McDonnell promises to de-fund Planned Parenthood, IF elected

by: aznew

Thu Oct 29, 2009 at 20:04:37 PM EDT

From Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia:

On Tuesday, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell revealed plans to single out and de-fund Planned Parenthood upon entering office as Governor of Virginia.

Speaking to conservative radio host Laura Ingraham, McDonnell was asked, "Can you promise that as Governor you'll use the veto pen to ensure that Virginians' tax dollars are not used to fund Planned Parenthood or abortion?"  McDonnell responded by saying, "Yeah, I've said that I would do that...that'll be part of what we'll get done." (Watch here)

(more on flip)

Hey, Virginia: WAKE UP!

by: aznew

Fri Oct 23, 2009 at 08:56:17 AM EDT

In retrospect, of course, it was all too clear by the Fall of 2000, or should have been all to clear to any reasonable person, that if elected that George W. Bush would fubar the country as badly as he did.

I'll leave it to historians and the many millions of people smarter and more astute than I to analyze exactly what happened and why during the Bush presidency, but long before he became president, George W. Bush had a clear record of incompetence and failure in virtually everything he had attempted as an adult.

Why on Earth was anyone surprised when he turned out to be a failure as President also, leaving the rest of us to grapple with the insecurity, fear and difficulty of living through the worst economy since the Great Depression

The Sublime Deceptions Of Bob McDonnell

by: aznew

Sun Sep 06, 2009 at 11:20:25 AM EDT

X-posted from The Virginia Democrat

Bob McDonnell's strategy for responding to Thesis-caca, like his overall campaign, is steeped in deception and dishonesty. It has also been effective.

Quite honestly, I have to admit it is somewhat frustrating, but fascinating, to watch this all unfold. While I can see and describe what McDonnell is doing, and I can divine the mechanics that allow it to operate, I can't for the life of me figure out how he is getting away with it with respect to voters, although if a recent poll is to be believed, getting away with it he is.

Well, I can figure it out, sort of. Bob McDonnell is unusually gifted and skillful at deception. And I mean that as a compliment.

(continued on the flip)

McDonnell's Transportation Plan is a Joke

by: aznew

Wed Aug 26, 2009 at 21:24:04 PM EDT

What is interesting about the transportation plan, however, is that unlike the distortion Bob uses to misrepresent his record in so many other areas (Choice, gay rights, education, etc., etc., etc.), in his transportation plan he doesn't even bother making a pretense that he is at all serious about the issue.

(More on the flip)

Meet Bob "Dubya" McDonnell: Will we get fooled again?

by: aznew

Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 21:47:49 PM EDT

In fact, if Bob McDonnell is elected governor, odds are he will do for Virginia what Dubya did for the United States. So, I guess, if you liked George W. Bush, you will probably love Bob McDonnell.

As for me and all other sentient Virginians, however, it scares the Bejesus out of us.

In 2000, when Bush ran for president, one of his problems was his past record. Oh, his years as a drunk could be excused easily enough by his religious conversion, but his ham-fisted, frat-boy worldview and his lifetime record of business failure at everything he attempted bespoke an uncurious and uncaring mind, a lack of judgment and poor leadership skills. These qualities would come back to haunt us.

Bush may have fancied himself a businessman and entrepreneur, and indeed, he was somewhat successful at creating this image of himself in the media, but the truth of the matter was that he was a serial failure in business. He was able to make millions anyway thanks to his family's connections - after all, when your Dad is a former head of the CIA and a President of the United States, there are plenty of people vying for the opportunity to bail you out.

Similarly, Bush sought to portray himself as a successful governor of Texas with a reputation for reaching across the aisle and forging bipartisan solutions. The truth, however, was that the governor of Texas is a weak post, and Bush did nothing of consequence in his time in office beyond public relations.

As it turned out, George Bush's past record was a harbinger for our future, from his failure to pay attention to a memo entitled "Bin Laden determined to Strike in U.S.," to the sheer incompetence of his response to Hurricane Katrina, to economic policies so steeped in a discredited ideology that they nearly plunged us into another Great Depression. All of this was easily foreseen from Bush's record. And it is not as if this record was hidden; the mainstream media reported it all, even if they did not embrace it as a theme for their campaign coverage.

