Friday, December 31, 2010

Bob Marshall's Case to Ban Gays from the VA National Guard

Shortly after the U.S. Senate voted to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell, Bob Marshall said he would introduce a bill blocking gays from serving in the VA National Guard. This quickly lead to criticism from people on both sides of the political spectrum as people argued Virginia did not have the constitutional authority to make that decision. Bob Marshall has stood firm in his decision, and recently explained how the states have the constitutional authority to determine who joins the ranks of its national guard.

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story noted in his Commentaries on the Constitution: "Thepower over the militia ... was limited, and concurrent with that of the States. The right of governing them was confined to the single case of their being in the actual service of the United States ... . It was then, and only then, that they could be subjected by the general government to martial law ... . The power to discipline and train the militia, except when in the actual service of the United States, was also vested exclusively in the States; and under such circumstances was secure against any serious abuses."

In Virginia, the National Guard denies applicants who have more than five traffic tickets or if they use drugs. States can impose tougher standards than Congress. Will state legislators and congressional Republicans listen to the troops and their constituents?

While I can not support the legislation until there is a written version, something needs to be done about the relentless push to make Americans unquestionably accept as normal, and embrace a lifestyle that is morally repugnant. While people may argue allowing gay people in the military is no big deal, it is one battle in the assault on traditional marriage and families. If we keep surrendering the battles, we will lose the war.

To quote Tom Seeman a long time member of the LCRC, and Precinct Operations Chair in 2009.
Likewise, the debate about gays in the military is about a lot of things, but military readiness isn’t one of them. Progressives couldn’t care less about either military readiness or the institution of marriage. What they want is to force the acceptance of the gay lifestyle on society. They want it taught in the schools, they want it instituted in law, and most of all they want to silence all debate on the issue.

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Virginia Rally for Life - January 13th

Virginia Rally for Life

January 13, 2011
Rally 10:30 – 11:30 am
(assemble at 10:00 am)
Lobbying 11:30 am – as time permits

Why: To witness to the sanctity of life, to urge Governor McDonnell to initiate regulations for first trimester abortion facilities, and to support pro-life legislation.

When: Thursday, January 13, 2011

Rally: 10:30am-11:30am, (assemble at 10:00am), Lobbying: 11:30 – as time permits

Where: Richmond State Capitol Grounds, Rally at Bell Tower, Lobbying at General Assembly Offices

Delegate Bob Marshall
Bishop Earl Jackson
Alveda King (by audio), Priests for Life
David Bereit, 40 Days for Life
Shawn Carney, 40 Days for Life
Dr. John Seeds, M.D., Obstetrics & Gynecology
Andrea Pearson, Silent No More
Rita Dunaway, Valley Family Forum
Tom Glessner, NIFLA
Karen Zbinden, Concerned Women for America

Maddy Curtis singing the National Anthem and more……

Radtke: Marco Rubio or Christine O'Donnell

Jamie Radtke's senate campaign kicked off with an interview on FOX News. The reporter began by asking, "Will Jamie Radtke be the next Marco Rubio or Christine O'Donnell?"

It is interesting to think of what kind of Tea Party senate candidate she may be like. Rubio being one of the most inspiring, and O'Donnell being one of the more embarrassing. She is someone without a legislative record, or a record of fighting for things when the heat was on, and a decade experience as a political consultant to different degrees. When you look at her bio, at first glance it seems more like the unqualified, unvetted O'Donnell than the experienced proven record of Marco Rubio. Hopefully I am wrong in this comparison, but after some of the Tea Party candidates that were nominated last cycle we need to be cautious about the ones we nominate in the years to come.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Jamie Radtke Announces for U.S. Senate

Jamie Radtke is the first to announce her intentions to run for U.S. Senate against Jim Webb in 2012. The former head of the Virginia Tea Party Federation filed the paper work to run in the last couple days. George Allen, Bob Marshall, and Corey Stewart are also almost certain to file in the next month or two.

In an interview, Ms. Radtke said she decided to run after watching Congress pass
legislation during this month’s lame duck session, including a package of tax
cuts, that added to the national debt.

“It has become clear that many in Congress still don’t get it,” she said. “The tax bill did nothing to cut the huge debt burden on all of us.”

Ms. Radtke gained some prominence in Virginia this year as the main organizer of a large tea party convention in Richmond, which drew nearly 3,000 participants.
If she is going to win she needs to unite the ant-George Allen elements, and a strong first quarter fundraising could go a long way towards that. Also for the record she decided to run well before the tax deal was negotiated.

Monday, December 20, 2010

RPV State Central Roll Call Vote

At the RPV Advance, state central voted for a primary. The following is the list of how everyone voted. It was a public roll call vote. Regardless of how you wanted the vote to turn out, it is an important vote with potentially important consequences.

Republican Party of Virginia State Central Committee Roll Call

Vote to Hold 2012 U.S. Senate Nomination by Primary.

