Tuesday, June 30, 2009
A prospective state attorney general goes back to the founders.
By Michael Warren
Several prints of war paintings hang in the law offices of Virginia state senator Ken Cuccinelli, but the most prominent is titled Sons of Erin: It shows a brigade of Irish-born Union soldiers charging into the Battle of Antietam — or Sharpsburg, as it’s known in Dixie. The Irish brigade, comprised of poor immigrants — many fresh off the boat — lost over 500 men that day. “The Irish were the best fighters on both sides of the war,” says Cuccinelli, a self-described Civil War buff who is half-Irish himself.
Cuccinelli is running for attorney general as a conservative Republican in a right-leaning state that’s having a fling with Democrats. Last year, voters delivered their electoral votes to Barack Obama. Virginia’s governor is a Democrat and so are its two senators. Perhaps this trend makes Cuccinelli an underdog, like those Antietam warriors and their ancestors back in Ireland. The candidate certainly sees it that way, except in one important respect: “They always lose,” he says.
So far, the 40-year-old Cuccinelli has always won. In 2002, he ran in a special election to represent Fairfax County in Virginia’s senate. He won again a year later. Then, in 2007 — a rotten year for Republicans — he had his toughest race yet, winning by about 100 votes in a race that required a recount. He expects a close election this November, too, against Democratic state delegate Steve Shannon.
“I’ve been outspent in all three races,” he says, showing the pride of a businessman who is satisfied to have done the job well for half the cost. It may happen again this fall: Shannon currently leads in fundraising. But Cuccinelli insists that victory is just a means, not the end. “The point is to accomplish the agenda,” he says. What is the agenda? “I’m running to advance a more limited-government, pro-family agenda. The founding fathers would approve.”
The founding fathers play a critical role in Cuccinelli’s political philosophy. He doesn’t have a favorite, but he has a natural affinity for fellow Virginians like Patrick Henry, James Madison, and George Mason. For Cuccinelli, though, the ideas are more important than the people, and he makes the point with another Virginian, Thomas Jefferson. “He articulated the principles spectacularly,” says Cuccinelli. “But he didn’t always live up to them.”
Cuccinelli says the founding fathers got the principles right: “It’s a foundation that can’t be improved upon.” He offers this foundation as a remedy for disenchanted Republicans. “My view is that the GOP platform should read ‘Life, liberty, and property.’ It would save us a lot of paper.” He goes on to criticize Republican efforts of the past decade. “What have the Republicans been supporting? No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, and supporting TARP I. So much for the party of small government.”
Cuccinelli becomes most animated when he’s talking about the philosophy behind the principles. He cites the Declaration of Independence’s most famous line, about the self-evident truths that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Then he makes an important observation: “Most people forget the next phrase, which explains that it is for these purposes that governments are created.” Cuccinelli considers this phrase — “That, to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men” — the key to understanding what the founders were thinking: Rights are inherent and universal, and governments exist only to guarantee them, not to grant them.
To illustrate this idea, Cuccinelli points to the recent Supreme Court case over gun ownership in the District of Columbia. In his written opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia explained that the Second Amendment did not grant people the right to defend themselves with arms but only reaffirmed the preexisting right of a free people to do so. Cuccinelli leans back in his chair and paraphrases Aquinas: “Natural law is written from the hearts of all men.”
“Read from the founding period and do it continuously,” he says. “That’s what I tell new legislators.” Cuccinelli wants to educate Virginians about Mason, Madison, and the rest. “All of the great founders, except for Adams, are from Virginia,” he says. “When I run in Virginia, I talk about those Virginians.”
In the contest against Shannon, Cuccinelli will need more than a good reading list. “We have a significant grassroots advantage,” he says. “We know grassroots better than anyone else, and we’re more focused on that.” He claims his strategy of knocking on doors gave him the small margin of victory in 2007. This approach won’t work as well statewide, though he plans to repeat the practice as much as possible and encourage his volunteers to do the same.
