Washington Post on Kaine's "First Major Showdown"

By: Lowell
Published On: 1/18/2006 2:00:00 AM

The Washington Post has an editorial today that strongly supports Gov. Kaine on his land-use planning ideas.  The Post also takes a much-deserved swipe at the crybaby real estate developers (wah wah!), calling them "hysterical" for claiming that "the governor's plan would mean 'death' for the industry."  The Post rightly points out that this over-the-top statement "ignores the reality that developers are doing quite well, thank you, in other states where local governments have the clout that Mr. Kaine proposes." 

In fact, as the Post explains, "By proposing that localities be empowered to reject rezoning requests that would overwhelm roads, Mr. Kaine is restoring balance to the development equation."  Exactly right.  Which is why Kaine has pushed his "solid strategy for connecting land use and transportation planning," and why this strategy has resonated so powerfully among suburban voters. 

On the developers' side, of course, they've had a nice gravy train going for years now, so their attitude obviously is "why should we give it up?"  But guess what, guys, the gravy train is coming to an end, in what the Post calls "Mr. Kaine's first major showdown as governor."  And something tells me that when Kaine's proposal passes the General Assembly and is signed into law, the world won't come to an end for developers.  In spite of all their frantic lobbying, crying and complaining (wah wah!). 

Look, Virginia today is in gridlock, and Gov. Kaine's proposal on land-use planning is just step #1 in getting us out of it.  That's why everyone who cares about this issue should call, write, or e-mail their state representatives and let them know exactly how they feel.  For contact information, click here.  Remember that by making your voices heard now, you are counterbalancing the entrenched and powerful special interests on this issue and helping Gov. Kaine help you.

P.S.  Lee Hockstader points out why Kaine is a "man in a hurry" in "dealing with the state's No. 1 problem: its sclerotic road system."  Among other things, Hockstader notes that "[u]nless new money is found, the state estimates that every nickel of its transportation budget will be spent on maintenance by 2018, leaving nothing for new or wider roads, let alone pricey rail projects."  And he arguest that Republicans will be making a big mistake if they "[stand] against the first governor in a generation who is trying to do something about traffic."

Comments



No way.......no way (Soccer Mom - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
No way.......no way on earth anybody could or would ask McDonnell whether he has had oral sex!  With a man?  With a woman?  With THAT man?  With THAT woman?

AND NO WAY in the universe would anyone in their right mind answer such a question, much less say that they "can't remember"!#!!@!!!

Holy shades of ASHCROFT and Bill Bennett....this is really, really scary ....



Unfortunately Deeds (Alex - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
Unfortunately Deeds hasn't done a very good job of getting himself out there, especially after the NRA endorsement.


Soccermom -- nobody (I.Publius - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
Soccermom -- nobody ever asked Bob if he'd had oral sex.  A reporter asked whether Delegate McDonnell had ever violated the Crimes Against Nature Act.  The question was posed in jest, and it was answered in jest. But those facts won't stop the far left from continually bringing it up as if it's an actual issue. 

Anyone with even the slightest understanding of Virginia state politics could've seen these poll numbers coming a mile away -- or at least back when the candidates announced.  McDonnell is the perfect AG candidate, and he'll win by double digits. 

I like Creigh Deeds a lot -- he's a terrific guy and a great citizen-legislator.  In fact, I look forward to Creigh eventually moving the other side of the aisle, where he belongs.  Then it'll be fun to watch those who now sing his praises actually start saying what they really think... (just like they did when another SW Virginian, Virgil Goode, switched parties).



I haven't seen so mu (Jambon - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
I haven't seen so much as ONE Creigh Deeds sign.  And very few Bryne signs as well.  But there are  TONS of McDonnel and Boilling signs up around Oakton, Fair Oaks, Fair Lakes, Centreville etc. 

I'd be happy to help put signs up.  The campaign should be posting on the Nova Kerry & Dean listserves about doing sign blitzes. 



1) When the religio (OnBackground - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
1)  When the religious smears start, I know the campaign is just about over. I'm getting a little tired of the Taliban Bob line being used on an army vet and father of a soldier now in the Middle East. What you will hear from me is Creigh is a first rate guy, and my support for Bob in no way diminishes my respect for Creigh. 2) Just finished a daylong Southside swing, 360, 58, Virginia 40 -- saw a few, and I mean few Kaine signs, zero Byrne and maybe 2 Deeds signs. 


I.Publius -- Socc (Soccer Mom - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
I.Publius --

SoccerMom is blushing as I write this, but I cannot imagine a situation in which anyone would have a valid reason for TO ASK if anyone had ever violated "The Crimes Against Nature Act" and WHY IN THE WORLD would anyone ANSWER such a stupid question.  Even in jest. 

We are talking about the same Bob McDonnell who won't reveal who or what gave him HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS?!

SoccerMom has heard enough.  McDonnell can't be right in the head if he can't figure out which of those questions he needs to answer and which of those questions he needs to ignore. 

Sheeesh.... I need a Creigh Deeds sign in my yard.  FAST.  And, don't anybody ask anymore questions .... as the kids say...T.M.I.



James and "OnBackgro (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
James and "OnBackground":  It's not a smear if it's the truth.  Bob McDonnell has demonstrated repeatedly that he is an intolerant, bigoted fundamentalist in the Pat Robertson mold.  So that's "conservative" in your book, huh?  Wow, you guys must be so proud to be on the same team as "Taliban Bob" and Pat Robertson. Congratulations.

PS  I didn't coin the nickname, but I wish I had.  It's a classic!



"James and ?OnBackgr (Jonathan Mark - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
"James and ?OnBackground?: It?s not a smear if it?s the truth. Bob McDonnell has demonstrated repeatedly that he is an intolerant, bigoted fundamentalist"

Why not just call him intolerant and bigoted, if you think that is what he is? Why call him a fundamentalist?

This sort of rhetoric likely alienates fundamentalists who might be considering voting for Creigh Deeds.



Wow, you guys mus (I.Publius - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
Wow, you guys must be so proud to be on the same team as ?Taliban Bob?

It's comments like that one that separate you from the majority of Virginians... a fact that will become VERY apparent on election night, when you see Bob McDonnell win by double digits.  :-)



and comparison of De (ed_in_Reston - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
and comparison of Deeds to Goode is really really weak and makes zero sense IMHO, sorry

I knew Goode when he was a Dem way way back and he is in NOOOO way even close to being a Deeds Democrat. I publius, sorry ABSOLUTELY NO WAY



Go back and read it (I.Publius - 4/4/2006 11:28:57 PM)
Go back and read it again, ed -- I in no way compared Deeds to Goode.  You're right that the two men were and are quite different.

Goode switched parties, and was immediately villified by people who had previously been big supporters.  Deeds may do the same thing, and then it'll be hilarious to see what people like Lowell, Josh and Waldo say about him when he runs for office with an "R" next to his name.



Ah dang, Lowell. Yo (I.Publius - 4/4/2006 11:28:58 PM)
Ah dang, Lowell.  You just cost me five bucks!  I had a bet with Hanover that there was no way anyone could post anything dumber than Mary's "scary jerry" entry.  Thanks a lot!


Aw, thanks I. Publiu (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:28:59 PM)
Aw, thanks I. Publius.  I love you too!!!


Hanover: Unfortunat (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:03 PM)
Hanover:  Unfortunately for your boy Jerry Kilgore, it doesn't look like all of his money -- from King Pharmaceuticals, Pat Robertson, the Republican Party, etc. -- has done him much good to this point in the race.  Also, I would point out that it takes a lot of money to be negative 24/7, 10 months straight.  But, sadly for Kilgore, it hasn't worked. 

That's why I say, PLEASE let Jerry Kilgore keep spending his money on more "Hitler" and immigrant bashing ads by Scott Howell!  That's right, Jerry, go ahead and waste millions of dollars telling Virginians who you REALLY are and what you're REALLY about.  I'm sure that will work out well for ya!  Meanwhile, Tim Kaine will keep on talking about his POSITIVE VISION FOR VIRGINIA, a concept that apparently has never crossed Jerry Kilgore's mind.  Could this be why Tim Kaine is leading in the polls with just 1 week to go?  Hmmmm...



I don't know, guys. (Hanover - 4/4/2006 11:29:03 PM)
I don't know, guys.

Down by about $3 million?

That doesn't seem good.



Allen is probably al (Alex - 4/4/2006 11:29:04 PM)
Allen is probably already calling Scott Howell for help.


A step up from Ben A (OnBackground - 4/4/2006 11:29:04 PM)
A step up from Ben Affleck, that's for sure. He's telling everyone to call him back on November 9, right?  (Or if we're still counting then, November 10....)


Hmmm. Is that a t (Hanover - 4/4/2006 11:29:04 PM)
Hmmm.

Is that a touchdown dance on the ten yardline, Lowell?



You Democrats will (CD Long - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
You  Democrats will learn what many of us learned about Jim Webb a long time ago.Regardless of what he says or claims,IT'S ALL ABOUT JIM. When you learn that-the hard way-you will wish you never met him. 


An acolyte of addled (Ken - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
An acolyte of addled Ron running as a d. Now that is stupid. I remember his efforts to bankrupt this country in the 80's while dancing on the edge of armeggodon with his fantasy of a huge US navy maintaining a surface presence on the russian coast.
Lets not forget the slurs and innuendos he so casually tossed about when he was serving the fantasies of our gladly departed mentally deficient sock puppet president.
If he wish's to "prove" his progressive credentials how about revealling the dirt on his fellow travelers in the neocon coup that was the reagan misadministration.
This sounds like a quisling trying to infiltrate the d's so he can stab the country in the back ( again) when his puppet masters so order.
 


It always is "always (vmirog - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
It always is "always about Jim." He is unpredictable and unstable.  Just when he think he's a team player, he's off doing his own thing again.

He'll screw Dems just the same way he did Republicans.  By the way, he claims that he was a Democrat until 1978...and switched because of Carter's bungling national security issues.

Does this mean that he supported McGovern in 1972?



