To volunteer or donate to Janet Oleszek's campaign, please click here. Thanks.
Comments
Cuccinelli is about as far out of the mainstream (Lowell - 10/23/2007 5:36:29 PM)
of his district than any politician in Virginia. It's amazing he could even be competitive, but I guess that's what entrenched incumbency and boatloads of money can do.
Let's Get Janet on Network (VaNative - 10/23/2007 7:49:48 PM)
Dig deep folks - it's crunch time. We need to rid Richmond of "The Extremes"
I had the pleasure of being able to tell (PM - 10/23/2007 6:24:29 PM)
a Cuccinelli canvasser this past Sunday that Ken was too extreme for me. I was very polite, as was he. "But you're listed as a Republican on our sheets" he said. (Well, that was wrong by about ten years, but . . .) "It's his position on social issues . . ." I concluded. (Well, it's more than that, but I wanted to drive home a point.)
I don't understand how people think they can/should try to legislate onto us all their personal religious beliefs and prejudices.
For the love (JScott - 10/23/2007 7:18:51 PM)
For the love will you please stick with Stall. This guy can't catch a break from you guys can he. Look I am not a constituent but met him last year and I can tell you that it was no surprise that he has the endorsements of the NFID, Virginia's largst business advocacy, the Chamber of Commerce, the Va Retail Merchants Association, and Virginia Farm Bureau Agpac let alone Marshall Thieden and the Fairfax Coalition of Police who said
"lots of politicans say they are going to help you, many even try, but ONLY Senator Cuccinelli was able to succeed in getting our highest-priority bill signed into law"---
the guy is the only Senator, Republican no less, who is fighting to get the index (LCI) reviewed to increase the amount the counties should be getting from the state for funding education.
FYI Cathy Belter, Kathy Smith, and Tessie Wilson of the School Board endorsed his efforts on this last year and BTW Janet voted for this in 05 and 06 on the School Board and now she comes out against Cuccinelli's Education Funding Formula. The purpose of the increased funding could be used for pre-k---I thought you were endorsing that and here you have a Republican attempting to at least try and get more funding to make that happen and you guys slam him as an extremist. Guys how about giving up some of the reasons why Janet is the better candidate instead of simply ripping the incumbant. Seems to me with reagdr to the education formula....Janet you got some splaining to do?? Please, this guy is no Stall!!!
There are times. (Pain - 10/23/2007 7:38:48 PM)
Some times, there is the situation that the person running is so extreme, so out of touch with my view of reality, that if that person were running against a flatworm, then I would still have to pull the lever for the worm. This is one of those times. And, no, I don't think that anyone is a worm, but I'm using this as an example of how out of touch I think this guy is, just like Delegate Bob Marshall in Prince William. Now, take this comment out of context and say that RaisingKaine has called the opponent in question a worm.
Why Janet is the better candidate (Lowell - 10/23/2007 8:53:06 PM)
*Janet supports potentially life-saving embryonic stem cell research, Cooch opposes it.
*Janet is an expert on education, with years of experience helping to make Fairfax County public some of the best in the nation. Cooch apparently believes that the Fairfax County public schools, their teachers and students are failures.
*Janet is pro-environment, unlike Cooch who has received abysmal ratings in this area.
*Janet supports access to contraception, unlike Cooch who wants to ban the "Morning After" pill and other forms of birth control
*Janet supports a woman's right to choose, unlike Cooch who wants to throw women and their doctors in jail if they have an abortion (you think that's an overstatement, then tell me what it means to legislate that life begins at conception)
*Janet is in the mainstream of her district, unlike Cooch who is far outside it
*Janet opposes the hated abuser fees, unlike Cooch who voted for them
*Janet is in the mainstream of her district on gun issues. Cooch got a 100% rating from the Virginia Citizens Defense League. 'Nuff said.
