Pathetic Desperation by VB Dems

Oh, scandal!

VB Dems have discovered that State Senator Ken Stolle has stolen the photo picture taken by the Commonwealth and gracing the pages of Virginia’s Legislative website and used it on Kaufman & Canoles' website. Oh, foresooth!

Welllll, maybe not.

I don't have much use for a tax increaser like Stolle, but if THIS is the best these guys can do....

Besides, on what basis do the VB Dems assume that the picture was taken by the Commonwealth, and used by K&C, and not vice versa? 'Course, it's much more likely that the photo was taken by the law firm or Stolle, and submitted to the Commonwealth for use on the legislative website.

Pathetic.

Nancy Pelosi's Penis Envy

Well, it seems that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi isn't satisfied with the government transportation supplied to former Speaker Dennis Hastert. No; she wants something bigger: a military version of the Boeing 757, in order to travel back to her San Francisco district. At $300k per round trip, she should quickly become a deficit unto herself.

Wow! It took the GOP twelve years in the majority to fully indulge big-spending ways. Queen Pelosi has managed to get there in just over a month. Color me surprised.

Personally, I'd give her a 747 used as Air Force One ... so long as it was only a one-way trip.

When It Gets Too Hot....

Greg gets out of the kitchen.

It seems there was a little exchange over the last couple of days on Greg Letiecq's website. It had its roots in another comment thread, in which someone --- probably someone like "t," a parody of that which he or she purports to represent --- suggested that "racist jews" were opposing Faisal Gill. Greg, of course, hater of all things Gill, decided that this parody must be representative of the Gill campaign, and a member of his usual, pseudonymous/anonymous "Amen!" chorus chimed in.

As did I, offering the observation that "I suppose that you COULD make a case that there is clearly bias at work here. Of course, given the tone of this blog with regard to Faisal, it is not 'anti-Semitism' which is the most likely candidate."

And oh my, how the hatred piled on! Jonathan Mark, a Democrat (rejected for leadership as a committee member in his own district in Fairfax), played the victim card, wrongly or dishonestly claiming that "From the beginning, Gill’s supporters have accused his critics of being racist."

And then, the little bastard called me a "race pimp," notwithstanding the fact that I quite clearly said only that one "COULD make a case that there is clear bias at work here." I didn't make the case, or accuse anyone of bias.

Well, it went back and forth for a while, with Greg editing a comment in which I called Mark a ... well, a sphincter muscle at the lower end of the alimentary canal, which is probably an insult... to assholes.

Well, Greg finally got sick of comments, and closed the thread. In doing so, and notwithstanding the fact that it was Mark who started the name-calling (but in support of Greg, and therefore, acceptably), and indeed, was --- save for my one transgression, which probably few saw --- the only one who did so. Nevertheless, Greg had to get one last shot at me in:

I try to walk a fine line between allowing hard commentary and reigning in what too often devolves into personal attacks between posters which only serves to lower the quality of the threads. It doesn’t escape my attention that this only seems to occurr when you’re involved in the discussion in some way.

Once again you’ve managed to change the topic of discussion on a thread and make me waste a lot of my time babysitting. I’m aware that you’re not responsible for all of this, and at other times you’re contributed valuable and insightful commentary on a lot of what’s been posted.

Well, Greg, that might be so. It has less to do with me than it does with the facts --- as opposed to guilt-by-association and innuendo --- that I bring to the conversation. You know: facts about people like AWCheney, who makes pretensions of integrity, but served as little more than pit bull with PMS for Harry Parrish's last primary campaign, by using the criminal justice system for political advantage. Facts about Faisal Gill, like the fact that he was cleared of any wrongdoing by Federal investigators.

People frequently resent one who demonstrates or illustrates their inadequacies.

I know these are historical facts sometimes inconvenient to whatever goal Greg seems to have. But they are relevant, and they are facts.

I also raise questions. Questions like why Greg is so hostile to Faisal, whose law firm represents Steve Chapman in a lawsuit against Greg which increasingly looks like it will be successful. Questions like why is Greg so focused on spreading negative innuendo against a Republican candidate, when he seems to have nothing positive to say about his primary opponent (at least nothing we've seen yet).

Yeah, Greg, I changed the topic of the conversation. I changed it from irresponsible defamations of Gill supporters as anti-Semites to noting that, if one were to search for racism, an argument could be made that it was better found to be underlying some of the attacks (though probably not Greg's) against Gill.

But Greg has demonstrated yet again that the end justifies the means. It's OK to call me a "race pimp." But suggest that Greg --- or more accurately, his posters --- might be motivated by racism, or simply that someone could see it that way?

That gets comments shut down. And that blame placed not upon the name-calling offender, but on the recipient of the bile.

Yeah, Greg. That's a very reasoned, rational discussion you've got going there.

UPDATE: Awww! No Greg has blocked me from accessing his little website. I guess if you're not part of the "Amen!" chorus, you don't get to participate.

With that level of maturity, it is little surprise that he's facing a lawsuit for his irresponsible defamations.

Is There No End To Their Perfidy?

I just received a very interesting telephone call. Of course, the enthusiasm for tax increases demonstrated by Senator John Chichester (RINO-Northumberland) and the Winchester Billygoat aka Russell Potts (RINO-Winchester) is one way of currying favor with the Democrats.

However, it seems that rumor around Richmond has it that this is a considered course by Chichester and Potts, and that --- if the Democrats were to gain control of the Senate in 2007 --- they would attempt to switch parties to maintain their lofty positions as Committee Chairmen under Democrat control.

Tell me again why "RINO" is not an appropriate appellation for these two? Or why Potts was allowed to retain his seat as a Committee Chairman after running as an independent for Governor?

Democrats Shocked ---- Shocked! ---- About Politics In Judicial Nominations

It seems that a Republican Senator is being scored by the far Left for a conversation that he had with a candidate for a Juvenile & Domestic Relations District Court judgship.

The boys and girls at Raising Dough ... er, "Raising Kaine," are shocked --- shocked! --- that politics plays a role in judicial nominations.

The Virginian-Pilot reports that Senator Nick Rerras dared to ask a potential nominee about her views on abortion, and referred to far Left feminists as "FemiNazis." Norfolk lawyer Mary G. Commander "was shocked, offended and embarrassed" by the conversation, and stated in a letter Rerras that "I know that I will never be able to pass your litmus test. My conscience, however, will not let me remain silent about what you have done."

However, Commander later revealed that she is unqualified for the bench, asserting that "because judges do not make law, her personal views should be irrelevant."

Somebody hasn't been paying attention. No candidate to become a judge is qualified if he or she is so ignorant about the legal history of the last century or so that they would claim that "judges do not make law." Of course, the problem is that judges all too frequently "make law," and reactionary Liberals are doing their level best to insure that Conservatives are not put in a place to restore the law.

It is a measure of the arrogance of the far Left that they believe that a politician who asks a prospective judges views on abortion so-called "rights" is applying a "litmus test," but that a requirement that a prospective judge pledge fealty to Roe v. Wade is not a "litmus test."

Their faux outrage is equally disingenuous.

Democrat Party Attacks Democracy

Just a few days ago, the far Left blogosphere was abuzz over the President's use of the phrase "Democrat Party" in reference to the majority party in the House and Senate. Vivian Paige banned someone for doing so, and sparked a lengthy discussion. I wish I could provide a link, but I can't find the thread.

Now, from Virginia "Progressive," we have this, celebrating the introduction of the fraudulently-misnomered "Employee Free Choice Act." It is the top legislative priority of the AFL-CIO, and proposes to do away with the inconvenience of a secret-ballot election in order to impose monopoly bargaining on private-sector employees. It is co-sponsored by 230 House Democrats.

Tell me again what's "democratic" about the Democrat Party?

Senate Refuses Transportation Compromise

At Lt. Governor Bill Bolling's "Bloggers Day" in Richmond a few weeks ago (I've got to do a lengthy post on that, and will, soon), the main talk was of the transportation/tax "compromise" proposed by House Republicans. Like all proposed compromises, it was chock full of bad ideas, the main one being a tax increase.

Compromise is not in the lexicon of the tax advocates in the Senate. Once again, pro-tax Repubmocrats on the Senate Finance Committee --- led by the estimable John Chichester (RINO-Northumberland) --- refused any compromise, and decided to slap on a 5% sales tax on gasoline.

