Is Bob McDonnell considering a tax increase?

In the State of the State address the other night, the governor had this – and only this -- to say about taxes:

The budget that was waiting for me at 12:01pm on Saturday requires $4 billion in cuts.



Some say taxes must be raised – it’s unavoidable. Here’s what I say. I will work with you –Democrats, Republicans and Independents. We will meet and negotiate; there will be disagreements, and there will be compromises.



Virginians are struggling with the worst economy in generations. We will not turn our economy around by taxing Virginians more. To do so would ignore the indisputable truth that the fiscal fortune of any government is tied to the economic prosperity of its people.

 Therefore, if you pass a bill in this recession that raises taxes on the hardworking families of Virginia – I WILL VETO IT.

 And if you pass a budget embedded with those same tax increases – I WILL NOT APPROVE IT.



I find it hard to believe that McDonnell would seriously consider raising taxes. Given the choice between responsible, constructive governing and blind adherence to an ideology that teaches that taxes and government are always bad, a Republican that dreams of a future in his/her party will choose ideology every time.

And yet, McDonnell’s specificity of language is intriguing. Would he approve a tax that was not imposed on “the hardworking families of Virginia” – say, a gas tax, or an increased sales tax, or additional taxes and fees on business. Of course, ultimately, those taxes hit hardworking families, but one could at least argue that they are taxes actually levied on others.

After all, if the Governor meant all taxes were off the table, there was a more direct and clear way to say so, like “Read my lips. No new taxes!”

But he chose not to do so.

Could he be telling the General Assembly he would support a tax incre…er….revenue enhancement of some sort, if could be argued that the burden does not, somehow, fall on families.

I’m sure I’m off base. My Republican friends in the Commonwealth might be misguided and dangerous ideologues, but they are not stupid enough to fall for this.

But there is a $4 billion budget gap that McDonnell needs to close, and I am eager to see how the Governor solves this puzzle over the next couple of months by expense cuts alone, consistent with the promises of his campaign.

EXTRA! EXTRA! McDonnell renegs on transportation promises

Well, Gov-elect McDonnell has reneged on his promises to fix Virginia’s transportation mess.

I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, that this has happened!

Not that it matters much. McDonnell’s “plan” for transportation was always clearly intended as so much campaign fodder, and never intended as an actual and practical solution for the Commonwealth’s transportation issues.

Still, Bob McDonnell is responsible for his own actions, and reneging on a promise so central to his election before he is even sworn in is, frankly, inexcusable, even in these cynical times. But it won’t be the last promise on which McDonnell reneges, unfortunately, as most of his campaign was premised on presenting an image of himself completely at odds with the reality of who Bob McDonnell really is.

The trick for McDonnell, of course, will be to maintain his viability as a national candidate while delivering on his “Manchurian Candidate” role to remake Virginia in the image of Pat Robertson (it’s all laid out there in his thesis). To accomplish this, I suspect that much of the dirty work in the social arena will fall to Ken Cuccinelli, with McDonnell simply not interfering with Cooch and instead playing the role of “Moderate Bob” insofar as most citizens are concerned, with a healthy dose of winks, nods and coded language to the teabaggers he will need as he reaches for national office.

That’s what’s up, it appears, with McDonnell’s low key demeanor and overtures to Democrats heading into his inauguration.

Progressives are at an inherent disadvantage compared to Republicans when it comes to acting as an opposition party. Because we believe in the capacity of government to act as an agent of progress in society, we try to find areas of constructive compromise and cooperation with political opponents when they operate the levers of power, even at the expense of supporting policies we know to be wrong because they possess some good aspects, and even if short –term political objectives are impaired in the process.

While the reasons were certainly more complex, it was this general approach to governing that allowed Democrats to seek common ground with President Bush throughout most of his presidency, notwithstanding his record of lying and incompetence. It was only following Katrina that common sense took hold, although it was too late by then, and Democrats realized that they were doing long-term damage to the country by supporting Bush policies.

For Republicans, however, being obstructionist is not only entirely consistent with their philosophy that any government action is inherently bad, quite apart from the objectives and means of implementation of that action itself, but it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. This strategy, of course, has the added virtue of providing the opposition with short-term political gains, as people turn on the party in power because of its inability to deliver.

I’m curious to see how Virginia’s Democrats respond to the McDonnell/Cuccinelli Administration in Richmond and to their inevitable sacrifices of education, health care, and public safety at the altar of tax cuts, much as we see McDonnell toss transportation to the wolves. And I’m curious to see the response to Cuccinelli’s efforts to reverse what little progress Virginia has made in social areas, whether the right for a woman to control her own body, gay rights and other civil liberties as he pursues his narrow Evangelical vision of society.

I do not have high hopes.

How to prevent McDonnell, Cooch bait & switch on Virginia? Vote. Just vote.

Bob McDonnell and Ken Cuccinelli are pulling a bait and switch on Virginia.