Lowell: You are exac (Tony Mastalski - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Lowell: You are exactly right!! Anyone who was in the Naval Service at the time James Webb was SECNAV knows what an inspirational leader  he was. You saw it in the leadership directives he put forth. You saw it in the kind of people he got promoted .... like General Al Gray (CMC-USMC). I know I was there reading those directives. Beyond that, Tailhook was well after his time and more the function of a specific goup, getting out of hand. The Navy did not handle it properly and cowered in the face of Politcal Correctness. Webb challenged the very institution he grew up in, specifically it's leadership to do the right thing and clean up the mess. It's all there in black & white in the speeches and editorials he's made over time at www.jameswebb.com. Regarding Tailhook the Washington Times (conservative leaning) went out of it's way to say his speech at the Naval Academy was one of the best Leadership speeches EVER written / given.

The Replublican Right is very concern (as they should be) if JHW runs. The Replublican Middle will vote for him since most middle road people vote for whom they think is the best leader for the times (applies to both parties). My Ist Congressional District VA voted 2 to 1 for GWBush. If Webb runs it will vote 2 to 1 for him ..... why??? Because it is Chalk Full of Marines (active and retired) .... and Marines are very loyal. James Webb is a Marine's Marine. Between Arlington / Fairfax to Norfolk / VA Beach lies the Ist District. Should Webb run he will carry that entire populus territory and consequently the state. No one else will.

He's very close to deciding .... encourage him to run. He's by far the best person Virginia could put in the Senate!!! James Webb for Senate: When INTEGRITY MATTERS!!!



Beth: Please provid (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Beth:  Please provide evidence for your charge that Webb "endorsed" Tailhook or sexual activity on Navy ships.  If not, your future comments will be deleted as "troll" material.


Anne: With all due (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Anne:  With all due respect, it's utterly unfair to blame James Webb for the entire culture of the Nay, which was deeply entrenched LONG before he becamse Secretary of the Navy.  I would also remind you that, as Secretary, Webb created more billets for women in the Navy than anyone before or since.  Finally, do you have ANY evidence whatsoever (I have never found any) that Webb was "largely responsible" for Tailhoo or "misconduct" on USN ships?  If not, this is simply a scurrilous charge, possibly made by someone working for the Allen campaign.


I agree that Reagan' (Lt. Commander (Ret.) Anne - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
I agree that Reagan's Secretary of the Navy, James Webb, was largely responsible for both the Tailhook excesses and the "Loveboat" sexual misconduct and pregnancies on non-combat USN ships.


As a former female U (Beth - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
As a former female USNA grad and retired U.S. Navy officer there is no way I waould ever vote for a Secratary of the Navy (i.e., James Webb) who endorsed both Love Boat and Tailhook.


After having viewed (Tony Mastalski - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
After having viewed the comments on this page, a couple of things are apparent. First the Democrats have not only an identity problem (liberal / progressive)... they have a leadership problem not unlike the Republicans. That is.... nearly every candidate mentioned for high office is a careerist politician (and all that implies - self serving actors). Mark Warner has morphed into that title and it isn't helpful for his reputation to be considered / labeled a Presidential WannaBe .... like Senator George Allen (who's life story fits the "Careerist Politician" title more appropriately).

Then there is the Honorable James Webb. Funny how that title is truly befitting only to a few of those who've earned it. He is an extraordinary man of principal which in this age of compromise and immediacy makes him truly unique. AUTHENTIC. Compare Mr. Webb's life story to say JFK (as in John Fitzgerald Kennedy - I assume everyone knows JFK's pedigree). Mr. Webb comes from a  middle class military family background (think North VA demographics). He pushed himself through college at the very competitive Naval Academy. Served HEROICALLY in Vietnam - luckily surviving and talented enough to write about it. (READ Fields of Fire if you're interested in talented writing). Writes his own speeches .... the best of which address principals of INTEGRITY, honor and service. Extraordinary!! Did JFK write anything noteworthy ... ON HIS OWN??? If PROFILES in COURAGE were written today .... James Webb might be in it. Heck the last politician I know of .... that wrote his own material was Abraham Lincoln.

No Careerist by any stretch .... in fact Anti-Careerist as SECNAV. I know I was reading his leadership directives while in the USMC ... what a breathe of FRESH AIR. True Leadership sans any self serving notions. Can you say that about any Politician today?? The only reason(s) Mr. Webb would not run for office .... is that a) He doesn't need the burden his family would bear b) He doesn't need the ego trip / trap c) He doesn't need to ruin his very fine reputation by being labeled a politician.

Should Mr. Webb decide to run (and God knows we need his leadership and vision) He'll be clear as to why. And it will center on his deepest concerns for where this  nation is headed .... and it will be a very fine announcement.

Democrats should be elated - Nation Wide - that a man of this character would consider running for high office as one of them. Truely Mr. Webb is an independant, unfettered by the demagogery of liberal, progressive, conservative, etc.  But he has a keen sense of the common man / american ..... sent off to fight a war of choice by elitest (most of whom have never served in the military). And isn't that what the democratic party is about .... representing the common man (not the lobbyist) (or Special Interest - no matter who those special interest are)

I for one look forward to his decision to run. It will be made soon.... and for the country's sake (let alone Virginia) I hope and pray that he does run for the SENATE .... and I expect he'll do it right!!

Happy New Year Democrats  it could be a very good year,

TMski



Lowell: First, you' (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Lowell:  First, you're right.  It was unfair for me to call Ken an idiot, and I apologize.  My Hokies had just lost the ACC Championship, and I was still mourning.

As for your "definition of Progressive" stance, let me clarify my argument.  There are Liberal Democrats and Progressive Democrats.  People seem to be confusing the two as of recent.  If you are a TRUE progressive (i.e. Kennedy, Teddy), then I am not referring to you or those who follow your political ideology.  You have to understand, many liberals have turned to calling themselves progressives, when in fact they have changed nothing in their policy.  I'm not saying there's no such thing as Progressive, I'm simply saying that Liberals calling themselves Progressives aren't fooling anybody.  Changing a word doesn't change the actual philosophy. 

I highly doubt, as well, that the general public will be able to tell the difference, hence the "Only Liberals and Conservatives."  Republicans are master spin-doctors, and if they want the word Progressive to mean Liberal, it will.  A few Liberals pretending to be "Progressives" will only make that job easier.

The truth is, I am VERY tired of having my candidates attacked for less-than-left political ideology.  I'm a centrist kind of a guy, with one or two views to the right.  People like Ken, making me feel unwelcome in my own party, makes me want to check out what the other one has to offer.  I don't want to do that.  I've been a Democrat my whole life, and even the thought of calling myself a Republican makes me ill. 

Liberals don't get elected in Virginia.  Not in Statewide elections, anyway.  Ask yourself this, would you have a guy run who supports 100% of your beliefs run, lose, and then watch the other guy crush any chance of those beliefs becoming policy?  Or, would you rather have a guy who hold 50% of your beliefs run, win, and give you that 50%?

To contact Webb and ask him to run, please e-mail him at webmaster@jameswebb.com  Also, inform your friends in the party of his potential candidacy and ask him to run.



Dan: A few points. (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Dan:  A few points.  First, I disagree with Ken as well, very much so, but I think it's wrong to attack him personally as an "idiot" or whatever.  Ken may be the most brilliant person in the world for all I know, but in my opinion he's wrong on this issue. Ideological "purity tests" and microscopic examination of a person's past political affilations are NOT the way to build a large-tent, inclusive Democratic Party.  Did Ronald Reagan turn away Democrats?  Ever hear of "Reagan Democrats?"  Ha.

Second, I definitely agree with you that not all Democrats are "liberal."  In fact, I believe that most are NOT "liberal," at least as the word has come to be defined.

Third, I disagree with you on the word "Progressive."  Personally, I consider myself to be a Progressive in the Teddy Roosevelt tradition, but I do NOT particularly consider myself a "liberal."  This may seem like splitting hairs to you, but I'm not playing games.  I see Teddy Roosevelt/JFK Progressivism as about national greatness, about a positive and expansive view of America, about taking on the special interests and the megacorporations, about fighting for what you believe in, about courage and strength in your convitions.  Unfortunately, I believe that much of that has been lost in modern day liberalism.

Finally, I would love to know more about James Webb, but from what I have seen SO FAR, I would LOVE to have him in the Virginia Democratic Party taking on George Allen.  If Webb's a centrist like Mark Warner, then more power to him!  That's EXACTLY what we need to defeat George Allen, a radical right-winger masquerading as an "aw shucks" guy in a cowboy hat.  Unfortunately, many Virginians have been fooled by Allen's image, as opposed to the reality that he is busy every day, working against their own interests!  So please, keep trying to Draft James Webb for Senate, and let me know what I can do to help!



Ken...you're an idio (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Ken...you're an idiot.  That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.  It's that kind of "My way of the High-way" crap that has cost Democrats election after election.

First of all, Webb QUIT the Reagan administration because he found himself disagreeing with too many of Reagan's policies.  Second, not all Democrats are liberal.  And speaking of liberal, PLEASE stop with the Progressive crap.  Call dog a cat, it's still a dog.  There are Conservatives and Liberals, Progressive isn't fooling anyone.  As a moderate democrat, I can't stand this "You have to be Liberal to be in my party" bull that people pull on these sites.  You know what?  Liberal may work in California and Massachussets, it's NOT going to work in VIRGINIA!  James Webb is a Virginian we can be proud to have as Senator, and just because he doesn't fall in line with extremist party ideology doesn't mean he isn't the man for the job.  I support Drafting Webb to run for Senate, because a) In this time of war we need more experience in the senate b) he can beat Allen while not one liberal can c) his ideology matches that of most of Virginia...not to the left, not to the right, but in the middle.

Infiltrate the Democrats?  Right, you go on with your little conspiracy theory, why'll James H. Webb and I win an election.



More power to him. I (I.Publius - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
More power to him. I hope he runs, so the Va Democratic Party can throw millions of dollars into an empty pit.  Allen is unbeatable.  Everybody with more than a 2-digit IQ knows that.