Will strong grassroots efforts put Cuccinelli over the top in November? Although the races are separate, he’ll run with the GOP’s nominee for governor, Bob McDonnell, who is polling roughly even against Democrat Creigh Deeds. A good election for McDonnell —the state’s former attorney general — will help Cuccinelli’s odds. Even so, the prospective attorney general says he won’t be counting on McDonnell’s coattails. He believes he has the secrets to success: “I’m willing to lose, and I won’t abandon my principles.”
— Michael Warren, a Collegiate Network intern at National Review, studies economics and history at Vanderbilt University.
Monday, June 29, 2009
June 29, 2009
Dear Fellow Virginians,
I need your help today.
We have our first post-convention fundraising period ending tomorrow at midnight -- and we MUST have a strong showing.
Our challenger, Steve Shannon, ran unopposed for the Democrat primary, and as a consequence has been stockpiling money for over a year now.
With just one month since we won the convention, I need your support to help us play catch-up!
While Steve Shannon was stockpiling cash, I was driving around the Commonwealth meeting with Virginians and building a grassroots network of volunteers and supporters.
We are miles ahead in our grassroots organization, but now I need your support to help us close the financial gap.
You can help us show a strong report by donating to our campaign before midnight tomorrow night, June 30th.
And remember, it doesn't matter if you give $5 or $500. It all helps tremendously, so please give what you can.
Donate here today at : http://www.cuccinelli.com/
Thank you and see you on the campaign trail!
Senator Ken Cuccinelli II
National children’s and other social programs would be created in order to comply with the CRC. The U.S. would have to curtail defense spending in order to keep in proportion with these social expenses. To a western European country whose defense our military has subsidized for decades, this would have no major impact. But the effect would be devastating to both our economy and our security.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
"Many politicians forget where they draw their authority--from you the people. Government has an obligation to be transparent and to maintain as limited a place in our lives and businesses as possible while protecting our communities. These are beliefs I will carry with me to the state capitol."
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Last week, in response to a letter from American Solutions on the Waxman-Markey national energy tax (also known as "cap and trade"), Bill Bolling joined his running mate Bob McDonnell in opposition to massive new energy taxes on Virginia families and businesses.
In typical fashion, Bill's opponent, former Democratic Party of Virginia Vice-Chair Jody Wagner, refused to take a stand. (Wagner has also refused to take a stand on numerous other issues currently facing Virginia.)
The people of Virginia deserve a Lieutenant Governor who will lead, and you can't lead by ducking the issues that matter most to Virginia.
While Bill Bolling and Bob McDonnell have said "Yes" to More Energy, More Jobs for Virginians, Jody Wagner has said "No" to the development of Virginia's energy resources.
By opposing nuclear power, clean coal and the development of Virginia's offshore energy resources, Jody Wagner is rejecting common sense, job-creating solutions to our energy crisis and siding with the extremist wing of her party in opposing our attempts to create a more prosperous Virginia.
- Bono Mack
- Castle (Let's see how your run for U.S. Senate goes.)
- Smith (NJ)
- Davis (AL)
- Davis (TN)
- Donnelly (IN)
- Edwards (TX)
- Horseth Sandlin
- Kirkpatrick (AZ)
- Wilson (OH)
Friday, June 26, 2009
"When you file a 300 page Amendment at 3:09 AM, the AMERICAN PEOPLE have the RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT'S IN IT!"
Besides being used to undermine the ability to homeschool, the UN CRC will also undermine private gun ownership in America. Because the UN CRC is a self executing treaty, the UN interprets and applies it. People that advocate the UN CRC and its authors are clear that they believe gun ownership is dangerous for children.
And now we learn one more aspect of this charming treaty: guns.
Yes, guns. To put it bluntly, if you live in a community with children – and who doesn't? – you shouldn't have guns.
Allegedly the CRC's justification is to keep kids from becoming child soldiers in third-world countries. No argument from me. Afghanistan could use some lessons in raising kids.
But if the U.S. ratifies the CRC, then we must accept the UN's position to "believe, teach and promote the idea that all private gun ownership is dangerous for children, and children have the right to grow up in a community that is free from all guns" (emphasis added).