These two guys have been cultural warriors their entire public lives. How can anyone believe that once they find themselves in power that they are going to change their stripes?

Indeed, no sooner did they feel assured of victory than they began to show their true colors. As this article clearly demonstrates. Bob McDonnell contradicted a promise he made at a debate within 48 hours concerning both protecting a woman’s constitutional right to choose and non-discrimination against homosexuals. And in the last week, McDonnell has simply reaffirmed these positions.

Bob McDonnell is spitting in all of our faces. In the faces of all Virginians.

The only question is whether we will let them get away with it.

Democrats and moderates in the Commonwealth have the power to stop them.

All we need to do is vote.

That’s it. Just vote.

Vote.

McDonnell promises to defund planned parenthood

So much for Bob McDonnell's promises that he will not impose his exreme, Conservative, Pat Robertson social values on the entire Commonwealth.

From Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia:

On Tuesday, Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell revealed plans to single out and de-fund Planned Parenthood upon entering office as Governor of Virginia.

Speaking to conservative radio host Laura Ingraham, McDonnell was asked, "Can you promise that as Governor you'll use the veto pen to ensure that Virginians' tax dollars are not used to fund Planned Parenthood or abortion?" McDonnell responded by saying, "Yeah, I've said that I would do that...that'll be part of what we'll get done." (Watch here)

"McDonnell has tried to hide his ideological background throughout this campaign. However, with the polls favoring him to win the Governor's race, he reveals his true colors on conservative talk radio," said Jessica Honke, Director of Public Policy for Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia (PPAV). "The fact is Bob McDonnell is out of step and out of touch with voters and the wrong choice for Virginia. As Governor, he will continue the anti-choice and anti-women's health policies he's pushed since his first day in public office."

McDonnell's plan to defund Planned Parenthood is an attack on basic, preventative health care. If Planned Parenthood were defunded, tens of thousands of women and families would lose access to prevention services, including pap smears, cancer screenings, gynecological exams, family planning counseling and services, HIV and sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment and a host of community education programs emphasizing healthy relationships and lifestyles. Furthermore, McDonnell's statement is factually inaccurate; no state funding goes to the provision of abortion-related services. In 2008 and 2009, an amendment to defund Planned Parenthood was defeated.

As a legislator, McDonnell sponsored over 35 pieces of legislation designed to chip away at a woman's right to choose. He is opposed to reproductive choice, even in cases of rape or incest, voted to allow pharmacist to refuse Emergency Contraception and supports Bush-era abstinence-only policies that are medically inaccurate and dangerous to teens.

Additionally, he voted against common-sense legislation that would help ensure women could access contraception at their local pharmacy, voted against a bill declaring that contraception was not a form of abortion, voted against allowing public universities to distribute Emergency Contraception, and voted against requiring discussion in schools of the importance of post-rape medical help.

"McDonnell has repeatedly jeopardized women's health through divisive attacks on Planned Parenthood," said Honke, "At a time when more and more families in Virginia are uninsured and under financial strain, we can't afford to elect a Governor who will create more barriers to affordable health care. Virginians are looking for solutions, not politics as usual."

McDonnell Position on Opt Out Now Poses Real Danger to Virginia

Now that it looks as though the U.S. Congress is going to pass health care reform with a public option that will include an opt out provision for individual states, the stakes are higher in Virginia’s gubernatorial race, and it is worthwhile to examine the respective positions of each candidate on this critical issue.

While it is true that Creigh’s position on this – when asked about it hypothetically, he said he would look at what was passed and make a decision on whether to opt out based on whether it was good for Virginia – is less that I would like, Bob McDonnell’s position – a blanket promise that under his leadership Virginia would opt out of any public option – was irrational.

In the absract, I suppose, this was merely yet another case of ideology trumping facts and common sense when it comes to Bob McDonnell’s worldview. Take a look at McDonnell’s views on the environment, where he has politically declared off shore drilling environmentally safe despite much conflicting evidence, or on transportation, where he has put any new revenue source off limits despite abundant evidence that it will be necessary, or on climate change, where he has simply refused to recognize the irrefutable science.

Bob McDonnell might not be a member of the Flat Earth Society, but he is damn close.

Still, on each of these issues, the consequences to average citizens of McDonnell’s ideological positions seems speculative or remote. It’s tough for folks in, say, Charlottesville to appreciate how they will be hurt by off-shore drilling, and even the consequences of climate change seem like science fiction to most people. Furthermore, the negative effects of all of these will likely be gradual, so people will have the opportunity to adapt and time goes on.

Perhaps a few weeks ago, given the uncertainty of health care reform in Congress, the hypothetical opt out issue debate between Creigh and McDonnell was similar -- fodder for debate among policy wonks and political nerds, but no immediate practical consequence for Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public.

Given Sen. Reid’s comments yesterday, however, that is no longer the case. A public option with an opt out for states looks more probable today than two weeks ago, and so the candidates’ positions on this critical issue is more significant than it was.