Everyone, send Mr. W (Mimi Schaeffer - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Everyone, send Mr. Webb an e-mail and encourage him to run.

His e-mail address is: webmaster@jameswebb.com.

Thanks!!



I didn't realize tha (Hanover - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
I didn't realize that Webb had also written Don Quixote.

I guess George Allen must be his next windmill.



Sounds interesting. (summercat - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Sounds interesting.  I would have loved to see Mark Warner run--he could have beaten Allen handily, IMO--in fact, I think that if he had run, Allen would not have, saying he was concentrating on a presidential bid.
Allen is definitely Bush-lite--so if Bush is a liability at election time, and if Webb is really, really good--Allen might go down.


Oh great, let's run (Alice Marshall - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Oh great, let's run this guy, 'cause that worked with Bud Zumwalt so well.

Seriously, has this guy lifted a finger to elect Kaine? Has he ever done anything for the Democratic party save condescend to consider accepting a nomination for statewide office?

Did he do anything for Kerry?



No doubt Sen. George (F. T. Rea - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
No doubt Sen. George Allen will/should be difficult to unseat by any opponent. However, if James Webb's potential to be a new player on Virginia's political stage is underestimated by right-wing know-it-alls that seems like the perfect way to start a story about an upset, not unlike Allen?s upset win over Mary Sue Terry in 1993. 

No doubt, the GOP would love to convince everyone, especially timid Democrats, that its boy can't be beaten. Why not? Webb has plenty of potential and Team Elephant knows it. 



Allen?s upset win (I.Publius - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Allen?s upset win over Mary Sue Terry

ROFLMAO!!

Upset?  That was a 60-39 "upset" if I recall.  Only the truly delusional (and those relying on WP polls... oh wait, they're the same people) ever thought Mary Sue had a prayer.

Face it -- Warner chose to sit out the '06 race because he knew that a loss to Allen would kill his presidential bid.  Nothing could've given him a boost for '08 like beating George, and you know it.  (Meaning, if he thought he had a chance in hell, he would've run.)

Webb sounds like he's your Colin Powell -- centrist, level-headed, well-respected... and not about to be anybody's tool.  We all know how it worked out for Powell.  Webb will wisely choose to remain in private life.



Wow, I.Publius, you (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Wow, I.Publius, you guys are REALLY scared of James Webb. The more you talk, the more convinced I am that Webb is the one to kick Allen's ass in 2006.  Run James Run!!!


I am not familiar wi (Matusleo - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
I am not familiar with James Webb.  Therefore, I will not be jumping on the bandwagon convinced that he will beat George Allen in 2006.  But I nevertheless encourage him to run and run as if he is going to win.  After all, no candidate can win if they start out thinking they are going to lose.

I encourage this gentleman, if he decides to challenge Allen, to run hard, run smart, and run to win.  Stay upbeat and positive, and describe for Virginians what a better future can be had for us all, not what bogeyman the right thinks they should be afraid of now.  If James Webb does that, then he can indeed beat Allen.

In the end though, no Republican should be without a challenger next year, or any year.  We Democrats love our country very much, and we love it too much to just let the GOP trample it to dust.  So I say full steam ahead, Mr. Webb.  Give Virginia a reason to look forward and not back.  Give Virginia a reason to elect another Democrat.

If you wish to be that man, Mr. Webb, we are here ready to stand for you.  You may not win, but you certainly cannot lose unless you want to.



George Allen is one (Mimi Schaeffer - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
George Allen is one of the dumbest senators in Congress.

So much so that Sen. John Warner can't stand to be in the same room with the smiley-face-village idiot.

And after George Bush and his administration, a public servant needs a little more than a cowboy swagger to win elections.

Any person of stature can wip his chicken hawk butt; and that includes Ben Afflect or James Webb; hell if Gov. Mark Warner took him, he'd definitely be-a-goner.

A Strong candidate and he's dead meat.

Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.Take back the Senate.



I.Publius: I could h (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
I.Publius: I could have sworn that Mary Sue Terry had a 30-point lead in that race before running an awful campaign and falling apart.  How could someone without "a prayer" have held a 30-point lead at any point in that race?


Alice, do you want t (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:05 PM)
Alice, do you want to beat Allen or what?


Thanks, Dan, but blo (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:09 PM)
Thanks, Dan, but blogging's more fun! :)  Anyway, if the Post hired me all the Republicans would do would be to say, "see, we TOLD you, the Post is liberalliberalliberalliberalliberalliberalliberalliberal," etc., etc."

PS Even though I'm a Teddy Roosevelt/JFK Progressive and a former Teenage Republican, not a "liberal" in many ways...



So is the second "wi (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:09 PM)
So is the second "win." Yes, we should get over it, 2 million more votes for el bumpo; but remember, if you're to steal, steal big enough to give you enough to fund your defense, don't go for peanuts. I still wonder about the count in Ohio in some precincts where the votes exceeded the number of voters, and all those enormous numbers of absentee ballots. Maybe we should ask Willie Mae Kilgore how you do that, she ought to know.


So what else is new? (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:09 PM)
So what else is new? Jerry is simply mimicking his big league Republican bretheren, who are running America as the Bush private fiefdom with legislation, regulation (and de-regulation) that rewards major corporate interests and fawning "faith-based" interests... The Looting of America is proceeding apace, excused by the smug hypocrisy of the fearless leader in the White House, aided and abetted by vitriolic right wingnut talk shows and a suprine press corps. Pardon me while I barf.


I keep ex[ecting the (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:10 PM)
I keep ex[ecting the mainstream media to pick up on all the grungy scandals among the Republicans at the state level in Virginia, but somehow they do not.  It's incredible but gratifying that a small local newspaper with strong conservative credentials should "out" Bolling. Will it also "out" McDonnell's coy refusal to reveal the source(s) of his millions in campaign contributions? Or his peculiar sexual hangups and peodphile campaign manager (as I understand it)? Guess that's too much to hope for.


The mainstream med (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:10 PM)

The mainstream media, with a few exceptions (mainly smaller, independent papers), is turning into a complete joke.  That anyone could call it the "liberal media" is simply beyond hilarious.  How about the "lazy, incompetent, corporate media?"  I mean, really, why the hell do we even HAVE a news media for if it doesn't do its freaking job?  Last time I checked, that meant digging and investigating, beating the pavement to get a story, working for the TRUTH.  Unfortunately, there appears to be very little of that anymore.  In part, that's how we ended up where we are with Iraq, the budget deficit, and the corruption scandals - the media not doing what it's supposed to be doing.  Pitiful.



Wow i didn't realize (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:11 PM)
Wow i didn't realize Teddy Roosevelt pushed for a federal income tax.

How many other US Presidents have received a Nobel Peace Prize?



Great point about TR (Conaway - 4/4/2006 11:29:11 PM)
Great point about TR, Lowell. The key for progressives is to actually define what the term means - historically and in a contemporary setting - as well as define what liberalism is and how progressives differ. Sure, we can point to politicians like TR, LaFollette, etc. as progressives, but the present-day manifestations of that sentiment - and the ability of progressive policies to be timeless - is less clear. Also, the cross-partisan nature of progressives has to be upfront, otherwise, the term will have little traction.

All-too-often, people assume that progressive is just a code word for liberal.

-- Conaway



You guys did do a he (Timothy Seeley - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
You guys did do a hell of a job now I'm just hoping I can take the model and use it to help with the Deval L Patrick Campaign here in Massachusetts.

PS: Time for you all to join us at www.draftmarkwarner.com
Mark Robert Warner for President, Renewing the Promise of America. 



PS: Thanks, but I'm (Sam Penney - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
PS: Thanks, but I'm not quite an Eagle Scout yet. 


Lowell gets a lot (Sam Penney - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
Lowell gets a lot more credit than he gives himself.  Without his leadership and political talents, RK could never have become what it is today.  Also, Lowell, thanks for understanding when I slacked off on blogging to focus more energy "on the ground."  You rock!


Thanks for giving me (Chris from ASL - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
Thanks for giving me good material to read. You folks are quality professionals and all interactions I have had with you have been fantastic. Count me in as a regular reader and I greatly appreciate your work.  Now, let's go do some "Good Deeds" :)


Yeah, what she said! (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
Yeah, what she said!  10 times over.
Thank you, Lowell for making this all possible!


I second those Thank (Matusleo - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
I second those Thank yous!  I treasure the period of time whe I was able to be a regular contributor to this site.  It was my fondest rgret that I had to leave the state to follow a job, and thus could not vote for Kaine myself.

But I have kept coming here and keeping track of how the race has proceeded in my home state, and I am proud of the accomplishments of all my friends and fellow Democrats here at Raising Kaine.

Keep at it!  Together, next year we can get rid of Allen and Sen. Sanctimonius-orum(R-PA) who I now have the dishonor of having as a Senator.  And who knows what we can achieve beyond that!



Lowell: Thank you (Jen Little - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
Lowell:

Thank you for bringing us all together!

Thank you for breaking stories!

Thank you for educating all of us, and helping us to share the Kaine campaign message!

Thank you for exposing all the LIES of the Republican ticket!

Thank you most of all for keeping Raising Kaine and for realizing the work has only just begun!!!!!

You rock man!



"Thank you" to all t (Rats On A Sinking Ship - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
"Thank you" to all the "Raising Kaine" people for the incredible job you've done (yes, I saw the contribute post, and I will be visiting that link) over the past ... well, it seems like an eternity.

It's been a pleasure to have met and worked with Tabitha Peace and Jason Stewart, and with Gerald Gray and his wife, Denise, over at Brian Patton's law firm (don't tell Mr. Gray I gave away his practise, please).

The few limited interactions I've had with "Kaine Raisers" have all been positive, and energetic experiences.

Reading the group and individual blogs has been both informative and entertaining, especially the posts from Mr. Feld, and I'm very glad to hear you're sticking around and moving ahead.