*Janet is a common-sense moderate, unlike Cooch who is a right-wing ideologue (except when he violates his principles and vote to raise taxes...er, fees...er, regional authorities...er, whatever).
I could go on and on, but I'd rather not spend all night.
Just for clarification (JScott - 10/23/2007 10:58:06 PM)
Just for clarification the 37th is Pro-Choice, Anti-Gun, Against Traditional Marriage and Pro-Taxes and thats "the mainstream of the district"? Well then certainly Cuccinelli is indeed in alot of trouble.
I have to point out that the polls over the years do not bear that assertion out. Maybe this election will demonstrate a shift in the 37th, but those views have not shown up at the polls as of yet in recent elections.
I find it interesting how all of the Republicans are "idealogues" and "extremists". I concede some are but not all gentleman butI will let Barticles continue the debate with Lowell on that score.
And in all fairness, I am a little concerned at any candidate getting enormous contributions from Richmond than her own county. Janet received 250K from Richmond in her warchest mostly through PACS and siginificant contributions from outside the County so when people talk about the direction being "mainstream" we will see how she has really done with the people who count...you know the ones who vote Lowell.
Well, not all the Republicans are extreme... (Craig - 10/24/2007 12:45:20 AM)
...but I think it's pretty easily argued that Cuccinelli is. I mean the guy brags about stopping stem cell research. To me anyway, that's at least next-door neighbors with far-right, if not there already. Maybe you have different standards for extreme than I do, but frankly I don't even see how a sane pro-lifer would have an issue with stem cell research, the things would otherwise just be thrown in the trash anyway.
And I have to be honest, I don't really base my opinions on candidates' sources of funding. I base it on their positions, and I don't agree with 90% of Cuccinelli's.
Plus, didn't Cuccinelli's district vote for Webb and Kaine? That would seem to indicate a mainstream at least somewhat to the left of Ken's positions.
thats embryonic (JScott - 10/24/2007 9:12:03 AM)
thats embryonic stem cell reaearch that is right?, he is not opposed to stem cell reasearch. I realize thats a fine point point but thats the legislation that came before the GA. He is not extreme on that. The conservative, the sane part anyway which is still 70%, is split on that issue right down the middle in terms of the kinds of stem cell research. Not saying he's right, but not extreme on that point given his base. Wackos in both parties tend to be the most vocal but does'nt mean they represent the majority of a Party.
As to Webb/Kaine. I would not base much on that honestly. I live in one of the most predominant Republican districts and we managed to get the largest turnout vote for a Demcorat in Webb and yet Eric Cantor, is overwhelmingly supported as are State Sen. Watkins and Martin. As for Kaine, Kilgore has to have been the worst candidate ever maybe only eclipsed by Gilmore for Senate this time around.
Embryonic stem cell research is the key (Lowell - 10/24/2007 9:34:07 AM)
If Cooch opposes embryonic stem cell research, he opposes BY FAR the most promising form of research into curing juvenile diabetes, Alzheimers, Parkinsons, and many other diseases. We can get into the reasons -- pluripotency, etc. -- but obviously I'm not going to change your mind or stop you from making excuses for every insane thing Cooch does. Whatever, I hope you're happy blindly supporting a party that has totally lost its way and has gone over to the far-right-wing extreme, as Russ Potts and many others have pointed out.
there is a difference (JScott - 10/24/2007 12:21:44 PM)
Yous see Lowell there is a difference between us. I can be convinced you can't. I agree with the portrayal of Stall because there are statements and records regarding extreme positions. Her own words for one at times. But here you want to shut the debate down by saying "I" cannot be convinced. Same guy who canvassed for Webb remember? Or is that to convenient to forget. I call them like I see them reardless of Party, my friend it is you who are going blindly with a Party not me.