(Continued on the flip)

McDonnell's Money Deserves Closer Look

by: aznew

Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 21:25:08 PM EDT

Is Bob McDonnell for sale?

Between 2007 and 2009, a Houston, Tex. couple, Bob and Doylene Perry, contributed $55,000 to Mr. McDonnell's campaign.

Bob Perry, it turns out, was the largest contributor to the oxy-moronically named Swift Boat Veterans for Truth back in the day. This has been extensively reported in the Virginia blogosphere.

If all Mr. and Mrs. Perry were involved in were the spreading of vicious smears against decent, patriotic Americans on behalf of GOP candidates, I wouldn't bat an eye. Such tactics have become de rigueur in the Republican playbook these days.

Of more concern to me was an alarm raised in March about the Perrys from the blog "Clearly New Mexico," a project of the non-profit, non-partisan Center for Civic Action based in Albuquerque, about the Perrys donating money to politicians in the Land of Enchantment. Here is what the blog had to say:

New Mexico was one of only five states in the nation with no caps whatsoever. Texas is another. [aznew - as is Virginia].

Perhaps that's why Bob Perry, the multi-millionaire Houston homebuilder, and his wife Doylene Perry have found New Mexico politics so hospitable.  In 2008, Bob wrote campaign checks to the New Mexico Republican Party totaling $240,000.  In the 2006 cycle, the Bob and Doylene dropped a total of $361,000 into the state.

In 2002, Perry gave NM Republican gubernatorial candidate John Sanchez a cool $250,000. So what ever does Perry expect to get in return for all of this generosity?  Good government?

(More on the flip)

A Brief Personal Comment On The Attack Launched Against Creigh Tonight

by: aznew

Mon Jun 08, 2009 at 23:36:14 PM EDT

When I first saw the letter from Omar Samaha and Colin Goddard, first on NLS and later on http://bluevablog.blogspot.com... I had mixed feelings. On the one hand, the Virginia Tech tragedy touched both of them in ways that I simply cannot understand, and I cannot and will not sit in judgment of how they, or anyone touched by this or other tragedy, choose to express their profound anger and grief.

On the other, I was bothered by the sense that, even as Lowell and Ben protested they were simply reporting news, they were also exploiting, for the political gain of their chosen candidate, Terry McAuliffe, the anger and grief of these young men. It does not matter that their letter did not say, "Vote for Terry," because all concerned understood that, given the current state of the race, a vote not cast for Creigh would accrue to the benefit of Terry McAuliffe.

So, even as controversy over the letter the swirled on the blogs and on Twitter, I stayed out of it, unsure of my own sense of the situation. I was struck by how Hokies, in particular, were most upset by the exploitive nature of the political attack launched by NLS and Blue Virginia using this letter.

But new revelations force me to comment.

Challenged on his blog that he was working in concert with the McAuliffe campaign, Lowell wrote:

This didn't come from a "campaign," it came from Omar Samaha and Colin Goddard.

[snip]

To my knowledge, swear on a stack of bibles and all that, this was sent out independently by Omar Samaha and Colin Goddard, picked up by the Virginian-Pilot, then blogs and NBC12.

But, it turns out that Samaha and Goddard, while sincere in the thoughts expressed in their letter, did receive help from the McAuliffe campaign.

Ryan Nobles at Decision Virginia reports:

However, when I asked Goddard directly about the involvement of either campaign, he confirmed that he had received assistance from Terry McAuliffe's campaign. Specifically he said the campaign provided he and Samaha with a press e-mail list to distribute their statement. He said the e-mail was supposed to go out Sunday, but an error was made in the sending process delaying it until today.

What a sad way for Terry McAuliffe to end this campaign.

Lowell is a friend of mine, and so I'll take him at his word that he knew nothing of the McAuliffe campaign's involvement in this when he swore on a stack of Bibles, but I can only assume that his earlier statements, in the parlance of Watergate, are "no longer operative."