You did not put your (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:22 PM)
You did not put your own name up there, Lowell, so we'll do it for you. Not only was RK your idea originally, you kept it going, wrote the most insightful posts... and let's not foret the marvelous Kelley, who graciously tolerated a husband who had more than the usual amount of time NOT to devote to her as he worked a full-time day job and then repeatedly blogged until 3 or 4 AM. Thanks from us to you both.


I say that we should (RickyD - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)
I say that we should not put a high tax on oil because the government would become addicted to it and we would never be free of big oil. 

Kind of like smoking.  A big tax will insure that smokers stay around to pay taxes even if it cost more in medical cost in the long run!



Although who would c (RickyD - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)
Although who would care what happened in the Mideast if we didn't need oil!


Hey guys, it's Decem (Tabitha - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)
Hey guys, it's December 15th and I have just come out of my coma. I am trying to catch up now! I haven't read any blogs in a month I believe, and I have over 1000 emails!

It has been fun to pour over this election with you guys. I hope to meet you all someday, maybe some of you at the inaugeration! Yeah!



Thanks Waldo. I jus (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)
Thanks Waldo.  I just wish I knew HOW we did good.  "Metrics" would be nice, as in actual, tangible measures of success - # of voters persuaded (if any) due to Raising Kaine, # of races that would have gone the other way if Raising Kaine (as in "It's a Wonderful Life") had never been born, etc.

Any thoughts on that?  More broadly, how to we measure the impact of the political blogosphere?



Y'all did good. :) (Waldo Jaquith - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)


AHHAHAHAHAHA (Paul - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)


On the other hand, B (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:23 PM)
On the other hand, Big Oil was NOT under oath (sports figures were put under oath t testify but not oil executives). Did they use past profits to hunt for more oil? No, they let wildcatters do it, and then on occasion tried to Acquire and Merge, but spent darned little in the effort. Nor did they build new refineries, or even try to meet environmentalists halfway in buiding new refineries.  They paid themselves handsomely, though. What a racket.

And, this is the first major war we have ever fought that did not have a "war profits" tax. No, we had major tax cuts for mega top dogs instead. This was supposed to help fight the war? Like the top dogs aren't patriotic, and have to be bribed? I guess that's so, since now the Republicans plan on removing taxes from dividends and unearned income, and sticking the lowly wage earner with all the income taxes to run the society which is being sucked dry by the parasites at the top. When will the voters stop being fixated on "social issues" like gay mrriage and wake up to the fact they've been royally, ah, screwed.



He didn't do too bad (Chris from ASL - 4/4/2006 11:29:26 PM)
He didn't do too bad today.  He was pressed on Iraq, but gave an answer I liked...how are we going to handle this situation we are in.


I would like a Warne (Neal2028 - 4/4/2006 11:29:27 PM)
I would like a Warner/Bayh ticket or a Warner/Richardson ticket.  Warner/Biden would help with foreign policy, but Biden might be too much of a lightning rod.


Adam: Not as far as (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Adam:  Not as far as I know, but you should be able to catch it on C-SPAN radio this afternoon.


I dunno why everybod (Craig - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I dunno why everybody at Kos is so upset about his Iraq answer.  I mean I like the idea of stopping the infighting about how we got there and just coming up with a good plan to get us out.  I'll say it again: HE SAID WE HAD TO THINK OF A GOOD EXIT STRATEGY.  This is what Bush has not done.  Why is that so objectionable to the Kos crowd?


Jonathan: Oh great, (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Jonathan:  Oh great, so now you're going to start attacking Mark Warner?  C'mon, why don't you spend your time attacking the real enemy, right-wing Republicans like Bush and Cheney?


Terrence and Alice: (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Terrence and Alice:  Is Daily Kos "ultra liberal?" Uh, yah!!  Don't believe me, then check out this Pew poll and note the differences between "Dean activists" (basically, synonymous with the Kossacks) and "all Dems" (the vast majority of Dems).  For instance, just 27% of "all Dems" say they're "liberal," compared to 82% of "Dean activists."  Only 38% of "all Dems" support gay marriage, compared to 91% of "Dean activists."  In other words, there's a HUGE disconnect between "Dean activists"/Kossacks and "all Dems."  A few others?

* 59% of "Dean activists" profess "no religion" or "other."  This compares to just 15% of "All Dems" in those categories

*More than nine-in-ten Dean activists (92%) are white and just 1% are African American.  Over one-in-five Democrats (22%) are African Americans."

*Only 19% of Dean Activists believe Pre-emptive Force is "often/sometimes justified."  In contrast, 44% of "All Dems" believe that.

The bottom line:  Dean activists are far more rich, white, secular, liberal, gay (twice as high a percentage), educated (twice as high a percentage with some college), and anti-war than "all Dems." 

As far as this site is concerned, there's a diversity of views contained among the writers here.  They range from life-long Republicans to Teddy Roosevelt Progressives to traditional liberals.  Overall, I'd say we are a Progressive/centrist blog, but that's a huge generalization.



I see Lowell is now (Yanna - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I see Lowell is now spouting republican talking points about dailykos and other "lefty" blogs. Ultra-liberal really? Have we come to this?

Mark Warner was great by the way.



Corey: I say Warner (Jen Little - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Corey: I say Warner is #1!


Warner was awesome! (Jen Little - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Warner was awesome!  I was proud!


On a side note today (Corey - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
On a side note today Time magazine has named Warner as one of the top 5 Governors in the nation.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1129494,00.html



It is not objectiona (Jonathan Mark - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
It is not objectionable to have a good exit strategy. However, Warner won't tell anyone what that exit strategy is.


I would call Daily K (Alice Marshall - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I would call Daily Kos ultra-partisan rather than ultra lefty. Anti war is not necessarily lefty.

I have no idea where Warner is getting his information, but it certainly is not the soldier blogs, at least not the ones of those stationed in Iraq. Enlistment is in meltdown and morale is dismal. We can't repair the damage to our military or security until we get out of Iraq.

And make no mistake, as soon as Sistani decides we have done his dirty work and he no longer needs us, we will be chased out of there. Either as an orderly retreat or bloody rout, but we are certainly getting out.

Some of the brass seem to know this, based on their internal discussions.

http://www.dohiyimir.org/2005/10/disengagement.html



Daily Kos readers, t (Jonathan Mark - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Daily Kos readers, to their credit, often blast Moran over CAFTA, bankruptcy and other issues. Warner may yet suffer from his alliance with a still-in-office Moran over these and other issues and events.

I would not be so dismissive of the Daily Kos people. They are your potential friends.



Hmm Lowell, is Daily (Yanna - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Hmm Lowell, is Dailykos now "ultra-liberal"? Could you please explain why you think so? And in what "category" is RaisingKaine in?


I like Warner a lot. (Yanna - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I like Warner a lot. My advice to him Warner... He should tread very carefully with his centrism. As Yanna somewhat implies, he must not take the Dem base for granted. Talking down to the base especially with regards to Iraq is political suicide.

Good diary from dailykos on this subject
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/13/1637/8398



Michael that's why i (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Michael that's why i think Warner is the top choice. He's already proven he can take a disasterous Republican agenda and make it positive. He did it with a 6 billion dollar debt, he can do it with an 8 trillion dollar debt.

It's just a few more 0's what's the big deal? :-)



My observation - His (Yanna - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
My observation - His dismissive tone of Democrats interest in pursuing the how of what got us into the Iraq war was an eye-opener for me.

If he continues this trend, his "light" would dim very quickly. Is he another Joe Lieberman in the making?



I'm a centrist. I've (Yanna - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I'm a centrist. I've a problem with the way you described dailykos. The tone came across as dismissive, which I didn't like.


I like the idea (Alice Marshall - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I like the idea of stopping the infighting about how we got there and just coming up with a good plan to get us out.

Yeah, who cares if Ahmed Chalabi is an Iranian agent, who cares that Larry Franklin passed secrets to the Israelis, why should we get hung up on stuff like that?



It's Clark-Warner. (autorank - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
It's Clark-Warner.  Pure intelligence, left of center at the top and outstanding manager & vision guy at #2 (Warner). 

I love this state and I'm proud to have worked hard for Kaine.  At the same time, Virginia (NOVA in particular) is a rarified version of the country.  There are working people all over America who are furious at Bush and looking for some red meat.  If Warner can adopt the same attitude he had on election night when he said he'd "fight for every vote" then he'd resonate better.

I like that ticket.  It would win hands down and govern well.

The next president will have a frightening task , dealing with our current Republican made disasters plus the closing in of global warming at a rate no one ever thought of previously.



Winston: Aren't you (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Winston:  Aren't you proud of being "ultra liberal?" What's the problem?  I see nothing wrong with being liberal, even though I'm a Teddy Roosevelt Progressive myself - and proud of it!


Wes Clark on Iraq:  "Now, more than half the American people believe that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. They're right. But it would also be a mistake now to pull out, start pulling out, or set a date to pull out. Instead we need a strategy to create a stable democratizing and peaceful state in Iraq ? a strategy the Administration has failed to develop and articulate."


Mark Warner is the s (The Rev - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Mark Warner is the still the governor of Virginia, why should we expect him to reveal plans to get us out of the mess the right wingers have spent four years concocting, my goodness he has not committed to running for president yet, I watched him today on face the nation and each question was answered with more intelligence than I have heard from the other side in 30 years, this man is the Real Deal, His first National appearance since the speculation of him being a contender as a presidential candidate and people have already started picking at what he did or did not say. If he decides to run he has my support 100%, please everyone be patient give him a chance. Mark Warner is right by not answering the question on the decision of going to war, he can not alienate the moderate republicans that he could gain in 08,there is ample amount of other people that are keeping this on the front page.


however lives a (Alice Marshall - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
however lives are not on the line if it does?nt happen.

So what if our foreign policy and military apparatus are being manipulated by Iranian intelligence, how would that put lives on the line?



I interpert Warner's (Corey - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
I interpert Warner's position on Iraq as saying there will be a time and place to talk about how and why we got into Iraq, but as we argue these points both inside and outside of the Party and fail to put forth a sensible exit strategy our men and women are dying.  Period. 

