So let's get this straight: according to EW Jackson, people should NOT be able to, as the Christian Science Monitor explains, "object on religious or moral ground" to military service when taking the Oath of Allegiance, by omitting the words "bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law." But the same EW Jackson goes nuts at any suggestion that people can't object on religious grounds to their businesses serving gay customers cakes or whatever. As one friend of mine put it, "EW doens't really much get consistency, does he?" And as another noted, "One person who might have objected to taking up arms? Jesus."
P.S. It's interesting that this language was added in 1950, at the height of Cold War hysteria/McCarthyism, "several years after the Supreme Court decided that the promise to bear arms was not implied in the overall promise to 'support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'"
Yes, this guy really was the 2013 Virginia Republican Party's nominee for Lt. Governor of our state. Even more horrifying, 45% of Virginia voters cast their ballots for this raving bigot, extremist, theocrat and all-around nutjob. So...what's the deal with those E.W. Jackson voters? Do they actually AGREE with crap like these disgusting tweets?
Here are a few excerpts from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit opinion in the Bob McDonnell corruption case. A correct one, IMHO, as I always saw quid-pro-quo corruption here. Now, Virginia needs to toughen up its almost non-existent ethics laws so that crap that's "legal" right now becomes illegal. Of course, that would crimp the style of "legalized corruption" people such as Bill "ALEC" Howell, Tommy Norment Dick Saslaw, etc., but too bad.
*"Appellant appeals his convictions, alleging a multitude of errors...Upon consideration of each of Appellant's contentions, we conclude that the jury's verdict must stand and that the district court's judgment should be affirmed."
*"The jury also found Mrs. McDonnell guilty of eight counts of corruption and one count of obstruction of an official proceeding. The jury found her not guilty of three counts of corruption and one count of making a false statement. Her appeal is not at issue here, as it is pursued separately."
*"Appellant contends that he was entitled to a trial separate from the trial of Mrs. McDonnell...Appellant simply failed to provide adequate justification for his claim that a severance was warranted. He was not entitled to an ex parte examination of his evidence; he was not entitled to deferral of the district court's ruling. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Appellant's motion to sever."
*"Appellant has thus failed to show that the court's 'official act' instructions, taken as a whole, were anything less than a 'fair and accurate statement of law.'"
*"In sum, we are satisfied that the court properly instructed the jury on the 'quid pro quo' requirement of the charged offenses. Accordingly, we reject Appellant's claim of instructional error in that respect."
*"In the first place, we reject Appellant's contention that the Government's evidence cannot satisfy the 'official act' requirement." *"Critically, the Government's evidence demonstrated a close relationship between Appellant's official acts and the money, loans, gifts, and favors provided by Williams to Appellant and Mrs. McDonnell."
*"The temporal relationship between the 'quids' and 'quos' -- the gifts, payments, loans, and favors and the official acts -- constitute compelling evidence of corrupt intent."
*"Throughout the two years during which Appellant was performing the official acts alleged, Williams lavished Appellant with shopping sprees, money, loans, golf outings, and vacations...Appellant and Williams did not know each other until after Appellant was elected Governor."
*"This evidence established that Appellant received money, loans, favors, and gifts from Williams in exchange for official acts to help Williams secure independent testing of Anatabloc. In light of the foregoing, the jury could readily infer that there were multiple quid pro quo payments, and that Appellant acted in the absence of good faith and with the necessary corrupt intent."
*"Appellant has thereby failed to sustain his heavy burden of showing that the Government's evidence was inadequate."
Significantly, the jury found the necessary corrupt intent despite being instructed extensively on Appellant's "good faith" defense and hearing from an array of witnesses who testified to Appellant's honesty, integrity, respect for the law, and good character. The jury was instructed not only that "if a defendant believed in good faith that he or she was acting properly . . . there would be no crime," but also that "evidence of good character alone may create a reasonable doubt as to a defendant's guilt." See J.A. 7692, 7694. Appellant's character witnesses included cabinet members from his time as Governor of Virginia, as well as longtime friends such as Father Timothy R. Scully, a Catholic priest and University of Notre Dame professor who met Appellant in 1972 when they became college roommates.
*"Appellant received a fair trial and was duly convicted by a jury of his fellow Virginians. We have no cause to undo what has been done. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED."
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, has called on the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (Metro) to explain why a Muslim woman driver who wears an Islamic head covering (hijab) was prevented from operating her train with a group of political VIPs as passengers.