The Asses of Evil strike again. Ward has a great roundup here.

Now, They're Attacking Tony Dungy

First, the Boy Scouts of America. Then marriage itself.

Now, partisans for the radical homosexual agenda are attacking a pro football coach.

By most accounts, Indianapolis Colts Head Coach Tony Dungy is among the finest men in professional football. Moral; upright; but with his share of family tragedy (his son committed suicide last year).

Of course, that means that he has to be attacked. It seems that Dungy has agreed to appear at a fundraiser for the Indiana Family Institute, an organization that dares to push back against partisans whose arrogance and radicalism causes them to attack the language ("marriage" should mean something other than the union between a man and a woman) and the fundamental building block of civilized society (the aforementioned "marriage"). Hence, one finds various logs (Pam's House Blend, OutSports, and AOL Sports Blog) attacking Dungy.

You see, any group that dares to push back against the radical homosexual agenda is attacked as "an organization which promotes hate toward gays and lesbians."

Of course, what the far Left calls "hatred" is simply resistance to their agenda. It's belittling and disparaging, the very opposite of rational debate, in the same way that partisans for the radical homosexual agenda dismiss their opponents as "homophobes," i.e., "those who fear homosexuals," when of course, fear has nothing to do with it.

Most Conservatives I know couldn't care less about --- and wouldn't even think about --- what homosexuals do in their so-called "private" lives. The problem arises when they demand not merely tolerance for their perversions, but public acceptance of them, i.e., when they seek to make public what they misnomer as their "private" lives.

It's long past time when Conservatives respond in kind, and reject the radical homosexual agenda for what it is: an agenda seeking to mainstream perversion. That is the standard that partisans for the radical homosexual agenda have chosen for the terms of their debate. They cannot legitimately complain when Conservatives respond in kind.

New Far Left Insanity

According to Waldo, an organization fraudulently touting itself as the "Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance" is floating a referendum which would void any marriage which does not produce children within three years.

I suppose there might be enough homosexuals, homophiliacs, and partisans for the radical homosexual agenda to get this on the ballot. But one hopes that the voters of Washington are sensible enough to reject it for the far Left BS that it is.

On the other hand, perhaps this is a good thing. If the attack on marriage hasn't been enough, perhaps this will finally wake up those who still deny the existence of a Culture War. I confess that I used to be one of them.

What is truly amazing is that the far Left is so used to advancing its agenda without opposition, that its partisans express incredulity at those who dare to engage in the battle.

Sometimes, You Just Have To Call The Lunatics Out

I haven't said anything about the campaign against Faisal Gill here. Frankly, a lot of it just seems silly, little more than guilt by association and smears. Moreover, while some may have a point about Faisal's electability, and a reasonable debate can be held over the relative merits of Faisal versus his opponent, Neabsco School Board member Julie Lucas, it is utterly clear that such reasonable debate is not to be found on a website owned by a man named as a defendant in a lawsuit in which the Plaintiff is represented by Faisal's law firm.

I run hot and cold on Greg Letiecq and his creatively- and tackily-named website. He has done much to expose the apparent scandal regarding Rack and Roll in Manassas, and an apparent campaign by Manassas Park authorities against Dave Ruttenberg and his business. Yet, other times, he seems to associate with the sleaziest elements of the Prince William County GOP, and many be the first Virginia blogger who's managed to get himself sued for his over-the-top behavior.

But recent posts on his website make it utterly clear that those attacking Faisal Gill --- and I mean, those other than those who are deeply and irrationally resentful of his role in Steve Chapman's nearly successful Republican primary campaign against Harry Parrish, who allowed himself to be rolled into an unnecessary tax increase by a Democrat Governor --- have utterly jumped the shark by equating all associations and second-hand associations with people who know people who know people who have been involved in terrorism must equate to support for terrorism. That Greg is indulging them seems to be little more than his deep resentment over the fact that Fasial's firm has dared to provide legal representation to Steve Chapman in his suit against Greg and his website over the smears that Greg promoted in his campaign against Chapman.

Here's a recent exchange on Greg's website, which I reproduce because I remain optimistic that Greg will recognize the insanity of those who also oppose Faisal's candidacy on this basis, and will ultimately edit/remove the posts because of their embarassing and foolish character:

1. Jonathan Mark said on 1 Feb 2007 at 11:29 pm:

   “”"it is those who are attacking Faisal with charges upon which he was cleared”"”

   Faisal was the imprisoned terrorist money-launderer Abdurahman Alamoudi’s chief lobbyist in 2001.

   That makes Gill a terrorist sympathizer, because Alamoudi is a terrorist serving a 23 year sentence in a federal prison.

   No one forced Gill to work for Alamoudi as a lobbyist. Gill chose to do so as an adult and now he is facing the consequences.

   That is appropriate. Support for terrorists like Alamoudi has consequences for those who provide the support.

This was my response:

1. James Young said on 2 Feb 2007 at 9:30 am:

   Wow, Jonathan! That’s quite a stretch. From lobbyist in 2001 to “terrorist sympathizer.”

   Gee, I’d better do an inventory. I represented Redskin Terry Orr in 1993 and 1994. A few years later, he pled guilty to and served time for a financial crime. Guess that makes me a “financial-crimes sympathizer.”

   And I’ve known Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist for years. Since they are associated with Jack Abramoff, I guess that makes me complicit in his crimes, too.

   Then there was the guy with whom I shared fellowship in a cigar shop who later shot his wife and murdered his stepson, right here in Prince William County. Guess that makes me a “murderer sympathizer” and a “wife-abuser sympathizer.”

   ‘Course, I can get in my WayBack Machine, and note that, on my way to elementary school in Northumberland, I used to walk by a guy who tried to kill his sister-in-law. Guess that makes me an “assault sympathizer,” too.

   I wonder what your inventory would show? You’re a Democrat, right? And you supported Bill Clinton, right? Guess that makes you a “perjurer/adulterer/rapist sympathizer.” Then there’s Dan Rostenkowski. Let’s add “tax-evader sympathizer.” Oh, and let’s not forget “check-kiter sympathizer.”

   Unless you can make the case that Faisal knew Alamoudi was a terrorist money-launderer, your claim is absurd.

Jonathan Mark favored us with this response:

1. Jonathan Mark said on 2 Feb 2007 at 12:47 pm:

   “”"Wow, Jonathan! That’s quite a stretch. From lobbyist in 2001 to “terrorist sympathizer.””"”

   From chief lobbyist for a terrorist in 2001 to “terrorist sympathizer.” I.e, Gill sympathized with Alamoudi the terrorist. That is why he was the terrorist’s lobbyists.

   “”"Gee, I’d better do an inventory. I represented Redskin Terry Orr in 1993 and 1994. A few years later, he pled guilty to and served time for a financial crime. Guess that makes me a “financial-crimes sympathizer.””"”

   Were you Terry Orr’s chief lobbyist while he engaged in the criminal activity? If so, what did you do on Terry Orr’s behalf as his chief lobbyist? I need more info before I can determine the propriety of your actions as Terry Orr’s putative chief lobbyist.

   “”"And I’ve known Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist for years.”"”

   That might explain why you support Gill. Norquist is Gill’s mentor. Without Norquist the candidacy of Faisal Gill would be a joke.

   “”"Since they are associated with Jack Abramoff, I guess that makes me complicit in his crimes, too.”"”

   You were never Abramoff’s chief lobbyist. Gill was Alamoudi’s chief lobbyist. No matter how much James Young tries to insinuate that Young is as guilty as Gill, James Young stops short of providing information that Young was ever a convicted criminal’s chief lobbyist while the convicted criminal was committing his crimes.

   “”"Then there was the guy with whom I shared fellowship in a cigar shop who later shot his wife and murdered his stepson, right here in Prince William County. Guess that makes me a “murderer sympathizer” and a “wife-abuser sympathizer.””"”

   Were you the murderer’s chief lobbyist while he engaged in criminal activity? Gill was Alamoudi’s chief lobbyist.

   “”"‘Course, I can get in my WayBack Machine, and note that, on my way to elementary school in Northumberland, I used to walk by a guy who tried to kill his sister-in-law. Guess that makes me an “assault sympathizer,” too.”"”