Vote held on November 20, 2010

* A Yes vote is a vote for the primary

Chairman, Pat Mullins Abstain

First Vice Chair, Mike Thomas Yes

Morton Blackwell, National Committeeman No

Kathy Hayden Terry, National Committeewoman No

Paulina Campbell, Secretary Did Not Vote

Brian Plum, Treasurer Yes

Linwood Cobb, Budget Chairman Yes

Lee Goodman, General Counsel

William Fralin, Finance Chairman Yes

Juanita Balenger, Eastern Vice Chairwoman No

Kevin Gentry, Eastern Vice Chairman No

Judi Lynch, Western Vice Chairwoman Yes

Wendell Walker, Western Vice Chairman No

1st District

Tom Foley, Chairman Yes

James Bowden sent a proxy, which was disallowed, opposed the primary

John Van Hoy No

Michael Lowe No

Carol Dawson No

Allen Webb No

2nd District

Gary Byler, Chairman No

David O'Kelley Yes

Curtis Colgate No

Roger Miles No

3rd District

Mike Wade, Chairman Yes

Bryan Meals Yes

Chris Woodfin Yes

Cortland Putbrese Yes

4th District

Jack Wilson, Chairman Yes

Col. William Flanagan Yes

Irene Hurst Yes

Wayne Ozmore Yes

Bob Wheeler Yes

5th District

Bill Stanley, Chairman No

Christopher Shores No

Renee Trent Maxey No

Gene Smith Yes

Rachel Schoenwald Yes

6th District

Trixie Averill, Chairman Yes

Mickey Mixon No

Matthew Braud Yes

Jim Crosby No

Mark Peake Yes

Lynn Mitchell Yes

7th District

Linwood Cobb, Chairman Yes

Kristi Way Yes

Marie Quinn Yes

John Tucker Yes

Doug Rogers Yes

David Fuller Yes

8th District

Mike Ginsberg, Chairman Yes

Vellie Dietrich-Hall Absent

Michael Giere No

Mark Kelley No

9th District

Michelle Jenkins, Chairman Yes

John Kilgore Yes

Jerry Lester Yes

Jack Morgan Yes

10th District

Howie Lind, Chairman No

Jo-Ann Chase No

Elizabeth Kay Gunter No

Gary Lofton Yes

Mary Gail Swenson Yes

11th District

Becky Stoeckel, Chairman Yes

Keith Damon No

David Ray No

Patsy Drain No

Caucus Representatives

Senator Emmet Hanger Yes

Delegate Morgan Griffith Yes

Senator Frank Ruff Yes

Delegate John Cosgrove Yes

Virginia Federation of Republican Women

Fay Williamson VFRW President Yes

Vicki Alford Yes

Anna Lee Yes

Young Republican Federation of Virginia

Micheal Hardy, President Yes

Andrew Vehorn Yes

Neil Miller Yes

College Republican Federation of Virginia

Lena Morill, President Yes

Jadan Horyn Yes

Lexy Rusnak Yes

Saturday, December 18, 2010

6th District Treasurer Race Story

A few weeks ago I wrote a story about the 6th District committee refusing to remove a member, Dexter Gaines, who opposed a Republican nominee in the general election. The 6th District Watchdog also did a story on it as well. As a result of the story someone who tried to run for treasurer of the committee asked to share his story which I am republishing. The man's name is Lee Carter, and the rest of this post is the narrative he wrote about trying to run for the position Dexter Gaines now holds.

My name is Lee Carter and back in May of this year a friend of mine who is a conservative Bible believing Christian and a member of the 6th District Republican Committee told me that perhaps I should consider running for the Treasurer’s position on the committee since it was coming open. When I told him I would consider it closely he sent me an application with instructions. I decided to give it a shot since the worst thing that could happen is that I’d get a good look at how politics works. Did I ever! The instructions on the application form said that I must submit an original form directly to the Chairwoman who was Trixie Averill and a fax or email copy to the then secretary Kelly Keech both before five o’clock on June 11th. Before noon on the deadline day I called Trixie and asked if I could deliver my application to her on my lunch break. She was at home so she gave me her address and I met her in her driveway sometime around noon. She was very pleasant and of course inquired why I decided to run and more importantly who told me about the position. I was completely honest with her on all counts. Near the end of our meeting she emphasized to me that I had to submit my application to the Secretary via email or fax by five o’clock that evening.

When I returned to work, I did indeed work on getting the application to her before the deadline and as business goes, I didn’t get the opportunity to email the application immediately but I did hit the send button on my email with the attached application at 3:47, more than an hour before the deadline. After that I went directly back to doing my other business. As it turned out, at about six o’clock that evening I got a call from Kelly Keech informing me that she never received my application and thus didn’t meet the deadline. I of course informed her that I sent it via email at about 3-ish but she said she never got it. I asked her if she checked her spam filter and everything and she said she did. After I got off the phone, being extremely perplexed that she didn’t receive my email, I took a short drive back to work to find out what might have happened on my end. Indeed I did find out that the outgoing email server was not working, or perhaps a setting on my outgoing email properties was not correct. Nevertheless I quickly sent another email to her and this time to everyone of the 6th District Committee. I used a different email account this time and again I attached my application AND I attached a copy of the original email that I sent at 3:47 with the time stamp proving that I had sent it in on time. After that I called Kelly Keech back to tell her of the circumstances but I didn’t catch her so then I called Trixie and let her know of the circumstances. Though I didn’t catch her either I did leave her a message. Later that evening I found a voice mail on my phone from Trixie explaining that, regardless of my circumstances, my application would not be accepted because I did not meet the very specific instructions on the application.

The next day or two I called my friend and told him about the situation and he said he thought it was terrible for them not to accept my application when I had submitted the original on time and I had proven that I sent the email on time and that the Secretary had received my email application albeit about an hour after the deadline. After that I left it all to those on the Committee to sort out.

I was kept in the loop of some of the discussions regarding my application and there is one incident and statement by Trixie that really stands out. An individual named Carl Tate submitted an application to run for the position of Vice-Chairman. After some time and consideration he decided to withdraw his name from the running. His explanation was thus, “This entire process has been disappointing and a further reminder to me of just how divided this committee/district still is. I contacted the chairwoman of this district inquiring about running for vice-chair of this committee and asking about any pre-filing requirements. I was sent an email stating there would be no pre-filing requirements. Yet the very next day I receive an email, along with the committee, that outlines a set of pre-filing requirements. It is my contention those requirements were established to discourage individuals from standing for election. Something that is unfair and contradicts our stated efforts to grow our party. Further it has also come to my attention that those requirements have been used to block someone from standing for Treasurer, although the individual had delivered his application to the chairwoman. Again, something that is unfair and contradicts our efforts to grow our party. I became a member of the Republican Party over fifteen years ago. I have served at just about every level of the party – from precinct work and lit drops to two presidential appoints. And I actually looked forward to working for the party here at home in the sixth district. That won’t happen now. I am completely turned off by the petty maneuvering, the back-biting and the in-fighting I’ve seen over the past two years. What I have seen happen in this district is the reason people hate, not only politics, but the GOP. And I can see why some of your unit meetings barely attract quorums as opposed to the area tea party meetings where hundreds of activists come out.”

