claimed the mantle of fiscal conservative, signing a no tax pledge and receiving the endorsement of the local tea party. The others are curious in their own right. It should be interesting to review the campaign finance reports on each and every one. Ed Maulbeck told Tony Macrini last week that the contributions have been flowing in of late; that to now there had been people “stuffing money in his pockets,” but he had not made a concerted effort to raise funds. The one candidate that hasn’t connected with the outliers is Jessica Sandlin whose resume actually seems to embody the much vaunted Republican “family values.”

What is certain is that come Tuesday night, the Republican nominee will be damaged goods. Scott Rigell’s campaign has been smart to avoid joining the fray. It has focused on his professional and personal accomplishments and the support of Bob McDonnell. But for most, bridges have been burned come a Rigell victory. And fuel will be added to the fire over the next two days. Tuesday night, the strident and motivated “conservatives” will not have a champion; or, Congressman Nye will face an opponent who stands at the fringe of electability.

America has been at war in Asia for longer than any other war in which we have engaged. True, it’s not total war, we do employ contract mercenaries, and we have a volunteer military which is composed of people, fellow Americans just the same as you or I but for their choice of jobs and, perhaps, that their dedication to their country goes down a different path from that of civilians. I come from a military family myself, and I remember the horrible dailiness of living week after empty week in an incomplete family, the money problems, the endless and ever-present background fear that Daddy (or, today, Mommie) might never return, or return disabled for life, forever.  

How much more difficult now for the families of those in combat in Iraq or Afghanistan, when their fellow Americans, standing in the line at the grocery store with them, do not even remotely have in mind that we are at war, and that other Dads and Moms are not present, but in harm’s way a long way from home. Still.

Leave aside arguments or rationale for being where we are, the monetary cost to us for our overseas adventures is often cited as cause for alarm, and reason to get out as soon as possible, to stop hemorrhaging billions and billions of dollars and blood. This is one reason even many true conservatives support reducing our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan—- and, certainly, the consequences of reducing and eventually ending our footprint will show up in reducing the budget deficit… despite the greedy importuning by the industrial-military complex.

President Obama, to give him credit, after creating his own Surge in Afghanistan, has started that drawdown process for Iraq, in the face of pompous militarism from die-hard reactionary Republicans. Afghanistan is another place where Obama is betting his presidency on creating space for the Afghans to reach an accommodation with their Taliban, and supposedly he will begin withdrawing troops from there within another year, too, even though I suspect neither our military nor the Afghans really believe he will.

Can he really mean it? Will we really stop being the world’s policeman? Will we finally have the time and the budget to pay attention to our own infrastructure, our own economy…. our own families?

The world has moved on: Bush’s aggressivness completely changed America’s place in the world; he squandered our treasure and the good will of the world with his arrogant, instinctive bullying, especially with what was essentially an illegal war in Iraq. The costs of his adventurism and peculiar political philosophy (unitary executive, free market de-regulation, profits as sacred) will have their own surge down through history. We are living with the consequences, and paying for them today and will be for several generations more—- I refer to the unintended consequences as well as the obvious, fiscal consequences.  

I refer to such things as the damage to our society with years and years of ongoing veteran support costs not to mention the broken families, the missed opportunities because we spent money and attention on Iraq-Afghanistan when so many other geopolitical threats or changes were afoot and yet ignored, or at best pushed to the back burner.

What could that be? The Palestinian-Israeli open wound which is like a case of yaws, the rise of non-European states with utterly different intentions, the upcoming world shift in economic power, the very real threat of an upended climate that cannot be treated as frivolous, the obvious faults and crises of modern capitalism as it creaks toward one crisis after another, collapsing while changing into—– what? a new form of capitalism as feudalism, or something quite different, at least on a global scale?

The neo-cons were convinced that the “Great Crisis” of Bush’s time was what they called the “clash of civilizations” that they interpreted as Islam vs. Christianity, which for them had replaced the previous Great Crisis of Communism vs. Capitalism, which had replaced the previous previous Great Crisis,Totalitarianism vs. Free World. Their mindset requires a life-or-death struggle complete with victims—- if no such Great Crisis is readily available, they will eagerly create one, and drag the rest of us, willynilly, into their Hobbesian world.

Unfortunately, they missed the mark with Islam vx. Christianity, although they did everything they could to make their Great Crisis come true. We are now winding down that mis-managed stupidity and will have to deal with its collateral damage for some time to come. Dealing with all this, and whatever black swan swims by in the interim, begins with Coming Home From the Wars.

Yet let us not lose sight of the human costs of that transition. so often overlooked as we argue about budgets, immigration, drilling for oil, whatever new crisis-mess is vomited on to poor Obama’s desk. See here below how soldiers come home from the war. Forget the monetary bit, here is the human face of the dividend for coming home from the wars:

I don’t agree with Bearing Drift’s J.R. Hoeft on much, but I certainly have asked myself this question for years now” “Where are the environmental Republicans?”