   Were you the attempted murderer’s chief lobbyist while he engaged in criminal actitity? Gill was Alamoudi’s chief lobbyist.

   “”"I wonder what your inventory would show? You’re a Democrat, right?”"”

   WRONG!!!!! I am no longer a Dem because where I live the Dems almost all support the odious Rep. Jim Moran. I was twice denied membership in the Lee District Democratic Committee. The first time they rejected me they even pocketed my $35 application fee.

   I voted for George Allen last year. Don’t assume what you don’t know, James Young.

   “”"And you supported Bill Clinton, right?”"”

   Absolutely, and I gave money to both of his presidential campaigns and to his wife’s first senatorial campaign.

   “”"Guess that makes you a “perjurer”"”

   Alamoudi is in jail for 23 years for terrorist money laundering. Bill Clinton was never even indicted for a crime, let alone convicted. YOU ARE BLIND TO ALAMOUDI’S CRIMES! You are blind to the fact that Alamoudi sits in a jail cell. Alamoudi’s crimes are proven.

   “”"/adulterer/”"”

   I don’t even want to go there. Suffice it to say that the PWC Republican Party, and the Democratic Party too, would be much smaller organizations if adulterers did not join.

   “”"rapist”"”

   This bores me. Bill Clinton is not running for the HOD-51 nomination. Faisal Gill is. We have questions about what Gill did on behalf of the imprisoned terrorist Alamoudi while Gill was Alamoudi’s chief lobbyist.

   You can respond to our reasonable questions by railing against Bill Clinton if you like. It is not much of an answer though.

And then, he offered this:

1. Jonathan Mark said on 2 Feb 2007 at 12:53 pm:

   “”"what is next? you gonna accuse president Bush(senior) for supporting Talibans.”"”

   No, because Bush senior is an old man and is not running for office. Someone else could reasonably accuse him, though.

   “”"He had taliban delegation visit white house.”"”

   Unusually bad grammar, suggesting that English is not the author’s first language.

   “”"Talibans were “freedom fighters”, they got thier training,weapons and funds from usa. So should we hold papa bush responsible for supporting them?”"”

   Yes. However, Bush senior is retired from politics and I guess is in his 80s. I have no interest in criticizing him in 2007.

At this point, I came to the ineluctable conclusion that Jonathan Mark is insane, so I didn't respond. Nevertheless, he felt the need to attack anyone who challenges his sleazy tactics:

1. Jonathan Mark said on 2 Feb 2007 at 2:26 pm:

   James Young seems very involved in this matter. How well does he know Gill? Is he or has he ever been representing Gill in any criminal or civil matter?

   I am not convinced that James Young is sufficiently distant from Gill to have clean hands in this matter.

   At this point we do need to ask James Young: Asim Ghafoor’s contracting firm was Gill’s nominal employer when Gill worked as the AMCs chief lobbyist. Ghafoor is currently Gill’s law partner.

   Does James Young oppose Ghafoor’s proposals to create an Islamic state in the US, with Moslems at least subject to Sharia law and non-Moslems reduced to dhimmi status?

   Is James Young at all concerned that Ghafoor was Gill’s nominal employer while Gill worked for the AMC in 2001, and is Gill’s law partner now?

   If Gill becomes a Delegate then would Gill’s law practice, and therefore that of his partner Asim Ghafoor, benefit? Is James Young comfortable assisting Asim Ghafoor, directly or indirectly, in his attempts to institute sharia law in the US?

   Has James Young ever met Asim Ghafoor? Alamoudi? Gill and Alamoudi together? Has James Young ever discussed Gill with Norquist? Norquist with Gill?

This was my response:

1. James Young said on 2 Feb 2007 at 6:47 pm:

   Jonathan, all that you managed to demonstrate with that last comment is that you’ve jumped the shark.

   But thanks for confirming what most reasonable people should have suspected all along: you’re insane.

Well, I don't indulge the insane, and the only rational thing that Jonathan seems to believe is that Jim Moran is "odious" (no argument there). On the other hand, at the rate he is going, Jonathan seems anxious to join Greg in the dock as a defendant against a slander lawsuit.

But if Greg is going to indulge these insane fantasies, it is little wonder that Steve Chapman's lawsuit was filed and, at this writing, remains pending.

Demonstrating What They Really Care About

I can’t help but remember a line from the Broadway show “Pippin”: “The church isn’t interested in saving souls; it’s investing in real estate.”

In an amazing display of candor, the remaining leaders of the newly fag-friendly Episcopal Diocese of Virginia demonstrate what they really care about, by suing those rambunctious Episcopalians who dare to believe that God really meant what He said when He condemned homosexuality.

As noted in the Washington Times article:

The diocese filed 11 separate suits against the clergy and lay leaders of Truro Church in Fairfax, the Falls Church in Falls Church, Christ the Redeemer in Centreville, Church of the Apostles in Fairfax, Church of the Epiphany in Herndon, Church of Our Saviour near Leesburg, Church of the Word in Gainesville, Potomac Falls Church in Sterling, St. Margaret’s in Woodbridge, St. Paul’s in Haymarket and St. Stephen’s in the Northern Neck.

But what it's really about follows:

At stake is millions of dollars in real estate, including an estimated $27 million to $37 million at Truro and the Falls Church, two of Virginia’s largest and most historic churches.

At least the parishioners in these diocese are still interested in eternal salvation. And EDV leaders are demonstrating that in which they are interested.

H/T to VJP

Going Around The Virginia Blogosphere

Well, here are my results, though these quizzes were clearly written by a Democrat:

You Are 88% Republican

You are a card carrying Republican, and a pretty far right one at that! There's no chance anyone would ever mistake you for a Democrat.

How Republican Are You?

A few qualifications, though:
1. I never listened to the Dixie Chicks;
2. I've never liked Nascar;
3. I've no problem with public school teachers. My only problem is with their unions;
4. I hardly ever shop at Wal-Mart; and
5. I've never smoked marijuana (first time I saw it, it was in an evidence bag).

As for the other side:

You Are 4% Democrat

If you have anything in common with the Democrat party, it's by sheer chance. You're a staunch conservative, and nothing is going to change that!

How Democrat Are You?

Apparently, the only thing that made me "4% Democrat" was the fact that I have a graduate degree. That someone thinks that a graduate degree makes you more Democrat is simply an indication of the narcissism of the far Left.

The Blue Stops Here!

Election results from Occoquan District special election for Supervisor:

Republican Mike May --- 57%

Democrat Jeff Dion --- 43%

Precinct-by-precinct results here.

Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction

Headline tonight on Raising Dough... er, "Raising Kaine":

"Jeff Dion Goes Down To Defeat In Prince William."

Heh.

Adventures in Sycophancy II

From our friends at Sean Connaughton's Cult of Personality ... er, "Too Conservative."

Only a Connaughton sycophant would care.

Delegate Jeff Frederick's Week 3 Update

From Delegate Jeff Frederick (R-Dumfries/Woodbridge):

- Week 3 Update

--> UPDATE <--

In last week’s update I mentioned how over 2700 bills had been filed by Members of the General Assembly. If you’re doing the math, this year’s General Assembly will have to successfully process an average of 60 pieces of legislation per day during our forty-six day ("short") session. The average member of the House of Delegates filed 18 bills and resolutions this year; the average Senator filed 23 pieces of legislation (I'm a bit above the average at about 35).

The process for dealing with all that legislation is in full swing. Yet, as you might guess, just because legislation is submitted doesn’t mean it will be approved. A lot of bills will pass, of course, but the number won’t likely approach the 2700 filed. Some bills just don’t have enough support to be approved. Others are remarkably similar to other pieces of legislation that were filed, so bills sometimes to get combined to increase efficiency. And, some will pass one house only to be rejected by the other (i.e. pass the House, fail in the Senate, or vice versa). Legislation has to jump through a lot of hoops before becoming law, and only the strong – and, hopefully, the best ideas – survive.

Still, it is sometimes frustrating when good legislation fails and bad legislation succeeds, and frankly, that isn’t such a rare occurrence around here. There are a number of reasons for this: the quick pace; conflicting priorities between the House and Senate, and often, the Governor’s office; the strong influence of special interests; constituent/citizen feedback; party politics; and a range of other circumstances.