After Carl sent out this email, Trixie responded thus, “Pre-filing does not block anyone from participating in an election. We pre-file regularly to attend conventions, and to run for office. We had pre-filing for the Chair candidates for the 6th District. The requirements were clearly stated at the top of the form and were mailed to everyone on the 6th District Committee so that they could recruit candidates. The individual whom Mr. Tate references waited until the last afternoon to turn in his form to me, and then failed to have his electronic copy sent to the Secretary (as required) by the deadline. When all the other candidates (including one who had his own wedding to prepare for) got their forms in on time, to make and exception would, in my opinion, be grossly unfair to the others. As I said at the convention, and I’ll reiterate now, we have all had enough divisiveness in the 6th to last a lifetime.”

My own response to these statements of Trixie is that she said that the committee has too much divisiveness to last a lifetime. If that were really her concerns, she surely would have let my slight pre-filing hiccup pass rather than calling it “grossly unfair to the others” which really is a gross overstatement. She could have easily accepted my application as it was given to her and the other candidates wouldn’t have known anything happened. To me the real truth is she didn’t want opposition to Dexter Gaines, her own very special candidate to perform her own very special work as we now see.

But the story doesn’t end here. I was advised to attend the election meeting and that a couple other men were going to nominate me from the floor. So I attended that meeting to see how it would all come together. Though the minutes of the meeting were extremely brief and did not entail any of this event (probably for a reason) I have to recollect this information as best I can from memory and because of this lack of the detailed information, this will be brief. It was discussed how I applied and the Secretary stated that she did not receive my application by the exact time of the specified instructions and Trixie stated emphatically that I was therefore unqualified to run. Someone later attempted to nominate me from the floor and a Parliamentary rule was argued against such a motion and the motion ended without a discussion. Without my candidacy Dexter Gaines was able to run completely unopposed for the Treasurer’s position.

It is my contention through all of this experience that the majority makeup of the 6th District Republican Committee is a partisan and exclusive non-Christian political good-ol-boy network that does not represent the good people of the 6th district of Virginia. It is ugly self-serving politics as usual.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Defending Your Faith Can Still Get You Killed

In American we often take our liberty for granted. It is important to remember that in other countries people do not enjoy the freedom we do. One current example is Pakistan. About a year and a half ago, a woman in Pakistan defended her Christian faith in public when she was taunted for her beliefs. She was sentenced to die for blaspheming Mohammed. Even if she pardoned, she will have to go into hiding because the religious leaders have put a price on her head.

The freedom of religion and expression are important freedoms that flow from the Christian tradition of the west. It is important that we preserve these freedoms, and never take them for granted.

Monday, December 6, 2010

Mitch McConnell: Accomplishing Things as Minority Leader

Not long after the elections, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell joined Sen. Jim DeMint's efforts to put a caucus moratorium on earmarks. This was a pleasant sign that McConnell understood what the November elections were all about.

Sen. McConnell kicked off the lame duck session by releasing a letter signed by the entire caucus, promising to filibuster every bill until the Bush Tax cuts had been extended, and the government has been funded for the following year. As a result of this commitment, it seems that eventually the Democrats will grudgingly agree to a two year extension of all the tax cuts. This is quite the legislative accomplishment for a party that still has very little in this session of congress.

How Desperate is George Allen?

In less than two years Virginia will have a competitive election for U.S. Senate. It appears George Allen is all in as he fights to reclaim his old seat.

Regardless of your opinion on state central's decision to nominate our 2012 U.S. Senate candidate through a primary, the timing of the vote seemed to be politically motivated. While people were originally being told state central would vote on that issue in March, suddenly days before the November meeting Mike Thomas, a close George Allen ally, moved the vote to that meeting. While Mike Thomas denied the timing of the vote was politically motivated, a long time Allen ally ramming through a vote that would help George Allen seems to be a very political move.

As if setting the method of nomination in his favor weren't enough, it now appears George Allen is trying to clear the field of primary opponents. Corey Stewart is planning to run for U.S. Senate. He recently made some critical comments about a George Allen candidacy. (One of few high ranking elected officials to do that.) Days after making those comments, the Washington Posts that Corey Stewart may face a primary challenge in 2011. A few more days pass and we learn that George Allen may be behind this primary challenge.

Appearances suggest George Allen is setting the method for the nomination contest, and clearing the field of opponents. This smacks of some one desperate for power. George Allen has a record and connections. He should be using them to build support, and lay out a bold message for why we should support him, not manipulating the system so that he is the only option we have.

Trixie Averill Supports Undermining the Republican Party

This past year Rick Boyer was the Republican Nominee for Clerk of the Court in Campbell Co. Article 7 Section C of the State Party Plan makes it clear that party officials who oppose a Republican nominee shall be deemed to have resigned their position.
"Therefore, a member of an Official Committee is deemed to have resigned his Committee position if he (a) makes a reportable contribution to and/or (b) allows his name to be publicly used by and/or (c) makes a written or other public statement in support of a candidate in opposition to a Republican nominee in a Virginia General or Special Election."
On October 18th, the Treasurer of Virginia's 6th District Republican Committee, Dexter Gaines, sent out an e-mail calling on voters in Campbell Co. to support an independent candidate for the position.


Below is a good article on the Clerk of Court for Campbell County. If you live in Campbell I would ask that you support Shelia Bosiger. I have met her and feel she is the best person for the job. As you know I am a Republican. Not ashamed of it but this is one time I can't support the nominee.