And in light of that, Bob McDonnell’s position has gone from merely irrational to irresponsible, if not disqualifying him from the office he seeks.

Here’s why.

As far as Bob McDonnell is concerned, it doesn’t matter whether the public option would ultimately be good or bad for Virginians. He will just opt out.

But in this issue, lives are at stake, literally, and there is nothing abstract about that. At the very least, Virginia deserves a Governor who will honestly and intelligently evaluate the facts in front of him and come to a reasonable and considered decision, not simply be driven by an ideology, no matter how sincerely believed, that government is bad.

Evaluating the facts, the benefits versus the liabilities, is exactly what Creigh says he will do. It is exactly what Virginia needs.

It is, also, the exactly what Bob McDonnell says he will not do. He has made his decision, facts be damned.

Look, I don’t think McDonnell is callous or doesn’t care about people. I do think, however, he is a prisoner of an ideology from which he cannot break loose, and that it leads to ill-considered decisions that have serious consequences, intended or not.

I am amazed how, in light of this, any reasonably informed Virginian can cast a vote for Bob McDonnell.

Hey, Virginia: WAKE UP!

A while back, I wrote a post about how Bob McDonnell’s gubernatorial campaign resembled that of George W. Bush’s for president in 2000, in the sense that in each case the candidate’s success in the media and polls seemed to be based more on the perception that he was a good guy rather than a meaningful assessment of what kind of chief executive he would make, based on an analysis of their lifelong records and the substance of their political positions.

In retrospect, of course, it was all too clear by the Fall of 2000, or should have been all to clear to any reasonable person, that if elected that George W. Bush would fubar the country as badly as he did.

I’ll leave it to historians and the many millions of people smarter and more astute than I to analyze exactly what happened and why during the Bush presidency, but long before he became president, George W. Bush had a clear record of incompetence and failure in virtually everything he had attempted as an adult.

Why on Earth was anyone surprised when he turned out to be a failure as President also, leaving the rest of us to grapple with the insecurity, fear and difficulty of living through the worst economy since the Great Depression

So, what do we learn about Bob McDonnell from this?

More than anything else, Bob McDonnell’s past tells us that the most lasting historical legacy of his administration, should he be elected, will probably be the implementation of extremist social policies. Bob McDonnell has always been, and still is, first and foremost a culture warrior.

Need proof? A day after suggesting at a debate that he would not focus on pursuing his conservative social agenda were he elected governor, but would focus on jobs and the economy, Mr. McDonnell gave a speech at Liberty University where, perhaps feeling confident of victory on Nov. 3, he let his guard down and, to loud cheering, defiantly asserted that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that as governor he will tirelessly protect the unborn.

(BTW, lets none of us get into an argument over semantics and pretend that we don’t know what Mr. McDonnell means, i.e., that gay people will burn for all eternity in Hell on account of their deviant sexual practices and that official government discrimination against such people is not only acceptable, it is encouraged. Indeed, Bob McDonnell pursued this exact policy, to the extent he could, as Attorney General. As for abortion, I suspect we will see some of the strictest limitations in the U.S., especially if Ken Cuccinelli is Attorney General. Why would anyone think that two politicians who have spent their entire public lives espousing extreme pro-life positions would finally get into office and not act in a manner consistent with the tenets that have guided them their entire lives? Does that make sense to anyone?)

Mr. McDonnell has praised the economic record and policies of George W. Bush and suggested he would follow a similar policy, were he elected Governor – presumably, tax cuts for the wealthy, reducing government regulation of the financial sector and generally favoring big business at the expense of workers. In the conservative ideology, it does not matter if these policies produce poor results. Lower taxes and smaller government are the goals themselves, and as an ideological matter, low taxes and less involved government are always virtuous, without regard the actual effect such policies may have on the lives of actual people.

Lowell at Blue Virginia has a great post up about looking to California as a predictor of what Virginia might look like as a result of a McDonnell administration following such economic policies:

If Virginia elects [McDonnell], they can look to California as an example of what happens when conservative "starve the beast" economics meets a transitioning 21st century economy: start with gross, across the board underinvestment in public education, from pre-K to city colleges & public universities. Pile on deficits because the government needs to spend on is going to be debt-financed. Watch wages stagnate and unemployment climb even in up business cycles, and then shoot up when the business cycle goes flat, because all the tax cuts and resulting mountains of debt prevent counter-cyclical public sector spending. Don't forge the massive, always-growing inequality (and the resulting increases in political polarization) because the tax cuts are always somehow tilted towards either rich individuals or corporations, or both.

So, when I hear people say they are not excited about voting for Creigh, or that there is an enthusiasm gap, or that they just won’t vote, I just want to tell them to think about it this way:

When you vote, it is not for the sake of the politicians running for office, it is for your own sake.

Get out and vote for Creigh. Not for Creigh’s benefit, but for your own sake.