Let's do what we need to do to get out of Iraq, then worry about who deserves to go to jail over it.  (Okay that's my opinion there).



Hey Craig, some of u (JennyinVA - 4/4/2006 11:29:28 PM)
Hey Craig, some of us whose family members have died in this war believe in getting the truth out about how we went to war in the first place. So for those of you who want us to "move on" with our lives.. I ask you, if you were in our shoes, what would you have done?



Late to the party, b (Medley - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Late to the party, but good lord - there are smart Democratic bloggers who still buy the Republican-fed media spin that Howard Dean is an ultra-liberal? I would laugh except that I'm too busy crying... Jeez...

(Independent Virginian who's pissed at Kos over numerous things - the Kaine nonsense being the latest - but even more frustrated by people who still swallow the swill about Howard Dean's political stance - I guess propaganda is very effective... sigh...)



Lowell: Wow, this (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Lowell:

Wow, this one really tears me up.  I'm a regular dKos diarist and I post here all the time.  I'm not ultra-liberal, I'm a progressive like you.  Where's the love, my brotha?

You're dead on in your criticism of the kos community in many ways.  When they went after Wesley Clark it made no sense to me.  The centrist position is the prevailing American position.  I must say however, that without SOMEBODY speaking out for the left, the national leadership will triangulate itself into Pat Robertson's pocket.  They largely have already.

I think it's great to see the Kos community defending its position.  I think it's great that we can have these debates and highlight our differences. 

While I wouldn't have written this the way you did, I'm proud of you for stating your position and for defending it.  You are not wrong.

I think we all could have forseen some kossaks taking umbrage at Warner's Iraq position.  I think Warner does Americans all a disservice in not seeking to understand the lies that took us to war. Still, I also see that those in office and those seeking office need to concentrate on working through Mr. Bush's own personal quagmire.  A focus on the future is necessry for Warner, but that shouldn't stop anyone in America from seeking the truth. 

Bush's mess is going to be a nightmare to fix.  Warner needs to be seen as someone with his eye on the ball, not someone who's looking backward.

Warner's right to keep looking forward.  The DK community is right to keep fighting for the truth.  You're right to defend Warner's position.  The only ones in the wrong here are Bush, his supporters and defenders.  Oh, and me for putting up such a long comment.

Americans need to quit electing Elephants, it makes it really tough for us Donkeys to clean up after them.



Lowell, as someone w (Steve M - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Lowell, as someone who was honored to write a post for this blog during the campaign I wish you would take it easy on my friends at dkos.  I, too, was upset at the front-page post a week before the election.  Now that it's water under the bridge, I'd like for peace to break out.

There is a lot of diversity at dkos and you're always going to be able to find some minority of people to take any given position.  That doesn't mean it's worth getting worked up because a few people think Warner might be too moderate for them.  Any time you get two Democrats in a room you're likely to have at least three opinions.

I'd like to see more Warner fans posting on dkos because I think right now he's seen as a bit of a caricature - a successful Southern governor, the type of background that's won us the Presidency in the past - but you don't see a lot of specifics on dkos about why he was so successful in Virginia and what sort of positives he would bring to the table.  So I'd love to see more details on that from the people who know him best.

Let's work together to promote our shared values.  Cheers!



Since when is "Dean (Maura in VA - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Since when is "Dean Activist" synonymous with "Kossacks", Lowell?

In all of the most recent DailyKos surveys (frontpaged by Kos himself) on support for 2008 candidates, General Clark has come in first by a very wide margin.

So it seems more accurate to say that "Kossack" is synonymous with "Clarkie". 

Does that characterization of Clarkies make you comfortable, Lowell?  It's certainly more based in fact than your characterization of all Kossacks as "Dean activists".



I don?t think us (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
I don?t think us Kossacks want an ?immediate pullout?.

http://www.dailykos.com/poll/1131985452_IYpPlvkU

Out of about 100 votes, 22% want a pull out immediately. 66% (option 1 & 2) want a pull out between now and 6 months not taking into account what may or may not change in the next 6 months.

This poll may be skewed, i don't know. But doesn't it show that Lowell really wasn't that far off?



btw, the percentages (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
btw, the percentages will likely change depending on when you look at them. The numbers i posted came from 96 votes. It's at 115 votes now and the numbers are changing a little (24% for option 1 and 64% for options 1 and 2 combined)

I do find it fascinating that not a single person suggested "stay the course".



Steve: Thanks...exc (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Steve:  Thanks...excellent points.  Of course I respect most of the people over at DailyKos, I was mainly angry at the attack by Markos on Tim Kaine, and on some attacks made by a few DKos posters/commenters on Mark Warner.  Also, in general, I think a strong moderate/Progressive strategy is the winner for the Dems in 2008 and beyond...


josh- "When they (vernon - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
josh-

"When they went after Wesley Clark"

cite, please? and do you have any clue who "they" are?



Someone named "NHLib (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Someone named "NHLib" made a good point.

The difference between "immediately" and "In 6 months" or "in a year" is probably moot.  There is a limit to how fast all that personnel and equipment (don't wan't to leave any dangerous stuff behind) can be safely gotten out of there.

If you combine options 1,2 and 3 on that poll into this: "pull out the troops as quickly as you can load them on ships and planes (it would easily take a year)" That covers about 75% of Kossacks. That is pretty damn significant.

Seriously, Lowell, i think your statement was dead on. You said it in a mean, offensive and just plain rude way, but your point was correct.



"mean, offensive (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
"mean, offensive and just plain rude"

Ha, seems like you just defined the term "political blogger!"  :)



Vernon: During th (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Vernon:

During the '04 primaries it was pretty rough being a Clarkie on dKos.  I only watched from the sidelines, since I was a Deaniac myself, but when terms like "unqualified" and "inexperienced" were used to describe the Supreme Commander Allied of NATO, I had to first roll my eyes, and then reign in some of my friends in the Dean corner.  I mean, if Bush is qualified and experienced enough, Clark certainly was and is.



I'm flat-out thrille (Bill Camarda - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
I'm flat-out thrilled that Kaine won. Outstanding work, folks. And I'm definitely open to Warner's candidacy for President. I'm also an avid member of the Daily Kos community. I think there's plenty of common ground to be found between the two, and we'll all be better off if we start looking for it.

I second the comments on this site that as Americans, we are all owed accountability. George Bush and his cabal do not deserve a free pass on the way they behaved, and continue to behave. That position is entirely consistent with wanting the United States to have a strong military -- and wanting the military honor code to mean something again. The men and women of our Armed Forces deserve better than the hand they have been given.

We can debate and discuss what America should do next, having set loose chaos in Iraq. But we also need to make sure this generation of Americans understands why it happened, so they will never permit the likes of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al into positions of trust and leadership again.



I'm sorry, but as a (Michael Taylor - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
I'm sorry, but as a DailyKos member, I'm all too often embarassed by the tone of discussion that goes on there.  While I certainly respect the rights of everyone to speak, I feel as though the extreme left-wing members there, while their views may not entirely be respective of the rank and file membership, hold far too much sway.  Far too much of the discussion focuses on attacking Democrats who merely fail to meet exceptionally liberal standards of the leftmost wing of the Democratic party.  Often, members spend as much time attacking some of the most effective Democrats (such as Tim Kaine, Joe Lieberman and Mark Warner) instead of attacking the Republicans.  For a party that supposedly embraces a diversity of viewpoints, the most influential members appear to be as beholden to litmus tests as their Fundamentalist Republican counterparts, if not more so.  For instance, the Warner-bashing that took place over his Iraq comments was completely uncalled for.  a)It smacks of the very Republican tactics that we all seem to disdain, where hyper conservative bloggers regularly enforce the religious right's orthodoxy on their members. b)It does very little good, since I fail to see those attacking Warner provide any semblance of how things should go in the world beyond punditry--i.e. how does anger and "accountability" (which we'll never get if we can't offer real solutions) get us anywhere as a party when most voters out there are really looking for solutions and for politicians who actually want to help people live their lives? Let the historians decide on Iraq, just as they will decide on Clinton and let's get on with the task of fixing what's going wrong there and leaving America with a legacy that we can be proud of in the nation.  c)Teddy Roosevelt, someone that we all seem to respect here, wouldn't give a damn about trying to hold Republicans accountable for their actions, or about whether the war was or is just--he would get on with the task of winning it to make sure that Americans are safe from the spectre of both international terrorists and from the spectre of threats originating from Iraq.  Warner's point is that it's time the Democrats embrace action in the proud tradition of our most revered Democrats,  from Jackson to Wilson, Kennedy to Clinton who knew that when all was said and done and when the dust settled on history, the Democratic Party would be defined not by our criticisms, complaints or charges of accountability, but by our deeds.  We don't want to be remembered as the Democratic Party who surrendered America to a bunch of right-wingers--we want to be remembered as the Democratic Party that rose to the challenge of combating America's enemies both foreign and domestic and as the party that pulled America headfirst into a gleaming, successful future. 


Michael, Bashing (kredwyn - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Michael,

Bashing Warner? You mean like the past several diaries posted about Warner, which included discussions of a Drafting Warner (senate or '08) campaign as well as chat about his new PAC?

Here's a list of some of those diaries:
Mark Warner's PAC Website; Mark Warner Launches PAC website; Al Gore, Mark Warner, and the road to 2008; Turning Virginia Purple, The Mark Warner Lesson, Part II; Draft Mark Warner for Senate (w/poll)

Last time I checked dKos was a large place where many different people found within the Democratic Party talk about foreign policy, Iraq, Afghanistan, issues, politics, and elected officials.

Not everything is going to be positive. Not everything is going to be something that you agree with. If it were, it'd be DailyMichael not DailyKos.