The redeeming thing is that frequently, good legislation that does not succeed in one year is refilled in subsequent years for another attempt, and sometimes, the bill finally moves forward. While it is too early to know what bills we are working on now will ultimately become law by the end of session, one good example of a repeat effort we're undertaking this year is to protect Virginians from the effects of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo v. New London.

That decision – which permitted a local government in Connecticut to seize the property of a private citizen to turn around and sell to a private developer for a project that would allow the locality to collect more tax revenue on the same property than it did previously – caused genuine alarm among advocates of individual property rights, and rightfully so. The ability of government to seize land under eminent domain has been controversial from time-to-time throughout our history. Because the Kelo decision greatly expanded that power for governments, the debate has taken center stage.

Some states have already passed legislation to protect citizens from the effects of the Court’s decision. This year, we're working to have Virginia join their ranks by passing legislation to protect the property rights of individuals.

As we reach the midpoint of this year’s session, known as crossover, there’ll be even more to report. The House and the Senate must complete work on all of the legislation filed by its respective members by February 6th.

Finally, as I've mentioned the last couple weeks, I wanted to again remind you about the Third Annual 52nd District Constituent Day on February 19 (for info, visit http://va52.com/news.asp?docID=94). Of course, our door is always open and constituents are welcome to visit anytime – we’d enjoy seeing you.

-------------------------------

As always, if there's anything I can do to better serve you, please don't hesitate to let me know.

-JMF.

Here's A Huge Surprise

This is going around the Virginia blogosphere (I saw it first at NLS, who came out most like the Great Prevaricator; I have a higher opinion of Ben than that), so why not?

You Are Most Like Ronald Reagan

People tend to think you're a god - or that you almost ruined the country. But even if people do disagree with you, they still fall victim to your charms!

What Modern US President Are You Most Like?

Interesting. 'Course, it is most certainly the latter, not the former.

Ignorant Anti-Christian Bigots

Well, it's happened. Though the Framers must be spinning in their graves, an institution they knew well --- the College of William and Mary --- has removed a cross from the altar of the Wren Chapel.

Why? If you said the "diversity police," or a variation on that theme, you understand.

College President Gene R. Nichol was quoted today at length in a Washington Times front-page, above-the-fold story on the controversy. According to the Times:

"I modified the way in which the cross is displayed in the ancient Wren Chapel seeking to assure that the marvelous Wren -- so central to the life of the college -- be equally open and welcoming to all," Mr. Nichol told roughly 400 students, alumni and faculty packed into the college's Commonwealth Auditorium.

Nichol was also quoted as being concerned about non-Christian visitors to the College:

"I have been saddened to learn of potential students and their families who have been escorted into the chapel on campus tours and chosen to depart immediately thereafter," he said. "And to hear of a Jewish student, required to participate in an honor council program in the chapel during his first week of classes, vowing never to return to the Wren."

Never mind that anyone who has "chosen to depart immediately" after having had their sensibilities offended by the sight of a cross (or any other religious symbol, for that matter) should be immediately disqualified from a publicly-financed education. Junior Joseph Luppino-Esposito has it just about right when he notes "We are going to support someone who is so intolerant that, when they see someone else's religious symbol, they leave?"

But the real issue here may well be how poorly Nichol and others supporting the removal of the cross from the altar may be about the Christian faith.

What do they think the altar symbolizes? Here's a couple of hints: "This is my body, given for thee"; new covenant? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

The simple fact of the matter is that the altar is no less a symbol of the Christian faith than is the cross. Thus, removing the latter while leaving undisturbed the former is not only inconsistent, but is a cheap and meaningless effort to sate the desire of the "diversity police."

Perhaps the joke is on both of them, however. The joke may be on Nichol, for if he actually believes his action to be a meaningful effort to make "the ancient Wren Chapel ... equally open and welcoming to all," then he simply demonstrates his ignorance of the Christian faith, for he has failed miserably in "cleansing" the Chapel of an important Christian symbol. On the other hand, if he is aware of the significance of the altar, then perhaps he is merely goofing on the ignorance of the diversity fascists.

On the other hand, it might have been easier simply to dismiss those who have complained about the cross (removable on request for special events) for the anti-Christian bigots that they are.

Deborah Orin Succumbs To Cancer

Sad news tonight. New York Post reporter Deborah Orin, favorite target of those favoring a monopoly by left-wing media, succumbed to cancer.

Your Hypocrisy Is Showing

Courtesy of Charles at TwoConservatives, I was reminded today's WaPo editorial, denouncing those who take note of Senator Barack Obama's middle name ("Hussein").

I guess I missed the WaPo editorial denouncing the campaign of Jim Webb and his paid Internet hacks, who engaged in the same tactic with regard to George Allen. You know. Like this. And this. And this. And this. And this. And this. And this. And this. And this. And this. And ... well, you get the point.

Yet 'nary a word from the Standards Police at the Washington Post. Indeed, here is the result of a search of the Washington Post's website on "George Felix Allen."

Of course, when it's Conservatives taking note of the middle name of a Democrat, it's worthy of a lead (i.e., first), Sunday editorial.

Repeat after me: "There is no Left-Wing media bias. There is no Left-Wing media bias. There is no Left-Wing media bias. There is no Left-Wing media bias...."

Prince William Media Gone Brokeback?

Does the Potomac News' continuing lurch to the Left mean that it is actively ignoring issues relevant to the voters?

One cannot witness the Occoquan campaign between Mike May and Jeff Dion and conclude otherwise.

The Pot. News has utterly ignored Dion's affiliation with the far Left, as a member of Perversion Prin... er, "Equality Prince William." The funny thing is, even Dion has told the truth about his affiliation with that organization. Well, he lists it on his bio, so that one can know his affiliation if one is familiar with that organization and its agenda for mainstreaming perversion. Yet only a single Pot. News campaign story on Dion --- one from 2 December --- has mentioned that affiliation. And even that Keith Walker story ignores the fact that it is a homosexual advocacy organization.

Never mind that the Pot. New has ignored serious questions raised about Dion's quibbling/misrepresentation of his custody status. Never mind his apparent and inevitable lies to the Boy Scouts of America in obtaining a position as a Cub Scout Pack leader.

What about the impact of Dion's far Left affiliation upon what would be his execution of his public duties? Will Dion's self-serving affection for the radical homosexual agenda mean that he will attack organizations which resist it?

This isn't about the Pot. News outing a homosexual who wants to keep his private sexual conduct private, for Dion is well and fully "out." This is about the local media covering for --- rather than simply "covering" --- Dion's radical activities, and failing to ask relevant question which must arise as a consequence of his radicalism and affiliations.

It is abundantly clear that the sub silentio radical agenda of the Pot. News and its publisher/editors and/or staff has failed the voters of the Occoquan District. One only hopes that they know just how radical Dion is --- efforts to disguise that fact to the contrary notwithstanding --- before they vote on Tuesday.

Snakes on a Campaign

Well, the Clinton spin machine is already in overdrive, trying to deny the campaign's complicity in a story that Barack Obama was educated in a madrassa (a fundamentalist Islamic school). As I noted earlier, the far Left blogosphere and others are in full attack mode against Fox, to avoid attributing responsibility to Hitlary and her campaign.

Now, they're expanding the wild accusations. You see, it isn't just Fox News that's engaged in this story, it's the whole Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy! Others are whining about it as "Smear Politics."

'Cept, I heard the editor of Insight Magazine on the radio yesterday afternoon, and he's standing by the story. Not, mind you, that Obama was educated for a time in a madrassa (which, even if true, it not likely to be disqualifying, particularly in light of the fact that he is apparently a practicing Christian... well, OK, a member of a United Church of Christ congregation), but that the source for the story was Her Thighness's campaign.

Of course, we all know the Clintons are paragons of the Truth and Virtue. They’d never float false information against a political rival. They'd never engage in the "politics of personal destruction." They'd never even do a background check on rivals or potential rivals.

Yeah. On Bizarro World. Does more than 900 FBI files ring a bell? Terry Lenzner? Remember the denials about "that ridiculous blue dress"?

It is an appropriate irony indeed that the Great Prevaricator popularized the phrase "the politics of personal destruction," in light of the fact that he and his minions have been its most practiced and prolific practitioners. It's fascinating to note that, whatever the status of the Clinton marriage, they at least retain their commitment in that regard.