If Creigh is going to win this race, it will not be because of some magical canvassing or phone-banking operation that we haven’t yet seen;

If Creigh is going to win this race, it won’t be because he is suddenly going to become a smooth orator;

If Creigh is going to win this race, it won’t be because he will suddenly adopt the kinds of Progressive positions that many on the left would like to see;

And if Creigh is going to win this race, it won’t be because the mass of low-information voters out there who are getting their news from the MSM and who are tilting this race McDonnell’s way are suddenly going to get a new flood of information to change their minds.

Creigh will win this race because each of us on our own will have taken it upon ourselves to get out and vote, to get our friends and family out to vote.

It will be because each of is taking personal responsibility for the future of the Commonwealth.

The votes are out there.

Here’s a simple idea. Send an e-mails to five friends today who are not politically involved, and remind them how important it is to vote for Creigh.

Or the Virginia we have begun to take for granted, one that is moving in a inexorably positive and progressive direction, may be no more.

Does Bob McDonnell Believe in Evolution?

Well, now that we know Bob McDonnell is uncertain about whether human activity is causing climate change on our planet, I wonder what Mr. McDonnell's views are on Evolution and the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools?

I would be very curious to know, for example, whether Mr. McDonnell accepts the Theory of Evolution, in the sense that humans evolved into our present form, or whether is he a Biblical literalist like his mentor Pat Robertson, who completely rejects Evolution as an explanation for human existence and contends G-d created the universe in seven days as set forth in Genesis.

But even if Mr. McDonnell chooses not to share his personal belief on that score with the voters, he should specifically answer whether as Governor, would Bob McDonnell permit, or even advocate, the teaching of Intelligent Design in science classes along with Evolution, or any place else in Virginia's public schools? Would he limit the teaching of Evolution in any way in our public schools?

These are legitimate questions to ask for several reasons.

First, it involves the education of our children, and so these questions are not really about Mr. McDonnell's personal beliefs, but the extent to which those personal beliefs would manifest themselves into public policy.

Second, given his aforementioned comments about climate change, Mr. McDonnell has demonstrated that he views science through a lends of ideology. That is his right, but voters have an even more powerful right to know what he believes.

Finally, and not to beat a dead horse, there is Mr. McDonnell's background at Regent University. His alma mater is steeped in advocating the teaching of Creationism in public schools.

1. At a 2007 "Faith, Facts and Evolution Conference" held at the school, for example, seminars included the following, all of which are designed to train participants to create the impression that Intelligent Design is science that is on equal footing with Evolution, and should be taught in schools::

- Tools for Resolution: A Scientific Model of Creation – Dr. Hugh Ross
- Origin of Life: Comparing Models – Dr. Fazale Rana
- Scientific Challenges to the Evolution Model – Dr. Fazale Rana
- Scientific Support for the Creation Model – Dr. Fazale Rana
- Cosmic Design: Fine Tuning the Universe – Dr. Hugh Ross
- Cosmic Design (cont’d) – Dr. Hugh Ross

2. As for the school's founder, Rev. Robertson's belief in Creationism has gone much further than mere personal belief on his part, and into the realm of advocacy of teaching Creationism in public schools. In 2005, the Rev. Robertson condemned the town of Dover, PA, for example, suggesting G-d might smite it down, for ousting a school board that had advocated the teaching of Creationism as science.

3. Finally, consider this 2005 LTE from Dr. William Cox, Professor and Director of the Christian School Program at Regent, to the Virginia Pilot, stating:

If intelligent design is banned as theory from discussion on the basis of a “faith” orientation, so should evolution be banned. If evolution is allowed in the classroom, then so must be intelligent design. To do otherwise is to hold a double standard in both science and religion.

Of course, not all of the beliefs prevalent at Regent should automatically be attributed to Mr. McDonnell, but given his official positions with the school, and the school's mission to train graduates to implement Regent's fundamentalist tenets as public policy, it is fair to ask which ideas he adheres to and which ones he does not.

I don't really care what Mr. McDonnell thinks about Evolution privately, or what he chooses to teach his children about it.

But I profoundly care what he proposes to teach mine.

Bob McDonnell: Invisible With No Secrets to Conceal

The Washington Post’s endorsement of Creigh this morning (see Hokie Guru's post here) hits the nail right on the head when it comes to articulating why Creigh is the clearly superior choice to Bob McDonnell to be our next governor.

While I don’t typically subscribe to the notion that newspaper editorials make a huge difference in voters’ decisions – voters have a nasty habit for reaching their own decisions for their own reasons – I think this one will resonate for the remainder of the campaign and make a huge difference.

Not because the WaPo chose to endorse Creigh over McDonnell – that was expected – but because while the right-of-center Post editorial board tried to argue that its differences with Bob McDonnell “are on questions of policy,” they are barely able to hide the clear disdain they feel for the GOP candidate and the campaign he has run.

