State GOP Convention Observations --- The Preliminaries

Just returned from Richmond, and after a few hours of recovery, I'm organizing my thoughts on this weekend's gathering. Because I was able to get a last-minute reservation at the Marriott, we went down on Friday afternoon. Arrived too late for registration, or the first-day activities, but was given the rundown by Josh Suarez, on the Marshall staff.

Didn't attend the Gala on Friday night. The family opted for dinner at the Tobacco Company, in Shockoe Slip. Interesting night. I first went there about 24 years ago, with my college girlfriend. The scary part was when, in talking to my oldest, I found that our waitress was 22. Yep. Wasn't even born the first time I went there.

Nevertheless, had a great meal. Ran into John Stirrup and talked for a time with him, and returned to the hotel for the hospitality suites.

Since it was two doors down from our room, hit Bob Marshall's first. Wine and deserts mainly, and a good group of people, but rather quiet. It was early, and after my youngest managed to loudly pop a balloon on a candle, we went to search out other venues.

Ran down to the lower level, and went into Jeff Frederick's ice cream social. A dry hospitality suite!?!?!?! Well, the boys liked it, and we had desert. But there were almost more hotel staff there than guests, and after an ice cream bar, we left.

Turns out most of the suites --- and the best ones --- were at the Convention Center. Stopped by Bob McDonnell's/Bill Bolling's. Ah, beer! Had a good conversation with State Central Committee Member David F.C. Ray, saw a few other old friends, and went next door to John Hager's suite. More good food, fewer people I knew well, but they had chocolate and strawberries, and Patrick was in hog heaven. Saw John on the way out, and told him that I would be supporting him. And that, while I believed some of Jeff's criticisms to be unfair, he would be well advised to adopt some of his suggestions for Party improvement.

At this point, Brenda thought it best to get the boys back to our room and into bed. Couldn't blame her, given the hour she rises for her commute.

Then went around the north corner, and found Governor Gilmore's, National Committeeman Morton Blackwell's, and the Jeffersoniad's suites. Morton had the best food, by far. Crab cakes; shrimp; chicken fingers. But Jim Gilmore had the best bar (perhaps explaining his victory). Full, open bar. Crown Royal; good bourgon; Chivas! Would come back to this one.

Saw many old friends: John Tate; Kevin Allen; Corey Stewart; John Stirrup. Had a great conversation with Boyd Marcus, for whom I have recently had a new respect, as he had the wit to send his son Randy, Bill Bolling's Chief of Staff, to Hampden-Sydney. Got to know Christopher Younce. Talked to John Stirrup's brother, as well as getting to know Jim Fotis (really, for the first time) and his lovely wife, Kim.

Had a great conversation with Jim Bowden, whom I have admired for a long time. Wonderful fellow. Saw Shaun Kenney for the first time in years. And Jim Hoeft, whose Bearing Drift is Tidewater's premier blog. Rick Sincere (who got great footage of the maroons protesting Vice President Cheney's visit) and Alton Foley were also in attendance. The Jeffersoniad Suite was a blogger's hotbed, for obvious reasons.

Jim Hoeft made one of the better suggestions of the night, and suggested that we all head to Tucker Watkin's suite. Tucker is the Fifth District GOP Chairman, and I'd never had the pleasure.

Well, it turns out that Tucker's suites are legendary. Great bar, and I capped off the night with an incredible burboun recommended by him. We then had a wonderful conversation about Fifth District politics. The alma mater lies in the Fifth, and it seems that Tucker and I have quite a few mutual friends.

Turned in for the night after two --- the party was still going strong --- and prepared for the events of the 'morrow....

What A Republican!

Say what you will about John McCain --- I have, and probably will --- but anyone who would even consider voting for a raging Socialist like Barack Obama can't be seriously considered to have ever been a Republican, or a Conservative.

And he's lecturing us on what's wrong with Washington?!?!?

What's most wrong with Washington is people who seek political power by auctioning their political "principles" to the highest bidder.

Poor Ed King --- So Bitter; So Irrelevant

Just came across this rather interesting comment, in response to a recent Gary Jacobson column in the Daily Fishwrap ... er, "Potomac News":

I think Gary’s thoughts are correct and expressed very well. What a contrast with those columns written by the not-great James Young who could call anyone any dispicable name he desired but was protected by the editor of the “PotNews” from the any criticism by letter writers.The editor MUST publish the critics. A truly free press demands it.

Wow! I'm so flattered. I wrote a little weekly piece for that journal for about seven years, and was unceremoniously canned nearly four years ago --- no notice to me or the readers, just discontinued, with the editor lying about how many complaints she received over it --- and Ed King (a former County Supervisor, prior to 1992) is still fixated on me. I suspect that most people, even in the district he represented, would be hard-pressed to identify his name, and I don't write letters for free to a journal which used to pay me for my work.

Now, I suppose I could ask Ed what he's talking about, since he provides no examples of me "call[ing] anyone any dispicable [sic] name [I] desired," and never mind that Gary Jacobsen's work is notable for the fact that it persuades --- contrary to its intent --- people to vote Republican, but why bother? Democrats rarely let the truth interfere with their childish accusations.

But I can't imagine a more ringing endorsement of my influence as a columnist. Just ask Lt. Governor Sean Connaughton.

BTW, Ed, it's "despicable."

The Green Tree Has Red Roots

Apparently, the Czech President is causing quite a stir by publicizing something else that the so-called "mainstream" media has chosen to ignore: that environmenalism and calls for government action to combat "climate change" are simply the same old far-Left prescription for the elimination of freedom dressed up in new clothes.

The Europeans recognized this fact decades ago, with the rise of the "Greens," with the recognition that "the Green tree has Red roots."

I would not recommend that the Czech President hold his breath waiting for Al Gore to appear for an honest intellectual exchange.

H/T to Drudge

Impending Conference

Driving to Central Pennsylvania to visit the family over the Memorial Day weekend, saw a billboard advertising an impending convention of "Muslims for Peace," set to occur in the unlikely location of the Farm Show Complex in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

It's certainly a refreshing change for a religious whose most prominent adherents these days seem to be making war on America. It's also evidence which encourages those who respect the faithful of all faiths, and question why so few Muslim leaders denounce radical violence.

Ranting Kids Are Upset

Now that Governor Timmy! has endorse Gerry Connolly for the Democrat nomination in the 11th Congressional District, it seems that the boys and girls at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough ... er, "The Blog Formerly Known As 'Raising Kaine'" have case his name down the proverbial Memory Hole, and scrubbed his name from their masthead. Now it's just "RK."

Now, some of us have always thought that "RK" stood for Ranting Kids. Works as well as anything else.

Remember that old show "When Animals Attack"?

Perhaps we should call this "When Moonbats Attack."

Interesting Time Of Year

I'm always fascinated by springtime in D.C.

I vividly remember leaving here one April morning, and when I arrived in Anchorage, Alaska, it was warmer there than it was when I left.

It's not much different today.

More Observations On PWC GOP Committee Meeting

Another observation on last night's first meeting of the newly-reconstituted Prince William County Republican Committee:

Where was everyone?

We heard for months on end from those who breathlessly trashed Tom Kopko for "destroying" the County Committee, or provided a forum for it. But not even Greg Letiecq was there.

Now, to be sure, most did so behind the cowardly cloak of anonymity/pseudonymity, but nevertheless, they managed to follow mindlessly the meme that Kopko was evil, and that his decisions harmed the GOP. Never mind that those who have been around for awhile --- actually participating, not just casting brickbats while GOP candidates enjoyed unprecedented success County-wide --- observed the same cyclical trends which have been virtually unbreakable since the founding of the Committee in 1991. The Internet just provides so many opportunities for smears.

And to be sure, Kopko overpromised when elected. Those who have been around for some time knew it was unrealistic to dream of --- let alone promise --- a "600-member County Republican Committee." Might be nice, but aside from the fact that it would increase the costs and difficulties in finding an adequate venue for County Committee meetings exponentially, experience teaches that it's just not realistic. The GOP is any venue is more that those elected to the leadership position of County Committee Membership, as I have observed elsewhere.

But now, Lyle Beefelt is the Chairman. Nice guy. Have been friends for a long time, notwithstanding some disagreements, and even including a cheap, foolish shot or two from him (yes, Lyle, Julie Lucas is a lightweight, intellectually, from all that I have observed; your list of her "accomplishments" says little about substance, particularly regarding matters to come before the House of Delegates, and your criticisms of her winning opponent seem misplaced from someone who has just been elected to a position from which his primary goal should be to grow the GOP). Trustworthy, honest, and fairly non-confrontational. Even endorsed by those who agree on little else. As Citizen Tom observed, he "tends to occupy the middle ground between the party’s different factions, he still manages to be on speaking terms with everyone. That actually is no mean trick."