Beyond that, I won't compound the sadness of the events that have transpired tonight, and will simply close with Creigh's comment on this tragic episode:

"My heart has gone out to all of the victims and the families of the Virginia Tech tragedy.  There are certain events that happen in our lifetime that are above politics."

PPP Poll Preview: Almost All Undecideds Moving In Same Direction

by: aznew

Sun Jun 07, 2009 at 14:51:46 PM EDT

Last night and this morning brough two posts on the PPP blog.  The first is very interesting.

Last night, Tom Jensen wrote:

Looks like a tight race in Virginia...for second place. The undecideds seem to almost all be moving in the same direction. ... But it doesn't look like things are going to be as close on Tuesday as the polling in the last week suggested.

This morning, Tom said they would try to get the results out between 10 and 11 tonight.

Myth and Reality: What Deeds Performance in 2005 AG Race Really showed

by: aznew

Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 22:17:55 PM EDT

In what is certainly one of the more inapt metaphors I could use on this blog, one of the larger elephants in the room as we head into the 2009 Democratic Party gubernatorial primary (and there are several) is which candidate, Creigh Deeds, Brian Moran or Terry McAuliffe, can make the argument that he is the most electable in November's general election.

This is due, in part, to the relatively minor substantive differences between the policy positions of the respective candidates (notwithstanding the arguably larger distinctions in their respective records), and it is due in part to the fact that virtually every Virginia Progressive agrees that defeating Bob McDonnell is essential. Would any supporter of Deeds, Moran or McAuliffe hesitate to throw their support to another candidate if it could be convincingly demonstrated to them that the other has a substantially greater chance to prevail in the general election?

Like many other issues surrounding this primary, the question of who is the most electable candidate, however, is open to legitimate debate, as each candidate brings different strategic strengths and weaknesses to the table.

In this diary, I want to deal with what I see as on of the more pernicious falsehoods surrounding Creigh Deeds' electoral performance in 2005 and what it portends for 2009, should he be the nominee.

(more on the flip)

Brian "the Joker" Moran Up to His Old Tricks

by: aznew

Sat Jun 06, 2009 at 21:55:47 PM EDT

Crossposted from The Virginia Democrat
(I support Creigh)

Well, the Brian Moran slime machine is out in full force, and as usual it is full of half-truths, misrepresentations and distortions.

This time the target is Creigh Deeds, apparently explaining Brian's newest tag line, "We need a fighter, not a dedicated, decent, intelligent public servant."

Which brings me to Brian's interview today with NBC12. Before I get to the substance, I just want ask what is the story with that grimace? Did Brian accidentally fall into a vat of toxic chemicals on his last visit to Gotham City?

Despite being freaked out by that, onto the substance.

(more on the flip)

Brian Moran: The gift that keeps on giving

by: aznew

Thu Jun 04, 2009 at 22:03:25 PM EDT

(I support Creigh)

When the Brian Moran campaign criticized Terrence McAuliffe for accepting out-of-state campaign contributions, when Moran himself had accepted such donations in a significant amount, I attributed the gaffe it to the fact that it was early in the campaign and his campaign needed to get their sea legs.

When the Moran campaign made his opposition to the Surrey coal plant the moral centerpiece of his campaign, even though Moran had voted in favor of a coal plant in Wise, I was merely bemused since I don't really know much about environmental politics.

When the Moran campaign criticized Creigh for his Marshall-Newman vote, saying he needed to be held "accountable," even though Moran had an anti-gay marriage vote record in his background, I attributed it to poor research by his staff or perhaps an obscure vote five years ago. (But when his campaign tried to explain away that vote as having been wrongly recorded, despite the presence of contemporaneous comments from Moran himself showing he was against gay marriage, I attributed it to political malpractice.

When Brian Moran misstated the procedure for amending the Virgina Constitution on Mark Plotkin's radio show last week, I just felt bad for him.