Those at the UN don't just believe in taking guns out of homes where childrens live, they believe they shouldn't be present in communities in which their are children. This is nothing short of an attempt to eliminate gun ownership. Dr. Michael Farris makes this very clear in his article "The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child:The Impact on Private Gun-Ownership in America." In the article he analyzes statements by the UN on children and gunownership. These statements include,
- In communities enjoying relative peace, children witness and are traumatized by the use of small arms and light weapons in domestic violence and in disputes. Children also become accidental victims because adults fail to keep the weapons out of their reach.
- Efforts must be ongoing to overcome the destructive messages that small arms and light weapons are essential instruments for survival and protection in daily life.
- Regulations are needed to ensure that small arms and light weapons are not easy to acquire and are never accessible to children.
- Explore enacting bans on all handguns to civilians or certain cheap models that are attractive to youth
"Two crucial conclusions can be drawn from these assertions:
First, the UN intends to address far more than children in war; the object is to eliminate the “threat” posed by guns from the lives of all children whether their community is characterized as “in conflict,” “post-conflict,” “destabilized,” or “enjoying relative peace.” Guns are a threat “on the streets of cities worldwide.”
Second, the UN contends that the threat posed by guns violates the “human rights” of children."
and concludes that,
If the United States Senate ratifies the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child we will have become willing parties in a regime that obligates us to disarm our citizens, keep guns from children, and indoctrinate American children to believe in the utopia of world disarmament. This will cause our nation to surrender our own defenses and rest in the “security” of a world based on “individual and collective rights.”
Please join us in making it clear to the senate and the Obama administration that we believe in gun rights, and the UN CRC should not be adopted.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Last week the Children’s Secretary of Britain accepted a report in full by Graham Badman which argues for an end to homeschool freedom. “While it’s disgraceful that the British government would even entertain this report it’s particularly troubling for American parents because the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) was used as the justification for this action,” said Michael Farris, Chairman of HSLDA and President of ParentalRights.org.
The Badman report uses Articles 12 and 29 of the UNCRC to justify registering the estimated 80,000 homeschooling families in Britain, forcing them to provide annual reports regarding their homeschool, granting government officials the right to enter the home and interview the children alone as well as reserving the choice of curriculum to the state.
HSLDA has been warning that the UNCRC could bring an end to homeschool freedom in the U.S., if the treaty was ever ratified by the U.S. Senate because Article VI of the U.S. Constitution says that treaties become the supreme law of the land.
Victoria Cobb, President
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Victory Alert: Court Upholds Ban on Partial Birth Abortion
Read Our Latest Blog Posts @ www.familyfoundationblog.com
Sign Up for Our Twitter Updates @ www.twitter.com/TFFVA
Join Fans of The Family Foundation On Facebook @ www.facebook.com
Visit Our YouTube Channel @ www.youtube.com/user/
The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals this afternoon upheld Virginia’s long sought ban on partial birth abortion. The law, passed in 2003, has been blocked by courts ever since.
Substantially similar to a federal ban that was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court last year, Virginia’s law could face one more hurdle should pro-abortion advocated appeal to that court, but the hope is that the Supreme Court won't hear the case because of its decision last year (retiring Justice David Souter voted against the law.)
But today, we celebrate the Fourth Circuit’s decision!
Honestly, I still have vivid memories of the courtroom last fall where this case was debated. Those of us who were there can remember the lawyer from the Center for Reproductive Rights arguing against the ban making her case that, should the Virginia statute as it currently reads be upheld as constitutional her client, a doctor who performs abortions, could potentially face prosecution. During the course of her explanation, she actually described a potential situation in which the doctor fully delivers the child, who is then separated from the mother, and placed on a nearby table to…“expire.” Not, die. Expire. Born alive, and left to die.
The coldness of that statement and the complete lack of compassion for human beings in their most vulnerable stage were palpable in that room. These were people who were advocated for the killing of a child, a fully developed child just days from birth. Thank God the majority of the court rejected their argument.
All pro-life Virginians owe a debt of gratitude to Delegate Bob Marshall (R-13, Manassas), the original patron of the legislation, for his passionate advocacy for the unborn on this issue, and to former Attorney General Bob McDonnell and his office for their skilled defense of the law throughout the process.
(This was not in the Family Foundation e-mail, but here is Bob McDonnell's response to the decision.)