So where were all the disgruntled people who had been so alienated by Tom Kopko? Wasn't he the problem, according to some? Wouldn't all those people come rushing back to the GOP Committee once he was out the door (actually, he still sits on the County Committee's Executive Board, by virtue of being immediate past Chairman)?

To be fair, I recognize that one meeting does not a trend make, but last night's rather anemic attendance does not bode well for the Committee resurgence implicit in the arguments of those demonizing Kopko.

Now I suppose, were I of a mind to demonize Lyle (i.e., were I a damn fool), I would blame him for that anemic attendance. I might declare in hushed conspiratorial tones that he is masterminding the destruction of the County GOP, or that he is engaged in some sort of campaign to deliver the Committee to those who wish ill to PWC, Virginia, the United States, and all that is good and pure in life.

But I won't. As noted above, it is merely the same cyclical trends which have been virtually unbreakable since the founding of the Committee in 1991.

Not that those who engaged in it won't find an excuse to blame someone else when their over-promises are revealed as such.

New PWC GOP Committee Meeting

Just returned from the first meeting of the newly-reconstituted Prince William County Republican Committee.

Interesting.

All three newly-elected members of the State Central Committee elected from the 11th Congressional District at Saturday's Convention --- David Ray; Patsy Drain; and Keith Damon (who I had not previously met, but came highly recommended by Fairfax Senator Ken Cuccinelli) --- were in attendance, and expressed their appreciationfor their support from Prince William.

And give new County GOP Chairman Lyle Beefelt credit: he knows how to stick to a schedule. We were scheduled to adjourn by 8:45, and by God, we adjourned by 8:45.

It might have been earlier but for some controversies which might well have been resolved more easily with a little more planning and/or better execution of the County Convention.

What is perhaps most interesting is the fact that the good planning and/or little missteps which would have provoked charges of conspiracy and perhaps even high treason probably will be ignored by those who hated former Chairman Tom Kopko for ideological reasons. One has to wonder why?

The only big controversy was over elections of inferior officers. Not because there was a surplus of candidates; none of the races was contested. And a question was raised over only one of them.

What provoked the controversy was the question of Treasurer. It seems that the individual interested in the job, a woman I don't know by the name of Fotis (Kim?), had erroneously failed to mark the box for Committee membership at the County Convention. Hence, she was not technically qualified for election prior to a vote on new Members, as the Party Plan requires election by the County Committee from "among their number." As an aside, this was a conscious choice by the committee which drafted the Party Plan --- I was its Chairman --- to insure continuity of leadership, among other reasons.

It seems that a number of people (initially just former Secretary Karen Ulrich) objected to moving the election of Treasurer --- required to occur at this meeting by virtue of the Party Plan --- to after the election of new members. The change was suggested by me, among others. The practice of the Committee has long been to hold that election until the end of the meeting.

However, this problem was averted when the prior Treasurer, Kathy Royse, consented to election, and promised to resign in favor of the new Treasurer upon her election. While I have no reason to distrust Kathy, the problem with this course lies in the fact that Kathy was technically elected to a two-year term, and there is nothing which would compel her to resign, should she choose not to.

Now, there are good and sufficient reasons for the practice of electing new Members at the end of the meeting. Primarily, it insures the orderly conduct of County Committee meetings, and insures that no one can "pack" a Committee meeting and engage in activities which would embarass the GOP and its nominees.

And there were good and sufficient reasons to vary from this practice on this occasion, the primary one being that there was no great controversy over this single election, and it appears that the single candidate was not technically qualified at that point in the meeting simply due to an oversight.

Of course, the County Committee is charged with the continuing corporate existence of the GOP in Prince William County. It is, though some seem not to understand this, or ignore it, the leadership of the Republican Party in the County. It is decidely not the rank-and-file of the Party, which --- by virtue of the County Party Plan --- is made up of:

All legal and qualified voters of Prince William County under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, regardless of race, religion, national origin or sex, who are in accord with the principles of the Republican Party and who, if requested, express in open meeting either orally or in writing as may be required, their intent to support all of its nominees for public office in the ensuing election....

Because of this fact, it is sound policy to provide some level of control on those who vote in a County Committee meeting. The same reason justifies the rules limiting Membership to a certain number of Precinct Members (never approached, so far as I know) based upon a proportion of GOP votes in preceding elections, and a limited number of At-Large Members (again, never invoked, so far as I can recall). Aside from this fact, Members of the County Committee are require to be registered voters. And indeed, that desire for "control" is precisely why we vote new Members in to the Committee. Objections can be raised, for good reasons and bad, but certainly among them, over the concern that adherents to principles other than those of the GOP might attempt to take over the local Republican leadership.

Allowing anyone who appears at a County Committee meeing, signs an application, and writes a check for $50 (dues for a two-year membership) to vote immediately prevents the important process of verification that the applicant is, in fact, a registered voter (a process followed by the Credentials Committee at the County Convention and/or Mass Meetings). This is an important process required by both the State and County Party Plans as a qualification for Membership.

As it turns out, the only item of "New Business" discussed at tonight's County Committee meeting was when the Old Whithered Wench, AKA Anke W. Cheney, appeared at the meeting to declare that, perhaps, this policy should be reconsidered. She made no motion, but provoked some discussion.

Now that the Old Whithered Wench thinks it's a good idea is sufficient reason to question it. After all, she has absented herself from most participation in the deliberations of the Committee since it was founded in 1991. Perhaps not coincidentally, this is when the GOP in Prince William County has come to dominate County politics.

And, of course, she has engaged in the sleazy practice of attempting to use the criminal justice system against political enemies, chronicled here. Moreover, she has previously renounced the GOP when she didn't like the results of a contested nomination.

Ah, were it that it were so.

But the policy --- and it is only a practice, apparently not written into the Party Plan --- is a sound one, and one which has proven useful in the past. The Old Whithered Wench suggested at the meeting that the alternative of voting in new Members at the beginning of a meeting would promote Party growth. She asserted that such individuals stay in the GOP.

I have my doubts. After all, the only occasion when it was meaningfully invoked involved the efforts of former Chairman Sean Connaughton to take revenge on the GOP for the embarassing loss he suffered in a straw poll conducted at the 2004 County Convention regarding the impending race for Lieutenant Governor, for which he was a candidate for the GOP nomination. Having failed to support the local GOP, he didn't encourage his supporters to attend. They stayed away, in droves. Probably as a result, his main competitor --- future nominee and Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling --- walked away with a victory, and 70% of the vote.

At the next meeting of the County Committee, the organizational meeting, Chairman Sean attempted to "pack" the Committee with new "Members," all paying the then $30 dues on the spot and demanding a vote for new officers. Chairman Sean's campaign flack, Hector Quintana, was in attendance to oversee the operation, and it was reported to me at the time that he was on the phone with a very-agitated Chairman Sean when his attempted coup failed miserably, upon invocation of the existing practice by then-Chairman Brian Murphy, much to his credit.

The group brought in was widely described as a "mob" by those in attendance. And apparently, Chairman Sean didn't have too many standards in his quest for higher office: many were also Democrats. At least one of those attending was an individual with whom I attend church. Now, she's a very nice lady. But she's also a Democrat. Indeed, just a few months later, I saw her car with a "Kaine for Governor" sticker prominently displayed.

Few, if any, of the others have ever darkened the door of the GOP in the years since.

And even if it were true, is it the kind of "growth" to be desired by a political party with public responsibilities? Should local GOP leadership in the form of its Committee become subject to the control of a well-funded group which sufficiently organizes itself for a single meeting?

I think not. And while the goals of those who separated the County GOP from the combined Manassas/Prince William County Committee in 1990/91 were explicitly to deliver control of the County Party to the grass roots, as always, it was important to strike a balance between grass-roots control and surrendering control of the GOP to whatever mob happens temporarily to assemble.

It's a lesson as old as the American Founding, in which the Framers conscientiously and intentionally bequeathed to us a republic, not a democracy. And one that those who would consider any proposed change to this long-standing practice to consider carefully before doing so.

Methinks They Doth Protesteth Too Much

With some in the far Left moonbatosphere in high dudgeon over the President's speech yesterday in front of the Israeli Knesset, at least one popular denizen of the left-of-center portion of the Virginia blogosphere has been strangely silent on the subject.

Maybe there's a conscience or two there after all.

Nevertheless, it must be that President Bush has struck a nerve. Apparently, the President was out of line, according to Democrat leaders, as detailed by Doug Mataconis. Interestingly, he didn't associate any names --- or any political party --- with those remarks.