Oh puh-leeze! (Lowell - 10/24/2007 12:58:05 PM)
You think you're going to convince me about Ken Cuccinelli?!? I thank you for supporting Jim Webb, but what on earth does that have to with anything? And, if you've been reading this blog for any length of time, you may have noticed dozens, probably hundreds, of occasions where I've differed -- often strongly -- with Tim Kaine and other Democrats. I also call them like I see them, and I really do think Ken Cuccinelli's a nutjob. I've felt this for years, by the way, long before I started blogging. In fact, it's the extremists of the world like Ken Cuccinelli -- combined with my own strongly held beliefs on the environment, foreign policy, and many other issues -- that motivated to get involved with politics in the first place. The way to convince me is with empirical evidence. If you can prove to me that Ken Cuccinelli really doesn't oppose embryonic stem cell research or the Morning After pill, for instance, I might start to change my mind about him. But the overwhelming evidence I've seen is that "Cooch" is a far-right-wing extremist who strongly opposes these things. No thanks.
P.S. As far as I am aware, Jim Webb strongly SUPPORTS embryonic stem cell research, strongly SUPPORTS a woman's right to choose, strongly SUPPORTS access to contraception, etc. Honestly, I can't think of two politicians who are any more different than Jim Webb and Ken Cuccinelli, except perhaps on the gun issue.
Interesting Humane Society LTE on Cooch (PM - 10/24/2007 1:51:31 PM)
And BTW, the Fairfax County animal shelter makes you agree not to tether an animal for an extensive period if you adopt an animal from the shelter.
Your absolutley correct (JScott - 10/24/2007 3:28:14 PM)
Absolutely right on Lowell. The issue is not Webb. The issue is you made an accussation that I could not "be convinced" and that I was "blindly" supporting an extremist conservative agenda. I politely pointed out that you simply have misfired. I have supported conservative Democrats like Chuck Robb in the past, supported Jim Webb, and agreed with what has been said about Tricia Stall.
"But what does that have to do with anything" It has everyhting to do with you can't put poeple in a box and accuse them of being unable to see your point of view when many Virginians have done what I have done when they look at the individual and not the label and than decide.
I've determined to support conservatives whether Republican or Democrat based on the man/woman and my confidence in them as leaders not some perceived agenda. Agenda is what you advocate here. Your advocating that all conservatives or GOP's are extremist, whackjobs, or nut cases and that every Republican deserves to lose next month regardless of whether they have been on the side of conservative Democrats on issues in the past.
The fact that you fail to see that "I" can be convinced is why independents will not align with the progressives of the Democrat Party. You are attempting to alienate a voter who has shown the willingness in the past to vote open minded. With your rhetoric how are independents expected to perceive your willingness for inclusion in the Party, thanks for supporting Webb but no thanks, your not welcome at the table unless you agree they are all extremists on the other side mentality.
And BTW I assume you are responding to the Conscience Clause advocated by Cuccinelli and your "Morning After" issue was in reagdr to the giving of the pill to minors without the input or notification of parents and had nothing to do with the rape issue your are expounding on. I guess in your support for Pro-choice, which we may be aligned, you do not support doctors choice, pharmicist choice, nurses choice and womens choice as being equal. What was promoting was a doctor right of choice not to promote abortion I believe. And as to the whole abortion debate that is rather light with legislation, I assume you are referring to Cuccinelli advoccacy for treating those clinis that perform excessive abortion be regulated like outpatient surgical facilities....Lowell that is a Womens Health issue. It was applying the same standard to those clinics as ambulatory ones. Whats wrong with that? Its not denying the operation its regulating the facility and making sure it is in line with health standards on the same scale as other surgical facilities.
**Child Protection and Family Law Reform was not anti-family
**Sexual predators legislation was not anti-family
**Domestic violence and preventing eviction of women suffering from a domestic violence incident is not anti-family
***AND THE BIGGIE YOU WILL LOVE LOWELL
A Republican who wants to punish employers who hire illegal aliens through civil litigation
But all you portray is his stand on not allowing illegal aliens or non-residents for getting in-state tuition rates at Virginia colleges and universities....sorry Lowell but that belief is mainstream in Va and most Virginians welcome them but feel they should pay out of state rates unless coming from those countries with refugee status. You fail to articulate his stand on increasing teacher salaries and attempts to get something done to promote it at the State level not just the local.