… politically, what’s perhaps the most disturbing issue is the lack of comment from Republican leaders. Whether it be John Boehner, Eric Cantor or Bob McDonnell, the lack of seizing initiative on this issue from conservatives has been appalling.

Certainly now is not the time to be talking about drilling off the coast of Virginia – although the president is wrong to ditch the plan altogether. However, now is a great time to be talking about tax breaks and incentives for alternative energy production.

Whether it be biofuels, solar, wave energy, wind power, nuclear, or other – why has no Republican seized the opportunity to talk about the “all of the above” solution? Why have they not spoken about how dreadful this spill is and how it is yet another example, in a long string of examples, of how oil is a commodity that we eventually have to ween ourselves off of? Why have they not promoted and presented alternatives?

A few possible answers to J.R. Hoeft’s questions?

1. As a commenter on Bearing Drift points out, ” the age old adage of ‘follow the money’ usually reveals plausible answers to the queries.”  For instance, according to Sourcewatch, BP donated $198,500 to federal candidates in 2008, of which 59% went to Republicans. In 2006, BP donated $219,500 to federal candidates, of which 65% went to Republicans. According to Open Secrets, Exxon Mobil in 2008 donated $1.4 million to federal candidates, of which 76% went to Republicans. In 2006, 90% of Exxon Mobil’s contributions to federal candidates went to Republicans. On and on it goes, where it stops, we all know – weakened environmental laws, gutted federal oversight of the oil industry, billions of dollars in corporate welfare to Big Oil, thousands of dead and dying animals (not to mention an entire way of life) on the Gulf Coast.

2. Ideologically, today’s “conservative” movement is a far cry from what “conservative” used to mean, back when the Teddy Roosevelts of the world – or even the Dwight Eisenhowers, Richard Nixons and Gerald Fords of the world – were in charge.  It seems to me that, just as the root of “progressive” is “progress,” the root of “conservative” should be “conserve,” and that included “conserving” natural resources. In addition, you’d think that a movement with so many religious people would believe in “creation care.”  Unfortunately, today’s conservative movement seems to have ditched the “conserve” part from its vocabulary, and instead chosen to worship on Grover Norquist’s altar of the “free market.” Of course, it’s not even really a “free market,” as there are distortions – tax breaks, subsidies, lax regulations, failure to price in “externalities” – which wildly tip the playing field away from energy efficiency/clean energy and towards dirty fossil fuels.

3. Today’s conservative movement actually has people in it who aren’t just pro-business, but are actively anti-environment (bizarre, I know; how can anyone actually be ANTI-environment? WTF?). These people are the ones claiming that those of us who want to protect our planet – the only one we’ve got, last I checked! – from devastation and degradation are “radicals” and “extremists.” The fact is, the people who want to trash our planet – or at the minimum, who don’t care if we damage our environment, all in the pursuit of profits, cheap energy (however dirty or dangerous), and their (bizarre) version of the “American Way” – are the “extremists.” Because, I put it to you, it’s “extreme” (and completely crazy) to believe in destroying our only home.

The question is, do the J.R. Hoefts of the world have any influence in the Republican Party of John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell, Rand Paul, Don “This is not an environmental disaste” Young, and their ilk?  Unfortunately,  as far as I can tell, the answer to that question is a resounding “NO!” Which is one of the many reasons – along with the Jerry Falwell fundamentalist influx – why I decided to leave the Republican Party back in the early 1980s. What I don’t understand is how anyone who is pro-environment can remain in a party which, by the very nature of its ideology and by the very makeup of its main contributors, is inherently, even extremely, anti-environment. I’m not saying these people will or should become Democrats, but how about a new, Teddy Roosevelt-style Republican Party that ditches the pro-“robber baron” mentality and puts the “conserve” back in “conservatism?”  Along those lines, the big question is, who – if anyone – is going to be today’s Teddy Roosevelt?

UPDATE: Also see this column by another pro-environment Republican, “Loudoun Insider” at Too Conservative.  He writes, “I am no fan of over-bearing regulation, but this incident should shut up the no-regulation crowd for good.  Stringent, competent regulation (not this kind of BS) is absolutely necessary to protect our finest natural resources.”  I agree, it should “shut up the no-regulation crowd for good,” but sadly, I doubt it will. These people are greedy, and they are shameless.