Please forward to everyone you know in Campbell and encourage them to vote for Shelia.



(I linked to the article instead of posting it all here.)

As a result of Dexter's work, and the work of other Republicans, Rick Boyer lost to the independent candidate Dexter encouraged people to vote for. One would think that campaigning against a Republican nominee would result in punishment for a Republican Party official. In Trixie Averill's 6th District Committee, the opposite happens. Trixie Averill had the power to remove him as treasurer in accordance with the party plan. Instead she gave Dexter the volunteer of the year award for the district. While members of the committee tried to have Dexter removed from the committee for opposing a party nominee, Trixie Averill made sure Dexter was not punished.

If you call yourself a Republican, you can not oppose a party nominee. If you disagree with them either hold your nose and support them, or sit on the sidelines. Openly opposing a party nominee simply because you disagree with them undermines the party. This is what Dexter Gaines did. This is the action Chairman Trixie Averill supported.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Fat Poor People...

You would think that would be an oxymoron, but while advocating for the Child Nutrition Bill, Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman, Barbara Lee, stated that the bill would fight the twin problems of poverty and childhood obesity. Presumably these two factors describe the same set of people... If our poor people are obese, maybe they don't need more money for food...

Monday, November 29, 2010

Corey Stewart Takes on George Allen

Now that 2010 is over attention is turning to the 2012 Senate elections in VA, and the effort to unseat Jim Webb. In a recent interview Corey Stewart points out the difficulties George Allen will have running for U.S. Senate. Both men are currently planning bids for U.S. Senate. Bob Marshall, and Jamie Radke are also currently running for the nomination.

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Loudoun Blogger Declares Work of Largest 10th District Unit Unnecessary for Frank Wolf to Win Big

Loudoun Insider is upset that the LCRC won 10th District Unit of the Year, and Suzanne Volpe won volunteer of the year. In explaining why he doesn't agree with those awards, he didn't deny they worked very hard this year. No one can sanely deny that. He simply said their work was unnecessary. Maybe we should be happy that someone who believes hard work is unnecessary to winning elections is only a blogger.

Thanks to everyone who worked hard to make 2010 a sucess in VA. It took a lot of working with people we disagree with to do it, but it was worth it.

Monday, November 22, 2010

Concerned Women for America Stands for Life

Thank you to Janet Robey and Concerned Women for America for taking a principled stand for life.

Bill Stanley for State Senate

Bill Stanley is a rising conservative star in Virginia. He passionately believes in our core conservative principles, and will fight for them in whatever position he holds. Whether it was as Franklin Co. or 5th District Chair, or in his run for Party Chairman, Bill Stanley has a record marked by accomplishment and conviction. His hard work as Franklin Co. Chair lead to overwhelming support in his bid for 5th District Chairman. As chairman of the 5th District Bill Stanley was able to unite conservatives around Robert Hurt as Republicans took back the 5th District. In his bid for Party Chairman in 2009, Bill Stanley showed that he was willing to fight for things that looked impossible, and was not willing to be bought off.

Most importantly as a pro-lifer and a fiscal conservative, Bill Stanley will work make a pro-lifer chairman of the Senate Health and Education Committee, and will not vote to raise taxes.

Conservative State Senators Mark Obenshain, Steve Newman, Steve Martin, Ralph Smith, and Jill Vogel all endorsed Bill Stanley as they look forward to another conservative coming to the state senate. Ken Cuccinelli, Bob Marshall, The Lynchburg Tea Party, Gun Owners of America, and Bearing Drift have also endorsed Bill Stanley.

If you live in the 19th Senate District, help put a conservative majority in the state senate by voting for Bill Stanley on November 23rd.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Cuccinelli Supports Making Conventions Financially Viable

The State Central meeting at the Advance this weekend will be about one thing. Conventions. Cuccinelli is proposing party plan amendments to make conventions more financially viable. These have been debated and discussed by party activists since they were first unveiled in the summer. As a supporter of conventions, I support Cuccinelli's efforts. Bill Bolling and Bob Marshall along with others are opposing them.

The other issue is that it seems Mike Thomas and others have decided to force a vote for a primary at the meeting. Bob Marhsall who seems inexplicably on a warpath against conventions is also supporting the vote for a primary, even though that will insure that he loses if he runs for U.S. Senate. Apparently he has a proxy and will be voting for a primary at the meeting on Saturday.

I will post more about the primary vote later. For now, here is Ken Cuccinelli's statement on the party plan amendments he is proposing.

From: KEN

This memo is intended to share my perspective on the content and purpose of the two party plan amendments being proposed that will increase the financial viability of conventions as a method of nomination for statewide offices. These amendments to the party plan are being proposed in light of the 2009 convention, which left RPV with lingering financial obligations.

1. The first proposal being put forward is to allow the party to charge up to a $25,000 filing fee for candidates for all statewide offices.
2. The second is to allow the party the option of charging pre-file fees to delegates to attend conventions. The number being put forward is no more than $50 per delegate.

My reason for supporting these concepts may seem counter-intuitive. When you think of an entire nomination process - including the campaign itself, not merely the nomination election day - a very large convention filing fee, e.g., $25K for a candidate for statewide office will cost much more than a primary filing fee (approximately $4,000), but running a convention campaign can be done for a fraction of the cost of running a primary campaign.If you compare the cost of the 2009 Cuccinelli/Brownlee/Foster convention to the candidates – about $1 million total, to the cost of the 2005 McDonnell/Baril primary to the candidates – about $5 million total, it’s clear that even with significant filing fees, conventions provide the lowest cost access to a realistic, competitive nomination.

By increasing the likelihood that conventions will end up in the black financially, they will be even more viable as a nomination option. Following this page are some questions I’ve encountered about the need for these proposals.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why are these fees helpful?

