Friday, February 20, 2009
RPV Day Notes - Part 2
Yesterday I wrote about the first ever RPV Day. What follows is a continuation of that.
State Senator Steve Martin spoke, followed by Dels. Bill Janis, and Morgan Griffith. Janis was definitely the best (and most captivating) speaker on the RPV Day lineup, while I learned the most from Del. Griffith, the House Majority Leader.
This was the first time I've ever heard Griffith give a speech. I've heard Martin and Janis plenty of times. Steve Martin addressed issues relating to voter fraud, and defended statutes making it necessary to show identification in order to vote. Martin stated that long ago when communities were smaller and more people lived in less urbanized areas, election officers (poll workers) were people who knew their communities and its denizens very well. Because of this, it was easy to identify those who were trying to create election fraud. Because our society has grown, it's gotten tougher to stop fraud. I had not thought of this before, and so found Steve Martin's discussion both interesting and salient.
The oft animated Janis went next. He told the story of Murphy the Irishman, who while walking home from the pub one day had a knife pulled on him and placed near his neck. Murphy was asked, "Are ye a Catholic or Protestant?" Murphy, knowing that given either answer he would be badly wounded, decided to say he's a Jew. Because, after all, the man who pulled the knife likely hates either Catholics, or Protestants -- but not both. Murphy considered this a safe pick. But Murphy got cut because the knife-wielding rouge was Muslim (and presumably didn't care for Catholics, Protestants, or Jews!)
Janis concluded his story by revealing its moral: It's better to be hated for who you are, than to be loved for who you aren't.
Griffith rounded out the speakers. He said that other than the smoking ban the budget, there really haven't been too many front page issues this year coming out the General Assembly. Griffith acknowledged the lopsided support for the smoking ban among the public, and revealed that the press frequently portrays the Republicans as the party of "no" and that some Republicans in the leadership pushed through the smoking ban to refute this stereotype, and also because some Republicans in urban areas need to "look good." Apparently restricting people's individual liberty and property rights is "in." Whether or not it'll help, it's bad policy. Hrumpf!
Griffith took note of a curiosity in the House of Delegates: Dels. Gear, Griffith, and Gilbert (all R)frequently cancel out the votes of Dels. Eisenberg, Ebbin, and Englin (all D), and vice-versa.
Griffith lamented over Kaine's lack of expediency in releasing 3 billion dollars in bond money for new roads -- a project Republicans enacted in 2007. Griffith predicts that Kaine won't release any bond money until after the November elections, as a sly and intellectually dishonest way to make it look like transportation is bad due to Republican leadership.
Griffith concluded that we've got to get back to the notion of common people running for office who are willing to carry their party's banner (even if it's a sure loss) and we seem to have lost that spirit. He said this goes especially for anyone involved in insurance, law, or real estate as this is a way for young professionals to get their name out to the community, if nothing else.
State Senator Steve Martin spoke, followed by Dels. Bill Janis, and Morgan Griffith. Janis was definitely the best (and most captivating) speaker on the RPV Day lineup, while I learned the most from Del. Griffith, the House Majority Leader.
This was the first time I've ever heard Griffith give a speech. I've heard Martin and Janis plenty of times. Steve Martin addressed issues relating to voter fraud, and defended statutes making it necessary to show identification in order to vote. Martin stated that long ago when communities were smaller and more people lived in less urbanized areas, election officers (poll workers) were people who knew their communities and its denizens very well. Because of this, it was easy to identify those who were trying to create election fraud. Because our society has grown, it's gotten tougher to stop fraud. I had not thought of this before, and so found Steve Martin's discussion both interesting and salient.
The oft animated Janis went next. He told the story of Murphy the Irishman, who while walking home from the pub one day had a knife pulled on him and placed near his neck. Murphy was asked, "Are ye a Catholic or Protestant?" Murphy, knowing that given either answer he would be badly wounded, decided to say he's a Jew. Because, after all, the man who pulled the knife likely hates either Catholics, or Protestants -- but not both. Murphy considered this a safe pick. But Murphy got cut because the knife-wielding rouge was Muslim (and presumably didn't care for Catholics, Protestants, or Jews!)
Janis concluded his story by revealing its moral: It's better to be hated for who you are, than to be loved for who you aren't.