Again, I read the case for Janet and you made some valid points, but none of these things Cuccinelli has proposed should be portrayed as "extremist".
I have issues with him like the marriage amendment to be sure but on balance he is not some radical nutjob as you portray.
Well, I guess that settles that (Craig - 10/24/2007 6:29:09 PM)
"I've determined to support conservatives whether Republican or Democrat based on the man/woman and my confidence in them as leaders not some perceived agenda."
Well, if you support conservatives then I guess Ken would be your guy. I mean he's nothing if not conservative.
And my confidence in someone's leadership is actually DECREASED by their being conservative. But hey, that's just me.
So I guess (JScott - 10/24/2007 10:22:18 PM)
Craig, So I guess you will not be voting for Mark Warner right? Is not his record of one of moderate conservatism? Mark is certainly no social conservative but he is certainly a moderate one in the traditon of Chuck Robb is he not? No one I know in the DPVA has ever called him a liberal, but hey 2008 in a new year I guess.
Actually, I will be voting for Warner (Craig - 10/25/2007 5:55:23 PM)
I guess our definitions of conservatism don't gel. By my definition Warner is a centrist.
You have never defined what you see as conservatism (tx2vadem - 10/24/2007 11:47:44 PM)
I asked you a while back to define this for me. This was in response to your statement:
but I again I guess theres no place in the Party for a social conservative, I did not say right wing either, Democrats. What has happen to the Virginia Democrats my parents once were proud to call home?
I took what I highlighted in bold to be a veiled reference to the segregationist and discriminatory policies and practices of the Democratic party that once ruled the "Solid South". But you never responded to that. Now you use Republican code words like "Traditional Marriage." So, I am still left with the question as to what kind of conservative are you and what does that mean to you?
Cooch and animals (PM - 10/23/2007 10:05:42 PM)
What was Cooch thinking when he voted against toughening penalties for those who take part in illegal cockfighting? http://www.richmonds... (He and Obenshain voted no.) When Mecklenburg County authorities raided a cockfight earlier this year they found 140 fighting birds, boxes of knives and razor-sharp spurs, gang members, etc., but most of the 122 people charged walked away with only a ticket. The person who sponsored the event could only be cited for a misdemeanor.
The Bill he voted against would have raised the penalty to include the potential of jail time. With so much money floating around at such events, a $500 fine is not much of a threat. A spokesman for the Humane Society said: "They can win $10,000 or $15,000 at these derbies. When you can win that much money, a misdemeanor fine is just seen as the cost of doing business."
In case you didn't know, cock fights involve more than just birds flailing away at one another. Sponsors attach curved knives to a spur on each bird's foot to ensure the fight causes serious injuries. Birds fight to the death; I guess the sight of birds ripping one another's throats open (a common cause of death) is amusing to some. The Mecklenburg County prosecuting attorney said that in the raid six birds had died and four more had to be euthanized from horrific wounds - their windpipes ripped open or their entrails exposed through gashed thoraxes.
The same Panel on which the Senator sits also voted down by voice vote a bill to require veterinarians to report to state authorities dogs with injuries consistent with illegal dog fighting rings. Anyone remember Michael Vick?
In addition to the points Lowell raised, I'd add this. I hate animal torturers and their condoners.
If we have a Democratic Senate, maybe we'll get some action on humane animal bills as well.
That's reason enough right there to oppose "Cooch".
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress. can be measured by the way its animals are treated." Mahatma Gandhi (1869 -1948)
That's a great quote (PM - 10/23/2007 10:18:42 PM)
One that a friend of mine attaches to all her e-mails (she went to N.O. to work on animal rescue).