Oh dear.

These are the same people who frequently accuse and/or tolerate accusations that the President is a terrorist and/or a murderer and/or a liar and/or a nasty bastard who's simply trying to enrich his buddies in the oil and gas industry.

One might take them more seriously if they weren't advancing the notion and/or accepting support from the "Bush Lied; People Died" contingent.

Not A Chance

Just received this in today's junk mail folder:

Friends,

John McCain doesn't know me from Adam... but neither did George W. Bush in 2004 when I rallied over 80,000 Vets4Bush plus their friends and families. I did this "on my own nickel" and I'm doing it again for John McCain. I'm doing it because McCain is an honorable man and he is head and shoulders above the Democrat candidates. He is the ONLY candidate fit to be Commander in Chief. I don't agree with him on all issues, and it's likely that you don't either.

I know you all agree with me that we REALLY NEED to elect another Republican President this year - that's why you're attending this Convention. I would like to represent you - the grassroots Republican Activists - at the RNC National Convention in Minneapolis, MN on Sept 1. I would greatly appreciate your vote.

I hope to meet you at the 11th District Convention tomorrow. Registration opens at 9:00 a.m. and the convention is scheduled to begin at 11:00 a.m.

Suggestion: You might consider bringing snacks, because I've been told there will be no food for sale in the School.

O. P. Ditch
Candidate for RNC National Convention Delegate

I suppose I could dissect this chapter and verse, starting with the mistaken salutation "Friends."

But what would be the point? Suffice it to say that Ditch was part of Julie Lucas' charitably-named "Brain Trust" in last year's 51st District Delegate race for the GOP nomination, and when he didn't get his way at the Convention, either opted out entirely or, more probably, gave aid and comfort to Democrat Paul Nichols in his narrow victory in the General Election.

My response was more succinct than usual:

It seems to me that we need a National Delegate who works for all Republican nominees.

Not a prayer.

They Can't Be Serious

With the Democrat nomination all but won by Sen. Barack Hussein Obama, attention has started to turn to his choice of running mate. Of course, with Hillary Clinton still in the race, notwithstanding the virtual numerical impossibility of winning, many in the media are asking "What does she want?" They speculate that she would accept the VP slot.

Sorry, but I have to ask: If you were Barack Hussein Obama, would you really risk choosing such a nakedly ambitious person --- with all of the suspicious activities swirling around her --- as the person who would succeed you to the highest office in the land upon your untimely demise?

One hopes that an American President would be somewhat more risk averse.

Whether It's True Or Not....

that's just offensive.

Apparently, a Georgia bar owner is selling "Obama in '08" t-shirts, with a picture of Curious George above the slogan.

He justifies it by saying there's a resemblance between the cartoon character and the Democrat frontrunner.

One needn't be a race hustler to be offended by this.

Lowell Feld: Far-Left, and a Liar, Too

Yeah, yeah, I know: big surprise, coming from the far Left.

Nevertheless, it's more than a little surprising when those on the far Left, who make pretensions to commitment to free speech (especially when it's there's) so nakedly avoid uncomfortable little facts which reveal their irrationality.

Now, I don't often comment on Ranting Kids, ... er, Raising Dough, ...er, "Raising Kaine." Don't do so much at all. After all, it's little more than an echo-chamber for the far Left.

However, when I noticed a post on the Great Annandale Earthquake of Ought-Eight, I realized what had happened, and given that I felt it at my office (a mile from the epicenter), I offered that fact. First one in more than a year.

Then yesterday, I noticed that Lowell Feld, the Kid-in-Chief, offered a few "thoughts" on Governor Timmy's! tax increase plan... er, "transportation plan." I prefaced my comments with the attempted witticism that "thought" would be a nice idea, but implied that it wasn't reflected in the post.

Didn't record the comment elsewhere myself, but it was something to the effect that the typical far-Left pap about "the exorbitant profits of oil companies like ExxonMobil" --- you know, the 8-9 cents they make (on average) per gallon --- was more than a little nonsensical, since their increased profits are a function of increased volume of sales, and since both the Federal and Virginia governments tax gasoline at a rate about double that amount, thus "profiting" much more than those eeeeevil oil companies from the sale of gasoline. I also pointed out the basis for my authority on the issue, since my father was, for more than four decades, an owner of a single, small service station, and laughed at the uninformed premises underlying Lowell's "thoughts."

I also pointed out that, if you wanted to talk about altering the tax structure, "A reasonable, sensible case can be made for altering the calculation of the gas tax, changing it from a flat rate (17.5 cents per gallon) to a percentage of price, to adjust for inflation concerns. You don't make it, and Tim Kaine didn't have the guts to. What leaders!"

My comment generated a number of thoughtful responses, even an endorsement from someone with the handle "Bubby." Since I don't pay too much attention to Ranting Kids, ... er, Raising Dough, ...er, "Raising Kaine," I don't know much about "Bubby," or where he's generally coming from.

Lowell's response? He deleted my comment. Not the responses, mind you. Just the comment. When "Bubby" complained, Lowell declared:

"Skeptical Observor" is more than deserving of being "troll rated." And no, we're not going to have an "honest discussion" with someone who believes every Democrat is a left-wing "extremist," a "socialist," a "nihilist," a "communist," or any of the other things he's called us over the years.

Now, I can't look at my comment, since Lowell deleted it, and I have to work from memory. But I remember having said virtually none of those things in my comment. And certainly said nothing more insulting that one regularly sees on the pages of Lowell's blog about Conservatives.

But then Lowell said this:

This blog isn't the government (0.00 / 0) so the "free speech" issue is not applicable. People who come on this blog choose to play by our rules, just as people who go into any other blog -- right, left, center, whatever -- choose to play by their rules.

Anyway, if you read our posting guidelines, they are very clear:

* Users who unnecessarily bash or attack, including ad hominem attacks, any users on the site are subject to immediate banning. Our actions will be dictated by the specific circumstances.

* Users that post comments that do nothing but name-call, denigrate other users, or make inflammatory remarks will be warned first and banned if warnings are not heeded. Extreme violations will be banned outright.

Now, if asserting that someone has made an uninformed comment without thought is "ad hominem," and offering actual facts (about oil companies, for example) as opposed to anti-corporate propaganda is "nothing but name-call, denigrate other users, or make inflammatory remarks," then....

Well, the simple fact of the matter, it's not. And while I can't remember chapter and verse about what I said, it certainly wasn't fairly categorized as any of that. And I said so, giving Lowell a chance to restore my comment. He didn't.

And certainly, I was never "warned first." No e-mail from Lowell. Nothing. Just deletion of my comment. Which, of course, denies any other reader the opportunity actually to read the comment and see if it is fairly categorized as such.

Which is, of course, the point. The far Left --- and yes, that's precisely where Lowell resides --- can't take honest debate. It especially can't stand facts which disprove it's rhetoric. So Lowell deleted my comment.

Perhaps the most revealing fact is that, in responses which complain about ad hominem attack and imply name-calling, Lowell calls me a "troll."

That just about says it all about the merits of his position. And while I have no illusions about whose position on this will be more widely read --- not nearly as many people read this blog as read Ranting Kids, ... er, Raising Dough, ...er, "Raising Kaine" --- the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the leading "light" of that blog must be recorded somewhere.

Even if little, childish Lowell can't face the criticism himself.

Welcome Home

You know you're getting old when kids you watched grow up put away childish things and start their lives as adults.

One young man, a boy named Thomas, is someone I've watched grow up in my church over the last nearly-19 years. I watched him as a child, play softball with his dad, and watched him as he became an Eagle Scout. A few years back, he went off to Virginia Tech, graduating last year. He was not involved in last year's tragic shooting.

I was quite surprised to learn, a few months ago, that he had received his commission in the Army and had gone to Afghanistan.

Thankfully, he just returned from Afghanistan --- safely, thank God --- and was joyfully welcomed at today's church service.

Welcome home, Thomas. And thank you for your service.

Another Milestone for H-SC's Class of '86

I was pleased to learn today that a classmate and long-time friend has been named as the Publisher of the Virginian-Pilot.

Maurice A. Jones, H-SC '86, a Rhodes Scholar and former Commissioner of Social Services in Gov. Mark Warner's administration, assumed his duties on 14 April. It makes the Virginian-Pilot the nation's largest daily newspaper with a black publisher. Nevertheless, Maurice commented on the significance of that fact about as I would have expected:

"I hope that in whatever period of time I have to do this job, I won't be remembered as just the first black publisher," Jones said. "I hope people will say, 'This guy made a positive contribution to this place.' "

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Maurice graduated at the very top of our class, and was therefore our Valedictorian. He's just about one of the hardest-working guys I know. The Virginian-Pilot could have done a lot worse and, to my mind, couldn't have done much better.