P.S. Just to emphasize, protecting the environment should never be a “liberal” or “conservative” issue. Whether you are a hunter, angler, or other outdoorsperson who wants to protect the habitat you enjoy; a religious person who believes that protecting “god’s creation” is a sacred duty; an enlightened businessperson who knows that environmental responsibility and energy efficiency are completely consistent with making good profits; someone who simply loves nature and wants to protect it; a national security “hawk” who wants to keep money out of the hands of Ahmedinejad and Al Qaeda; and/or a pragmatist who knows that an unhealthy environment means unhealthy humans as well; you should want to slash our dependence on oil and other dirty, fossil fuels, while preserving the environment for generations to come. Again, how is any of that “liberal” or “conservative?”  Answer: it isn’t.

When most Arlingtonians are happy with our current form of government, it’s awfully hard to get over 14,000 signatures to get a measure to revolutionize that government onto the ballot. Especially when the measure is backed by some very strange bedfellows — public-safety unions, the Arlington County Republican Committee & the Arlington Green Party.

But what this coalition lacks in ideological cohesion & grassroots support, it appears to be trying to make up for with large piles of money. Check out this Craigslist ad (typos in original, bolding added):

make 1000 dollars in 10 days! this is a legit opportunity (Arlington County Virgina)

Signature Masters inc is looking for signature gatherers to help us get an issue on the ballot for the voters and we are paying well. there is no experience required we do have trainers on staff to teach you. if you are interested in more details, please email resumes to accounting@national-solutions.org. please provide telephone contact information and be prepared to start right away and work a whole day with us. the only requirements are, you must be 18 years of age and a resident in arlington county.

   * Location: Arlington County Virgina

   * Compensation: 100- 125 per day

Wow, up to $15.62 an hour? Just to ask people to sign a piece of paper? In this economy? Not bad. And all you have to do is live in Arlington, Virgina!

With Arlington County’s government getting such high marks from residents & such a shady campaign to change it, it’s no wonder so many Arlingtonians are declining to sign the petition. To join Arlington Democrats in showing your support for our successful system of government, join the Coalition for Arlington Good Government.

Leaving aside the dubious resume of the chair of Bob McDonnell’s commission to streamline Virginia government, we might want to consider whether this new commission won’t simply be repeating what former Govs. Doug Wilder, Mark Warner, and George Allen tried to do, all with mixed results.

I have a feeling that the 31-member commission that is supposed to report to McDonnell by the end of August is simply another way for the governor to recommend selling off the state’s ABC stores. Doug Wilder was the first governor I remember who advocated privatizing the stores, but his idea got absolutely nowhere, and I predict that this governor won’t get any further either, unless he finds a way to keep revenue going annually into the General Fund approximately equal to what state-owned stores produce now. There is one result of privatizing that would help localities, however. Liquor stores would be on local property tax rolls.

I really don’t know what yet another commission report will accomplish, especially since Gov. Warner’s report was presented just eight years ago. Plus, relaying on 31 people to agree on things is practically nil, so I expect that Fred Malek and several other businessmen – along with staff from the governor’s office – will write the report that McDonnell gets.

No one has asked me, not will they, but I do have a couple of suggestions for the commission to look at, none of which I expect them to actually study. After all, I’m not a banker, a politician, or an executive in big business. But, here goes…

Here’s my first suggestion: The commission should look at the excellent results that have been achieved by the Iowa Charter Agency program. Basically, this program allows agencies willing to adopt the program “to be held strictly accountable for measurable benefits in return for exemption from many of the state’s bureaucratic requirements.”

The results in Iowa have been quite remarkable. Six Iowa agencies accepted charter status in 2003: the Department of Revenue, Department of Corrections, Department of Human Services, Department of Natural Resources, the Iowa Veterans Home, and the Alcoholic Beverage Division.

Those agencies, in the first year of the program, produced savings of $22 million. In addition, the turnaround time for permits went down, the failure rate of prisoners on probation decreased, the speed of issuing tax refunds was better, and citizens reported improved service. It’s pretty obvious to me why. The people who actually do a job are the best people to find ways to do that job better, not some CEO type or politician who never worked in that environment.

My second suggestion for something to be looked at is just a personal gripe. I’ve often wondered why Virginia cities have both a professional police force headed by a chief of police, plus a sheriff’s office and sheriff’s deputies who simply run the jail and transport prisoners to and from court. Why not fold the sheriff’s department in cities into the police force, with the jail and court deputies under the leadership of the police chief, thus eliminating the position – and the large salary – of the sheriff?

My final comment is simply to agree with Paul Galuszka of Bacon’s Rebellion who wrote in the Washington Post,

What Virginia needs even more that streamlining is jobs…Badly-hit areas such as Southside and Southwest Virginia with double-digit unemployment can’t wait…McDonnell managed to pay up to $14 million in state money to get defense contractor Northrup Grumman to move 300 high-paying headquarters jobs from Los Angeles to Northern Virginia. Let’s hope he can do something for out-of-work Virginia textile and furniture workers, as well.