Griffith rounded out the speakers. He said that other than the smoking ban the budget, there really haven't been too many front page issues this year coming out the General Assembly. Griffith acknowledged the lopsided support for the smoking ban among the public, and revealed that the press frequently portrays the Republicans as the party of "no" and that some Republicans in the leadership pushed through the smoking ban to refute this stereotype, and also because some Republicans in urban areas need to "look good." Apparently restricting people's individual liberty and property rights is "in." Whether or not it'll help, it's bad policy. Hrumpf!
Griffith took note of a curiosity in the House of Delegates: Dels. Gear, Griffith, and Gilbert (all R)frequently cancel out the votes of Dels. Eisenberg, Ebbin, and Englin (all D), and vice-versa.
Griffith lamented over Kaine's lack of expediency in releasing 3 billion dollars in bond money for new roads -- a project Republicans enacted in 2007. Griffith predicts that Kaine won't release any bond money until after the November elections, as a sly and intellectually dishonest way to make it look like transportation is bad due to Republican leadership.
Griffith concluded that we've got to get back to the notion of common people running for office who are willing to carry their party's banner (even if it's a sure loss) and we seem to have lost that spirit. He said this goes especially for anyone involved in insurance, law, or real estate as this is a way for young professionals to get their name out to the community, if nothing else.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Notes on This Year's RPV Day - Part 1
Today marked the first ever Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) Day, which was held on Capitol Square in Richmond.
Just as a bevvy of non-profit and advocacy organizations hold lobby days year in and year out, RPV decided to have one for the first time this year. A lobby day allows members of a statewide organization to meet with their legislators at their Richmond offices when the General Assembly is in session, and furthermore provides a social opportunity for members to get together at a roughly central location to enjoy camaraderie and to fellowship. (For me, today had more a social purpose, as I can head down to Capitol Square every day of the week, if I wanted to.)
Technically, RPV Day in its entirety was held from 9:30 a.m. until 4 p.m., however due to my academic obligations I had to duck out at about noon. I took pictures, and even got a photograph with Jeff Frederick, the party chair. The photographs in their entirety can be viewed at this public link, here. What follows is notes. The following is not the day in its entirety.
I rolled out of bed at an earlier than usual 6:30 a.m. so I could bathe and get dressed. I then went to my 8 o'clock World Regional Geography class, then took the bus down to Capitol Square. I checked in with the RPV staff handling and received a folder containing the contents needed for the day. As I went inside the meeting room I saw a mix of people, taking into account the span of Republicans who came out for RPV Day. The attendees differed in race, and age, with most conventional categories represented.
I barely had enough time to eat my bagel -- let alone, sit down -- when RPV Executive Director Allison Coccia got the party started when she introduced a special surprise guest, Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling. (Outgoing Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell spoke later. Technically you'd expect both of these gentlemen would have been given prime speaking spots well in advance, but they weren't listed on the docket. Hence the surprise.)
Bolling set the stage. He spoke about the "787 billion pieces of manna" raining down from the heavens -- a sarcastic reference to the recent "stimulus package" of Obama's -- a package Bolling termed a "spendulus" for "ongoing government programs." Bolling spoke of how he opposes it, but is cognizant that 4.5 billion dollars are destined for Virginia anyway, and demands that these dollars be spent responsibly. Bolling also stressed that this is "one-time money" whose delivery must be taken by September 30, 2010 and that the incoming federal funds can give the General Assembly an "intoxicating illusion."
Bolling then fired a penultimate salvo: he lamented over Gov. Kaine's confiscatory policy, noting that the administration has "habitually missed the revenue estimates" year in and year out, thus creating the need to decimate the Rainy Day Fund.
Bolling concluded by saying that Virginians don't really care if something (e.g., an idea) has a D or an R next to it; they simply wonder if it is good government that will have a positive impact on people's lives. Bolling noted that George Allen did not become Governor in 1993 by dandying about the state telling people he had ideas that were Republican; rather, Allen advocated his own agenda that just happened to resonate with people. I found this was a reoccuring theme of RPV Day.