In an ideal world, we would not have to charge fees at all in order to run for public office. Personally, I am in favor of keeping the bar to entry for candidates to enter nomination contests as low as possible. However, because the 2009 GOP Convention resulted in a financial loss for RPV, it would be helpful to make changes so that the State Central Committee can vote for conventions without serious concern that it will send the Party into the red.

Won’t these fees make it more expensive for longshot or low dollar candidates?

No, exactly the opposite. While these fees represent a significant increase from the 2008 and 2009 conventions, they are still significantly lower than the cost of running a statewide primary. For example, in 2005 McDonnell/Baril primary cost both candidates a combined total of around 5 million dollars, whereas in 2009, the convention contest for the same office cost less than 1 million dollars.Conventions are, by far, the cheapest method of nomination for statewide office. By far.If conventions are not more reliably financially viable – the alternative (primaries) will shut out many candidates who otherwise would have had a realistic shot in a convention.

Won’t delegate filing fees keep people from attending the convention?

While charging a fee for delegates to attend a convention is undesirable in some circumstances, it doesn’t mean it will substantially lower the turnout. For example, the 1978, 1993 and 1994 GOP conventions were the largest conventions in Virginia’s history, yet in all three the Party charged a pre-filing fee for delegates.

Will the Department of Justice approve these changes to the Party Plan?

Maybe. This is something that we will only know when an approved party plan amendment is submitted to the DoJ. Based on a case that arose in Virginia, the courts have said that delegate fees would have to be pre-cleared by the Justice Department under the Voting Rights Act. This is one of those that we just won’t know until we try.

Is there any alternative to charging delegate and candidate fees?

At the moment I believe these are the two simplest alternatives. Voluntary contributions to the party to help offset the cost of conventions are the other most obvious alternative; however, it may be dicey to rely upon that approach to generate the necessary revenue to pay for the event.It is important to remember
that these proposals are to allow RPV to charge the fees if you all feel they are necessary to pay for the conventions. If we come up with an alternate revenue source in the future – the fees may not end up being necessary, and thus don’t need to be charged. This is simply a vote to allow RPV SCC the discretion to charge the fees if they feel they are necessary.ant to remember that these proposals are to allow RPV to charge the fees if you all feel they are necessary to pay for the conventions. If we come up with an alternate revenue source in the future – the fees may not end up being necessary, and thus don’t need to be charged. This is simply a vote to allow RPV SCC the discretion to charge the fees if they feel they are necessary.

Monday, November 15, 2010

McConnell Listens to People; Backs DeMint's Earmark Ban

In the summer of 2009 Sen. Jim DeMint decided to endorse a largely unknown state legislator battling a sitting governor for the Republican nomination for Senate. At the time this primary challenge was considered a quixotic quest, and a political impossibility. After Marco Rubio won overwhelmingly in the general election, Sen. DeMint turned his sights to passing a Republican Senate Conference ban on earmarks. At the time, Sen. McConnell, along with D.C. lobbyists, and conservative senators like Sen. Inhofe, and Sen. Thune were leading the fight to protect earmarks. Grassroots groups like FRC, RedState, and AFP joined Sen. DeMint in the trenches pushing hard for Senate Republicans to take this first symbolic step in the war on spending.

Today Sen. McConnell announced that he was going to support an earmark moratorium for this session of congress.

"Nearly every day that the Senate’s been in session for the past two years, I have come down to this spot and said that Democrats are ignoring the wishes of the American people. When it comes to earmarks, I won’t be guilty of the same thing.

Make no mistake. I know the good that has come from the projects I have helped support throughout my state. I don’t apologize for them. But there is simply no doubt that the abuse of this practice has caused Americans to view it as a symbol of the waste and the out-of-control spending that every Republican in Washington is determined to fight. And unless people like me show the American people that we’re willing to follow through on small or even symbolic things, we risk losing them on our broader efforts to cut spending and rein in government.

That’s why today I am announcing that I will join the Republican Leadership in the House in support of a moratorium on earmarks in the 112th Congress."

Is there a purpose for earmarks? Yes. However it is very encouraging to see Sen. McConnell listen to the American people and support banning them for this congress as they work on solving the major fiscal crisis in this nation. A leadership willing to listen to the American people instead of blindly doing what they desire inspires hope and renews confidence.

With senate Republicans joining House in banning earmarks, and most of our presidential contenders supporting the effort as well, the party is solidly on the right side of this issue.

Marco Rubio's strong challenge to Charlie Crist lead to many other conservative challenges this cycle, and ultimately to a more conservative Republican Senate Conference. Let's hope this victory on earmarks is a sign of even better things to come legislatively this congress. Extending the Bush Tax Cuts? Balanced Budget Amendment?

Morton Blackwell Endorses Saul Anuzis for RNC Chairman

Morton Blackwell, Virginia's National Committeeman, longtime conservative leader, and founder of the Leadership Institute has endorsed Saul Anuzis for RNC Chairman. Blackwell describes Anuzis as a commonsense conservative with a record of winning in blue states who will give us the leadership necessary to win in 2012.

"Saul Anuzis will be a Chairman who will, once again, inspire the confidence of our grassroots activists, attract top talent to the RNC, revitalize fundraising from our small and large donors, and focus on the organizational nuts and bolts of a ground game that delivers our message and our voters to the polls.

Saul has excellent relationships across the country with social, economic and foreign policy conservatives. He worked successfully with Tea Party activists in Michigan who became a vital part of the winning coalition. He will build this same coalition nationally. Saul will provide the essential leadership to run and manage the RNC and put together a winning team and game plan to facilitate our wins in 2012."

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Is Sarah Palin Qualified to Be President?

For about the last month, the great "gotcha" question from the press has been to ask people if they think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president. It created quite a controversy for Joe Miller in his senate race, and was also recently asked of Bob McDonnell. Dick Cranwell, the chair of the DPVA, even sent out an e-mail proving McDonnell was radical because he thought Palin was qualified to be president.