Congrats, Maurice!

Another First (And Perhaps Last)

For the first time in history, the winner of a major Indy-car race is also appearing in Sports Illustrated's famous (or infamous) swimsuit edition.

Not that there's anything wrong with that!

Absenting Myself Briefly

As my friends know, I've had other pressing professional matters commanding my attention of late, and precluding my avocation here.

However, a few random comments:

On Obama's Attribution of Bitterness to Small-Town Pennsylvanians --- I'm from a small town in Pennsylvania, and maybe it's because I "escaped," but I am pro-gun, religious, and not bitter. No, Senator Barack Hussein Obama, I'm not. In fact, speaking for myself, and probably a goodly number of my fellow small-town Pennsylvanians, I can honestly say that we "cling" to our religion and our guns through good times and bad, the former, because it has stood the test of time, and it is not a mere faith of convenience, and the latter, because unlike you, we --- like the Founders who walked the streets of a then-small Pennsylvania town over two centuries ago --- don't put our faith in government. And we dislike you for what you represent, and what you believe. It has utterly nothing to do with your skin color.

Most of the time, it has to do with your Typical. Liberal. Arrogance.

On the Other Hand --- Obama's smear did give us the spectacle of Hitlary! Champion of the Faithful and of Gun-Owners!

Anybody who actually believes that is actually stupid enough to vote Democrat.

And Yet Another Reason to Dislike Hitlary --- Was actually in Philadelphia for most of last week, in trial in Federal court. Walked through the bar on Thursday night, and noticed a few guys with ear pieces standing between the bar and the restaurant. Sure enough, caught a rear view of a fat-a**ed bottle blond. Yep. Hitlary! was there. Not quite within spittin' distance.

Next morning, tried to get off my 18th floor room, and had to wait 15 minutes for an elevator, finally being relegated to a freight elevator.

So thanks, Hitlary. Now I have reason to personally dislike you.

Happy Earth Day!

Join the celebration.

I plan to set the appropriate tone by enjoying a fine, imported, hand-rolled tobacco product while driving home in my gas-guzzling SUV.

Far-Left Idiotic Whining, Vol. 4357

It seems that "Howling Latina" has discovered that Presidents no longer receive lifetime Secret Service protection, courtesy of --- according to her --- "Republicans [who] ran Congress [when] President Bill Clinton was president."

The implication seems to be --- she describes it as "skimpy security thanks to Republicans" --- that Republicans wanted to deny protection to Bill Clinton.

Oh, those wascally Wepublicans.

Of course, Clinton still receives lifetime protection, as the law only applies to "presidents elected to office after January 1, 1997 will receive Secret Service protection for 10 years."

And Clinton signed the bill. Well, OK. I couldn't find a reference for that. But it doesn't appear on a list of his vetoes.

And oh, by the way, it was introduced by Maryland Democrat Steny Hoyer.

Perhaps this is yet another "problem" that the Dems who now control Congress can "fix."

Unless, of course, it's only a "problem" if the concern is "skimpy security" for Democrats.

Then again, I guess there's no more basis for that accusation than for the silly whining of Howling Latina.

NOTE: I would have left a comment on HL's website pointing out these inconvenient facts, but HL is one of those far-Lefty blogs which shrinks from truth like a vampire shrinks from sunlight, and does not allow comments from other than registered users.

Charlton Heston, RIP

I first became aware of Charlton Heston when I was probably about 10 or 12, and the CBS Friday late movie would frequently be something like Soylent Green, The Omega Man, or Planet of the Apes. I liked his science fiction work in the late 60s and early 70s, and became something of a fan.

During a brief flirtation with high school theatre, I even had the privilege of attending a workshop with his wizened acting teacher, held at Bloomsburg State College (now Bloomsburg University). My recollection is fairly fuzzy, but I do remember the impression that this credential was pretty impressive among the teachers accompanying our group.

It wasn't until somewhat later that I learned that he had played Moses in Cecil B. DeMille's remake of his silent classic, The Ten Commandments, and much later that I finally saw Ben Hur. What a great actor.

In the early Nineties, I had occasion to meet the elderly actor from Hollywood's late Golden Age, when he came to Washington to aid in the Right to Work cause at a press conference near the Supreme Court. I met him briefly, and was impressed by his accessibility and friendly touch. He was the first "celebrity" I had ever met, and I found that I liked him. I remember telling him that I enjoyed his work, and he seemed pleased to hear it.

A few years later --- and before he became President of the National Rifle Association --- he lent his name to an award given by the National Right to Work Foundation to one of my clients, Terry Orr, who I had the privilege to represent in his successful effort to vindicate his Right to Work when the NFL Players' Association was attempting to force him and a number of his teammates on the Washington Redskins to pay union dues.

Once again, I was impressed. Since I was Terry's attorney, I got to speak with him at a little more length. I thanked him for his efforts on behalf of the Right to Work movement, mentioning that I had just returned from Alaska, where I had another case. As I recall, we spent the rest of our time together commiserating about jet lag. I suspect he was more acquainted with it than I.

I confess: I had become a fan. I bought three of the books he subsequently authored (two about his career; one devoted to lessons he wished to impart to his young grandson), and learned much about him. A devoted family man, Heston was clearly a Renaissance Man in many, many ways. Yet he was also a product of America's Heartland, hailing from Michigan, and never lost touch with his roots. Perhaps that explains his popularity among the movie-going public, why so many --- during the Clinton Interregnum --- put bumper stickers on their cars declaring "Charlton Heston is MY President."

I saw more of his older movies, and was impressed by his range and depth as an actor. I particularly remember one passage about his brief role in True Lies, Arnold Schwarzenneger's spy picture: he had apparently been picked for the role as one of the few men who could credibly intimidate Ah-nold, playing his grizzled boss.

Yeah, that worked, and worked well.

In one of his last roles, Heston recreated the role that won Paul Scofield an Oscar: that of Sir Thomas More, in a cable remake of A Man for All Seasons. Yet another role which Heston, among few, could credibly play.

So when I read last week that he was in the last stages of Alzheimer's disease, I was deeply saddened that a great voice, a sharp mind, was in decline. And when I turned on the television this morning, and learned that he had passed away, I was deeply saddened.

Of course, the deepest sadness is for his beloved wife of more than sixty years, and his children and grandchildren. Hopefully they can take some solace in the fact that their mourning is shared by legions of fans of all ages, and among those whose life he touched in so many positive ways.

RIP.

GWB's War: Safer Than A Democrat CinC

Don't believe me. The numbers tell the story:

1980 .......... 2,392 (Carter Year)
1981 .......... 2,380 (Reagan Year)
1984 .......... 1,999 (Reagan Year)
1988 .......... 1,819 (Reagan Year)
1989 .......... 1,636 (George HW Year)
1990 ......... 1,508 (George HW Year)
1991 .......... 1,787 (George HW Year)
1992 .......... 1,293 (George HW Year)
1993 .......... 1,213 (Clinton Year)
1994 .......... 1,075 (Clinton Year)
1995 .......... 2,465 (Clinton Year)
1996 .......... 2,318 (Clinton Year) Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,000 deaths
1997 ............. 817 (Clinton Year)
1998 .......... 2,252 (Clinton Year)
1999 .......... 1,984 (Clinton Year)
2000 .......... 1,983 (Clinton Year)
2001 ............ 890 (George W Year)
2002 .......... 1,007 (George W Year)
2003 .......... 1,410 (George W Year)
2004 .......... 1,887 (George W Year) George W years (2001-2006): 7,033 deaths
2005 ............. 919 (George W Year)
2006.............. 920 (George W Year)

The numbers are from a report by the Congressional Research Service.

Now, since the number of dead members of America's armed services aren't and can't really be the basis for the far Left complaints --- clearly, fewer Americans are dying in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq than died on base in the United States, or on the Clinton Administration's "peacekeeping" operations --- what can it be that bothers them so?

Might it be a military which is actually pursuing American interests abroad?

H/T to RightsideVA. RightsideVA has it right, too: Don't expect these facts to be reported in the so-called "mainstream" media.

Mass Slaying Justifies Strong Legislative Response

Apparently, there has been another mass killing, this one in Alaska. Four people are dead, allegedly murdered by a recently-released, 18-year-old domestic assault suspect.

This is the straw that breaks the camel's back for me.

There is simply no justification for allowing these instruments of death in the hands of young adults. Government control is absolutely called for. If only these weapons had been secured, four lives might not have been tragically ended in a spree of mass killing.