Consider the following characterizations of McDonnell from the editorial:

-- “Mr. McDonnell has staked out the intolerant terrain on his party's right wing[.]

-- “Mr. McDonnell lacks … political spine[.]”

-- “Mr. McDonnell … remains in denial.”

-- “Virginians should not confuse Mr. McDonnell's adept oratory for wisdom[.]”

And, of course, the worst cut of all:

-- “He is a dexterous politician.”

As this race has wound down to its final weeks, the question hanging heavy in the air for Democrats is whether Creigh can win it, in light of the numerous polls showing McDonnell beating him. The state’s Republicans are already filling Cabinet posts.

They should wait.

I’m not interested in arguing about the methodologies or results of these polls, and I don’t quibble that their internals are consistent with the overall results, although I would argue that this consistency is derived from the potential flaw all these polls share.

The question surrounding these polls is the extent to which their likely voter screens are accurately predicting who will show up on Election Day. In that regard, these polls do not so much show a persuadable electorate that is choosing McDonnell over Creigh as much as they suggest an electorate that has been stacked against Creigh from the start.

On the one hand, these polls may be accurate gauging an electorate ready to turn on Democrats as a result of various political and social forces largely beyond the control of either candidate in the race, and capturing the vicissitudes of the national discussion and political scene.

But given Virginia’s recent electoral history demonstrating a clear trend towards Democrats (even discounting 2008 as an once-in-a-lifetime election), and the circumstances of this specific race, the evidence suggests that that these polls are wrong because they are flying in the face of common sense.

It is not that I am unaware that many of my fellow Virginians simply see the issues and candidates from a different, more conservative perspective, than I do. There are loyal Republicans and Conservative ideologues that would vote for McDonnell even if it were proved he regularly engaged in bestiality.

I don’t even argue with Republicans comprising a larger share of likely voters than Democrats, even though this is not consistent with the trend either in Virginia or nationally, to the extent that this denotes some sort of enthusiasm gap.

Rather, it is the dominance McDonnell is showing in these polls among self-described Independents – even Conservative-leaning ones – that simply doesn’t track with the facts of the race, or the reality of each candidate so adeptly captured today by the Washington Post.

According to the Post, McDonnell has run “a disciplined, focused, policy-oriented campaign.” Perhaps. But as the Post makes clear, he has also run a dishonest and cowardly campaign.

I think it is hard for voters, confronted with this, to admit that it is really happening. Can any even slightly informed person actually believe Bob McDonnell is a moderate on the issue of choice or gay rights, as he pretends to be?

I have faith that when presented with the facts, independent-minded voters will make the right decisions. On issue after issue – transportation, education, the environment, the right to choose, anti-gay discrimination – analysis of the candidates’ positions and records demonstrate that Bob McDonnell will be a disaster for Virginia.

That is the fundamental issue in this race. And it is because the Post editorial so clearly explains this truth that it will resonate across the Commonwealth.

Washington Post Endorsed Creigh Deeds for Governor of Virginia

Great news... the Washington Post endorsed Creigh Deeds for Governor of Virginia.

And here's what they say about batshit crazy Taliban Bob McDonnell (who hides behind his wife and children in television commercials):

Mr. McDonnell has staked out the intolerant terrain on his party's right wing, fighting a culture war that seized his imagination as a law student in the Reagan era.

Yet Mr. McDonnell, champion of a revenue-starved status quo, remains in denial. He professes to feel the pain of Virginians struggling with financial hard times. In fact his transportation policy, a blueprint for stagnation and continuing deterioration, would subvert the state's prospects for economic recovery and long-term growth. And it would only deepen the misery of Northern Virginia commuters who already pay a terrible price -- economic, personal and psychological -- because of the state's long neglect of its roads.

As for Mr. McDonnell, he deserves credit for having run a disciplined, focused, policy-oriented campaign. As a candidate, a statewide official and a lawmaker, he has maintained a civil, personable manner. His intellectual agility, even temper and facility with the grit of policy have inspired the respect of colleagues, staffers and rivals. He is a dexterous politician.

Our differences with him are on questions of policy. The clamor surrounding his graduate dissertation from 1989, in which he disparaged working women, homosexuals, "fornicators" and others of whom he disapproved, has tended to obscure rather than illuminate fair questions about the sort of governor he would make. Based on his 14-year record as a lawmaker -- a record dominated by his focus on incendiary wedge issues -- we worry that Mr. McDonnell's Virginia would be one where abortion rights would be curtailed; where homosexuals would be treated as second-class citizens; where information about birth control would be hidden; and where the line between church and state could get awfully porous. That is a prescription for yesterday's Virginia, not tomorrow's.

Mr. McDonnell has inspired a worthwhile debate over privatizing liquor sales in Virginia, one of 18 states that control the wholesale and retail trade in spirits. But by suggesting the state could use the proceeds of privatization as an ongoing funding source for road improvements, he has played fast and loose with the facts -- first by plucking projected revenue figures from thin air and second by glossing over the question of what state services he would cut if the $100 million currently gleaned from annual liquor sales could be diverted for transportation.