According to the Muslim woman operator, the first car of her Silver Line train was commandeered for a media event [on Friday, May 8] featuring VIPs such as Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx and Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.)...
Before leaving on her normal schedule, the Muslim operator was reportedly informed by a supervisor that she would not be driving the train and was told to sit in the commandeered compartment while being watched by security personnel. The Muslim driver ultimately burst into tears because of the stress and humiliation she felt.
What on earth caused THIS to take place? Rep. Comstock, any comment?
From Right Wing Watch, which listens to extremist rantings/ravings like these so we don't have to:
Rep. Dave Brat, the Virginia Republican who unseated Rep. Eric Cantor last year thanks in large part to his uncompromising anti-immigrant politics, told talk radio host John Fredericks yesterday that a proposal to allow DREAM Act-eligible immigrants to enlist in the military represents the "decline of Western Civilization...I think everybody knows their old Roman history, part of the reason Rome fell was because they started hiring the barbarians in, otherwise known as the Germans at the time, to be troops in their own army, and that led to their eventual downfall."
Brat also had a response to proponents of the measure who pointed out that being willing to serve in the U.S. military shows a certain level of patriotism: "I wanted to stand up and shout, I mean ISIS is willing to serve in our military as well."
Yep, Brat is completely bonkers (not to mention racist), yet he was elected to Congress and undoubtedly will be reelected next year. Great job, 7th CD Republican voters!
Oh, and "Later in the conversation, Brat compared allowing undocumented immigrants who were brought to the country as children to serve in the military to requiring President Obama to hire Republicans to serve in the White House, a nonsensical comparison for a number of reasons, including that President Obama is in charge of both the military and the White House." Ee gads.
@LVozzella - "Is this an admission of paternity or just Joe Morrissey playing dress up?"
@LVozzella - "And the woman in the portrait? Is she the spurned lover/hacker?"
@MarcusSimon - "there is a lot happening in that photo. Just when you thought that saga couldn't get any weirder"
@TravisFain - "I am without words, because they are unnecessary."
@slday29 - "That's a teaser to the next season of his reality show."
Feel free to add your comments/captions in the comments section. Personally, I'm kinda speechless at the moment.
In an interview last month with conservative radio host Rusty Humphries, Rep. Dave Brat said that the terrorist group ISIS has set up a base in Texas.
Apparently referring to a debunked report from a right-wing group about an ISIS camp near the Texas border, the Virginia Republican told Humphries, "In our country, now it looks like we have an ISIS center in Texas now that's been reported last week."
Brat also warned of "2,000 un-vetted people coming across the border from Syria, the home of ISIS." The U.S. is planning to admit 2,000 refugees from Syria's civil war this year, who will be screened by the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security.
"You can't make up what a terrible problem this is," he said, "and the political parties are just blind to it because the money, it causes blinders on their eyes. They can't see reality clearly."
So much for Hal Parrish being in any way, shape or form a "moderate" Republican. Or, for that matter, a truth teller. I mean, seriously, does he think we are all idiots? As ProgressVA put it, "Mayor Parrish attempted to tell reporters and a large crowd of people on both sides of the [abortion] issue that it wasn't a vote about abortion." So...what were all these people doing there, if it's just about relatively snooze-inducing "land use?" Answer: Parrish is full of it. Unfortunately, Parrish is also going to be a tough Republican contender for the State Senate seat currently held by Sen. Chuck Colgan (D), who is retiring after many years of service. Democrats absolutely need to hold this seat, which is one of the main reasons I'm supporting Atif Qarni, as I believe he'd be by far the strongest candidate to face Parrish this fall.
Yeah, I know, it's not a big surprise that 2013 Virginia Republican gubernatorial nominee (and, as much as I still can't believe it actually happened, Attorney General of Virginia) Ken Cuccinelli's nuts: about climate change, homosexuality (and sexuality in general), government, guns, etc, etc. Now it turns out he's nuts about foreign policy as well. Did I miss anything? In reality, of course, without a deal, Iran could simply continue pursuing a nuclear weapons program, as it apparently has for many years (e.g., under the Bush administration, which completely failed to stop it; then under the Obama administration, which has a chance of stopping it via negotiations). The only alternative? War, which would be a bloody mess, and which almost certainly wouldn't stop Iran's nuclear ambitions for more than a few years. So what are the alternatives being offered by Teapublicans like Ken Cuccinelli? No idea, except that they love to bash Barack Obama for whatever reason(s).