(Part 2 coming tomorrow)
Just as a bevvy of non-profit and advocacy organizations hold lobby days year in and year out, RPV decided to have one for the first time this year. A lobby day allows members of a statewide organization to meet with their legislators at their Richmond offices when the General Assembly is in session, and furthermore provides a social opportunity for members to get together at a roughly central location to enjoy camaraderie and to fellowship. (For me, today had more a social purpose, as I can head down to Capitol Square every day of the week, if I wanted to.)
Technically, RPV Day in its entirety was held from 9:30 a.m. until 4 p.m., however due to my academic obligations I had to duck out at about noon. I took pictures, and even got a photograph with Jeff Frederick, the party chair. The photographs in their entirety can be viewed at this public link, here. What follows is notes. The following is not the day in its entirety.
I rolled out of bed at an earlier than usual 6:30 a.m. so I could bathe and get dressed. I then went to my 8 o'clock World Regional Geography class, then took the bus down to Capitol Square. I checked in with the RPV staff handling and received a folder containing the contents needed for the day. As I went inside the meeting room I saw a mix of people, taking into account the span of Republicans who came out for RPV Day. The attendees differed in race, and age, with most conventional categories represented.
I barely had enough time to eat my bagel -- let alone, sit down -- when RPV Executive Director Allison Coccia got the party started when she introduced a special surprise guest, Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling. (Outgoing Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate Bob McDonnell spoke later. Technically you'd expect both of these gentlemen would have been given prime speaking spots well in advance, but they weren't listed on the docket. Hence the surprise.)
Bolling set the stage. He spoke about the "787 billion pieces of manna" raining down from the heavens -- a sarcastic reference to the recent "stimulus package" of Obama's -- a package Bolling termed a "spendulus" for "ongoing government programs." Bolling spoke of how he opposes it, but is cognizant that 4.5 billion dollars are destined for Virginia anyway, and demands that these dollars be spent responsibly. Bolling also stressed that this is "one-time money" whose delivery must be taken by September 30, 2010 and that the incoming federal funds can give the General Assembly an "intoxicating illusion."
Bolling then fired a penultimate salvo: he lamented over Gov. Kaine's confiscatory policy, noting that the administration has "habitually missed the revenue estimates" year in and year out, thus creating the need to decimate the Rainy Day Fund.
Bolling concluded by saying that Virginians don't really care if something (e.g., an idea) has a D or an R next to it; they simply wonder if it is good government that will have a positive impact on people's lives. Bolling noted that George Allen did not become Governor in 1993 by dandying about the state telling people he had ideas that were Republican; rather, Allen advocated his own agenda that just happened to resonate with people. I found this was a reoccuring theme of RPV Day.
(Part 2 coming tomorrow)
Monday, February 16, 2009
Brownlee's Foray into New Media
Earlier today I received a Facebook message from Patrick Murphrey with the John Brownlee for Attorney General campaign to inform me of candidate John Brownlee's foray into new media.
Brownlee is seeking the Republican Party of Virginia's nomination for Attorney General of Virginia. Also seeking the GOP nod are Dave Foster and Ken Cuccinelli.
Right off the bat, let me say that I generally support the death penalty, even though as a Roman Catholic and faithful citizen, I realize that I should oppose it. Either way, it's not my top issue.
One of Brownlee's more odious pieces is a video, "John Brownlee Discusses Virginia's Triggerman Rule", which has been uploaded into his YouTube channel. In this video, Brownlee speaks to an audience -- perhaps at a campaign breakfast, Rotary Club meeting, etc., about the "triggerman rule" -- a rule that judging from a Google search is Virginia-centric, if not Virginia-specific.
Thrice describing the triggerman rule as "anti-justice" in his video, Brownlee says:
Brownlee then goes on to bemoan a situation by which an accomplice to a murderer couldn't receive the death penalty in Virginia because he isn't the "triggerman" (hence the term). Presumably, the accomplice should be able to receive the death penalty, too, because he was every bit as intent on killing as the triggerman, argues Brownlee.
In my judgement, Brownlee's argument makes little to no sense. Accomplices aren't murderers because they didn't do the tangible killing. So they shouldn't receive the death penalty. This is why there are lengthy prison sentences.