Mr. McDonnell has sought to corner Mr. Deeds by focusing on debates in Washington over energy policy, labor union membership and other contentious federal issues. But a governor of Virginia can do little to influence the ideologically charged debates raging on Capitol Hill. Mr. McDonnell also has claimed he would be more effective at creating jobs. Yet while Mr. McDonnell has been an activist public servant, he has no significant record, either as a lawmaker or as attorney general, of promoting policies to encourage job growth.

ON NOVEMBER 3, 2009, VOTE FOR CREIGH DEEDS FOR GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA!!

Hat Tip - Blue Virginia - Taliban Bob McDonnell Scares off Meg Whitman

Meg Whitman apparently thinks that Taliban Bob is too right-wing for reality.

Lowell has more!!

Bob McDonnell's Macaca Moment - Sheila Johnson

It made Hardball :)



George Allen, Bob McDonnell, and Sheila Johnson = Macaca

Hat Tip - Not Larry Sabato - Sheila Johnson Does the Dirty for Bob McDonnell

It is absolute bullsh*t that Sheila Johnson would make fun of a political candidate with a slight speech impairment. That's what she did to Creigh Deeds, an honest, nice, hard-working, intelligent man. Not Larry Sabato has more. Now, to her credit, she did apologize later... but...



No apology from the Taliban Bob McDonnell campaign. Stay classy, Batshit Crazy Bob!!

VIRGINIA WOMEN BE VERY SCARED OF BOB MCDONNELL!!!

Taliban Bob McDonnell is not taking anything back from his batshit crazy Christan Broadcasting Network (CBN) thesis, which depicts his Pat Robertson-esque right-wing views on the role of women on society.



VOTE CREIGH DEEDS FOR GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA!!

Blue Virginia (Hat Tip): McDonnell "All Porn Makes You Gay" Thesis Story Makes Rachael Maddow

Apparently, Taliban Bob McDonnell thinks that pornography makes young boys gay.



Lowell has more on Batshit Crazy, Bob McDonnell and the story of his thesis that made Rachel Maddow's television show on MSNBC.

VOTE CREIGH DEEDS FOR GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA.

Righty Blog Roundup: Conservatives reduced to laughable attacks on the WaPo

Over at Conservative blogs, bloggers have apparently abandoned any attempt to defend Bob McDonnell in connection with his thesis. Sure, the campaign and its defenders in the Righty Blogosphere have argued that the thesis is twenty years old, or that it is dirty pool to even discuss it, ot that it is irrelevant, but nowhere, as far as I can tell, have Conservatives even attempted to defend the views McDonnell expresses in the thesis, as opposed to trying to explain why they don't matter or have evolved into more Progressive attitudes.

Indeed, Righty blogs have ceased discussing McDonnell at all.

Consider, for example, the last six days of posts at Too Conservative, one of the better right-leaning blogs in the Commonwealth:

Sept 16:

* Rich Anderson Video

Sept. 15:

* 9/15 Reports: House of Delegates Round-Up
* 9/15 Statewide Fundraising Numbers

Sept. 14:

* NRA Endorses Bob (the sole post about McDonnell, the entire commentary of which reads, “Great news for the campaign.”
* You Report: Sign Wars

Sept. 10:

* HD-42: Dave Albo Up On Television
* HD-41: Bwana Goes After “Dug Out” Dave Marsden
* Lt. Governor Bolling’s First Ad
* HD-86: The Stevens Miller Mess He Hopes to Leave Behind

Other blogs with less class than Too Conservative have turned instead to simply attacking both Creigh and the Washington Post, the latter apparently for breaking the thesis story.

Of course, the argument that the Post broke the story in order to damage McDonnell's candidacy doesn't hold up because it was McDonnell himself who tipped WaPo reporter Amy Gardner off to the existence of the thesis in the first place.

Well, it had to happen, I guess. Somehow, some way, that inconvenient fact had to be dealt with.

A post this evening at Conservative blog Bearing Drift that tries to do that by attacking Gardner caught my attention for two reasons: first, for its sheer idiocy; and second, for showing the depths to which McDonnell's acolytes have to sink in order to plead on his behalf.

You can link to the post here:

Oppo-research on Bolling papers indicates McDonnell thesis was not an innocent find

Let me see if I can explain the logic of this post.

Bill Bolling, it seems, told a radio interviewer that shortly after the McDonnell thesis story broke, he learned that Democrats were doing some oppo research on his college writings.

Well, that seems to have made perfect sense to Bolling. Makes sense to me, too. Heck, based on the onging fallout in Thesis-acaca, there's obviously gold in them thar theses! I mean, of course they are being researched, by Democratic oppo-research teams, as well as Republican ones. Sheesh.