The question of whether Palin is qualified to be president is meaningless. The qualifications for president are simple. You have to be a U.S. resident, and at least 35. Has Palin met these? Unquestionably. Beyond that she has served as governor of the largest state in America, and the VP candidate for a major political party. To quote Rudy Giuliani, "The reality is she's got a hell of a lot more qualifications than Barack Obama had when he ran for president."

Is Sarah Palin the person we want as president, and as our party's nominee? That is another debate, and one that will be had through the primary season if she chooses to run. Let's stop discrediting her, and marginalizing her as someone not even qualified to run for president.

Anyone who meets the Article II Section 1 requirements in the U.S. Constitution is qualified to run. Anyone who has accomplished as much as she has, deserves to be taken seriously. Whether she wins depends on the case she can make to the American people, and whether that message resonates with them.

Patricia Phillips for State Senate 2011 Edition

Patricia Phillips just send an e-mail to her list annoucing her bid for state senate. This should come as no surprise to people following Loudoun politics. Patricia is a proven grassroots conservative who has worked hard for conservative candidates and issues. Let's make sure she wins this cycle. Patricia is the candidate we need to defeat Mark Herring in 2011.

Friday, November 12, 2010

Richest Counties in the Country are...

...Loudoun, and Fairfax. Both have a median income of over $100,000.

Pray and Work: Jim DeMint and the Earmark Ban

Jim DeMint is leading an effort to push for a ban within the Senate Republican Conference on earmarks. Tony Perkins and FRC are issuing a call to prayer for DeMint as he fights for a conservative senate. RedState has the battle plan for helping DeMint politically.

Are earmarks a way for the legislature to direct how money is spent as opposed to the executive? Yes.

Have they been added to bills regularly to encourage people to vote for bills? Yes.

In this way they lead to excess spending, and need to be banned for now.

Also call Mitch McConnell and let him know he needs to stop fighting against this effort.

For the record earmarks are not the solution to the deficit/spending problem in D.C. They are a key first step, partially symbolic partially meaningful, that must be followed by other things that will eventually culminate in a balanced budget amendment.

Saul Anuzis for RNC Chairman

Saul Anuzis is running for chairman. He will bring the leadership the RNC so badly needs.

Think about your own state. Did some terrific Republican candidate work their hearts out, yet fall short by a handful of votes on Election Day? Now ask yourself: if the RNC had properly funded the Victory program in your state, would that candidate have been a winner? Would that candidate have benefited from a robust 72-hour program with ground troops sweeping in for the final weekend?

Would Keith Fimian have won if we had a fully funded victory program?

Friday, November 5, 2010

Ask Gov McDonnell to Regulate Abortion Clinics

According to our Attorney General, the state of VA could enforce higher standards on abortion clinics in Virginia. Planned Parenthood says if these standards were enforced, 17 of their 21 abortion clinics in the state could close. The Governor has not done this yet and is hesitant to do so.

Can you help me encourage the Governor to do the right thing? We want Gov. Bob McDonnell to instruct the state Board of Health to enforce the regulations on abortion clinics that the Attorney General says is within the Governor's power to do.

You can read the Attorney General's opinion here.

So please:

1. Contact your GOP Delegates and state senators ask them to tell the Governor to take a stand on this by instructing the state Board of Health to enforce the regulations on abortion clinics. Find and contact your state reps.

2. Contact the Governor

3. Write letters to the editor of you local paper & call in to radio talk shows

4. Pray

5. Ask other believers to do steps 1-4 - re-post this note.

Remember tell them you want Gov. Bob McDonnell to instruct the state Board of Health to enforce the regulations on abortion clinics.

Thank you for taking the time to speak up for those who can not make their voices heard.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Election Prediction: Tsunami, not a Wave

Very simply the rejection of liberalism, progressivism, and elitism that is occurring is so widespread that this will be a tsunami, not a wave. To quote one democrat consultant...
Everybody that is tied will lose, and everyone that is ahead by a few points will lose because of the GOP wave,” said one party media consultant who is involved in a wide array of House races. “There are going to be some surprises.
The early voting numbers show a strong shift towards the Republicans, and the generic ballot poll shows unprecedented support for Conservativism, and Republicans. Gallup noted just how strong what the generic ballot poll domination means in their last poll...
It should be noted, however, that this year’s 15-point gap in favor of the Republican candidates among likely voters is unprecedented in Gallup polling and could result in the largest Republican margin in House voting in several generations. This means that seat projections have moved into uncharted territory, in which past relationships between the national two-party vote and the number of seats won may not be maintained.
In light of this and other evidence let's make some predictions...

Republicans win at least 70 seats in the house.

Republicans also take back the senate with late wins in NV, Washington, and other places. While it is a stretch for Republicans to win the senate, history gives us some good direction.
Since 1930, every time voters have thrown one party out of control of the House, they've done the same thing in the Senate.

Surprising wins...
  • Governor: Tom Tancredo wins Colorado
  • Senate: Christine O'Donnell wins Deleware
  • House: Patrick Murray wins the 8th district, and Democrats are left with one House seat in Virginia.
Other Important Races
  • Rick Boyer, a long time homeschool dad, is running for Clerk of the Court in Campbell Co.
  • Brenna Findley is running for Attorney General in Iowa. If she wins this would be a huge win for liberty in the Attorney General office.
  • The Iowa Supreme Court Retention vote. If the judges on the ballot lose this would be a huge blow to judicial activism on the state level.
  • Also it will be interesting to see the results of the VA Constitutional Amendments. They passed the general assembly, but it seems a lot of people are just finding out about them, and the blogosphere seems very unfriendly to the amendments. Few elected officials are really publicly supporting them.
None of these predictions, or the hard work that thousands have exerted will mean a thing, unless you vote. As you watch the returns, this is a very helpful guide.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Two Popular Youtube Videos

The following are two videos that have been popular in the blogosphere over the last week.

