Emerging Scandal Regarding Results of 51st District Convention?

Curiouser and curiouser.

At least, that's the way that some would be complaining, were the tables turned. How do we know this? Because they have already done so.

Remember all those posts, complaining about the fact that, before she announced for Delegate, Prince William County Republican Chairman Tom Kopko received payment from the Faisal Gill campaign for service rendered? You will recall that Kopko received a payment of $2000 for website design for Faisal Gill.

And, oh my!, how the Gill-haters screamed. Someone even ran a poll suggesting that 75% of those polled thought Kopko should resign as both legislative district GOP Chairman and Prince William County Republican Chairman.

Well, it seems that Eleventh Congressional District Chairman Becky Stoeckel is a paid consultant to the Julie Lucas for Delegate campaign. It seems that Becky's company, Executive Press, received two payments totaling $4,327 for direct-mail services to the Lucas campaign. Julie lists among her endorsees Becky Stoeckel.

Yet 'nary a word from the Gill-haters about the controversy. You see, according to Article X, Section B of the Republican Party of Virginia's Party Plan, any appeal from the results of the 51st District Convention would be heard by the Eleventh Congressional District Committee.

Well, Kopko is coming out swinging. In an e-mail sent today, he lists a number of rather serious charges against Stoeckel:

-- You helped Julie Lucas produce attack mailers against Faisal Gill (attached).

-- You attended at least one of the convention’s credentials meetings prior to the convention.

-- At the 51^st convention you inserted yourself as a secret, self-appointed observer on the grounds that you are the 11^th CD Chairman. Someone portrayed you as a “RPV Observer” but you told me you attended on your own accord.

- You did not notify the LD Chairman nor the Convention Chairman of your presence, let alone your asserted role and activities:

- You inserted yourself into sequestered activities of the Credentials Committee. That chairman complained that you were interfering with the committee while not understanding why you were there in the first place.

- You inserted yourself into the sequestered activities of the elections committee both during voting (for delegates only) and during the long and sequestered vote counting.

- You gave advice to credentials and elections committee members in your self-appointed role.

-- Now you are calling a clearly illegal meeting of the 11^th CD to consider overturning a convention in your endorsed client’s favor. It violates the party plan, is protested by committee members, and goes against your own request “without objection” to reschedule. All this while you claim today that your “hope is to get thru this process as expeditiously and fairly as possible.”

Now, if Brother Tom had done any of these things, he would be eviscerated by his/Gill's critics. Arguably, these amount to more serious "conflicts of interest" than anything Kopko was alleged to have done to "aid" Faisal Gill.

And still, no word from those who were savaging Kopko.

Unlike others, I won't necessarily question Stoeckel's motives or behavior. She's in business, a business which does political things, and she also serves as a volunteer as the Eleventh Congressional District Chairman. She has the luxury --- denied many --- to be able to indulge her political interests in a professional capacity, and make a living at it. Perhaps she did these things in her capacity and expertise as a Congressional District Chairman, hoping to smooth out the process and ensure its integrity.

But had she supported Faisal Gill in a party nominating contest, I note that she already would have been savaged for her behavior, with every motive and action questioned.

The only difference between her actions and Tom Kopko's appears to be that she is supporting who --- for some --- is the "right" candidate.

Among the elements of "integrity" is the ability to even-handedly apply a single standard.

If the criticism of Kopko as compared to the silence regarding Stoeckel isn't a double-standard, I don't know what is. And it is a double-standard which should be remembered the next time you read a comment or complaint from Greg Letiecq, Jonathan Mark, "Batson D. Belfry," AWCheney, or any other Gill-hater.

One of my standards is a well-developed contempt for those who purport to apply objective standards in the service of a subjective agenda.