But here is what Bearing Drift then concludes from this set of facts:

Bolling said the call came shortly after the story broke, so it’s possible the Democrats were clued into doing this type of oppo-research on the rest of the field after reading the story. However, it’s awfully coincidental.

Got that? The obvious order of event, that Democrats were clued into the oppo-research of old college writings of other candidates by the thesis story, is not likely and logical, merely "possible ... [but] awfully coincidental."

And from that, Bearing Drift asserts about Gardner:

She [Gardner] went onto write “McDonnell brought up the paper in reference to a pair of Republican congressmen whom he interviewed as part of his research. McDonnell then offered: ‘I wrote my thesis on welfare policy.’”

Yet she was very quick to look into the thesis after the interview.

Was this passing comment in the interview that interesting to her? Was it vitally important to her investigative research to learn more about it?

Not likely…especially given this new piece of information:

Now, let me get this straight. Research undertaken by Democrats following the publication of Garner’s article on McDonnell’s thesis is evidence that Gardner was not telling the truth about learning of the thesis from McDonnell himself?

Pathetically, this is what Republicans have been reduced to in trying to defend Bob McDonnell and his indefensible thesis. This reasoning makes less sense than the logic I used to convince myself last Sunday that, yes, the Redskins could conceivable beat the Giants in the opener, and that is saying a lot.

In all seriousness, if Bob McDonnell would only come clean and admit that this thesis reflects his true feelings on these issues, then he can get on with his campaign. He can defend his views, and voters can decide for themselves whether his positions matter to them or not. He won't do that, of course, because as he knows, voters would overwhelmingly reject his extremist views.

But denying the obvious truth, and instead falsely and maliciously attacking the credibility and motivations of reporters who are doing a pretty good job, is unfair, unwarranted and uncalled for.

Not to mention amusing.

McDonnell Campaign Running Scared

Internal e-mails from Bob McDonnell's campaign reveal that they are worried about the impact of his Chistian Broadcasting Network master's degree thesis (Hat Tip: NLS).

Aznew and the Hokie Guru have written extensively about Taliban Bob's extreme views on gays, lesbians, women, and several other topics from his thesis here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here. and here.

McDonnell campaign spokersperson, Taylor Thornley, actually gives 30 talking points to supporters to use when writing letters to the editor on behalf of McDonnell. Apparently, Taliban Bob is worried that the thesis he wrote (when he was 34 effin' years old) might have an impact on women, independent, and moderate voters. Duh?!?!?

Washington Post Roundup - What the Voter Needs to Know about Bob McDonnell

College football season started recently so if you're like me, you're glued to the television or you are watching this great game in person (like me at Lane Stadium in Blacksburg, VA... GO HOKIES!!) on Saturdays (or Sundays if you are an NFL fan). That means you might not get the time to read the Washington Post newspaper or catch up on political news as often as you would like. So, the purpose of this post is just to give you, the reader, a quick summary of the news about Taliban Bob McDonnell, the Republican Party candidate for Governor in Virginia (and his ads on television do not say that he is a Republican... he's lying... if you omit this fact, you are a liar). Here we go:

• On Monday, August 17, 2009, a Washington Post editorial suggested that it is completely legitimate to question Bob McDonnell's record on social issues. After all, "determining access and limits on abortion remains to a large extent within a state's, and a governor's, purview." And Bob McDonnell "sponsored 35 bill to restrict access to the procedure." Bob McDonnell is trying to remake is image as a centrist, but anyone who sponsors 35 bills to restrict access to abortion is basically part of the Taliban wing of the Republican Party.
  
  
• On Sunday, August 30, 2009, Amy Gardner broke the story about Bob McDonnell's thesis that he wrote for his master's graduate degree from Christian Broadcasting Network University (the school was founded by Pat Robertson and is now named Regent University). In the thesis, Bob McDonnell stated that working women are detrimental to the family and feminisim is among the "real enimies of traditional family." In Bob McDonnell's world, IF A WOMAN IS RAPED, she should be denied the right to have an abortion. And if you are single or gay or a woman, good luck in Bob McDonnell's world.
  
  
• On Tuesday, September 1, 2009, the Washington Post stressed in its editorial that Bob McDonnell pursued a socially conservative agenda (largely in line with his thesis) over his 14 years in the Commonwealth's General Assembly. Bob McDonnell is trying to remake himself into a centrist politician... but people deserve to know where the man's views are different today. We think he is a "Culture Warrier."
  
  
• On Tuesday, September 1, 2009, popular Virginia governor, Tim Kaine, suggested that the thesis would serve is a blueprint for how Bob McDonnell would govern the Commonwealth. We couldn't agree.
  