Medley: Let me just (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Medley:  Let me just clarify on one point - I like Howard Dean, find him smart and refreshing, and believe he was an excellent governor of Vermont.  I would add that the whole "Deaniac" phenomenom was helpful in many ways, energizing the Democratic "base" and stiffening peoples' spines against the right-wing Republicans.  For that, I thank them.  Where I differ from the Deaniac movement is on strategy, mainly.  I simply don't believe that Democrats can recapture national power until they fully return to their great roots: Progressive in a Teddy Roosevelt/FDR/JFK/RFK sense; optimistic and forward-looking; fighting for ALL Americans, not just one wing of one political party; defending our precious and awe-inspiring environment; striving to be the greatest nation we can be AS A NATION (not as individuals or special interest groups); boldly experimenting with new approaches, and ditching those that don't work, as FDR did; setting great goals and achieving them (e.g, the Apollo "man on the moon" project and racial equality back in the 1960s; energy independence today); embracing change and making it work for ALL of us, not fighting it; working for a better and more equitable/sustainable world.  That's where leaders like Wes Clark and Mark Warner -- Teddy Roosevelt/JFK Progressives -- come in. And that's why I support them.


I don't know what co (Medley - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
I don't know what constitutes the "Deaniac movement" but I do try to keep an eye on what Howard Dean is doing and to an extent what he's got his brother doing with DFA and I really don't see where either Howard (centrist VT governor) or Jim Dean (fmr Republican, as I recall) fail to live up to your wishes here... Have you read many of Dean's speeches from his campaign? Have some issue with the 50-state strategy? Didn't the DNC give millions to Kaine?

There is a real problem with labels here and far too few people recognize that the so-called liberal-conservative spectrum (and they always through in a dash of 'special interest group' - which usually means a group they don't always agree with, as opposed to a group they do agree with) is really inadequate to describe where most individuals situate themselves. Don't give in to media framings on this sort of thing; it's dangerous and misleading.



Sorry i had to jump (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Sorry i had to jump on the bandwagon! The peer pressure was just too strong. I forgot to add one thing... Jerk.

There now i feel much better. I hope every insulted person that posted here does too. :-)



If you are wedded to (Mike Kinkopf - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
If you are wedded to the notion that the readership of Daily Kos is limited to some group of ultra-liberals then you are mistaken.  I suggest you spend a little more time browsing the commentary to the individual diaries. While we are quite partisan, I really believe we represent the full spectrum of the Democratic party. We are quite accomodating to, for example, more conservative views of, say, supporters of Bob Casey. I myself am in alignment with many of Warner's views, particularly on gun ownership.  It is a serious mistake to lump the readership of that board into a single category.


Unfortunately, we (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Unfortunately, we?re not about to do that. We?ll ?stick to our principles? and run a liberal with the personality of a board.

Paul:  Different issues here.  The "personality of a board" obviously refers to John Kerry, and I agree with you there.  We need people with some charisma or at least likeability -- including the "red states" -- if we're going to win.  On the issue of "stick[ing] to our principles," I'd argue that Dems need to move away from "liberalism" and towards a broader, Teddy Roosevelt/JFK/RFK sweeping, optimistic, forward-looking PROGRESSIVISM.  We also need to be the party of American VALUES (e.g., democracy, freedom), not just a party of squabbling interest groups on every conceivable subject.  Unfortunately, in my opinion, that's what we've been - to a large extent - several decades now, with a few exceptions like Bill Clinton.  And he was a 2-term President.  Coincidence?  I think not.



The stupidity over a (Paul - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
The stupidity over at Dailykos gives aid and comfort to the enemy (the right-wingers) every day. To borrow a phrase from Bush...


If the Dems ignored (Paul - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
If the Dems ignored their base completely and ran a charismatic centrist (the clinton model) then we'd win easily.

Unfortunately, we're not about to do that. We'll "stick to our principles" and run a liberal with the personality of a board.



Let?s do what we (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Let?s do what we need to do to get out of Iraq, then worry about who deserves to go to jail over it.

I largely agree with that. We need to DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO, namely setting up a stable Iraqi government and security forces, then get the hell out of there as fast as possible.  And there very well may be people who deserve to be impeached or go to jail re: how we got into the war.  However, I would point out that most Dems also voted to authorize the use of force, and most intelligence services believed Iraq had WMD, so it's going to be tough...



lowell: dailyKos (vernon - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
lowell:

dailyKos was your strong friend, and did not bash Kaine in any way. you are going forward from the election with some perverse tack-right strategy, and you are obviously shameless as you go about it. if you speak for Kaine or Warner in any way, then they are the losers here, associating with you.



Good *Lord*, your mi (Heath - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Good *Lord*, your misinformation about DailyKos is absurd and offensive.  Previous commenters have focused on the epithet "ultra-liberal", which you've applied to the site.

The /real/ insult is the dismissive and wholly inaccurate characterization you've given here to its members:  "these are the same people who also criticize Hillary Clinton, Wesley Clark, and basically ANY Democrat who doesn?t say 'pull all the troops out right now, regardless of the consequences.'"

In fact, among DailyKos members who participated in September's front-page poll, Wesley Clark was named the favorite choice to win the 2008 nomination (and HRC came in fourth).  Mark Warner placed immediately behind "No Freakin' Clue".  (Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/9/20/134155/622 )

I'm really disappointed to see you trashing other Democrats now that the election is over.



Wow...you know what? (kredwyn - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Wow...you know what? I've been a kos member for a while. And I don't think anyone would consider me ultra-liberal. Many of us supported Kaine in several different ways (volunteering, phone banking, fundraising, money, kudos, email campaigns).

Frankly, I like the idea of Warner running. I like what I've heard about him.

I wish you hadn't said what you said. It was a low cut. Think of how many voters you may have just alienated by trying the "ultra liberal" tag.

There are 70,000 member of the DailyKos. Painting the site with a huge-assed paintbrush is a hasty generalization if I've ever seen one.

America deserves the best.



Heath: Well, isn't T (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Heath: Well, isn't THAT ironic?!?  Let's see now, I'm supposed to be happy about DailyKos' bashing of Tim Kaine in the closing days of the election, by none other than Markos himself?  I'm supposed to be happy about the constant bashing of Wes Clark and his supporters during most of 2003?  I'm supposed to be happy about the bashing of Hillary Clinton and even Barack Obama (did you see the response to his diary?!?) that goes on with regularity on DKos?  And now I'm supposed to be happy when they go after our own wonderful Governor, Mark Warner?  Uh, I don't think so!  Frankly, the prevailing "echo chamber" view over at DKos is that you can't be a "real Democrat" unless you pass all their litmus tests.  No thanks...that's a ticket to continued losses at the national level and ceding the country to the far-right-wing wack jobs, and I want no part of that.


The dismissive attit (Barb - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
The dismissive attitude about Daily Kos or anyone who would object to Warner's words on Iraq is very disturbing.  Wanting to know the truth of what got us into Iraq is not the same as saying we should pull out now, damn the consequences. 

While there are some who do advocate an immediate pullout, many do not...but don't mistake that with not wanting the truth.  Read the polls...a vast majority of Americans want an independent inquiry into how pre-war intelligence was used.  Don't dismiss the issue.



Daily Kos is partisa (Elrod - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Daily Kos is partisan, not necessarily liberal. And it isn't "the same thing" as Dean activist. I am a regular Kos reader and contributor and my candidate in the 2004 primary was Clark. I was not alone.


Lowell: Your misinf (Heath - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Lowell:  Your misinformation campaign continues.  Markos was careful not to 'bash' Kaine himself; the diary to which you're referring to makes this point clear:  "Kaine is still the better of the lot, and I hope he wins. And for all we know, Kaine doesn't even know about this little controversy. It might've been an overzelaous staff member."

I did see the responses to Senator Obama's diary.  I counted among them many comments that were supportive as well as many that weren't.  Did you read only half the comments?  Given the *overall* attitude towards Barack Obama at DailyKos -- the response to his keynote address at the 2004 convention, the response to his overwhelming Senate victory, even the suggestions that he'd make an excellent running-mate in 2008, your claim that the site "bashes" him "with regularity" is one-sided and ill-informed. 

Your use of the buzzwords "echo chamber" and "litmus test" are the sort of blanket weasel words used to dismiss a group of people rather than to respond to the actual substance of their statements and beliefs.  And your choice of words reflects poorly on yourself and on the RaisingKaine PAC.



Lowell Says: Novemb (Kitty - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Lowell Says:
November 14th, 2005 at 10:07 am

Happy?  No I can see why your unhappy.  Let me tell you what makes me unhappy.  the characterization of other Dems as far left & out of the mainstream.  What purpose does your post serve?  Sure it feels good to lash out at others who criticized Warner but does it help the Dem party in the long run?

I'm also tired of Dems bashing other Dems. I don't care for it on Kos and I don't care for it here.

My biggest gripe about the Dems (Biden, Lieberman, The DLC) is not their positions on any issue but their willingness to trash other Dems. The DLC is the worst in this regard.

No matter what Kos or others said the bottom line is that Kos members along with others helped get Kaine elected.  That should be enough.



Well, firstly I woul (Mikecan1978 - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Well, firstly I would say that if Kos bashed Kaine before the election that was stupid.

As for Obama, I was embarassed by that and so where a lot of experienced posters.

With over 300 Diaries a day and nearly a million visters the amount of views you can find on Dialykos are vast.  Your brief and unfair decription of the site sounds just makes you sound bitter...it just doesn't pass any sort of smell test.  Kos is a ally to most Democrats. 

I do have one comment.  When will Iraq be stable?  What is stable?  And how will it become stable.....if you can answer those questions it might provide for a better rationale for keeping the war going.  If you can't answer those questions, you may want to coonsider why the war is worth it now?



Brian: Thanks for (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Brian:

Thanks for the kudos, but we have a long way to go. 



Lowell, Mark Warner (Jonathan Mark - 4/4/2006 11:29:29 PM)
Lowell, Mark Warner is not the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee. He has to run in a primary first. Opposing him in those primaries  is not the same thing as supporting  Republicans.

If opposing Warner in the primaries were the same as being a Republican, then all of Warner's opponents in the primaries would be Republicans and thus ineligible to run.