The founders view on negative campaigning: Do IT.

A video of people in line for the Obama/Periello rally embracing socialism...

Press Working Overtime to Destroy Tea Party Candidates

Starting with Sarah Palin, the first Tea Party candidate, it seems like Tea Party candidates are generally unintelligent extremely conservative candidates with major skeletons in their closets. The past couple days has made it crystal clear why this is the case. The media is working overtime to paint candidates who represent regular Americans as fringe.

Exhibit A: Deleware Christine O'Donnell is already the media's favorite candidate to mock and ridicule. Granted she hasn't made it too difficult, but not everyone spends every year of their life planning a run for office. This past week we saw an anonymous article released that tried to make Christine out as a slut. The only evidence to back out the anonymous claims of a wild story, were pictures of Christine in a ladybug suit having a good time. The photos were cropped in such a way as to try to preserve the anonymity of the accuser. The story was so outlandish liberals had to begrudgingly condemn it.

Exhibit B: Alaska After a reporter from the Achorage CBS affiliate left a voice mail with Joe Miller's spokesperson he forgot to disconnect the phone line. The rest of the voice mail message was a conversation between reporters planning how they would stage a story of child molestors supporting Joe Miller, and try to create an incident like the Rand Paul stomp fiasco.

You can read the transcript here.

Journalism is not pushing anonymous stories, and planning how to make candidates look bad. That is what people with a political axe to grind do, not unbiased journalists.

Anyone can be made to look bad whether by overplaying seemingly innocent situations, or digging deep enough. Many candidates do have some comment, situation, or action that they would prefer was not brought up. Sadly politics today is more interested in making someone look bad than debating issues. This fact is even more true when conservative candidates challenging the status quo are involved. We need to be aware of this and careful of what we believe about our own candidates from the media who wants them defeated.

Understanding that people seem to work overtime to make conservative candidates look bad, these candidates and campaigns need to be careful how they respond. It is a mistake to portray yourself as a victim, as Sarah Palin seemed to want to do. Others will point that fact out. It is also a mistake to avoid the media as Rand Paul and Sharon Angle have done throughout this cycle. Instead, engage the media and fight back against the charges (assuming they are false) while standing strong and not trying to play the victim card. This is something Nikki Haley did very well through the brutal primary campaign in her bid for Governor of South Carolina.

On election day, let's disappoint the media and elect all the candidates mentioned in this post as well as the others standing for the constitution and limited government.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Virginians should Vote NO on the Constitutional Amendments

There will be three constitutional amendments on the ballot in Virginia this election. While the first two help people in the military, they use the military to open the property tax system to one of special breaks for people. The third amendment encourages the government to not cut spending, by increasing the size of the rainy day fund from 10%-15%.

For more detailed information on why you should vote NO on the constitutional amendments, check out these articles on Virginia Right, and Tertium Quids.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Morgan Griffith the Pro-Life Choice for Congress

There comes a time when tenacious commitment to ideological purity makes you at best detriment to the cause you claim to support, and at worse an enemy of that which you are trying to protect. Virginians for Life, and their Executive Director, Kellie McHugh, have definitely reached this point. This blog is unashamed to call out Republicans when they don't stick to their principles. What Virginians for Life has done here is not one of these occasions.

In their most recent e-mail entitled, "Cuccinelli Endorses Pro-Abort," Virginians for Life calls Morgan Griffith (Republican congressional candidate in VA-9) a "pro-abortion Republican" without giving any evidence to support this claim. It also claims that Ken Cuccinelli "sold out again" by endorsing Morgan Griffith. To conclude an e-mail of baseless accusations, the group decides to ask for money, and asks you to call Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and ask him to stop supporting "pro-abortion Republicans."

Since no evidence was given as to why Morgan Griffith is a "pro-abort," I decided to do my own research. In his issues page, Morgan Griffith's second issues is that he believes in the importance of the sanctity of life. He was endorsed in his bid for the 9th congressional seat by the National Right to Life because he "supports pro-life legislation, and opposes the use of federal funding for elective abortion." As a result of his strong commitment to support families, Morgan Griffith received a perfect score from the VA Family Foundation in their 2009 Report Card. This is not the record of a "pro-abort." In most people's minds an endorsement from the Virginia's pro-life champion would at least insure that the person is at least not a "pro-abort." This is the record of someone who has consistently worked for and advanced pro-life legislation as Majority Leader in the VA House of Delegates. May he have cast one vote that Virginians for Life disagrees with? Possibly. Calling a Morgan Griffith a "pro-abort" is a lie. Doing it without providing evidence is inexcusable.

Morgan Griffith's opponent Rick Boucher is most certainly a strong supporter of abortion. During the healthcare debate, he opposed the Stupak amendment, an attempt to make sure federal healthcare money would not fund abortion. His votes in the last congress earned him a 25% approval rating from the Family Research Council on family issues.

Not only is it a lie to call Morgan Griffith a "pro-abort" the timing of this e-mail is very troubling. Virginians for Life pretends like this is a recent development that Ken Cuccinelli endorsed Morgan Griffith. Cuccinelli actually endorsed Morgan Griffith in a Cuccinelli Compass e-mail sent out on May 20th. This summer Virginia Republicans participated in competitive nomination contests in five congressional districts: 2, 5, 8, 9, and 11. Ken Cuccinelli chose to endorse candidates in two of those nomination contests: Keith Fimian and Morgan Griffith. If Virgians for Life were actually upset about Ken Cuccinelli's endorsement they would have sent this e-mail out in May when Ken made the endorsement.