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Dear Friend of Parental Rights,
Monday in a Harlem middle school, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice told a group of 120 students that administration officials are actively discussing “when and how it might be possible to join” (that is, ratify) the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). As before, she also communicated what a disgrace it is that the U.S. would stand with only Somalia against such a widely-accepted treaty.
This is the first direct public statement by the Obama administration that it will seek ratification of the UN CRC.
In my 30 years of political involvement, I have learned to recognize this as what is called a “trial balloon.” Like in World War I trench warfare, our opponents have “sent up a balloon” to see if it will draw fire. If things remain quiet, they will proceed with their plans to push for ratification of the CRC in the U.S. Senate.
To discourage them from doing so, we need to make sure that our voices are heard with unmistakable clarity. We must let the Obama administration know that we oppose this anti-family, anti-American treaty.
Here’s what we need you all to do:
1. Call the White House comments line at 202-456-1111. Tell them you heard the administration wants to ratify the CRC, and you strongly oppose this giving away of U.S. sovereignty to the UN. Also keep in mind that this treaty gives the government jurisdiction to override any decision made by any parent if the government thinks that a better decision can be made—even if there is no proof of any harm.
2. Call Ambassador Susan Rice’s office at the United Nations. Tell her that you want her to represent the United States to the world rather than trying to get the United States to go along with international law initiated by the UN. Her office number is 212-415-4000.
3. Contact your Senators and urge them to oppose ratification of this treaty. (Find your Senators’ contact information by typing your zip code into the box here.) Ask them also to defeat it once and for all by cosponsoring SJRes 16 – the Parental Rights Amendment.
It is very important that we speak up right now. Please call before you close this email!
Mike Huckabee also issued a statement in which he was highly critical of the Republican establishment's support for Charlie "I love the bailout" Crist.
“I’m disgusted that they would take a position in a hotly contested race when you have a quality candidate like Marco Rubio, who was the youngest Speaker in the Florida House,” Huckabee told The Hill. “This is not just some nameless, faceless guy that decided to throw his name in, who had no chance and no credibility.”
He continued: “I thought that their endorsement not only was premature, but was outrageous. And they ought to get behind the guy who would do a whole lot more, in my mind, to unite and fire up Republicans, and that’s Marco Rubio.”
“The establishment Republicans have made this endorsement for the same reason that they’re in so much trouble,” Huckabee said. “They go out there and support stuff like TARP bills and stimulus packages, pork-barrel spending and huge debt, and they wring their hands and act like, 'This is not good, but we don’t have a choice.' "
The Obama administration is reviving efforts to have the United States sign onto a global children's rights treaty ratified by every U.N. member except the U.S. and Somalia, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, said Monday.
Administration officials are actively discussing "when and how it might be possible to join," Rice, a Cabinet-level official, said while visiting a school in Harlem and fielding a teenager's specific question about the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.
This convention would undermine parental rights by providing a platform to emancipate children from the authority of their parents. Of course, parents will be expected to provide all the needs of their children…and all the wants of their children. If children want something, and the almighty state agrees they should have it, then the parents will have to dance. And if the parents feel the need to spank or otherwise strongly discipline an unruly child, the parent will quickly find that they are acriminal. They will quickly find that the child, and the child’s guardian (the state), are in charge in the home.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Here is a video montage of Bob in his own words.
Here are quotes from Bob on the issue.
“McDonnell also rejected taxes, saying lawmakers should cut spending. “The worst thing you can do during a recession is try to tax yourself to prosperity,” he said”
The Virginian-Pilot, December 2, 2008
· McDonnell, who is unopposed for the Republican nomination, pointed out that unemployment is up and consumer confidence is at its lowest point in 30 years — not the time, he said, to place an additional financial burden on Virginia families. Rather than raising new revenue, McDonnell said, his administration would slash state government expenditures.
“We have a spending problem more than we have a taxation problem,” McDonnell said.
The Daily Progress. December 3, 2008
· McDonnell, in turn, said Deeds would be a poor steward to guide the state through a recession. "My philosophy is to keep taxes, regulation and litigation low," he said. "He set a record of doing something different."
The Washington Post (June 11, 2009)
· "The worst thing you can do is to tax your way to prosperity,'' McDonnell said. "That's failed in the United States and abroad."