And it is a sad commentary on Obama that he so fears the Clinton Attack Machine that, rather than attack the source, he attacks those who dare to tell the truth about the Clinton's sleazy tactics.

ATR's Statement On GOP Transportation Plan

This was forwarded to me by a friend:

Statement on Transportation Plans in the Commonwealth of Virginia

In light of the anticipated transportation plans for the 2007 session, Americans for Tax Reform has been asked about the implications of various proposals for signers of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. Although the compromise proposal put forth last week merits additional information and further evaluation, there are components that may be of concern for taxpayers.

Based on the limited information available to us at this time, the proposed state-wide tax and fee increases, specifically the diesel tax increase, appear to lack offsetting tax cuts in the legislation.

As signers are aware, the Pledge allows for revenue neutral reform. This allows for tax increases when offset by tax cuts of equal or greater value. In order for a tax cut to qualify as an offset, it must be in the same piece of legislation as the tax increase and must go into effect at the same time as the increase. Previous tax cuts and potential tax cuts in the future do not meet the definition of an offset.

ATR is also seeking clarification with regard to the apparent disparity between the current and the proposed revenue-raising abilities of local authorities. While the proposed compromise effectively repeals the authority to raise the local income tax, it also seems to omit two key taxpayer protections that existed under the income tax authority: the voter approval requirement and the mandated five year tax sunset. Without inclusion of a referendum vote and a sunset, taxpayers cannot be sure that
their overall tax burden will not rise under the guise of reform.

After a preliminary review of the information available, only with the addition of offsetting tax cuts to the legislation, legislators could vote for the compromise plan and be consistent with the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

ATR continues to seek and welcomes addition information and clarification.

Congratulations!

To the godfather of Virginia's Conservative blogosphere, His Honor, Judge Chad Dotson, who was approved today by the State Senate for a General District Court judgeship in his home county, Wise County.

I don't know what's scarier: that a blogger is now a judge, or that a guy considerably younger than I is a judge.

Getting older sucks.

'Course, now Judge Dotson will never be able to repeat that old joke --- first told to me by a friend now a judge --- asking "What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50?"

Answer? "Your Honor."

However, to keep him humble (a characteristic not surgically removed until one becomes a Federal judge, with life tenure), he should contemplate it.

H/T to Waldo

Bloggers Already In The Bag For Hitlary

Fox News made an error, reporting that Barack Obama was educated in a madrassa. Turns out he wasn't. Turns out the source for this erroneous story was people connected to Hitlary Clinton.

Nevertheless, the far Left blogosphere and others are in full attack mode against Fox, to avoid attributing responsibility to Hitlary and her campaign. The Clinton Sleaze Machine rides again! Now with bloggers willing to sell their souls to defend Her Thighness.

I wonder how many of those who will now savage Fox News Channel were either silent about or supportive of Dan Rather's hit job on George Bush less than two months before the 2004 presidential election?

Incidentally, I haven't been able to confirm that Waldo was among those supportive of Rather. However, neither have I been able to find any comments attacking him for his reliance upon forged documents, either.

You Forgot a Couple

It seems that "phriendlyjaime" over at Raising Dough ... er, "Raising Kaine," has list a couple of dozen reasons why he/she's "pro-choice." Now, never mind that many address things like rape and incest, "hard cases" which, while horrible, rarely result in pregnancy. Never mind that he forgets about the fact that, in the vast majority of cases, the appropriate time for the exercise of "choice" is when one chooses to engage in the behavior which causes pregnancy. Never mind that his/her criticisms of those opposing abortion on demand are nothing more than caricatures. And never mind that the same people who believe that women should have the "choice" to kill their children in the womb vigorously oppose any efforts to give parents the choice in where and how to educate their children.

It seems that "phriendlyjaime" has forgotten two of the most important reasons why he/she is "pro-choice":

"phriendlyjaime" is "pro-choice" because he/she hates the Constitution, and finds it necessary that unelected judges write their personal preferences into the Constitution in lieu of resorting to that inconvenient process of actually amending the document.

"phriendlyjaime" is "pro-choice" because he/she (probably rightly) lacks the confidence in his/her ability to persuade the majority of Americans and/or legislators of the worth of his/her position.

I am pro-Life, but I would have a lot less contempt for partisans for abortion on demand if they would stop bastardizing the Constitution to achieve their policy preferences. I would have a lot less contempt for partisans for abortion on demand if their "argument" did not rely upon the same kind of "substantive due process" reasoning that earlier generations of Liberals railed against when it was used to strike down economic regulation.

The simple fact of the matter is that, if the Supreme Court were to overturn Roe v. Wade, the issue would merely be thrown back to the State legislatures to decide each State's policies regarding abortion.

Isn't it ironic that so many of those who wax demagogic about their faith in "democracy" have so little faith in their ability to prevail through the democratic process with regard to their commitment to abortion on demand.

New Cog In The Democrat Smear Machine

Apparently, smears are going to be the primary stock in trade of Virginia's Democrat lawmakers as they seek a majority in this year's legislative races.

The tag line is "Paid for and authorized by the Virginia Joint Democratic Caucus."

Beyond Dion's Misrepresentations

As both regular readers of this space know, we now have two instances of serious questions having been raised about the honesty of Jeff Dion, who is the Democrat nominee for Occoquan District Supervisor. One involves his biographical claim about his custody status. Dion has not chosen to respond to the serious questions raised here and elsewhere, notwithstanding his blogosphere presence and repeated invitations to do so.

The other involves his role as a Cub Scout Pack Leader, notwithstanding the Scout's long-standing prohibition against practicing homosexuals from leadership positions.

It is becoming readily apparent what Dion's behavior in this regard tells us about his character and honesty. Without answers to these questions, it is almost beyond question that one must conclude that he is a fine student of the Great Prevaricator aka Bill Clinton, whose every statement needed to be parsed for hidden meaning and shadings. Remember "It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is"?

But as a practicing homosexual seeking public office in local government, one must also ask what impact Dion's proclivities will have on his performance of his public duties, if elected. Some have pointed out that his involvement as an adult Scout leader notwithstanding his deviant sexual activities demonstrates that he "seems to have decided that what HE wants to do is paramount."

Interesting point. And in light of it, one is entitled to ask how "what HE wants to do it" will affect his performance of his public duties, if elected.

One of the elements of the continuing far Left/radical homosexual war on the Boy Scouts has been to attack their access to public facilities. Soooo, if elected, will Jeff Dion support these attacks, if launched in Prince William County and/or Virginia? For instance, local Cub Scout packs use Leesylvania State Park for their annual summer Day Camp. I don't believe that the County has any role in use of that facility, but there are likely many County facilities frequently used by the Cub Scouts and the Boy Scouts. Will Dion support efforts to deny access of Boy Scouts to public facilities because of their beliefs in God and regarding homosexual behavior? Will Dion seek passage of so-called "non-discrimination" ordinances designed to protect practitioners of deviant sexual behavior, which have been used to discriminate against the Boy Scouts? Will Dion seek to deny to the Boy Scouts access to charitable donation campaigns because of the BSA's constitutionally-protected views and leadership policies with respect to homosexuals?

These are the types of attacks which have been launched against the Boy Scouts by partisans for the radical homosexual agenda. The question is, will Dion support such efforts as Occoquan District Supervisor? Will Dion attempt --- like so many other partisans for the radical homosexual agenda ---to enlist the awesome power of government to abuse the Boy Scouts?

UPDATE: One commenter on a previous thread said that "Dion may be gay, but that doesn't make him a pedaphile (sp). Nate hit the nail on the head when he said that Dion is doing the right thing by being active in his son's life."

Well, he's probably not. But that doesn't address the point of other people's sons in his charge. Leslie Carbone made the point about five years ago, asking:

Is the hypocrisy of today's cultural elites limitless? Is the Pope Catholic" After years of haranguing the Boy Scouts of America for refusing to place young boys in danger of sexual abuse, the liberal intelligentsia is now condemning the Catholic Church leadership for doing exactly that.

Carbone went on to note that:

But what if the church had exercised the zero-tolerance policy now demanded in the first place? Would it have dodged the criticism it now endures?