Chantilly Times Has Humane Society LTE Prominently Displayed (PM - 10/26/2007 9:03:54 AM)
The Chantilly Times published just one LTE this week -- the one from the Humane Society blasting Cooch for opposing animal cruelty bills. It is very prominent on the page--shown directly below their endorsements. That letter is going to lose Cooch votes.
For anyone who was not following the thread on this, here's the actual letter: http://www.fairfaxti...
Anyone who loves animals (Lowell - 10/26/2007 9:11:28 AM)
should vote against Ken "Cockfighting" Cuccinelli. Anyone who wants embryonic stem cell research to cure diseases in humans should vote against Ken "Social Extremist" Cuccinelli. Anyone who wants serious transportation solutions should vote against Ken "Abuser Fees" Cuccinelli. And anyone who wants ethics in government should vote against Ken "Shady Land Deals with Lobbyists" Cuccinelli. I could list many more reasons, but it could take all day...
take a look (JScott - 10/23/2007 10:45:13 PM)
We might want to also take a look at the others who are accomplices to such measures; in both parties.
Before you know it your locality might just have one hour teather laws like the City of Richmond just put in place. Thats right no more having that dog in the backyard teathered any longer. I expect the shelters to be over run with animals now that owners face criminal prosecution for teathering a dog in their own backyards during the day or night. I guess this is the humane bills you refer to. Maybe this measure will go statewide under a Democratic Senate. My childhood St. Bernard lived 16 years teathered. Was this animal cruelty?
In terms of dogfighting, you cannot have lived in Virginia long if you act like you were unaware of its practice in Virginia. The issue was avoided for decades by government. Its is dispicable that it takes a professional athletes partcipation in it to get action when its been common practice for decades without any attention being paid to it. Same with the cockfighting. Unfortunately we in Virginia have had a poor record on that front for far too long and if Cuccinelli not willing to promote jailtime then he may be a large part of the problem.
Animal Cruelty (VaNative - 10/24/2007 7:40:31 AM)
JScott
I've lived in Virginia for 63 years and was blissfully ignorant of any dogfighting problems in Virginia until the Vick situation. Nor would I think of tethering my dog for that matter.
evidently (JScott - 10/24/2007 10:52:01 AM)
evidently VaNative there alot of blissfully ignorant people in NVA as well in terms of not being aware. Why would we have laws, check the legal history and the legal record of cases for dogfighting in Virginia, if there was no problem. This case is shing a light on something that people and politicians have ignored for years. People seem to think that the Vick instance was an isolated case. If that were true than why havewe seen a rise in the number of pit bulls and breeds like it being sold and transported into Virginia?Tell me is a pit bull the kind of dog you think about first when it comes time to give a child a friend for life? I think we all should brace ourselves for the reality that this has been going on and people are profitting from it. Did you not listen to everyone one of those guys state that it was how they were raised? These guys are all in their thirties or older in this case. Its not an isolated incident I am sorry to say but the fact is no one wants to step up and admit it because of the political ramifications of acknowledging one knew about it all along. PETA and other groups would have a field day.
JScott (VaNative - 10/24/2007 6:18:28 PM)
You said "In terms of dogfighting, you cannot have lived in Virginia long if you act like you were unaware of its practice in Virginia." My response was that you CAN live in Virginia for a very long time and not know about dog fighting. I don't know that we have seen a rise in the number of pit bulls being sold and transported into Virginia either. For someone who proudly tethered the family dog, you do seem to be in the know. Perhaps you can now educate others on why you shouldn't tether dogs.
In the know (JScott - 10/24/2007 10:38:24 PM)
In terms of being in the know...you simply have to look at the legal record, how many cases have been tried (all be it not enough)and pit bulls were the fastest growing breed during the 90's in Virginia if you contact your vet and ask him/her in tersm of what they saw in new business. Personanly we are an Irish Setter and Sheltie family but again if you engage in the conversation, listen to the people of Surry County who are coming out now you will see that its been going on a long time. At VMI I recall people talking about it in the 80's in the Valley and SW Virginia. If people would think outside NVA from time to time, Virginia still has some rural areas where its been an issue.