Choosing to send this baseless attack out the weekend before the election serves only one purpose, suppressing pro-life votes for Morgan Griffith. I do not know the intentions of the person who sent the e-mail, but it is the only possible result. Normally baseless smear attacks a couple days before an election are reserved for your political enemies. It is unimaginable to use such tactics on your friends. Under the guise of supporting life, Virgians for Life are helping reelect an enemy of family values, and the unborn, Rep. Rick Boucher.

The race in Virginia's fighting 9th will be a close race. If you believe in family values, look at the records, and vote for Morgan Griffith on Tuesday.

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Victoria Cobb Declares War on the State Senate

At the Family Foundation Gala tonight, Victoria Cobb declared that the next step in making Virginia a family values friendly state was putting a conservative majority in the State Senate. She made a point of not just wanting a Republican majority in the State Senate. She noted that Republicans lead by Russ Potts consistently killed bills relating to abortion and choice in education in the Senate Health and Education Committee. Victoria talked about the impact the Winning Matters campaign had on the statewide and House of Delegates races in 2009, and believes that a similar strategy will significantly impact the senate races in 2011. Hopefully the Family Foundation and other conservative groups succeed in this goal, and Steve Martin or Steve Newman hold the chairmanship of the Senate Health and Education Committee. When that happens Virginia will be the leader in all of the important battles of our time.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

FRC Action Launches Ad Targeting Tom Periello

FRC Action just announced that it has spent 125k to target 5 congressmen over the next two weeks. One of those congressmen is Tom Periello who is being challenged by state Sen. Robert Hurt. Here is an excerpt from the announcement with a list of the targeted seats.
FRC Action PAC, the political action committee connected with FRC Action, the lobbying arm of the Family Research Council, started a television ad campaign today against five members of Congress who have furthered a big government agenda to the detriment of American families. This $125,000 cable news ad buy is connected with the "20 in 10" campaign targeting those members of Congress who voted for business-crushing pieces of legislation, including the new health care law that allows for taxpayer funding of abortions.

The members of Congress currently targeted in the two week ad campaign are:
Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ-8)
Betsy Markey (D-CO-4)
Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH-1)
John Boccieri (D-OH-16)
Tom Perriello (D-VA-5)

Sunday, October 3, 2010

The Flag of Islam Will Fly Over the White House

Today we were given a glimpse of the most influential faction of Islam. (Some may argue they are small. That may be the case, but the element of Islam this man represents is definitely the most vocal and influential in that faith.) Elements of Islam have repeatedly declared their intent to take over America, and impose Sharia Law on it. While not mistreating all Muslims, we need to keep in mind that this is a major view held in that religion.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

John Thune for President?

Sen. John Thune has been talking about running for president recently. He has been a solid U.S. Senator, but is he the person we want to nominate to run for president? The following article from Erick Erickson of RedState is a must read for anyone thinking of supporting him for president.

John Thune’s Tan Is Starting to Resemble Toast

Let’s be honest for a minute. John Thune is a great United States Senator from South Dakota. But the only reason people talk about him for President is because he’s a good looking guy in a city full of lesser looking people, is tall, and has an attractive wife.

Other than that his greatest accomplishments are doing nothing. But he gives a great talk about biennial budgeting, the topic of choice for establishmentarians who want to show a little leg.

The other day, Thune went on record dinging Jim DeMint for helping conservatives get elected. Thune also sided with Lisa Murkowski on her keeping her Senate seat.

Now comes word that Thune is doing zilch, zip, nada to help tea party backed Senate candidates.

In fact, in a review of Thune’s giving:

  • Thune’s PAC gave $10,000 to Shelby (appropriator with no real race) and $5,000 to earmarxist Trey Grayson, but nothing for Rand Paul (anti-earmarker in tough race), even post-primary.
  • His PAC gave $10,000 to Murkowski (earmarxist party traitor), but nothing to Joe Miller (anti-earmark primary winner).
  • His PAC gave both Crist and Rubio $5,000.
  • Thune’s PAC gave Jane Norton $5,000 but gave Buck nothing. Update: Thune has now given to Buck and will be doing a fundraiser for him.
  • His PAC gave earmarxist Bob Bennett $10,000 for a 100% safe GOP seat, but only gave $5,000 to the anti-earmark Pat Toomey who’s running in blue PA.

This guy has all the makings of a Presidential candidate . . . in an Aaron Sorkin drama for NBC. That’s about it. By every other measure he is toast.

Frankly, the talk about Thune 2012 is a greater commentary on the vapid nature of inside the beltway punditry and Senate egos than on his actual, factual chances. Need we roll the tape on Senate Republicans who’ve won the White House? Bob Dole will run the slide projector while John McCain serves crow.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Take Back the Hill: Keith Fimian Money Bomb

Today and tomorrow Keith Fimian is trying to raise 50k in his effort to defeat Gerry Connolly. If you can donate, please support this conservative. He is not just a Republican. He is the kind of principled conservative we need in congress, and with your help he will win in Fairfax Co.

Saturday, September 11, 2010

Remembering 9/11: Those who Died, and the Evil Ideology that Killed Them

September 11th, 2001, will forever be a day etched on the national psyche. Everyone alive then remembers the horror, shock, and fear that marked that day as well as the courage, resolve, and unity that was forged through that tragedy. It is a day where evil stared us in the face, and the courage of regular Americans showed the world once again who Americans are. This is not just a Patriot's Day. This is a day where Americans across this nation must think about the evil that murdered thousands of innocent Americans. We must also honor the courage and sacrifice of those who died that day and those who continue to die as we defeat those who attacked us. The rest of this post is a series of videos that portray the tragic events of that day, and some of the great moments that followed as Americans came together as a nation.

Tribute Video 1: A City So Cold

President Bush's Finest Moment

President Push's Bullhorn Speech

(Here he accurately identifies the enemy, and lays out the American response.) (full text)

Baseball Helps Heal a Nation

Let us come together again as Americans again to overcome the great challenges this nation faces as we preserve the greatest beacon of liberty and freedom in the world.