The Boy Scouts of America didn't. The BSA has come under constant fire for its policy of prohibiting homosexuals from serving as scoutmasters. While not all homosexuals are child molesters and not all child molesters are homosexual, there is a strong enough correlation to mean that the BSA's policy is prudent and responsible. Although homosexuals constitute only about two percent of the population, they represent one-third of child molesters. "The Gay Report," the 1979 work of homosexual researchers Jay and Young revealed that 73 percent of homosexuals surveyed admitted to having had sexual relations with boys ages 16 to 19 or younger. Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover sees a "substantial, influential, and growing segment of the homosexual community that neither hides nor condemns pedophilia. Rather they argue that pedophilia is an acceptable aspect of sexuality, especially of homosexuality."

It's easy to see why serving as scoutmasters is attractive to homosexual child molesters. Such a post provides easy access to lots of young boys away from their parents, on such excursions as the camping trips that are a staple of scout life. Though the BSA annually bars hundreds of homosexuals from serving as scoutmasters, a nationwide investigation of child molestation in the Boy Scouts found that more than 2,000 boys had reported molestation by adult Scout leaders who slipped by the ban during 1971 to 1991. Lifting the BSA's ban on homosexual scoutmasters would surely only increase this number.

Those of use who object to Dion's lying about his deviant sexual behavior in order to evade the BSA's prohibitions are being savaged by the far Left. One has to wonder how many of them have attacked the Catholic Church for its failure to respond appropriately to abuse by priests. Indeed, one has to wonder whether, in both cases, their criticism is rooted not in concerns about children, but in attacking traditional institutions they loathe.

UPDATE: Well, at least one far Left blogger has decided to attack by unsuccessfully arguing that a candidate's honesty is not an issue of importance to voters. He entitles his piece "On Obfuscation of Issues." While he is doubtless learning much about the theory and practice of the obfuscation of issues in law school, I'm pretty sure that how a candidate's private perversions affect his public decisions is always an issue important to voters.

And, of course, note the scrupulous silence from the far Left to this post.

To Whom Else Is Jeff Dion Lying?

Well, at least one answer is: the Boy Scouts of America.

As regular readers know (both of you), I have discussed at length Dion's the suggestion on his website that he "lives in Lake Ridge with his two children." As I understand it, Dion "lives in Lake Ridge with his two children" in the same way that I live in Montclair with Maureen Caddigan. That is, we both live in the community, but in separate homes (our spouses and children would likely object were it otherwise). Nevertheless, I have nothing more than my impressions, and those that have been reported to me, yet Dion has had plenty of opportunity to either disabuse me of my misimpression (in which case, he would immediately receive a public apology and retraction), and has failed or refused to do so, notwithstanding his monitoring of the blogosphere.

I received an e-mail today which indicates that Dion is acting as a Cub Scout pack leader. Cub Scouts are, of course, part of the Boy Scouts of America, a program in which I have more than a passing interest, as an Eagle Scout myself, and as the father of one Cub Scout, and one soon-to-be Cub Scout.

As it turns out, one witness reports that Dion is Cub Master for the local Cub Scout Pack at Antietam Elementary School in Lake Ridge. But is anything more well known than the Boy Scouts’ prohibition against homosexuals? The Boy Scouts took a case to the United States Supreme Court and won to protect their right as a private organization to hold their leaders responsible for their choices and to demand that they adhere to basic moral standards (Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000)). The BSA has since reaffirmed this policy.

A lot of questions are raised by this. After all, notwithstanding local press silence, Dion is apparently well out of the closet ... except when it comes to his campaign. The metro area's homosexual newspaper, the Washington Blade, has reported on his candidacy under the headline "Gay Va. lawyer eyes county seat." He has been endorsed by the "Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund." Another widely-read blogger has --- when not attacking with innuendo and guilt-by-association a prospective Republican candidate for Delegate whose law firm is representing another former Republican candidate in a libel suit --- reported at length on his deception and his preference. Yet while Dion's website biography prominently mentions his attainment of the rank of Eagle Scout --- presumably before he made public his sexual activities inconsistent with the Scout Oath and Laws --- and many of his activities (including the fact that he "volunteers for the PTA," an organization associated with the ultra-Left National Education Association teachers' union, which not only doesn't care about the moral values of Scouting, but actively opposes them), it pointedly does not mention the fact that he acts as a Cub Scout leader. Curious, indeed, since such a credential would presumably endear him to the family-oriented voters of the Occoquan District. Presumably, that is, if they remained unaware of his personal choices inconsistent with the values of Scouting.

So Dion is, once again, not telling the whole truth. Not to the Boy Scouts of America, not to the local leaders to whom he is responsible, and likely not to the parents who entrust their children, at least temporarily, to his care.

This is a candidate who asks the voters for his trust? This is a candidate that the Democrats asks voters to trust?

Curious, indeed.

UPDATE: A commenter over at BVBL has offered proof that Dion is, indeed, the CubMaster. Click on the link at the bottom to find out who is the CubMaster of the Pack.

Some on the far Left are trying to claim that this is about "mean spirited gay bashing" and intolerance. About the former, they're wrong. I never publicly commented upon Dion's perversion until he became a public figure and started offering public information which seemed --- to some acquainted with him --- specifically designed to leave voters with an entirely different impression of basic facts about him. However, it is absolutely true that it's about intolerance.

Of course, the "intolerance" that it's about is intolerance for those who misrepresent themselves.

Now Here's Some Things That Might Warrant Meaningful Apologies

Was thumbing through Pravda on the Potom..., er, The Washington Post this morning, and read Colbert I. King's column on Monday's comments from Delegate Frank Hargrove. As many know, in an interview published Tuesday in Charlottesville's Daily Progress, Hargrove said slavery ended nearly 140 years ago with the Civil War and added that ''our black citizens should get over it.'' He was also quoted as asking whether "we are going to force the Jews to apologize for killing Christ?"

Of course, Hargrove was immediately savaged in the far Left blogosphere and among the race hustlers. After all, group guilt is the other side of the group victimhood coin upon which so many of them rely for their fodder. Never mind that there were a couple of good points there. First, that asking modern Virginians to "apologize" for slavery, as though they were responsible for it, is every bit as ridiculous as suggesting that modern Jews are responsible for Christ's death (at least, any more responsible than anybody else, since Christ died on the cross for the sins of all of us). Or that modern Virginia blacks are in no place to ask for or receive an apology. Both points stem from the same fundamental point: there is not a single living Virginian --- or living person anywhere else --- who is either responsible for or a victim of slavery. Indeed, one economist/columnist --- I don't recall whether it was Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell --- who has noted that modern Black Americans should be thankful that their ancestors were kidnapped from Africa and carried into bondage into America since, as a result, the lives of modern Black Americans are infinitely superior to those of the descendants of those who did not suffer so.

That's not to say that Hargrove's comments were useful, or artfully or effectively rendered. As one blogger has noted:

But even for Blacks, like me, who could care less about an apology and are not holding our breaths for an apology for our ancestors, admonishing Blacks to "get over slavery" is counterproductive to improving race relations and mean-spirited.

In fact, Hargrove's comments are as silly as seeking or offering an apology. No Black citizen of Virginia has anything to "get over" with regard to slavery, since no Black citizen of Virginia alive today was ever a slave (at least, in Virginia, and by virtue of Virginia law). Unfortunately, that same blogger went on to gratuitously claim that "if Hargrove and people of his ilk had their way, African Captivity would still be very much an institution in America," a silly suggestion by any measure. Whatever Hargrove's faults, I am not aware of even the slightest hint that he supports reinstating slavery or Jim Crow. Apparently, this commenter is confusing advocacy of such policies with Hargrove's failure to be sufficiently self-flagellating about historical events for which he was not responsible, and in which he did not participate.

King's column had a point, though probably not the one that he thought it did, or the one that at least one blogosphere denizen identified. After all, King starts by listing his "bona fides," such as they are: "There's nothing quite like going to a county office building down in Culpeper County, Va., and finding evidence of your family's enslavement. I did that several years ago."

Now, I'm all for looking into your family history, since it's important to know where you came from. But it strikes me as singularly ridiculous to suggest that I should spend my time --- or anybody else's --- worrying about and/or becoming resentful of the wrongs perpetrated against my ancestors. Should I resent a hospital in Shamokin, Pennsylvania, because in 1929 by great-grandfather died there of a ruptured appendix? Or a treating doctor of my great-grandmother, who died during the great Spanish Flu epidemic of 1918/19? More pointedly, should I hold responsible the descendants of those responsible?