I find it rather funny that now in 2007 people act like they never saw dogs tethered in the 60's, 70's, 80's when they were kids. Its amazing at that level of denial given the fact there were places in teh South where you were not allowed to keep dogs in the house some thirty plus years ago.
By the way as the humane society promotes, a leash to walk your dog is simply just another kind of tether that hooks to the same collar as if if the animal were attached in the yard. The goal is for animals to be free, to be able to run and enjoy space which I agree. But you also have to look at local ordinances that fine residents for animals who get loose or in some instances are not tether in a yard and harm a child regardless of any fault on the part of the animal. You can't forget the law in alot of places simply goes against the current trend whether right or wrong those laws have to be addressed.
My point was dogs have been tethered humanely by thousands across America, our always got a clean bill of health from the vet who was fully aware of the tethering and even recommended the kind used. Which is worse I wonder, a tether or elctro-fencing being promoted. Shocking a dog...is that humane????
Tethering a dog for 16 years? (Lowell - 10/24/2007 7:51:13 AM)
Sure sounds cruel to me, but maybe we should ask Ken "Cockfighting" Cuccinelli what he thinks. Not.
Real human beings treat animals with respect (PM - 10/24/2007 8:59:19 AM)
'nuf said
Exactly, why is this so difficult for certain (Lowell - 10/24/2007 9:36:14 AM)
people, like Ken Cuccinelli, to understand? Hell, that guy probably abuses his toy, pet elephant!
"real" human beings (JScott - 10/24/2007 10:39:06 AM)
Are you guys telling me that dog owners having dogs leashed or on a chain in their backyards are not real human beings? Are you telling me that you never had dogs outside like that in the 50', 60', 70's in your childhood. I do not remember a single dog owner in Loudon or Fairfax who back then kept thier dogs in the house.
My dog lived to be 16 years old and my next door neighbor was a vet, who also kept his dogs outside as well so I surely doubt he was ever treated inhumanely and he was a huge part of our family.
But wait I left Fairfax years ago, do you guys have any backyards left? So most of you keep your animals in a house alone all day long. Yeah, like thats not cruel I guess.
Well we are one step away from the no leash proposal as well. Is putting a dog on a leash inhumane? Is it that hard to make teh leap from one hour on a backyard chain or one hour on a leash walking your dog. So much for the county I remember. Maybe your absolutely right the people of Fairfax that I recall so fondly have sinced moved on and they have been replaced by exactly what your mainstream beliefs(?)...that anyone who has ever had a dog outside on a chain or teather in their life is low life human being and no better than Mike Vick....you don't think thats extremist?
for the record (JScott - 10/24/2007 10:43:39 AM)
For the record Lowell is is what is currently called a "pulley run" which is the prefered method if a dog must be tethered as stated at hsus.org. Thank you very much.
Yeah (JScott - 10/24/2007 10:56:15 AM)
Yeah I guess we should get our PETA donations back since I was such a cruel child actually loving a dog who lived outside. Like cages aren't cruel either for birds, cats and dogs at Petsmart or I don't know how about electro-fencing ones yard as a means of keeping the animal from leaving the yard. Yeah, thats so much more humane than a leash or tether.
USDA, Humane Society views on tethering (PM - 10/24/2007 9:09:57 AM)
The US Dept. of Agriculture and the Humane Society have strong anti-tethering views. They're the experts. You can read their views here: http://www.hsus.org/...
Speaking of Cooch and cruelty to animals (Lowell - 10/24/2007 5:06:18 PM)
See here for the Humane Society's take on this subject. It's not pretty, either for the poor animals or for Ken Cuccinelli.