  
• On Wednesday, September 2, 2009, Washington Post Columnist, Ruth Marcus, really gives us the cold hard truth on Bob McDonnell's thesis that we've referred to several times in this post. Bob McDonnell wrote this anti-women, anti-gay, and anti-single people manifesto when he was 34 effin' years old. Bob McDonnell was not a "young college student" at the time. According to Marcus, "McDonnell, actually, was 34 in 1989. He had already earned a bachelor's and master's degree in business and served in the Army. He was getting a combined law and second master's degree -- while interning at the U.S. House Republican Policy Committee and preparing to run for the Virginia House of Delegates." So, Virginia Voters, this was Bob McDonnell's political philosophy... it was not just an academic requirement... it was how he planned to govern. And Bob doesn't want to talk about these issues in the general election, but it's okay for him to rev up his base with these Tailban social conservative stances? Yeah, right.
  
  
• On Thursday, September 3, 2009, Robert McCartney from the Washington Post questions Bob McDonnell's theory that the Christian Broadcating Network thesis is "old news." McCartney questioned the mild response from the McDonnell campaign that the thesis was just a 20-year old term paper. "It was a thesis for a combined master's and law degree. When he wrote it, McDonnell was a 34-year-old business executive and former Army officer, married with two children (he now has five), intent on launching a political career to offer what his school, Regent University, proclaims in its motto as "Christian leadership to change the world." READ: THIS PAPER IS NOT A YOUTHFUL INDISCRETION. Virginia voters do not want someone who is intolerant of women, gays, and single people as their governor.
  
  
• And you know what? in 2003, Bob McDonnell stated that certain homosexual conduct is a disqualification for judicial appointment in Virginia. You can find more about this in Amy Gardner's Washington Post (published on Sunday, September 13, 2009) column right here. And I agree with NLS; Amy Gardner is on track for a Pulitzer Prize.
  

As voters, you need to read these Washington Post news columns and stories in order to see the real Bob McDonnell. Bob McDonnell stances on social issues, gays, women, and single people should scare you to death. You need to be informed when you go to the voting booth.

All You Need To Know About Bob McDonnell

Dan Snyder supports him.

And we all know what a great eye he has for personnel.

Bob McDonnell's Amazing Record of Lying

Bob McDonnell’s disastrous interview this morning with Mark Plotkin demonstrated the extent to which his candidacy so far has been built on a foundation of lies.

Lowell at Blue Virginia does a nice job of detailing this morning’s bullshit here. If only that were extent of it.

The fact is that Bob McDonnell has been pulling this nonsense on Virginians since the beginning of this campaign. Bob McDonnell knows that if Virginians knew who he really was, he would lose this election in a landslide. That is why he has been refusing to talk about his thesis, and refusing to talk about his record. And when he does speak about them, you just can’t get a straight answer out of him.

But Bob McDonnell is proving to be the Lillian Hellman of this campaign, the play writer of whom a critic once said, “Every word she wrote is a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the.’”

It is really quite an amazing record.

I’ll say this as well. Bob McDonnell is not only a frequent liar when it comes to his record and presenting himself to voters, he is unusually good at it.

We have been documenting Bob McDonnell’s now voluminous record of dishonesty, dissembling and distortion for a while. Here are some posts dealing with the issue of McDonnell’s lack of honesty:

* The Sublime Deceptions of Bob McDonnell (September 6, 2009)

* Silent Bob Is Speaking Loud and Clear (September 4, 2009)

* McDonnell’s Stunning Lack of Honesty (August 31, 2009)

*Meet Bob “Dubya” McDonnell: Will We Get Fooled Again? (August 23, 2009)

*McDonnell Wants It Both Ways In Flag Flap (August 13, 2009)

* Bob McDonnell on Off-Shore Drilling: More Distortion (August 3, 2009)

* Will Bob McDonnell Be Able To Fool Enough of the People Enough of the Time To Get Elected? (July 29, 2009)

Question For Bob McDonnell: Would You Invoke States' Rights To Keep Health Care Reform Out Of Virginia?

TO: Bob McDonnell:
FROM: The Virginia Democrat
SUBJECT: Your Ideolgy

Minnesota Public Radio reported yesterday that:

In a Thursday night conference call hosted by the Republican Governor's Association, a caller asked whether governors would invoke state's rights if the health care bill is passed. Tim Pawlenty said it's a possibility.

"Depending on what the federal government comes out with here, asserting the 10th Amendment may be a viable option but we don't know the details. As one of the other callers said, we can't get the other callers, we said we can't get the President to outline what he does or doesn't support in any detail. So we'll have to see, I would have to say that it's a possibility."

Pawlenty also said he hoped Republican governors across the country will get "more assertive" about addressing state's rights and possibly start suing the federal government.

Well, Gov. Pawlenty was just here campaigning for you. You have spoken about states' rights being an important part of your ideology. You have cited states' rights in arguing against Virginia's citizens gaining the benefit of extended Federal unemployment benefits.

Did you discuss this with Gov. Pawlenty?

You oppose the President's reform efforts.

If you are elected governor, would you invoke states' rights to unilaterally keep Virginia from participating in National health care reform?