Now, however, that the Moran campaign has sent out a mailer attacking Creigh on his record on guns, with the headline, "By working so hard to get the NRA's approval, Creigh Deeds has lost ours," just several days after Brian rang up the endorsement of gun rights group opencarry.org, well, now I can only conclude that the Moran campaign a gift from the blogging gods.

(more on the flip)

Brian Moran vs. Candidate Moran

by: aznew

Sun May 31, 2009 at 20:31:16 PM EDT

(I support Creigh)

Blue Virginia has a post up about Brian Moran's interview with Mark Plotkin on Friday. Plotkin's a tough interview, so kudos to Moran for even taking it on. Creigh, too, who tangled with Plotkin on May 22 and did not come away unscathed..

And those guys are going back for more later this week.  (I believe McAuliffe has refused several invitations to Plotkin's show, but the two have had a dialogue, of sorts, through the media.)

Anyway, I agree with Lowell about Moran's dismal performance on this interview. At times, it was tough to listen to, and I say that as an advocate for a rival candidate, and as a humble blogger who holds the opinion that Brian Moran is not going to win this primary (with the proviso that predictions and opinions like mine count for nothing -- that's why they actually hold elections). And while I have written critically about Moran and the campaign he has run, I'm also aware that many people whose opinion I respect (and some whose I don't) are unalterably in his corner.  

I'll take no joy in Moran's defeat, if it comes to pass, and sincerely hope that he will remain in public life, perhaps come back to run again for office.

But back to the election before us now.

(More on the flip)

The McAuliffe Mailer: The facts stomp all over the truth

by: aznew

Thu May 28, 2009 at 19:57:14 PM EDT

(I support Creigh Deeds)

Terry McAuliffe's recent scratch-off mailer has raised, yet again, the issue of "negative attacks."

The McAuliffe campaign and its supporters assert that as long as "attacks" are "factual," they are somehow not negative attacks at all.  I'm not quite sure I get this logic, so I assume it represents some higher level of reasoning of which I am not capable.

Fortunately, debunking this pathetic mailer does not require superior analytical abilities. The fact is that the McAuliffe mailer might be "factual" in the sense that it doesn't print anything untrue - I won't argue that point -- but they are not truthful in any commonly understood and accepted sense of the term.

And therein lies the problem. "Factual" is not the same thing as "truthful."

(more on the flip)

Two weeks to go: Comparing the candidates

by: aznew

Wed May 27, 2009 at 22:09:35 PM EDT

(I support Creigh)

With only 14 days remaining until the primary, I thought I would try to hone down and prioritize the key issues as they have emerged in the primary battle, and evaluate the candidates with respect to these key issues.

Notwithstanding the mantra of "jobs, jobs, jobs" repeated by the candidates, the fact is that there are not wide policy differences between our candidates. Given that, the three key issues that should be of concern to the Democratic primary voter are as follows:

1. Electability. Which candidate has the best shot of beating McDonnell?
2. Vision. Which candidate has articulated a positive and pragmatic vision for the Commonwealth's future?
3. Capability. Which candidate will make the best, most effective Governor, able to begin work from day one and make the most of his four years?

Here, on the flip, is the rank of each candidate in these respective areas, with a very brief analysis

Creigh's Progressive Cred

by: aznew

Sun May 24, 2009 at 19:55:18 PM EDT

(I support Creigh for Governor)

Now that Creigh has gained the endorsement of the Washington Post, and now that several recent polls are showing a clear trend in his direction, enough such that purveyors of the conventional wisdom believe that Creigh now has a legitimate shot at this thing, he can expect more criticism from the other campaigns -- what the McAuliffe campaign might refer to as "negative attacks."

One meme that has already seen the light of day is the myth that Creigh is not a strong Progressive.

It is a charge that is utterly without merit. The fact is that Creigh has a strong Progressive record, one that is all the more impressive given that the district he represents is more conservative than many. As the Washington Post wrote in its endorsement last week:

Some progressive voters may look past Mr. Deeds, assuming he's too far to the right on social issues. They should look again. ...  Yes, he describes himself as a supporter of the Second Amendment. He's willing, however, to put limits on gun ownership when the stakes are highest, brokering a compromise in an effort to close the state's notorious gun show loophole. His support for abortion rights and for an amendment to prohibit the Confederate flag emblem from being displayed on state license plates are all the more impressive considering the weight of conservative voters in his district.