I would certainly hope that by the time of the Democratic Convention in 2008 Moran would have announced his retirement. That is too long  to wait. Warner should sever his connections with Moran now, or face the prospect of Moran and Reiley's baggage adversely affecting Warner in the run-up to the primaries.



Medley: Are you not (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
Medley:  Are you not listening to what I'm saying, or are you just purposely ignoring it?  For the record, I opposed Howard Dean for President because I thought he'd get his butt kicked (he would have been labeled -- unfairly, of course -- by Karl Rove as "gay marriage supporting Vermont liberal), and I supported Wes Clark in part because I thought he could defeat Bush in 2004. 

Also for the record, I strongly SUPPORTED Dean for DNC Chairman.  In addition, I've defended Dean numerous times, strongly, right here on this very blog!  See here and here and here and...

No, my problem is not with Howard Dean, it's with bullying "Deaniacs" like Vernon, who claim to be proud liberals but then get upset when someone says they're liberal!  Hello?  Logical contradiction alert!!

Oh, and I don't exactly take kindly to people who come on my blog and insult one of the smartest, best people around (and also a good friend of mine) -- Josh (who, by the way, was a Dean supporter).

Finally, I am sick and tired of certain "Deaniacs" (see numerous comments above) who get pissed because people are SUPPOSEDLY "attacking" them (by calling them "ultra-liberals," which they are and which they claim to be proud of), yet spend great amounts of time attacking fellow Dems as "DLC'ers" (ooooh, horror of horrors -- Bill Clinton and Al Gore and Mark Warner and Tim Kaine are all members of that heinous organization!!!).  Can we say "utter hypocrisy?" 

Oh yeah, those polls about Clark?  As far as I know, they all came AFTER Dean took the DNC job and pulled himself out of the Presidential running in 2008.  Before that, it was All Dean, All the Time - and heaven help anyone who supported another candidate, like Wes Clark.



BRT is fatally flawe (Annie - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
BRT is fatally flawed.  The big problem is that the buses must compete with existing traffic outside the any BRT lanes and thus is much slower than subway/rail.  Also BRT cannot move as many people as rail.  A lot of people forget that the HOV lanes on 395 were orginally BRT lane that were so underused that the idea for carpool lanes was born (don't know if 395 was the first HOV in the country, but at least it was one of the first).

Look at who is pushing BRT?  It's the GOP anti-government types -- they know that BRT will be a failure but push it as a sop to the pro-mass-transit voters to pretend to be "doing something".

One of the other fatally flawed ideas kicking around are HOT lanes.  Dumb, dumb, dumb.  Repeat after me, "There's no such thing as a free lunch."  HOT lanes do nothing to encourage  carpooling as the existing HOV setup does and many HOT lane private contracts actually have built-in restrictions that prevent local governments from expanding nearby roads so as to not compete with the HOT lanes.  And the current proposals for Beltway Hot lanes almost guarantee backups at enterance ramp toll booths .

It's not for nothing that the slug communities are dead set against HOT lanes as are folks like the local Sierra Club....

Hopefully good Democrats like Chap Petersen (against HOT lanes because of the failure of the Pokahantas Parkway in Richmond)can convince Tim Kaine that HOT lanes aren't what they first seem.



Lowell’s comments ab (vjames - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
Lowell’s comments about Kos are ignorant. What Lowell assumes of Dean Democrats is also ignorant.  I like Warner because I am a pragmatic American.  I hope this web site isn’t an indication of the level of intelligence behind Warner’s campaign.  Lowell you are uninformed.


I've read up on BRT (Annie - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
I've read up on BRT and I remain convinced that it would be a failure in NOVA.  It was already tried before remember? One of the reasons that BRT doesn't work is that you won't have buses every minute and those buses will get stuck in traffic on the DC end.  All around the world BRT moves fewer people than traditional rail and at slower speeds.

As for the too full METRO rail?  We stupidly built a baby system for what is now a large city.  We need eight car trains ASAP as well as politicans garnering support for additional lines, say one from the Pentagon down Columbia Pike to Annandale and one going from Alexandria (King Street station?) to meet up with Orange Line at Vienna going down rt 236.  Also for good measure the purple line dreamed of by the Sierra folks going around the Beltway is good.

We cannot go on the way we're going. Something has got to give.



Your capacity for re (Heath - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
Your capacity for revisionist history is astounding, Lowell. 

Since you claim that you have only "supposedly" attacked the membership of DailyKos, perhaps you can explain how accusing us of "ceding the country to the far-right-wing wack jobs" is anything /but/ an attack.

AFAIC, this isn't about Howard Dean, or about 'ultra-liberals', this is about Lowell -- who waited cowardly until after the election was over to unleash a diatribe against the members of a blog on which RaisingKaine had made frequent use of by cross-posting diaries and soliciting contributions.  Had you made these comments /before/ the election, I predict that these cross-postings would not have been so well-received. 

You continue to mischaracterize DailyKos as a one-dimensional ("All Dean, All The Time") entity -- making your strawman attack that much more facile.

I find the tone of your remarks to be unfair and intentionally hurtful.



lowell- answer th (vernon - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
lowell-

answer the question with some substance: on what issue(s) does dean fail you?

it isn't guns- he's got an essentially 100% voting record from the NRA

what is it?



sorry, josh, but if (vernon - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
sorry, josh, but if you don't want to live in the world of facts then i can't take you very seriously.

FOR THE RECORD, markos supported clark. clark won EVERY straw poll on Kos during the primaries. EVERY ONE.

your story is a nice yarn for the DLCers to pass around as a new and invigorated dean-led democratic party leaves the DLC cronies and hacks to the side of the road.



Dullas access is the (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
Dullas access is the biggest hole in the NOVA transportation plan.

We need some action and I think the rail system is a good one. 



Vernon: I didn't sa (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
Vernon:  I didn't say that Dean failed me, so your premise is incorrect.  Frankly, this whole discussion has gotten WAY off course from what I was originally saying about Mark Warner, a "sensible centrist" approach, an exit strategy from Iraq, etc. 


Heath: First of all (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:30 PM)
Heath:  First of all, what I said was that imposing a litmus test on Democratic candidates was a ticket to defeat at the hands of right-wing wack jobs.  I have said that for years now...certainly not just after the Virginia election.  Remember, I strongly supported Wesley Clark, not Howard Dean.

As far as my feelings about the far left wing of the Democratic Party are concerned, they're nothing new.  I am a Teddy Roosevelt/JFK Progressive, and do not like the far left wing of the Democratic Party much more than I like the far right wing of the Republican Party.  Sorry if that bothers you, but I don't appreciate many "Kossacks" constant attacks on centrist Democrats and specifically the DLC - of which Tim Kaine and Mark Warner are members, by the way.

Regarding DailyKos, I do not believe I said it was "one-dimensional" in terms of its coverage, simply that it's far to the left of most Democrats.  During 2003, I hold to my statement that it was pretty much "all Dean, all the time" with regards to the Democratic primaries. 

So how is any of this "hurtful?"  If you're proud to be an "ultra liberal," then what is offensive about being called one?  Do you think ultra-conservatives get upset if you call them THAT? 

Also, I would add that I simply don't agree with the far left of the Democratic Party.  You don't agree with me, either.  Is THAT "unfair and intentionally hurtful?"  Hmmm....



This was a very insp (Matusleo - 4/4/2006 11:29:37 PM)
This was a very inspirational post!  YOu have a way with words, Lowell that I can only sit back and marvel at.  Thank you!  :-)


Lowell, I'll second (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:37 PM)
Lowell, I'll second Matusleo.
You da man!

Matt:  There won't be a third party in America until we move to a parliamentary democracy, which is to say, never.  In Virginia's election last week, we saw 44% turnout.  20 years ago turnout in virginia was 66%.  With Good organization, an activated base, involved volunteers and exciting candidates every seat is competitive.

Keep your eye on RK.  We're building, expanding and taking it to the Republicans statewide.  contact poldir@raisingkaine.com with your contact info if you'd like to be part of the progressive movement that turns Virginia blue.



Matusleo and Josh: (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:38 PM)
Matusleo and Josh:  Thanks very much. I'd say more, but words fail me for the moment! Ha ha. - Lowell


No, Steve, but obvio (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
No, Steve, but obviously if you have money you can buy any verdict your nasty little heart desires. That's a little too far from perfect to be acceptable. As I recall, the English invented courts of equity to get around some of the legalisms and provide commonsense judgments. Or something.


Well, the logic is t (PM - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
Well, the logic is that one's individual liberty, i.e., staying out of the slammer, is worth more than money.  My law school teacher said think of the difference in the standards like this: you win a civil case under preponderance of the evidence by 50.1% of the evidence being in your favor.  Beyond a reasonable doubt?  Think 90%+.  Don't fret too much for Blake -- yet.  Juries are always making extravagant awards.  The defense will file a motion with the judge to lower the amount, and he/she likely will.  Even if the judge does not, appeals courts often reduce judgments. 


Brian - while I agre (Eric - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
Brian - while I agree with the legal point that you bring up, I completely disagree with the result.  Say what?  Here's what I mean...

Both the civil and criminal systems are extensions or implementations of legal system defined by the governing body of the county/state/country.  While there are clearly differences between the civil (usually citizen vs. citizen) and criminal (usually govt vs citizen), ultimately they both have the full backing of the governing and judicial powers that represent us.  So how is it possible, or even plausible, that one official legal body can find a person not-guilt (although this doesn't mean they are innocent) and another official legal body find them at fault (also not necessarily guilt)?  You could argue that I've answered my own question right there, but I say it's a bunch of semantic crap.  A person did what they did - the amount of punishment (civil and/or criminal) should be determined based on what the court finds that person did.  It should not be based on differing metrics of judgement for the same crime.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe we have a decent system of law in this country.  But there is always room for improvment.  And it's clear that cases like this cry out for changes in the system.

So as Lowell says - WHAT THE HELL?



Finally, one I can a (Brian - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
Finally, one I can answer. 