The Second Amendment be damned; it's time for gun contr....

Oops! Wait a minute! Turns out that the killer used a knife.

Never mind.

None Of Our "Business"!?!?

Former First Daughter Chelsea Clinton, campaigning as a surrogate on behalf of her mother in Indianapolis, was apparently asked yesterday whether her mother's "credibility" was hurt by her behavior in the Monica Lewinsky imbroglio. Her response?

"... I don't think that's any of your business."

Huh!?!?! A potential President's credibility none of our business?!??!

Among the many idiocies in the so-called "main-stream" media's coverage of the Clinton's, this one is certainly notable. This is a 27-year-old woman working for her mother. This is no longer a teenager being protected from a voracious media in the fishbowl which is the White House. For God's sake, this woman is old enough to run for Congress!

Yet the so-called "main-stream" media is applauding her!

But there's no media bias. Never mind. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Paul Nichols --- Your Union-Label Delegate

Just managed to notice this: the RINO's favorite candidate, Delegate Paul Nichols (D-51st) voted in favor of Delegate Adam Ebbin's (D-Lavender) bill to repeal Virginia's ban on public employee monopoly bargaining. Ironically, it would have repealed a law sponsored by former Delegate David Brickley (D-51st), Nichols' predecessor in the district. Though Brickley is a Democrat, and was at one time a union lawyer (for the PWEA, the National Education Association's County affiliate), even he was not enough of a moonbat to hold that government employees should be given privileged status in the allocation of scarce public resources.

Interesting. Even the obvious costs of creating a special agency to manage resulting contracts predicted that the bill would put a $7 million hole in the budget through 2014. And that's to say nothing of the possibility that government would grow, cost more, and the possibility of government-employee strikes (whether legal or not, they happen under such regimes). Very sensible in a time of tight budgets and transportation-spending deficiencies.

The Virginia GOP Caucus blog identifies it as the single worst bill for business in the Commonwealth. I wouldn't dispute that characterization.

You can thank the spoiled brats who didn't get their way in nominating Julie Lucas as the GOP nominee in the district, and/or the Gill-haters --- i.e., those who opposed the GOP victor, Faisal Gill --- for this lunacy. Apparently, for these children, smears are more important that policy.

And Nichols certainly can't plead ignorance about the effects of this bill. I had a detailed discussion with him about it well before the election.

I suppose Nichols can be credited with dancing with the ones who brung him. Or more likely, for hearing his master's voice.

Absurdity of the Day

From PeterFeddo.com:

"The Clinton's [sic] are very forgiving and gracious people...."

BA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Yeah. Ask Linda Tripp. Or Kathleen Willey. Or Juanita Broadderick. Etc.

Note: As one might expect, Feddo does not allow comments from other than those who register. I know I moderate, but I have yet to reject a comment since beginning that practice. It seems many of our moonbat friends fear confrontation with the facts.

Hilarious

Sent to me by one of my in-laws. Don't know if it's true, but it's hilarious, nonetheless:

The following is the 2007 winning entry from an annual contest at Texas A&M University calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term.

This year's term: Political Correctness.

Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

RFLMAO.

Arthur C. Clarke, RIP

My wife returned home from work today and informed me that she had heard that Arthur C. Clarke, one of our favorite authors, had died at age 90. His New York Times obituary is here. There are multiple copies of some of his books around our house, as we are both fans.

Though I never met the man --- having never traveled to Sri Lanka, where he had lived since before I was born --- I feel as though I have lost an old and trusted friend.

The word "visionary" is probably overused. It seems an understatement when applied to Clarke. He was a good writer with incredible foresight, two requirements for a great science fiction writer. It is a combination too rare in the genre. He conceptualized communications satellites in geosynchronous orbit in a 1945 paper, but failed to patent the idea.

Nevertheless, it is a measure of the esteem in which he was held that some of the things he imagined (a space elevator, for instance) are staples in other writers' works. It is difficult to believe --- as the NYT obituary stated --- that his worldwide sales were only around $25 million. His contributions to science, culture, and the intersection of science and culture may well be several orders of magnitude greater than that number.

Indeed, though his name has, for some time, been associated with giants like Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, it may well be that he will be remembered as the greatest among these giants. No small feat when one considers that Isaac Asimov was a contemporary.

RIP.

Marching Idiots

From the home area, word of a "protest" informed by idiocy.

"Bush lied"? About what? These are the morons who confuse error (about WMDs, a world-wide intelligence consensus, BTW), with prevarication. 'Course, they're probably the same people who were defending Clinton's serial prevarications. These people would have been right at home with the John Birchers, who insisted on confusing policy differences with perfidy and conspiracy.

Then there's "War is Not an Answer." Funny, but it was a really good answer to slavery, fascism, genocide, and totalitarianism.

But never mind historical facts.

UPDATE: Another thought occurs to me: Those who drive around with a "War is Not the Answer" bumpersticker on their vehicles demonstrate conclusively that they don't even know what the question is.

Interesting Priorities

I wonder how many health insurance policies for poor children could have been voluntarily paid for in lieu of this display of conspicuous consumption?

I love it when Dems demonstrate their hypocrisy.

Aren't these the same people who complaing about so-called "chickenhawks"?

Brought To You By A Democrat Congress

So the Democrats have controlled Congress for more than a year, and what have they accomplished?

• A barrel of oil? Price almost doubled
• Job growth? Cut in half
  
• Home ownership? Dropped for the first time in years (it grew for 6 years under unified Republican rule)
• Average family grocery bill? Increased about $70 per month
• Stock market? Lost about 10% of its value
• Home values? Fallen roughly 8%
• Inflation? Up, now to over 4%
• Consumer confidence? In the tank
• Most people think we are heading into a recession

Will the so-called "mainstream" media blame the Democrats?

Of course not. It's all George W. Bush's fault.

H/T to Charles at TwoConservatives.

Interesting Day

Completely by chance, had occasion today to enjoy fine, imported, hand-rolled tobacco products with the former Mayor of New York City. An intimate little group, it included this Conservative Republican, a couple of moderate Republicans, and even a Democrat or two. It was one of those happenstances that was completely unplanned, and therefore, was very casual and interesting. Just a bunch of guys sitting around a coffee table, enjoying espressos, smoking cigars, and chewing the fat. It's almost impossible to exchange cross words over cigars, and this little tete-a-tete was no exception.

Nice, accessible guy. Our disagreements on some issues to the contrary notwithstanding, I find myself sincerely hoping that his service to the Nation is not yet complete.

Ferraro Quits Clinton Campaign

Former Democrat nominee for Vice President Geraldine Ferraro has quit the Clinton campaign.

It appears that she's caused quite a furor with her remark about Democrat front-runner Barack Obama:

If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.

Wow. Quite an indictment. Let's get back in the Wayback Machine, set it for 1984, and play with the first sentence of that quotation a little:

If [Ferraro] was a white man, [s]he would not be in this position.

After all, she was tapped as Walter Mondale's running mate after only three terms in Congress.

I guess Ms. Ferraro knows from whence she speaks when she talks about the elevation of unqualified candidates by Democrats to play at affirmative-action, identity politics.

Of course, if either Hitlary Clinton or Barack Obama were a white man, neither one would be in the position they're in. Seven years in the Senate, and before that, the wife of a powerful politician? Three years in the Senate?

On an objective basis, neither one of them is qualified to be President of the United States (in facd, the only Democrat who ran who was objectively qualified was Bill Richardson; his campaign never got off the ground).

Senator Chuck Colgan: PLINO?

That's "Pro-Life in Name Only."

You'll recall that state Senator Chuck Colgan has been conning the Conservative voters of his district ... well, for literally decades. He prevailed over Dave Mabie in 2003, and over a very strong challenge by Bob FitzSimmonds in 2007. You see, 'round about election time, Chuck has successfully beat back Republican challenges by claiming to his constituency that he is pro-life.

Of course, to an ever-increasingly moonbat Democrat constituency, this is apostacy. State Democrats even went so far in the last election to send out the typical Democrat scare literature, directed at women, suggesting that Senator Chuck's vote was necessary to preserve a woman's "right" to choose to kill her unborn child.

Recognizing that this might strip away the last vestige of respectability on this issue that he possessed --- by voting with Democrats in the organizational vote, Colgan actually voted to insure that no meaningful pro-life legislative initiative could move forward --- Colgan immediately and publicly disavowed the Democrat Party mailer. Thereafter, he squeaked by a very strong challenge from Republican Bob FitzSimmonds.