The Washington Post, December 3, 2008
· "I'm conservative. But conservative means that you believe in limited government and low taxes and keeping regulations to a minimum”
The Washington Post (March 3, 2009)
· The former Virginia attorney general also said he would fight the rebirth of the “death tax” – an inheritance tax that was eliminated a few years ago.
“The federal government wants to reinstate that, and we should do everything we can to make sure it doesn’t,” McDonnell said.
TriCities.com (March 8, 2009)
· “The focus of this campaign is clearly going to be the economic issues--jobs and the economy--will far and away be the top issue in the campaign,” he said. “And there will be a big gulf between my opponents and me about the things I want to do to stimulate the free enterprise system that creates jobs, and they’ll be talking about strengthening the rights of unions and raising taxes.”
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Cuccinelli answers questions, takes positions - Steve Shannon? Well, he was there.
Candidates agree that debates are substantive for campaigning, agree to hold more.
Virginia Beach -
In the Commonwealth's first debate for the office of Attorney General hosted by the Virginia Bar Association, Republican Senator Ken Cuccinelli and Democrat Steve Shannon touched on a host of issues that demonstrated a wide difference in opinion and approach as to how they would operate as Attorney General.
Cuccinelli made clear that he would support and defend Virginia's right to work laws, where Steve Shannon has a 100% voting record with the AFL-CIO. Shannon refused to take a position on "Cap and Trade" - an issue that the next Attorney General will have to deal with as Washington continues to encroach on States economic prerogatives.
"I am pleased that Steve and I had this opportunity to debate on such a wide variety of topics said Senator Ken Cuccinelli. Virginians will be surprised to learn that not only will Steve Shannon not take positions on important issues but that if and when he does he will almost assuredly change them. Virginians need an Attorney General they can count on. As your next Attorney General I will interpret and defend the constitution and will remain consistent in my beliefs" added Cuccinelli.
In a debate lasting a little over an hour, moderated by the Executive Director of the Sorensen Institute at the University of Virginia Bob Gibson, members of the Virginia State Bar and Virginia's current Attorney General Bill Mims could witness first hand Steve Shannon's unwillingness to state a position on any major issue. His refusal to answer a question on the pending 4th Circuit Court ruling on Partial Birth Abortion and changing (again) position on the marriage amendment is indicative of a man without any sense of direction. He most certainly will have to deal with these and many other questions as Attorney General, but his silence speaks volumes.
Senator Ken Cuccinelli was the only candidate to unveil any major policy initiatives that he would pursue as Attorney General. These proposals will be discussed in detail in the weeks ahead, but go to the core of the job of Attorney General. "The first, consolidating the office of Consumer Affairs under the office of Attorney General would streamline government, provide a clear line of authority for business and get consumers off the Merry-go-around of where to go to get help said Ken Cuccinelli. How much sense does it make to house part of consumer affairs in the Agriculture Department?" added Cuccinelli. The second policy initiative would make the Virginia Court of Appeals a middle level of appeal for all cases, unlike its current, very limited authority. "This will help bring consistent application to the law of Virginia, and will offer the chance for truly meritorious appeals that now do not get consideration because of the Supreme Court's workload limitations," said Senator Cuccinelli. "It's a change a long time in coming."
# # #
Friday, June 19, 2009
In response to these statements, and President Obamas inactivity on this issue Rep. Mike Pence introduced a resolution that condemned Tehran's crackdown on protestors. While discussing the resolution, Mike Pence said, "When Ronald Reagan went before the Brandenburg Gate, he did not say Mr. (Mikhail) Gorbachev, that wall is none of our business." The Democrat Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and cosponsor of the resolution said, "It is not for us to decide who should run Iran, much less determine the real winner of the June 12 election. But we must reaffirm our strong belief that the Iranian people have a fundamental right to express their views about the future of their country freely and without intimidation." The resolution passed the house on a vote of 405-1. The sole dissenting vote was from the king of isolationism and the friend of liberty Dr. Ron Paul.
Senators McCain and Lieberman are considering introducing a similar bill in the senate.
Two Martin Luther King Jr. quotes are particularly poignant when considering the Iranian situation. When it comes to the Iranian protestors...