Brownlee points out that the triggerman rule made is difficult to convict (and sentence to death) John Allen Muhammad of the Beltway shootings. But by Brownlee's own admission, Muhammad was successfully convicted and sentenced to death due to terrorism statutes. This makes it sound like the triggerman rule was not an impediment for the prosecution, as other statutes exist.
Maybe this is just a difference of opinion. I can't exactly lay my finger on it, but with all due respect to John Brownlee, I feel there's something about this guy that's just not right.
Brownlee is seeking the Republican Party of Virginia's nomination for Attorney General of Virginia. Also seeking the GOP nod are Dave Foster and Ken Cuccinelli.
Right off the bat, let me say that I generally support the death penalty, even though as a Roman Catholic and faithful citizen, I realize that I should oppose it. Either way, it's not my top issue.
One of Brownlee's more odious pieces is a video, "John Brownlee Discusses Virginia's Triggerman Rule", which has been uploaded into his YouTube channel. In this video, Brownlee speaks to an audience -- perhaps at a campaign breakfast, Rotary Club meeting, etc., about the "triggerman rule" -- a rule that judging from a Google search is Virginia-centric, if not Virginia-specific.
Thrice describing the triggerman rule as "anti-justice" in his video, Brownlee says:
We have a rule in Virginia, it's called the triggerman rule, and it is an anti-justice rule. It's an anti-justice rule. And what it means is that only the person who literally pulls the trigger or plunges in the knife can be subjected to capital punishment in Virginia.
Brownlee then goes on to bemoan a situation by which an accomplice to a murderer couldn't receive the death penalty in Virginia because he isn't the "triggerman" (hence the term). Presumably, the accomplice should be able to receive the death penalty, too, because he was every bit as intent on killing as the triggerman, argues Brownlee.
In my judgement, Brownlee's argument makes little to no sense. Accomplices aren't murderers because they didn't do the tangible killing. So they shouldn't receive the death penalty. This is why there are lengthy prison sentences.
Brownlee points out that the triggerman rule made is difficult to convict (and sentence to death) John Allen Muhammad of the Beltway shootings. But by Brownlee's own admission, Muhammad was successfully convicted and sentenced to death due to terrorism statutes. This makes it sound like the triggerman rule was not an impediment for the prosecution, as other statutes exist.
Maybe this is just a difference of opinion. I can't exactly lay my finger on it, but with all due respect to John Brownlee, I feel there's something about this guy that's just not right.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Sabrina, The Teenage Mother
Twittering
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Jeff Frederick's Pending Announcement
This week, state delegate and Republican Party of Virginia chairman Jeff Frederick (R-52) -- and perhaps his wife Amy, too -- will make a major announcement. Jeff is asking that those who want to be the first to know sign up for emails at his website, www.va52.com.
Who's willing to bet Jeff will announce that he has decided to split into two via mitosis in order to serve as party chairman and Delegate?
Who's willing to bet Jeff will announce that he has decided to split into two via mitosis in order to serve as party chairman and Delegate?
Monday, February 09, 2009
Conservative Virginia GOP Leaders Stand on Principle: Oppose Smoking Ban
It is often pondered by people what makes conservatives a different breed: they stand on principle.
I just received a fiery email this afternoon from Mike Wade, the chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia's 3rd Congressional District organization. Wade, of Hampton, and fifteen other conservative leaders in the Virginia GOP have signed onto a memo to all Republican members of the Virginia General Assembly.
Titled, "HB 1703 is Antithetical To Our Party Principles", as I started reading through it I was amazed at the clarity of thought and exposition. I am reposting it below, followed by commentary.
Major kudos go out to Chairman Jeff Frederick (whose name appears to have been misspelled in the letter) and his fifteen co-signers. It is nice to see the state party's upper brass remind its officeholders in the statehouse that intrusions in the marketplace are unconservative, unRepublican, and that House Bill 1703 cannot stand.
I felt the exact same way in 2007 (an election year) when the (then) Republican-majority General Assembly pushed through the regrettable HB 3202. Not enough can be said about how bad this bill was. It was unconservative, done in an election year, and on the aggregate hurt the Republican members in November.
It's now 5:15pm at the time of me writing this, and since offices are closed, I'm waiting till early tomorrow to call my delegate Glenn Oder (R-94, Newport News) to tell him that this cannot stand.