We have to have the higher burden of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) in criminal cases because we are dealing with people's freedom.  In civil cases, though, we can use the lower standard because we are just dealing with people's money and property. 



Jonathan and Brian: (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
Jonathan and Brian:  I know you guys are right but this is still messed up!  Maybe that's why I never went to law school? :)


It is "preponderance (Jonathan Mark - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
It is "preponderance." Sorry for the initial incorrect spelling.


Because in a civil s (Jonathan Mark - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
Because in a civil suit the standard of proof is "preponderence of the evidence."

Therefore, a court ruled that based on the preponderence of the evidence Blake and Simpson killed their victims and owed compensation to their victim's families.



What do you want, a (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
What do you want, a perfect legal system?

good luck with that. :-)



What Eric said. Gui (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:41 PM)
What Eric said.  Guilty AND not guilty at the same time?  That may make TECHNICAL sense under the legal system, but it defies common sense and also justice in the broadest sense of the word.


Finally, something w (CR UVa - 4/4/2006 11:29:46 PM)
Finally, something we can agree on.


Degrees of corruptio (Teddy - 4/4/2006 11:29:49 PM)
Degrees of corruption: $1,000 is a measely bit of petty cash around K Street, all it does is establish the existence of corruptability. Given the breezy arrogance of this particular recipient, we suspect it is only the tip of the iceberg, and much more than $1K from K Street passed hands, for who knows what quid pro quo. 

Yeah, business IS done this disgusting way in our modern democracy, just like everywhere else in the world, but it does look as though the use of increasingly outrageous wads of cash, the "pay to play" culture, permeates the Republican Party AND its global business sponsors, from Enron to Iraq. In the final analysis such corruption inevitably ruins any system and destroys the people who participate. That is, a business plan based on looting defeats itself ---eventually.



Interesting - looks (Rob - 4/4/2006 11:29:49 PM)
Interesting - looks like Allen has some explaining to do.


This postcard turned (Kirby Gnilis - 4/4/2006 11:29:49 PM)
This postcard turned up in my mailbox, apparently by mistake. Anyone know who it belongs to?


http://www.avenginga (Kirby Gnilis - 4/4/2006 11:29:49 PM)
http://www.avengingangels.org/JACK_and_GEORGE/Index.jpg


Just called Allen's (Styve - 4/4/2006 11:29:50 PM)
Just called Allen's office to tell him that he should be paying more attention to the ever-creeping Abramoff scandal and stop doing stupid things like promoting Boykin (religious crusade against Satan) to head of the Special Ops in Iraq.  I said that we do not need more religious nutcases trying to destroy the country.

Funny thing...I didn't even know of particular Allen involvement with Abramoff...just assumed?!?! 

It's nice to have truth and justice on our side!

Styve



Paul: I think you f (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:50 PM)
Paul:  I think you found your soulmate. Let me know how it works out! Ha ha. :)


Let me be the first (Paul - 4/4/2006 11:29:50 PM)
Let me be the first one to say it:

Native Americans are AWESOME!!! (I'm 1/8 Cherokee)



I have some question (Paul - 4/4/2006 11:29:50 PM)
I have some questions but I don't have email. Can I contact you by phone?


Pocahontas's people (Wendy - 4/4/2006 11:29:50 PM)
Pocahontas's people are special people for they even offered to show English newcomers how to live in harmony with the land. I am culturally  mixed and also descend from Pocahontas. Because of her, my tribal heritage is Pamunkey and Mattapony from my Dad's side of the family. My mother is Spanish-South Pacific Asian and Italian-Irish. I have 3 cousins who are Native Hawaiians and they grew up dancing hula. My first cousin is enrolled member of Ogala Sioux Tribe and direct descendant of Chief Sitting. I descend from Chief Powhatan.
If you wish to make comments or to ask questions, I may be contacted at marykaywow@yahoo.com


Lowell, I never said (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Lowell, I never said Ashe wasn't a strong candidate.  However, as a member of the Second, I'm focused on getting the stronguest to take out that hack Thelma Drake. 

As for Senate, I too support a fighting Dem.  However, I personally leaning a little bit more towards James Webb in the Senate.

Those in Virginia Beach want Ashe to run for city council, and eventually for Mayor (when the current Mayor retires).  I'm personally VERY behind that idea.  True, it's longterm thinking, but all good things are worth waiting for.



We won't win this se (Mike Rogers - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
We won't win this seat because the Virginia Democrats don't want it.

If they wanted it, they wouldn't have been such pussies in my battle with anti-gay closet case Ed Schrock. The VA Dems and the DCCC could have had this seat in '04 and blew their chance.



Found the pic, thank (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Found the pic, thanks to whoever gave a look.  Kellam has over $100,000 dollars.  I'm with him on this one.


I have more informat (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
I have more information thanks to the FCC Website.  Wonderful place, really.

Anyway, since 2004, when she won, Thelma has been collecting money for a re-election run.  She has collected about $370,000. 

David Ashe has also been collecting money for a couple months, and the most recent has him at about $18,000.  Yikes.

Now, lets give David some benefit of the doubt.  More than half of Thelma's cash has come from PACs and such who are supporting her because they already know shes the GOP candidate.  Still, that leaves $179,850 in Individual Contributions compared to Ashe's measily $18,395.  But let's give more BotD, David is not the sure-fire Dem candidate, so I can see why some loyal Dems are hesitant to give.

Speaking of Dems, I went to check what Phil Kellam was pulling in.  Nothing on the FEC just yet, but I doubt that he's gone all of this time without a fundraiser.

I'm not saying that Ashe won't get the nomination because he isn't getting money yet.  I'm just saying fundraising is a good way of getting an idea of support.  We won't be able to have more money than Drake, but we want to get close.



I read somewhere tha (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
I read somewhere that Ashe has about $30,000 left over from 2004, and I read on Too Conservative that he has about $40,000 on hand.  Let's see what he can do with it, and if Kellam can raise more.


Just looked online, (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Just looked online, and no news yet of a primary challenge for Thelma, yet plenty of rumors.  Who knows, though?  Doubt she loses a primary (unless it's to Stolle), so it still comes down to Ashe or Kellam.  Yall know my opinion.


Thelma is facing a c (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Thelma is facing a challenge?  Wow, that caught me off guard!  I've been so busy focusing on the Democratic Primary, I must have missed it!  Details, man!  Details!


Can anyone get Ashe (Pete in Williamsburg - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Can anyone get Ashe to move to the VA-1? 

I'm not ready to get fixated on the 2004 point spread.  The money and Bush coattails were enormous (20% spread there).  The Fighting Dem angle is going to boost these guys across the country.  And Thelma is facing a primary challenge.



Farlow drops out and (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Farlow drops out and endorses Kellam for the seat.  Ashe could be in some trouble.  I just don't want Ashe to lose a primary and fall into obscurity.  He's a good guy, just not our best candidate to defeat Drake.


To add, as a member (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
To add, as a member of the Second, and as a Democrat, we do respect what Ashe has done.  But much more important to us is stopping the disaster that is Thelma Drake.


Dannyboy: OK, fine, (Lowell - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Dannyboy:  OK, fine, 10 points isn't that small...I concede your point.  Ans maybe Kellam is the strongest candidate in that disrict. However, I maintain the David Ashe would be a a fantastic candidate, a "fighting Dem," at some level in Virginia.  Here's a brainstorm:  what if David Ashe takes on George Allen, would that be hopeless or what?  Or, should he fight for the Democratic nomination for Congress?  Thoughts?

Thanks.

Lowell



[…]uncle. Regardless (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
[…]uncle. Regardless, Raising Kaine is not ready to hand the nomination to Kellam just yet. Ashe, has credibility on national security issues as a war vet. Farlow has an impressive business background.[…]

And Kellam is the only one of them who has ever one an election against a Republican.  Remember that one.

Most people in the beach like Kellam, and he has all the political and monetary force.  While that's no guarantee, he's got far more support than the other guys. 

Oh, and Lowell?  You know I respect you dude, but 10 points is not a relatively small loss.  We only loss that seat when Shrock first ran by 3 points.  THAT'S a relatively small loss.  10 is hard to come back from.  Also, he only won one out of the five localities (out of Appomatox County, Northampton County, Virginia Beach City, Hampton City, and Norfolk City, he only won Northhampton.)  The others, he lost by either 11 or 10 % points.

Sorry, I really like Ashe, but Kellam is the best shot at taking Thelma out.



There's a nice artic (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
There's a nice article on Fighting Dems

here



steve, as always you (Josh - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
steve, as always you prove the old addage, "wisdom begins with the right questions."


I find it fascinatin (Steve Nelson - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
I find it fascinating that we're starting to see soldiers interested in becoming politicians.  Not that this is a new thing. But in my opinion people's incentive to run for office is because they want to change something about how the government is run. For example, abortion activist politicians might want to change Roe v. Wade. Whereas environmentalist politicians run for office to make society more earth friendly.

It makes you think twice when soldiers are interested in getting in office. What could they possibly think is wrong with our government?



We are so very lucky (Ben - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
We are so very lucky to have David Ashe as a candidate.  He's got his act together, and could be a powerful voice in the Congress. 

Great interview Lowell.  If we had a David Ashe running in every district around the country, I think Democrats would win the majority this year.



Hey, if anybody can (DanG - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
Hey, if anybody can find or has that picture of Thelma Drake falling asleep at the BRAC meeting, can you post a link?  Or, send it to me by e-mail at dandalf_the_blue@hotmail.com.  Make sure you tell me where you got it.  Thanks!


I know Mr. Ashe and (JoeFek - 4/4/2006 11:29:51 PM)
I know Mr. Ashe and Mr. Kellam.  I think they are both fine candidtates.  I hope there will be no love-loss between them if/when a Primary takes place. 

However, I am for the best candidate who will remove Drake from her seat. 

What's important is that we do not divide the party within - we must support both of these men until there is a clear choice.  We must remain strong and we must show solidarity within the local Democratic party.

Go get 'er, Guys!