I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.In regards to our need to stand up with the Iranians...
I cannot sit idly by in Atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in Birmingham. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds. ~Letter from a Birmingham JailReplace Atlanta with America and Birmingham with Iran and the quote is very applicable. Let us continue to stand up for freedom everywhere around the globe.
However when you analyze the internals, the poll looks even better. McDonnell's favorables continue to be much better than Deeds. His overall favorables are better, he has a 7% favorable lead among independents, and is more favorable among Democrats than Deeds is among Republicans. McDonnell and Deeds also have an essentially equal disapproval rating, 35% and 36% yet double the people have no opinion on Deeds than on McDonnell. That is a lot of people who can be reached out to and educated on who Creigh Deeds really is.
Even with all the good news from this poll, it was slanted Democrat. (What a shock fom a Daily Kos poll.) The poll was overpopulated with Democrats and minorities, and predicts Deeds will win NOVA 3-1. Even with a slanted poll, McDonnell still leads.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
CRFV Summer Volunteer ContestIf you need a list of Victory Centers to volunteer out of, please click here.
The CRFV Executive Committee is proud to announce the first Summer Volunteer Contest open to all College Republicans statewide. We have teamed up with the McDonnell Campaign to offer incentives for volunteers who are able to give 10 HOURS of work (door-knocking or phone-banking at a local Victory office) between now and August 1st.
Those who complete the most hours will be given individual prizes, including the opportunity to introduce our candidates at local rallies, free access to fundraisers and ticketed events, and much more! All volunteers who meet the minimum 10 hour requirement will be eligible to attend the First Annual CRFV Fall Kick-Off with Bob McDonnell at the end of summer. Music, food, and drinks will be provided, and all guests will have the opportunity to spend time with fellow College Republicans & enjoy a meet and greet with our future governor! A complimentary photo with Bob McDonnell will also be provided.
More details to be announced soon, and we are looking forward to providing a great time and a well-earned reward for our most dedicated volunteers.
To RSVP, send an email pledging to complete the 10 hour minimum requirement to email@example.com. Include your name, school, and registered voting address. You will be sent a volunteer time log to record your hours. Pledge today so that we can put together the best event possible!
Please join us on our CRFV Wiki Page for updates and information about the CRFV. This tool will will enable you to communicate better with your fellow VA CRs, see what events are happening across the state, and stay informed as to the conditions of the CRFV and its chapters.
Visit www.crfv.pbwiki.com to request access
Let us know about events at your chapter!
Contact: Kate Maxwell (firstname.lastname@example.org)
or Cole Usry (email@example.com)
(Originally posted at PHC College Republicans.)
Right now, the Iranian people are protesting on the streets of Iran's capital, Tehran – demanding their freedo m, and yet President Barack Obama remains silent.
On the campaign trail, Obama constantly stressed the need to employ America's soft power, our moral and diplomatic clout, around the globe. If there was ever a time to expend America's reserves of soft power in the pursuit of freedom, it is now.
If our leaders will not stand up to tyranny when it stares us in the face, then we must. While the fight for the future of Iran and peace in the Middle East at large is going on inside Iran, there are things you can do to help the Iranian people.
Click here to read the five ways you can take action to help the Iranian people right now!
Last Friday when the Iranian people went to the polls to elect a new president, the election was widely seen as a choice between the radical, holocaust-denying incumbent, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the reform-minded challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi. The election was thought to be closely contested, and opinion polls leading up to election day showed Mousavi leading the vote.
So when the results were announced, mere hours after the polls closed on Friday, showing Ahmadinejad with an unbelievable two-to-one lead over Mousavi, even winning overwhelming in Mousavi’s hometown, people cried fraud.
Over the weekend, protesters took to the streets of Tehran and other cities in Iran demonstrating in the largest protests since the 1979 Iranian Revolution.
As you read this email Iranian students are risking their lives to protest in the streets, to spread their message via social networking sites like Twitter -- while the mullahs and Revolutionary Guard watch and wait, trying to decide whether to mow them down, make them disappear, or give in to their demands.
Meanwhile, the leader of the free world is AWOL. No threats of sanctions. No standing up for the people in the streets. No refusal to recognize the sham government that won via fraud. But Americans can do better. We must.