Frankly, I've got better things to worry about. Or, to paraphrase one editorial noting the need for a bigger couch on "The Apology Circuit" akin to the format we've become accustomed to seeing them in since the days of the late Johnny Carson and Jack Paar of the Tonight Show (host at the trademark desk, with coffee cup and microphone, guests arrayed on a sofa to the host's right), I'm gonna need a lot more time to track down and demand apologies from the descendants responsible for all of the wrongs done to all of my ancestors.

The real point? That there are plenty of racial wrongs for which there are living perpetrators and victims. King is kind enough to list them, but doesn't bother to identify the institutions responsible for them. He does note that Hargrove:

and many white Virginians alive today were present when the spirit of Jim Crow reigned supreme in the Old Dominion.

Wow! That's a pretty damning indictment. Likewise, there are many Germans alive today who were present when the spirit of Naziism reigned supreme in Germany. Many Russians, too, alive today who were present when the spirit of Vladimir Lenin reigned Supreme in the old Soviet Union. Lots of Iraqis alive today who were present when the spirit of Saddam Hussein reigned supreme in Iraq.... Well, you get the point. He goes on to note that:

the Virginia legislature passed a law requiring separate white and black waiting rooms at airports.

Sen. Harry Byrd declared massive resistance to the Supreme Court's 1954 Brown decision desegregating public schools.

the General Assembly passed a series of laws to prevent school desegregation, including a measure forbidding state funds to be spent on integrated schools? That was a memorable year. And the next year, Prince Edward County went to an extreme to protect lily-white education. It closed the school system rather than integrate.

On Feb. 20, 1960, students from the historically black Virginia Union University entered Woolworth's department store on Broad Street in Richmond, sat at the lunch counter and patiently waited to be served. Instead, the management closed the store.

On June 9, 1960, an integrated group of youths sat at a Peoples Drug store lunch counter in Arlington. Waitresses served the whites, then walked away. A few minutes later, the lunch counter was closed.

In 1963, protesters gathered in front of the College Shoppe Restaurant on Main Street in Farmville. Management refused to serve blacks. Sheriff's deputies, in keeping with Virginia's Jim Crow laws, forcibly removed them.

Now, there is a common thread here. It's not just that white Virginians were responsible for these actions, though they assuredly were. After all, there's a fairly good chance that a majority of white Virginians today had nothing to do with it, weren't even Virginians at the time (if, indeed, they were alive), and are repulsed by such behavior.

No, the common thread is in the fact that the state policies identified by King, and of which he rightly complains, were perpetrated by the politicians of the time. And what, to a man (almost exclusively) did they have in common?

They were Democrats, and segregation and racial discrimination were the proud and public policies of the Virginia Democrat Party.

If King and his fellow race hustlers want an apology from live perpetrators for behavior creating live victims, he needs to look elsewhere. King and his fellow race hustlers need to look to the Democrat Party.

And it's more than passing strange that King and his fellow race hustlers are using this issue as a club with which to savage the GOP and its elected office holders, since it was the Republican Party which produced the leaders who ended slavery, and who --- to a degree far greater than Democrats --- supported efforts to end Jim Crow and racial segregation.

Supreme Court Hears Foundation Case

Spent yesterday at the Supreme Court, for oral argument in Davenport v. Washington Education Association, a case being handled by one of my Foundation colleagues.

I won't comment on the merits here, in keeping with my policy. However, I did want to note that the Clerk of the Court, Maj. Gen. William Suter (USA, ret.) has to be one of the nicest people you can meet in Washington. Entirely helpful and friendly, and very approachable, he is simply a great guy. We arrived quite early to be sure of getting a seat, ending up as the first in the lawyers' line, and had an opportunity to greet him. He came over, chatted jovially, and did his best to make sure that we felt welcome. Others to whom I have mentioned this have confirmed this impression.

As to the coverage of the case, you can make your own judgments.

Emory '89L classmate Howard Bashman runs down some of the coverage here, here, and here.

WorkplaceProfBlog offers a prediction --- confirming most of my impressions --- here.

And in perhaps the best title and end line, Dahlia Litwick discusses the case on Slate.com. Her title, "Just Say No Twice," is priceless, but her last line, which questions the union position that nonmembers should be required to object to paying for politics after they've already refused to become union members, may be the single best commentary on the union's argument in the case:

[I]t's certainly not illogical to assume that if that cute freshman from your Russian-lit class already told you she didn't want to go on a date with you, it's a pretty safe bet she doesn't want to have sex with you, either.

Faisal Gill's Response

Jim Riley managed to get these up before I did, since we've been busily preparing for a Supreme Court argument in my office over the last few days, regarding questions raised by Greg Letiecq on his website. While I think some genuine electability issues are raised regarding these issues, it seems to me to be patently unfair for a Republican --- and one who is being sued by an individual represented by Gill's law firm --- to engage in what may well be guilty-by-association smears and innuendo against a man who wore his country's uniform, served honorably, and later was exonerated on these very same charges by officials charged with maintaining the nation's security.

I know that both Faisal and the other potential GOP candidate, Julie Lucas, can and probably will conduct the nomination contest on a much higher level. Sadly, Greg's efforts --- which are doubtless motivated at least in part by his on-going legal troubles --- will be supported by the dour and despicable individuals for whom no depth are low enough in their efforts to smear anyone with the temerity to demand that Republican and conservative candidates act like Republicans.

Fundraiser for Autistic Children

A long-time (she'd shoot me if I'd said "old") childhood friend of mine is running a fundraiser on Friday for an organization that she started for autistic children. The Youngs will be attending, and the information is below. Any contribution that you might make would be greatly appreciated.

FUNDRAISER

All cover charges and donations will go to support:

BRET’S ADVENTURE, INC.

A nonprofit organization committed to supporting people with autism in

Pursuing their passions, manifesting their destinies, and promoting their healing,

As they emerge into everything God created them to be!

WHEN: Friday - JANUARY 12, 2007

TIME: 7pm to 10pm

WHERE: FRONT STREET STATION, NORTHUMBERLAND, PA.

ENTERTAINMENT: LIVE MUSIC WITH

TIMOTHY’S BURDEN

Contact: Kathleen Dunkelberger, 570-286-4332 for more information.

$5.00 cover charge per person!

A great price for a great time AND a great cause!

(Cash bar and buffet meal will be available at extra yet reasonable costs!)

Additional donations are appreciated.

Mail to: Bret’s Adventure, Inc., RR#1 Box 594, Paxinos, Pa. 17860
Special thanks to The Front Street Station and Timothy’s Burden

for their generous contributions to make this event possible!

(Donations, contributions and all money raised will be utilized for costs that may or may not be allowable expenses under the waiver program and that should be covered but are not covered by the county or state government for programming needs such as, but not limited to: habilitative equipment, communication equipment, start up expenses, operating expenses, therapies, travel expenses, staff appreciation and training, supplements, recreation and socialization, alternative and complimentary medical care, other supplies and any other expenses that are determined by the Board and Management.)

Understanding Bush Derangement Syndrome

Hilarious, yet accurate:

I think, what it is, is he took a bad guy down. We’ve had Presidents do that before, too…but President Bush did it in the modern age, when good & evil are supposed to be matters open to individual interpretation. In an age where evil is supposed to be a subjective viewpoint…he targeted someone. He’s an unwelcome paradigm shift, and the shift is in an direction that makes a lot of people uncomfortable. Once you go down the road of insisting there is no such thing as “absolute” evil, you can stay there as long as you choose to…until someone else comes along, defines evil as being really evil, and does something about it. This makes the nihilist/anarchist crowd look bad.

It hurts their P.R. You stand there “helplessly” watching a house burn, you look okay. Someone else grabs a hose while you sit there on your ass watching…now, you’re embarrassed. If the other guy didn’t happen along, the house would have burned to the ground. But you’d look good. Nothing else really counts, right?

It’s like the guy watching a woman being mugged and raped, making a calculated, brazen decision to allow the attack to commence uninterrupted because it’s “not my concern.” Inaction resulting from purely pacifist interests. He looks all right…until someone else gets involved. And then the pacifist looks bad. And silly. And cowardly. And impotent. And then the pacifist begins to harbor some decidedly un-pacifist feelings, toward the other fellow who made a decision to help out.