I guess we shall see. His Republican opponent, Bob FitzSimmonds, just sent me this e-mail:

Working with the Republican caucus, Senator Ken Cuccinelli was able to get the Senate to vote to ban Planned Parenthood funding from the state budget. While this is fairly normal language for the House version of the budget, the Senate conferees have always stripped it out of the final state budget. This is the first time the Senate has ever voted this way, so we have a historic opportunity to stop funding this organization at state expense.

I was privileged to work with Ken as his Legislative Director during session and it was an amazing experience to see the Democrats come undone over this amendment. Nearly a whole day was devoted to Democrat attempts to side step Ken’s amendment. Ultimately they failed and the proposal passed with the support of one Democrat, Chuck Colgan. Amazingly, the biggest impediment to final passage of this language is now this same Democrat, Chuck Colgan. While Senator Colgan is pro-life this stipulation has never seemed to be a priority for him and in spite of his presence on the budget conference committees, this language has been stripped out year after year.

Immediately after voting for the ban, Senator Colgan appointed another pro-choice legislator to the conference committee. The only explanation for this is to bolster liberals on the conference committee. The outcome will almost certainly be that this restriction will die, while Senator Colgan can continue to claim that he voted right. Senator Colgan, as the chairman of the powerful Senate Finance committee, has tremendous influence in this process and can insist that this language stay in the budget.

It is really important Senator Colgan hear from folks about this. The vote on the budget may take place as early as Thursday. So please call Senator Colgan’s office at 703-368-0300 or email his office at district29@sov.state.va.us and ask him to vote against funding Planned Parenthood.

So, is Democrat Chuck Colgan really pro-life, or is it merely campaign rhetoric by which he cons the voters of his district? Is he now working against the very pro-life legislation for which --- to his pro-life voters --- he will attempt to claim credit?

We shall see.

Eliot Spitzer And The Politics Of Sin

With the deliciously-scandalous news of New York's Freudian (i.e., everybody does everything to get more sex) Governor, comes word that the randy chief executive is attempting to negotiate a plea deal. Apparently, he doesn't want to resign his office unless guaranteed that he won't be prosecuted for his crimes.

Hmmmm. Perhaps. But if the interests of justice are truly to be served, one might be inclined to demand a gubernatorial pardon for each and every madam, prostitute, and john prosecuted by Spitzer during his tenure in his various offices.

Anyone sitting in prison or with a criminal record because of Spitzer's actions seems to me to be entitled to demand it as a matter of simple justice.

What A Little Strange Will Get You....

It seems that New York's Democrat Governor Eliot Spitzer is in trouble for paying for a little strange.

You would think that someone in his position would be somewhat more discrete.

Wow!

Shocking

In the wake of news that the top ten administrators in the Prince William County government schools are in line for a cumulative raise of nearly $100,000 comes complaints from Occoquan District School Board member Grant Lattin that more than $10,000 in per pupil expenditures is not enough. It was an Op-Ed in today's Potomac News, but a link on line is not available at this writing.

Aside from the fact that per pupil expenditures in this County have now exceeded the cost for tuition, room, and board at my pricey private college during my years of attendance there (1982-86), it is worth noting that this cost exceeds the cost of my sons' private Christian school for both of them, and could pay for about 75% of the tuition for another student.

Explain to me again why vouchers don't make both economic and educational sense?

A Few Centuries Late

As a Christian in the Lutheran tradition, this is certainly an interesting development.

It's nice, however, to see that our Catholic brother and sisters have finally come around.

H/T to Reason and Revelation.

He Gets A Pass On This One

Driving in today, I heard on WMAL that Governor Timmy! vetoed two bills which would have expanded Virginia's death penalty to include those who plan premeditated murders.

I support these bills. I support (with appropriate procedural protections) the death penalty generally, and its expansion particularly. I would expand it to include those who serially molest children, among the vilest of crimes, and serial, violent rapists.

However, I can't bring myself to criticize the eminently critiquable Governor Timmy! on this one. He's a devout Catholic, and has long opposed the death penalty. It was an issue in his campaign for Governor. Virginians knew what they would get when they unwisely chose to elect him. And while I expect him, as Governor, to carry out the death penalty when it is imposed --- my recollection is that he has --- he is certainly within whatever "mandate" he has to exercise his authority as Governor to oppose its expansion.

So you won't read a word of criticism here over his decision to veto bills like this.

It remains to be seen whether the Virginia legislature will override his veto.

yippee

Fox News calls the GOP nomination race for John McCain.

Outrageous

Today's Pot. News carries a page-one, above-the-fold story on how the top ten administrators in the Prince William County government schools can look forward to an across-the-board pay raise of 6%.

For a limited payroll which already tops $1.6 million dollars, this translates into a cost to taxpayers of nearly $100,000.

Huh?

Let's see. Assessments are dropping, and with it, County income in tax revenue at the current tax rate. County Executive Craig Gerhart has proposed a budget which would raise the tax rate to over $1 per $100 of assessed value, and would result in a tax increase to the average homeowner an additional $258 per year in County property tax payments. By some measures --- I don't necessarily buy into these predictions --- the economy is slowing.

Yet County Superintendent Steven L. Walts is going to get a pay raise of more than $14,000? And his top deputies are in for pay raises of nearly $10,000 apiece? Oh, and by the way, government-schools administrators are getting nice, shiny new offices (to the tune of nearly $40 million), slated to open in September.

Enough is enough.

What is really disturbing is the fact that people like Gainesville School Board member Don Richardson, who ran with the GOP endorsement, is making excuses for these exorbitant salary increases. How many County taxpayers got a 6% pay raise this year? What percentage have seen their net worth drop with declining home values?

Government employment should reflect the economy, and County revenues, as a whole. The notion that the County's top government-schools administrators are asking for, and may well get, such huge increases in times like these should outrage everyone who foots the bill.

That would be every taxpayer in Prince William County.

Changing The Subject

I guess Dems who like Barack Obama would prefer to talk about this than talk about his endorsement by notorious anti-Semite "Calypso Louie," aka Louis Farrakhan.

I Want My Refund

It seems that the Virginia Supreme Court has today issued a decision throwing out that portion of last year's tax-increase bill ... er, "compromise" which permits an unelected body to soak Northern Virginia taxpayers for more money.

The 23-page unanimous opinion by Justice S. Bernard Goodwyn is online here, in .pdf format. The case was spearheaded by Delegate Bob Marshall (R-Prince William), and reverses the judgment of the Arlington County Circuit Court (the NVTA had brought an action to rubberstamp its authority in a tax-friendly jurisdiction).

I would think the chances for further appeal are virtually nil. The decision is based wholly upon the Court's interpretation of the Virginia Constitution, and that interpretation is considered authoritative. It is highly unlikely that the United States Supreme Court would grant certiorari under these circumstances.

For those blogosphere moonbats who belittle Bob and his constitutionalist leanings, this is quite a vindication. For Bob, that is.

What a great day. Perhaps Governor Timmy! can spend the next few days contemplating how he can refund to the taxpayers of Northern Virginia --- including yours truly --- the funds unconstitutionally extracted from us in the last two months.

And Repubmocrats can contemplate the wages of surrender. They told us last year that compromise was politically expedient, politically necessary. Yet just nine months later, Republicans lost control of the State Senate, and have been on the decline in the House of Delegates. Now, their "solution" --- and let's not buy into the far Left mythos that Democrats had nothing to do with this --- is in the trash.

What was that about the benefits of "compromise"?

Oh, and this should give quite a boost to Bob's senatorial ambitions.

Huh?

Marxist journalist I.F. Stone famously observed that the Washington Post "is a great paper. You never know on what page you will find a page-one story."

Young's Corollary: What makes the Potomac News a worthless rag is the fact that you never know what you'll find, if anything.

Today was a good example. One reads the tease just below the masthead: "Rights denied? State ACLU sues county over voter ID A3."

Sounded interesting. I always like to follow efforts to facilitate voter fraud.

So I turned to page A3. Nice story on "City man sentenced for immigration fraud." Another on "Marshall to hold press conference on gun bill." A third on "Lawyers advise immigrants before county crackdown." A photo from AP about a dog rescue in Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania, just up the Susquehanna River from where I was raised. Oh, and more than a half-page of advertising.

But no story about the ACLU and its lawsuit. So I looked throughout the news section with a keen eye. Nothing on the front page. Nothing on page A2. Page A4? Well there were the obituaries, the police blotter, and a few more news stories. Oh, and the same story on "Lawyers advise immigrants before county crackdown." Word for word. Nothing on page A5. The op-eds on page A6. A story on street racing with a catchy reference to James Dean on page A7. And on the last page of the section, A8? Weather, and two other news stories.

But no story anywhere on the ACLU and its lawsuit.

