Fortunately, the original post was preserved on Waldo Jaquith's indispensable Virginia Political Blog Blogroll. Here's the post, titled "Cuccinelli too Busy with Tea Parties to Defend Constitution," as it appears on Waldo's blogroll:
Virginia’s Attorney General has been so busy making public appearances with tea parties and gun rights groups this week he seems to have totally missed that James Madison University’s newspaper room was raided y local police.
Intimidation of any newspaper office by local police raises some significant constitutional questions and since JMU is a state school you would think the Attorney General might come to the aid of the press office. He has not.
Suggesting how much confidence the Breeze Newspaper has in the Attorney General, they have announced they are now consulting with the Student Press Law Center in Arlington.
Watch the story unfold in the voices of students.
Now, never mind that Doug Smith over at that site has apparently missed Cuccinelli's attempt to defend Virginians against unconstitutional "health care reform," pursuant to a statute passed with bipartisan support --- as opposed to BarryCare, which enjoyed bipartisan opposition --- by the Virginia legislature. No, wait! He trashes that.
And never mind that legitimate questions can be raised over whether a publication of the Commonwealth --- which any student newspaper at a state institution of higher learning is --- enjoys First-Amendment protection against another instrumentality of the Commonwealth, i.e., law enforcement.
No. Instead, Smith suggests that the Attorney General has some obligation to "come to the aid of the press office" raided by local law enforcement authorities.
Of course, Virginia's Attorney General has few, if any, law enforcement powers, and even less authority over local law enforcement officials.
And, of course, the Democrat candidate for the office waived his experience as an assistant Commonwealth's Attorney, even though Virginia's Attorney General has few, if any, law enforcement powers, and --- as a Democratic member of the House of Delegates reminded me last night --- ran worst among Democrat statewide candidates in 2009.
But why should a partisan Democrat let the facts get in the way of an ill-informed (and ill-edited) far-Left rant against Attorney General Cuccinelli?
And why was that ill-informed far-Left rant removed?
Could it be because it revealed its author as ignorant of the matters about which he presumed to comment?