An oppressed people are yearning to breathe free and you can he lp them in their struggle: http://collegerepublicans.org/
Now is the opportunity to stand with the Iranian freedom fighters.
(Originally posted at PHC College Republicans)
No plans to raise taxes? That answer has too much wiggle room for us.
The rest of Mr. McDonnell's answer doesn't make sense, either. The anti-tax-increase pledge is a guaranteed vote-getter. That's why office seekers sign it every election. In what everyone expects will be a razor-thin race, it is strange to give away a real political advantage.
This comment by Bob McDonnell seems to have conceded the high ground on taxes. This election gives a good opportunity to debate the merits of high taxes vs. low taxes since Creigh Deeds seems unable to find a tax increase he doesn't like. He even voted to increase the gas tax when gas was at $4.00 a gallon. Instead of taking Deeds head on for raising taxes, our gubernatorial nominee is leaving the possibility of a tax raise open. Which lead Not Larry Sabato to ask the fair question Is Bob McDonnell planning a middle class tax hike? If Bob is open to raising taxes we should find out now which ones he would like to raise. This is ironic because we should be telling our friends and neighbors about the taxes Bob has pledged to cut as we go door knocking this Saturday.
This Washington Times oped is only a symptom of a more fundamental problem. There is a fundamental clash going on right now about the nature of campaigns. Should they be about laying out conservative ideas that will win in the district you are from and persuading people to support those ideals, or should they be about "reaching out" to the elusive independents who "decide elections". In this election Bob McDonnell seems to have chosen to ignore his base and reach out to the independents as he seeks to win the governorship of our commonwealth. Ever since February we've been hearing about how Bob is trying to reach out to the middle. He has been talking about green jobs and bipartisanship and ignored the things that inspire people, taxes, guns, and social issues.
Running as a conservative is the path to victory, not political destruction. When was the last time the GOP won the top race on the ticket in Virginia? When was the last time the top of the ticket won in Virginia? Just in case you will point out the obvious that 2004 is old history, let me point you to a couple of recent polls. In a poll Gallup took a moth ago it found that a majority of Americans consider themselves pro-life. In another Gallup poll taken about a week ago found that conservatives (not liberals or independents) comprise the largest ideological group in America. The poll found that 40% of Americans consider themselves conservative while 21% consider themselves liberal, and 45% of independents consider themselves conservative. While these were national polls, I would think they would transfer pretty well to Virginia if there were a Virginia poll on these issues. Even if you want to disagree on this, explain how the Marriage Amendment was passed on the same ballot that George Allen lost on, or how Ken Cuccinelli won in Fairfax in 2007 when Republicans were getting defeated everywhere else. Running as a conservative is what has worked in Virginia and what will continue to work.
Newt Gingrich made this point very well when he said,
Like Reagan, we have to be inclusive, not exclusive. I’m happy Dick Cheney is a Republican. And I’m happy Colin Powell is a Republican
But here’s the key: Being inclusive doesn’t mean going wobbly. It doesn’t mean abandoning our principles.
Reagan called them “first principles.” They are our bedrock beliefs. And in a center-right nation, they are the touchstones that will guide us back into the majority.
I want Bob McDonnell to win this election, and if he is going to do it he needs to do it by winning on first principles. Bob McDonnell has a record as a fiscal and social conservative. However, he is refusing to run on it this cycle. D.J. McGuire theorizes that the western part of the state votes on social issues while the eastern part of the state votes on taxes. I would tend to concur with this theory. If it is true then Bob McDonnell is refusing to run on the two issues that lead to success in Virginia. Even if Bob wants to refuse to talk about taxes and social issues then give us something inspiring. What is the big idea Bob McDonnell is running on? What are the things Bob will do as governor that people can get excited and enthused about? Bob McDonnell I want you to win. Please inspire your base, and since you seem concerned about polls maybe that will help you raise your 78% support among Republicans.
To echo the words of Ronald Reagan, Bob McDonnell please stop running under a banner of pale pastels, but raise the banner of bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all the issues troubling the people.
Since agreeing with Reagan is almost always right...
I don ‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party”—when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.