I have a fairly low opinion of the Pot. News, and particularly its Executive Editor, Susan Svihlik, who discontinued my column --- arguably, the most influential political column in Prince William County at the time --- with no warning whatsoever, and then lied about it afterword (she said she received only one complaint, but I was blind-copied on about a dozen e-mails of complaint).

But this is just plain incompetence. You can't get a promised story into the paper, and then repeat the same story twice? Wow.

On second thought, just about what I'd expect.

William F. Buckley, Jr. --- RIP

Just got an e-mail letting me know that the Godfather of the modern Conservative movement, or at least, its midwife, died last night in his study at home in Connecticut.

National Review Online reports it here.

Though Buckley had a Right to Work case in the 1960s, it was well before my time (I was about five at the time), and I never had occasion to meet the man. However, having read his column for decades, read his books, and watched him on many talking heads shows --- including his own, Firing Line --- I feel as though I have lost a wise old friend.

I quote him frequently, with my sons: "I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken."

A giant of 20th Century opinion journalism has left the scene.

RIP.

Hypocrisy Alert!

Times like these, I wish I could emulate Ben Tribbett's wig-flipping Larry Sabato.

It seems that some in the far Left moonbatosphere are up in arms over radio talk-show host Bill Cunningham's reference --- in warming up a crowd for John McCain, who limp-wristedly disassociated himself from the comment --- to the leading Democrat presidential contender as "Barack Hussein Obama." They don't like the fact that someone is using his full name.

'Course, they don't mind referring to the former junior Senator from Virginia as George Felix Allen, which was part and parcel of the Virginia Democrats'/Jim Webb campaign's attacks on the former Senator.

Feel the love ... er, hypocrisy, on Cobalt 6, here and here.

Not that it would make any difference at this point, but one might take the criticism more seriously if it were accompanied by an apology to Senator Allen. As Byron York observed at the Corner on National Review Online, "Perhaps if they had criticized the whole George Felix Allen thing, they might have more credibility."

'Course, the boys and girls over at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough, ... er, "Raising Kaine" have pointedly not lept to Cunningham's defense.

There are at least a few non-hypocrites out there.

Light Blogging For Foreseeable Future

It seems that I will be quite busy into the first few weeks of the Supreme Court's next term. Because the update to docket sheets is a little slow, the better link is here, for now.

Quite overwhelming. Now, back to work.

Why Michelle Obama Shouldn't Be Proud Of America

I expect that Michelle Obama, wife of Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Barack Hussein Obama (D-Ill.) will take a lot of grief in the coming days over her comment that, for the first time in her adult life, she is "proud" of America, apparently because the man with whom she sleeps is a serious contender for the nomination of one of America's two major political parties.

I won't be joining in.

As I've written before, "pride" is something one takes in one's accomplishments, what one achieves, not that which is beyond one's control. Hence, there is a conceptual problem with taking "pride" in one's skin color, or one's sex (male or female), or one's national origin, since one has no choice in such matters.

And there is certainly little about America's accomplishments in the last quarter-century or so --- she is only a few months younger than I --- in which any far Leftie like Michelle Obama can legitimately take "pride."

Here's her biography, from the campaign's website:

After high school Michelle went on to Princeton University where in 1985 she graduated with a B.A. in sociology and a minor in African American studies. After college, Michelle continued her education at Harvard Law School, where she earned her degree in 1988.

For three years after law school, Michelle worked as an associate in the area of marketing and intellectual property at Chicago law firm Sidley and Austin, where she met Barack Obama. She left the corporate law world in 1991 to pursue a career in public service, serving as an assistant to the mayor and then as the assistant commissioner of planning and development for the City of Chicago.

In 1993, she became the founding executive director of Public Allies - Chicago, a leadership training program that received AmeriCorps National Service funding and helped young adults develop skills for future careers in the public sector.

Michelle began her involvement with the University of Chicago in 1996. As associate dean of student services, she developed the University's first community service program. Michelle also served as executive director of community and external affairs until 2005, when she was appointed vice president of community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Medical Center. She also managed the business diversity program.

Michelle has fostered the University of Chicago's relationship with the surrounding community and developed the diversity program, making them both integral parts of the Medical Center's mission.

Those are, of course, her accomplishments, and they are probably things in which she rightly takes great pride. They indicate that, among other things, she has fed at the public trough, and promoted others to do so ("Public Allies - Chicago, a leadership training program that received AmeriCorps National Service funding"). What of America's accomplishments?

The fall of the Soviet Union? Of course, in the last, twilight days of that struggle, Democrats were challenging Ronaldus Magnus' policies. In 1980, they tried to warn us that Reagan would start a nuclear war. When Reagan liberated Grenada, they attacked. When Reagan aided the contras in Nicaragua (which now has a democratic government), they attacked. Democrats, in whole or in large part, opposed every major foreign policy initiative of Ronald Reagan.

Was Michelle Obama among those who did? It's a little hard to tell, since she wasn't as prominent then as now. But if her political ideology was then where it is now, one can only assume that she would have signed on to likes of the outrageous "Dear Commandante" letter sent by left-wing congressional Democrats to Marxist Nicaraguan dictator Manuel Noriega.

The massive economic engine which is the economy bestowed on us by Alan Greenspan and Ronald Reagan? Who knows? Michelle Obama appears to have been a participant in it in some way for a short time, but after only three years, left the private sector to feed at the public trough. But apparently, she doesn't take "pride" even in that.

So I agree. Michelle Obama should not have "taken pride in America" during her adult life. As a far-Left Democrat, she has had precious little to do with America's accomplishments during her adult life. To the contrary, her ideology demands that she hold those accomplishments in contempt.

A contempt which revealed itself in her recent comment.

Funniest Line Of The Day

What to do when your ideology repels most Americans? Deny its nature.

From the boys and girls at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough ... er, "Raising Kaine":

"there is no actual 'left' in American politics."

As I once heard in a movie about a drug dealer, someone has obviously spent too much time sampling his own product.

Playing The Tax Game

Big government types love to tell us how reasonable their efforts to extract more money from the people who earn it are.

"It's just the cost of one Starbucks latte per month."

"It's just the cost of one soda per day."

Here's my new favorite, justifying the Democrat Senate's DOA proposal to increase the gas tax by one cent a year for the next five years, raising $2 million per year (an estimate which seems low), from Senate Democrat leader, Little Dicky Saslaw:

"the increase would cost the average family the equivalent of 'two Big Mac meals a year.'”

But what if Republicans tried to transfer funds from, say, education spending? How about taking it from spending on school lunches? "The transfer would cost the average pudgy sixth-grader in Virginia's government schools the cost of a Big Mac lunch once a month."

Or from teachers' salaries? Given that there are 86,569 government-school teachers in Virginia it would only cost each teacher less than $24, and "The transfer would cost the average government schoolteachers' family the equivalent of one Big Mac meal a year."

As I've said before, there are a lot of good conceptual reasons why the gas tax --- a flat amount per gallon sold --- is unsound. Strong arguments can be made that it should be restructured as a percentage of the cost of a gallon of gas.

Leave it to Democrats to avoid the strong intellectual arguments, and instead rely upon Little Dicky's demagogic tactics.

Have They Seen The Light?

Saw the headline for "Legalized Parasitism" on Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough ... er, "Raising Kaine," and thought that I might be reading an article about the evils of forced-unionism ... er, "union security" schemes and government-granted monopoly bargaining privileges.

Or maybe condemnation of the Liberal welfare state and the "war" on prosperity ... er, "poverty."

Or maybe an attack on Social[ist] Security.

Or socialized medicine, a.k.a. "national health care."

But no. It was just another attack on the free market.

There's a lot to condemn about payday lenders. It's an unseemly business.

But the fact that the compassion fascists on the far Left condemn the practice probably means that there's much to commend about it, too.

Return Of The "But-Heads"

That's "but-heads," not "buttheads," famed in song and story. Well, famed in a few movies --- Back to the Future, to be specific --- anyway.

You know the type. You hear them frequently on talk radio, and on C-SPAN. They're the Democrat seminar callers, the ones sent forth to create a false impression that Republicans are leaving the party and abandoning its principles because of ... well, whatever is ticking off Democrats lately.

They're the ones who declare, "I'm a life-long Republican, but I now support Democrat [whomever]." Or "Everybody hates taxes, but I support [whatever the latest tax increase proposal to come along]." Or "I'm not a socialist, but I support Socialized Medicine."

Or "I'm a Republican, but now I support Barack Obama for President."

That's the latest one, advanced in today's Washington Post. There, we read about "Republican Laura DeBusk," a Glen Allen resident who says she voted for President Bush twice, but is now supporting Barack Obama for President. The title of the article? "In Virginia, a Longtime Republican Votes for Change."