I just received a fiery email this afternoon from Mike Wade, the chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia's 3rd Congressional District organization. Wade, of Hampton, and fifteen other conservative leaders in the Virginia GOP have signed onto a memo to all Republican members of the Virginia General Assembly.
Titled, "HB 1703 is Antithetical To Our Party Principles", as I started reading through it I was amazed at the clarity of thought and exposition. I am reposting it below, followed by commentary.
2/09/09
To Our Republican Members of the General Assembly,
As members of the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia, we wish to remind you of the following core tenet of our Party’s creed: We Believe: That the free enterprise system is the most productive supplier of human needs and economic justice. We write to remind you of this key element of our Republican Creed because we understand that HB 1703 is moving on a fast track to a vote on Tuesday, and as our duly elected Representatives we urge you to vote NO. The passage of such legislation is completely antithetical to our Party’s core free market principles. This not about smoking. This is about unnecessary government intrusion into the private sector. This unconscionable encroachment will cost those affected their ability to operate a free enterprise and further alienate our Republican base.
Because the proponents of the smoking ban cite huge public support for this type of legislation, we understand one’s inclination to support it. But you will find the owners and patrons of smoking establishments will disagree. This legislation will make it difficult,if not impossible, for many small businesses to operate in Virginia.As you must know, bar or restaurant owners will be forced to make expensive renovations to meet the requirements of HB 1703 in order to offer their patrons a choice. This is another unfunded mandate that will cut into businesses’ profits. How will you explain the loss of revenues from successful businesses that fail from their loss of smoking patrons? Who will enforce this legislation? Where will the money be found to add the needed bureaucracy? In a struggling economy, to increase government enforcement and decrease revenue is completely flawed logic, particularly in an election year.
Consumers already have the ability to decide if they wish to frequent an establishment based upon whether that establishment does or does not allow smoking. We urge you to allow the marketplace to influence private sector activity instead of relying upon heavy-handed, intrusive government regulation. As members of the General Assembly, we believe you should be particularly concerned about passing this bill in an election year. Supporting HB 1703 will discourage and demoralize the Republican base and confuse those that view us as the Party of free market principles. Our Gubernatorial nominee understands our principles and position in regard to the smoking ban, and we believe you should take heed of his position. Every member should reconsider their support of this bill, and we are proud of all members who have already voted no. To allow this legislation to pass will compromise the integrity of members who have stayed true to Republican principles and faithfully worked against this legislation.
As a Party we do not need to create a divide between members and the Republican base by supporting legislation that is inconsistent with our Party’s core principles. It is our greatest hope that this legislation will be voted down as to avoid intra-party conflict. Our goal is a Republican Party united on principles and vision, standing ready to win in 2009.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeff Fredrick [sic], RPV Chairman
Mike Thomas, 1st Vice- Chair
Kathy Hayden Terry, National Commiteewoman
Kevin Gentry, Eastern Vice Chairman
Juanita Balenger, Eastern Vice Chairwoman
Trixie Averill, Western Vice Chairwoman
Tom Foley, 1st District Chairman
Gary Byler, 2nd District Chairman
Mike Wade, 3rd District Chairman
Jack Wilson, 4th District Chairman
Tucker Watson, 5th District Chairman
Fred Anderson, 6th District Chairman
Lynwood Cobb, 7th District Chairman
Mike Ginsberg, 8th District Chairman
Michelle Jenkins, 9th District Chairman
Becky Steckel, 11th District Chairman
Major kudos go out to Chairman Jeff Frederick (whose name appears to have been misspelled in the letter) and his fifteen co-signers. It is nice to see the state party's upper brass remind its officeholders in the statehouse that intrusions in the marketplace are unconservative, unRepublican, and that House Bill 1703 cannot stand.
I felt the exact same way in 2007 (an election year) when the (then) Republican-majority General Assembly pushed through the regrettable HB 3202. Not enough can be said about how bad this bill was. It was unconservative, done in an election year, and on the aggregate hurt the Republican members in November.
It's now 5:15pm at the time of me writing this, and since offices are closed, I'm waiting till early tomorrow to call my delegate Glenn Oder (R-94, Newport News) to tell him that this cannot stand.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