Come to think of it, the anger these leftists have toward President Bush, is not at all unlike the anger felt toward a masculine, self-assertive, virile interloper, from a cuckold, whose lonely and bored wife has finally been reminded what a real man can do. It’s not unlike that kind of anger at all.

One exception, though. In our society, we do not value the idea of strong, effective men stealing women from weaker men. We do not raise our sons to sleep with other mens’ wives. We do raise our boys to stand up for what’s right; to get involved, to lend assistance if evil is sure to triumph for lack of that assistance. That is what President Bush did. I’m glad it was done, and history will be glad for it too.

To those who insist on hating him and continuing to build that reasons-for-hate catalog, I say, go ahead. Hate him if you want; hate him all you want. I think it would be good for your own mental well-being to identify, in your own mind, WHY it is you hate him. If you come up with the reason, and are too ashamed to admit to anybody else what it really is, you’re still better off than the guy who hates President Bush but won’t put the effort in to figuring out why.

H/T to Dogwood Pundit. I wish I'd said it first.

Still No Word From Dion

Well, another Sunday, another service attended by myself and Democrat nominee for Occoquan Supervisor Jeff Dion at the church we attend (his daughter and my son are both in the Youth Choir, and sang at the early service today), and still no effort to answer the questions raised here and here, even in a personal aside.

Is Dion hiding an obfuscation? Sure, candidates don't have an obligation to respond to every allegation made in the blogosphere --- they could waste a great deal of time doing so, particularly with regard to wild allegations --- but this seems like such a simple one to answer. Plus, I don't have a record of wild, outrageous, libelous, and/or slanderous allegations.

I simply raise simple questions: Are Dion's bio and media reports which state that "He lives in Lake Ridge with his children," which leave the impression that he has custody of his minor children, even though he is divorced and sharing living arrangements with a homosexual paramour, mean that he has custody of those children? Does he "live in Lake Ridge with his children" in the same way that I live in Montclair with Maureen Caddigan, i.e., we live in the same community, in homes separated by a mile or more?

Were it demonstrated to me that my information were incorrect, I would happily publicize it here.

It is so easy to clear up this confusion. Yet Dion has not done so. One can only assume that his failure to do so means that the answer does not aid his cause. After all, if Dion is misrepresenting by artful evasion his custody status, answering the question would not aid his cause. A candidate's choices are a relevant inquiry for public consumption; hence, the fact that Dion "switched teams," in the Seinfeld parlance, is something of interest to voters.

Likewise, a prospective public official's frankness in his or her public pronouncements, particularly in something as elemental as his biography, is important to voters. And if Dion is misrepresenting himself and his custody status by artful obfuscation, voters are entitled to know that, as well. If voters and constituents are presented with a candidate whose every statement must be parsed for alternate and perhaps contradictory meanings (see, i.e., the Great Prevaricator AKA Bill Clinton), then they should know that before entering the voting booth. If Dion can't even tell the truth about his custody status and is publicizing false impressions, how can voters hope to assess his qualifications and policy prescriptions as a predicate to making an informed choice? In short, what else is Jeff Dion lying about?

It has been reported to me, as recently as this evening, that Dion does not have custody of his children from his previous marriage. Yet the bio remains unchanged. And seems specifically and intentionally designed to leave the false impression that he does.

Pot. News Gets New Publisher

Well, it appears that Mark Laskowski has been kicked upstairs, and the Potomac News has a new publisher.

No word on whether he will halt/reverse the leftward tilt of the paper. However, he hails from the People's Republic of Massachusetts.

The Macaca'ing Continues

Apparently unsatisfied with smearing candidates, Lowell Feld over at Raising Dough ... er, Raising Kaine, has decided to direct his smears at yours truly, offering this little gem:

"If only Allen had hired James Young (or Cliff Kincaid) as his anti-gay coordinator...."

I'm utterly perplexed as to why I would be equated with Cliff Kincaid. For one thing, I don't even know the guy. Certainly, I am not nearly as famous. Indeed, I had not even seen his column until I came across Lowell's little smear. And I probably wouldn't agree with his analysis. Indeed, given the political hackdom into which Lowell has descended --- I've met him, and he doesn't appear to be simply stupid --- one has to wonder whether this little assault isn't being launched because I dare to point out the dishonesty in Jeff Dion's campaign biography. Dion claims that he "lives in Lake Ridge with his two children," which may be true in the same sense that I "live in Montclair with Maureen Caddigan," when in fact, he lives in Lake Ridge, i.e., shares a home with, his homosexual paramour.

Lowell's smear is, of course, the same kind of smear that the race hustlers will use to libel those who oppose the recent resolution introduced to have Virginia "apologize" for slavery. I'm curious: to whom is such an apology to be issued? I once attended a Christmas party with an amazing woman. She was 113 years old, who was born in 1875. Her parents had been slaves in Kentucky, and she was the oldest human being I had ever laid eyes on. And she was still a decade removed from slavery at her birth. And, of course, it is an apology apparently to be issued by those who never owned a slave, who don't support slavery in any form, who had no responsibility for the "peculiar institution," whose ancestors may not even have been in the United States when slavery existed, and who themselves weren't even born until decades after slavery was abolished by passage of the Thirteenth Amendment.

I can imagine little more meaningless than an "apology" issued to no one, offered by those not responsible for the evil for which they are "apologizing."

Of course, most of those slandering opponents of such a meaningless "apology" are enthusiastic supporters of the servitude created by the welfare state.

And isn't it ironic? The authors of this resolution are all, or almost all, Democrats. If the notion here is that Virginia somehow institutionally owes an "apology" for slavery, then one has to wonder whether Virginia's Democrat Party has offered such an "apology." Indeed, they have much more than mere slavery --- which preexisted the founding of the Democrat Party --- for which to apologize. After all, the Democrat Party was the primary defending of Jim Crow, an organized effort to frustrate the effect of the Civil War Amendments.

The General Assembly should flatly refuse to even consider the proposal for a slavery "apology" until Virginia's Democrat Party apologizes for its racist behavior.

And as to Lowell's smear, I've just got to ask: Awww, whatsa matter, Lowell? Still smarting from the refusal of Virginia voters to mainstream perversion? Too bad Lowell doesn't understand the difference between opposing the radical homosexual agenda and being "anti-gay," whatever that is.

Besides, not all of us offer our opinions in the blogosphere simply because we're Raising Dough ... er, Raising Kaine.

UPDATE: I asked the first individual to whom this "apology" is to be issued what she thought of it. Aside from the fact that she hadn't heard of the nonsensical "apology" for slavery, her first reaction was to roll her eyes in contempt. That's just about right.

Radicalization of Pot. News Continues

Well, after seeing Gene Lyons' (author of a book reasonably and objectively titled The Hunting of the President, about Clinton's impeachment for perjury, a follow-on to his apologia Fools for Scandal: How the Media Invented Whitewater, both available on the remainder pile) nationally-syndicated column for at least the second time in today's Potomac News, there can be little doubt that the radicalization of the Pot. News editorial page continues apace.

But, oh, I forgot: Executive Editor Susan Svhilik was a "Goldwater Girl."

Just like Hitlary.

Credit Where Credit Is Due Department

Alice Marshall may exhibit symptoms of insanity --- primarily Bush Derangement Syndrome --- but it is appropriate to note that she has never failed to approve one of my comments on her site, on which comment moderation is enabled.

Get Ready for the Apologias

With the recent revelation that Barack Obama, wunderkind of the Democrat Left, was a self-confessed "pothead" and "junkie," get ready for the scrupulous silence of those in the far Left blogosphere who regularly savage President Bush for his long-ago battles with the bottle.

More Democrat Obfuscation

Confuse criticisms about lying as fixation on sex, gotta confuse criticisms about lying as fixation on sex.

After all, it worked for the Great Prevaricator.

And isn't that special? Alice Marshall --- she of the insanity --- thinks it's about panties (perhaps she knows something about Dion that I don't), not lying. Yet oddly, she offers no answer to the question, which would promptly resolve the issue, and prompt a post noting that Dion was NOT lying. And still, no response from Dion to this. Sure, he has a blog... with posts extending for almost ten whole days.

UPDATE: Dion's apologists are trying to change the subject with the same old, same old.