(More on the flip)

WaPo Endorsement: Creigh

by: aznew

Fri May 22, 2009 at 08:08:49 AM EDT

Crossposted from The  Virginia Democrat

By now, the news has started to circulate that the Washington Post has endorsed Creigh.

Not only has the Post endorsed him, it has done so for the right reasons. The Post said:

However, delve a bit deeper, and the answer might surprise you. In 18 years in the General Assembly, Mr. Deeds has time and again supported measures that might be unpopular with his rural constituency but that are the right thing to do, for Northern Virginia and the state as a whole. He has demonstrated an understanding of the problems that matter most, the commitment to solve them and the capacity to get things done. Mr. Deeds may not be the obvious choice in the June 9 primary, but he's the right one.

(More on flip)

Another View of Today's Debate: McAuliffe Wins! McAuliffe Loses!

by: aznew

Tue May 19, 2009 at 21:36:31 PM EDT

The final Gubernatorial debate was tough to get a handle on, mostly because it was too short, poorly moderated and failed to permit the candidates to make cases for themselves or offer up thoughtful critiques of their opponents.

For the best coverage of what went on, and some pretty spot-on commentary of what it all meant, check out this post and this post at Blue Virginia.

For some awesome contemporaneous commentary, go check out Ben Tribbet's tweets of the debate. I sat behind Ben at the debate, and his commentary - especially read in real-time, was devastating, illuminating and hilarious all at the same time. And, what can I say; the guy is a sharp dresser.

My first impression at the debate was that Terry McAuliffe won. In the hall, at least, Creigh seemed a little flat and Moran seemed, well, lost in the sense that with three weeks left to go in a campaign that he has been waging for three years, he still hasn't seemed to find a consistent voice or message.

McAuliffe record on predatory lending deserves more scrutiny

by: aznew

Sat May 16, 2009 at 09:22:17 AM EDT

Sometimes, however, a politician himself will invite scrutiny, either by direct invitation or, more often, indirectly through the unwarranted criticism of an opponent that calls that opponent's ethics into question. Then, hypocrisy is not only fair game, it becomes an arguably relevant factor in evaluating a candidate. Brian Moran is a serial offender in this regard - for example, vaguely criticizing, without any proof of wrongdoing whatsoever, that Terry McAuliffe's fund raising was somehow tainted, thus begging for the same standard to be applied to his own fundraising. The results have not been pretty for Moran.

This past week, however, it is Terry McAuliffe who invited the scrutiny of his own donors.

(More on flip)

A question for the lawyers out there

by: aznew

Sun May 10, 2009 at 14:04:52 PM EDT

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Read the entire story, but here is a quick summary of the relevant part:

In 2005, Farouq Massoud, who owned a cab company that several years earlier Moran helped get ousted from a contract at Dulles Airport, put Moran on retainer.

In 2005, it seems, the airports authority was looking again at the contract. The staff evaluated proposals, and Massoud's company was turned down. Massoud objected.

The board of directors was scheduled to approve the staff recommendation, but on Feb. 1, Mame Reiley, a director, delayed the scheduled vote without public explanation. Several months later, the board simply threw out all the bids.

(See more on flip)

What kind of crap is this?

by: aznew

Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 17:02:03 PM EDT

Here is the background: I recently wrote a diary discussing why I thought Brian Moran's "Fighter" argument was falling flat. In the context of doing so, I brought up some past indcidents involving controversial acts by the Moran campaign and its surrogates as it related to several people in the Virginia blogosphere. Two of those bloggers (but they were not the only incidents to which I was referring) were involved with an earlier iteration of BC.

My intent was, quite frankly, not to rahash these incidents, but rather to analyze why I think the Moran campaign is flailing about with this message. In the heat of a hard fought primary, however, that proved impossible, and another commenter and I exchanged a series of emails on the subject. It wasn;t the first time for us, and I doubt it will be the last.