Sure. And a monkey just emerged from the lower end of my alimentary canal. Sure, sure: there are probably some --- even a few with a public record of support for GOP candidates --- who may do the same thing. Certainly, a journal with the resources of the WaPo should be able to find someone whose claims to being a Republican are more than self-verified.

Here are some of the "gems" from the article:

DeBusk likes a lot about Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), too, but it's not enough to overcome her disenchantment with a Republican Party she thinks is adrift and uninspired, both in Virginia and nationally. She voted for President Bush twice and regrets where he has taken the country and what she thinks he has done to the good name of the United States of America. She's tired of what she sees as a lackluster string of Republicans that have run and, lately, lost in a Virginia that seems more liberal by the day. And she watched with particular dismay as Republican Sen. George Allen's 2006 reelection campaign went up in flames after he uttered a remark perceived by many [and sold by the WaPo] as racist.

The Laura DeBusks of the country are just the kind of voters that Sen. Obama (D-Ill.) has courted -- sick of what they've been offered, tired of where things are headed and willing to try something, anything, new. Exit polls from elections across the country last week showed that Obama won the majority of independent voters. DeBusk, like many voters, worries about Obama's lack of experience, and she disagrees with him on a handful of issues, particularly his tax policies. But her desire for change is so great, she's willing to take the chance.

The problem, of course, is that the article is one step removed from voter fraud. You see, there's utterly no proof whatsoever that DeBusk is or ever has been a Republican. To the contrary: the article itself contains evidence that large portions of piece are contrived frauds.

The tip-off, in black-and-white, is the claim that DeBusk's husband "husband, Chris, 38, ... is also a registered Republican...."

You see, we don't have "registered Republicans" in Virginia. As national Democrats swung over into the "moonbat" column, Virginia Democrats for years prevented registration by party (unnecessary when Virginia was a virtually one-party state), and allowing parties to limit voters to those identifying themselves with either respective party. Republicans, terminally insecure, and in the last six years, facing Democrat Governors, have failed to move forward to allow voter registration since the GOP gained control of the state legislature.

Anyone marginally informed about Virginia politics knows this. So how is it that DeBusk is as active/informed/engaged as she claims to be? The obvious implication? She is not, nor never has been. At least, not as a Republican.

Nevertheless, she claims that "She has been a member of the party all her adult life...." Really? How? Neither VPAP.org, nor OpenSecrets.org lists her as a contributor to, well, anything. Either under her married name or under her maiden name. And she grew up in Annandale and attended William & Mary, graduating in 1992. Perhaps she's newly engaged in the political process, but nothing more than her self-serving (or Obama-serving) claims support the notion that she is "a life-long Republican."

I'm certainly willing to be educated. But nothing publicly available sustains the notion that Laura Barchi DeBusk is or ever has been a Republican. "Googling" her name produces little beyond but comments about today's articles. And if one is going to be the subject of a feature article in one of America's major newspapers, one would expect to find more evidence than unverifiable claims.

But of course, the far Left is all over the notion that Republicans are defecting from the party to support a raging Socialist like Barack Obama. One asks "How Many are Like Laura Barchi DeBusk?"

Assuming the truth of the facts stated about Laura Barchi DeBusk, the question might be rephrased as "Real Republicans voting for Obama?" My guess is few.

But drawing a few reasonable conclusions from the misrepresentations made in the article, the questions is appropriately rephrased as "Lying Democrats?"

Oh, Hell! That's easy: Lots.

Hitlary's Contribution

Given the news that the Clintons have infused Hitlary's presidential campaign with $5 million of ill-gotten booty ... er, "their own money," one has to wonder whether Democrats have finally come to their senses, and want to throw Team Clinton under the bus.

The apparent ascendancy of a guy who was, until four years ago, just an Illinois state Senator demonstrates that, while the latter might be true, the former remains just a pipe dream.

Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to read too much into the Clinton's personal cash infusion.

It seems to me that there are only two or three main reasons why a candidate would put a considerable amount of his or her own resources into a campaign.

First, the candidate may be running to satisfy his or her ego, as a function of his or her lust for power and prominence. Think: Ross Peron ... er, "Perot." Some might even say Mitt Romney.

Second, the candidate may see the need for a cash infusion at a strategic time as just the thing to guarantee victory. I vividly remember Tom Davis telling me, back in 1994, of making such an infusion in the last weeks of the campaign, because he didn't want to come up short at the last minute.

Third, the campaign is desperate, and it's the last gasp of a sputtering, dying candidacy.

It remains to be seen whether Hitlary's move is a function of the second or third reason.

However, contrary to reports out today, it may not be the Year of the Rat, after all.

Where's Hitlary?

In Arlington, Virginia, of course. After all, Virginia will --- in six days --- be selecting delegates for the Democrat National Convention.

Arkansas, a state in which Hitlary Clinton was First Lady for more than a decade, already selected its delegates, on Super Tuesday.

Hence, it no longer has something that Hitlary wants (i.e., power).

Never mind that many people in Arkansas died last night in a spate of tornadoes which ravaged the South.

Didn't both Presidents Bush get savaged for not "caring" when they didn't show up in disaster areas promptly enough?

Homos DON'T Want To Destroy Marriage?!?!

Who was it who said advocates for the radical homosexual agenda don’t want to “destroy” marriage? Never suggested that they did, myself.

Exhibit A for the contrary proposition appears in Maryland.

Nice to see that Sen. Jamie B. Raskin (D-Montgomery) has come out of the closet on the real goals of radical homosexuals. Little surprise for someone who --- as a law professor in an American law school, and a Democrat --- is almost certainly an extreme positivist, with no respect whatsoever for natural law. According to the WaPo:

Raskin is a lead sponsor of that bill as well. "If those of us who are straight can experience the sense of indignity gay citizens experience every day, just for a moment, then this bill will serve its purpose," he said.

Oh, foresooth! "Gay citizens" experiencing "indignity ... every day"! I guess they really do get more than the rest of us. After all, the indignity of their perverse sexual behavior on a daily basis!

Doug Mataconis offers his contrary view here.

At Home With Hitlary

Driving into work this morning, I heard on the radio that Hitlary Clinton (D-Wherever) will be spending the day at home in her living room, doing 37 remote interviews.

Oh, the possibilities!

Did she have to Google the address to find "her" house?

Will this be the most time she's ever spent in her "home"?

Hopefully, Bill doesn't "notch" anything (indicating his conquests) within eyeshot, for those pesky TV interviews.

You can join the fun, too!

Best. Super Bowl. Ever.

Not much more to say about the game. An objectively great contest to be enjoyed by any fan of the game, without regard to whether you like the Patriots or the Giants. Perhaps even better if you don't particularly like either team.

'Cept it was nice to see Peyton Manning in the box, watching his little brother. And not taking some of the attention away from his brother's moment of glory by horning in on the celebration, as Eli Manning was named the game's Most Valuable Player.

What a class act.

What a great night for Archie Manning, seeing his younger son win a Super Bowl, only a year after Peyton's victory and MVP award.

Wow.

WaPo Hypocrisy, Redux

Today's Washington Post carries a story about Prince William religious leaders who attack the recent crackdown on public services for illegal immigrants residing in the County.

Two things are interesting about the article.

First, it fails to identify the "leaders" who have signed on to the letter to County officials. I certainly believe that such actions might be of interest to the various congregations served by these "leaders."

Second, it is unaccompanied by an attack editorial criticizing these "leaders" for attempting to mix religion and politics.

Imagine, if you will, the hue and cry if the topic of the letter had been a liberal abortion regime, or public funding of health services, or government schools?

Because They Should Be Doing Better Things?

Took the family out to dinner tonight, and saw a report that the ever-estimable Arlen Specter (R-PA) is questioning why the NFL destroyed videotapes regarding the early-season "scandal" over the New England Patriots' videotaping of opponents' practice sessions, instead of saving it for senatorial investigating committees.

Uh, because the Senate should have better things to do than investigating a game?

Is There No Depths To Which Islamo-Fascists Will Not Sink?

As the misnomered "war" in Iraq is being won, word comes that Islamo-Nazis are now using women with Down's Syndrome to perpetrate their acts of terror.

In a world which was recently treated to the positive contributions that individuals meeting this challenge can make, this vile and despicable strategy reveals, yet again, the utter moral depravity of the enemy.

I have to imagine that, if I were the forensic analyst who discovered this (Down's is a genetic disorder which would show up in DNA testing), I would have had to take time out from my analysis to go throw up upon this discovery.

Appalling.