Saturday, June 16, 2007

Creating A Blogosphere Myth To Steal An Election

No, I'm not talking about Algore and the Nutroots. I'm talking about Julie Lucas and her "team" of sore losers who are unwilling to accept the results of an election.

And they're using the Internet and blogosphere to do it.

The myths are numerous. To be sure, there were "overvotes," i.e., more votes that credentialed delegates, in three precincts. Now, the explanation for such overvotes could be as simple as people voting in the wrong precincts (there were many precincts with "undervotes," in which registered, credentialed delegates who showed up did not vote). But, of course, the Gill-haters are attempting to cast those votes in as sinister a light as possible, suggesting voter fraud.

And, yes, overvotes occured in three precincts. Apparently, "Team Lucas" is attempting spread the myth that they occurred in only two precincts, because of examination of some materials occurring after the Conventtion. The problems? They are two-fold. First, it relies upon the notion that their biased, post-Convention analysis is valid. Second, and perhaps more importantly, this issue was not raised by an appeal at the Convention. To be sure, there was an Algore moment late in the convention, which I witnessed, in which "Team Lucas" member O.P. Ditch attempted to have all votes in one or two precincts favorable to Faisal Gill thrown out, but his appeal was withdrawn, and the Convention adjourned with Gill as the winner. However, even by then, it was probably too late. After all, the Convention accepted the report of the Elections Committee.

To my mind, Lucas has waived her right to appeal. Here's the rub: Article VIII, Section I(4) of the State Party Plan provides that:
All Mass Meetings, Party Canvasses, Conventions, and Primaries shall, to the extent applicable, by governed by and conducted in accordance with, giving precedence as listed to, the following: the State Party Plan; District or Unit Plan or By-Laws; rules adopted by a designated Rules Committee; and otherwise in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order.
Here's the problem: "Team Lucas" never appealed from the report of the Elections Committee. "Team Lucas" --- specfically, its "brain trust" (charitably named), O.P. Ditch --- withdrew his appeal from the ruling of Convention Chairman Pat O'Leary, and therefore denied the Convention the right to rule on the issues it is attempting raise on appeal. Her appeal is therefore illegal under Robert's Rules of Order. Page 247, Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (10th ed.), holds that "Members have no right to criticize a ruling of the chair unless they appeal from his decision." An appeal at this point is therefore somewhat akin to trying to take an appeal from a state magistrate judge --- perhaps not even an attorney --- directly to the Supreme Court of the United States, while skipping the state trial court, the state's intermediate appellate court, and the state's supreme court. Such an appeal would, of course, be thrown out or rejected.

And perhaps "Team Lucas" is hoping from a more favorable ruling from a committee whose chairman's company was paid more than $4000 by the Lucas campaign, and who has been quoted as prejudging the merits of Lucas' complaints. I am also informed that Becky Stoeckel, Eleventh Congressional District Chairman, is the soul source of the radical notion that all votes in overvoted precincts should be thrown out, and therefore, that all voters in those precincts should be disenfranchised.

Of course, internet myths and smears are nothing new where Faisal Gill is concerned. There is a long-running campaign to smear him as a terrorist or terrorist-sympathizer, and some kind of security risk, notwithstanding his positions of trust within the Department of Homeland Security, and the investigation understaken, apparently, at the behest of political enemies, which cleared him of any wrong-doing. Much appears on a website whose owner is being sued by a former candidate represented by Gill's lawfirm. More appears on a racist Democrat's website.

Julie Lucas, by allowing this appeal to go forward for her benefit, is burning her bridges in the GOP, attempting to delegitimize its processes. That she has filed to run for reelection to her seat as the Neabsco representative on the Prince William County School Board demonstrates most persuasively that she lacks the courage of her convictions.

3 comments:

Virginia Brigand said...

You are right about all that you say concerning the overvotes and the convention. Her protaction of this election combined with her willingness to participate in the racist whisper campaign against Gill illustrate her declassness. I am shocked and almost infuriated by the garbage and half-truth being perpetuated by other blogs in PWC in regards to Gill. I remarked on other blogs about how some in Lake Ridge still have their Lucas signs up. While I respect the right of a homeowner - it is politically inappropriate for the Lucas campaign not to advise their supporters to take down there signs , weeks after the election is over.

James Young said...

Yeah, I noticed that on the way to church this morning, Brigand. Struck me as pretty classless. But no more classless that virtually the entirety of the Lucas campaign in the final weeks before, and after, the Convention.

Charles said...

I can fault the Lucas campaign for some things, but not for spending their time getting their supporters to take down the signs.

On public property? Sure, although I think they are probably mostly gone now anyway.