Sen. Kaine: "As we commemorate the shooting at Virginia Tech, honoring those we lost, honoring those brave survivors like Colin Goddard and Lily Habtu who are using their painful experience to help others, honoring the resilience of the entire Hokie Nation, it is my hope that my colleagues in Congress will get serious about gun safety. I am a gun owner and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. But the time is long overdue for a comprehensive background check system that keeps weapons out of the hands of dangerous people like Seung Hui Cho. And I look forward to working for the day when we will accomplish this and have a safer nation as a result."
Great work by Del. Scott Surovell, who hopefully will soon be State SENATOR Scott Surovell. Clearly, though, as Surovell understands, we need a lot more education, enforcement, and stronger laws to stop our streams, rivers, etc. from being polluted in the first place!
Mt. Vernon, Virginia. This past weekend, Delegate Scott Surovell held his seventh annual Little Hunting Creek Cleanup in the Hybla Valley section of Fairfax County. The cleanup, in coordination with the Friends of Little Hunting Creek and the Alice Ferguson’s Foundations Annual Potomac Watershed Cleanup, was led by Delegate Surovell at three different sites:
Janna Lee Avenue Bridge
Mount Vernon Shopping Plaza behind the Shoppers and Post Office
Eighty volunteers helped remove the trash from the creek over eight hours. Volunteers included students from Fort Hunt Elementary School, Carl Sandburg Middle School, West Potomac High School and Mount Vernon High School. Additionally, residents of the surrounding neighborhood assisted with the event.
The cleanup netted around 8,500 pounds of trash including:
For more, see Right Wing Watch, but in short, the 2013 Virginia nominee for Lt. Governor, EW Jackson, yesterday attacked the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for briefly listing 2016 Republican Presidential candidate (and an extremist by any definition of the word) Ben Carson in its "extremist files," claiming that SPLC's criticism of Carson was "no different than what maybe slave masters or segregationists would have said." Yes, you could brush it off as, "well, it's typical insanity by EW Jackson," but the problem is that Jackson't not an aberration in today's Republican Party. Remember, this is a party where top leaders, like Rudy Giulani and Scott Walker, routinely question Barack Obama's religion, patriotism, birth status, you name it. They also deny climate science and evolution, whlie routinely making outrageous comments about a whole host of other topics. The question is, how can an extreme, John Birch Society-style freak show like this be a major political party in this country?
From our old friend Paul Goldman, this one is definitely worth sharing! ;)
Cuccinelli and co-author Mike Farris slam Goldman's legal credentials and call him a political whatever.
Really Ken, that's the best you got?
Want to debate this issue in front of the media? I doubt it, as the following makes clear.
by Paul Goldman
Wow, did Norm and I hit a nerve with our latest column exposing the legal flaws in the constitutional arguments of Mr. Cuccinelli and his constitutional scholar posse. It was like Clint Eastwood "The Good, 'Bad and the Ugly" combined with Gary Cooper in "High Noon."
Our column, found here, lays bare the law and politics behind Mr. Cuccinelli and posse's efforts to get the Virginia General Assembly to pass a resolution demanding that Congress convene a Constitutional Convention pursuant to Article V of the U.S Constitution.
Norm and I were the first columnists in Virginia to explain the hard legal and factual truths.
The CUCCINELLI et al plan is now dead in the GA.
So today, he hit back at us: we are big boys, we can take it.
Hey Ken: You aren't the only one to go to law school here, dude! But I agree: I wasn't the AG nor did I hold the positions of the others mentioned in your Washington Post column found here.
Mr. Cuccinelli suggests it took a "fair amount of..." whatever for Norm and me to question the all those professors, law deans, former Supreme Court clerks, and others in terms of their understanding of Article V.
Sorry Ken: All it took is a little common sense and legal analysis.
By the way Ken: I am the only one who actually has any experience creating a governing document, the Elected Mayor Charter change endorsed by the General Assembly. So maybe you don't have the right experience to discuss these kinds of founding document matters!
Bottom line: Cuccinelli slammed me as a "political blogger" and thus, someone who viewed the discussion from a partisan political writing angle. That's silly: If that were true, then why would Cuccinelli have asked me to help him get some new laws passed in 2013 to improve the political process: laws which passed with huge bipartisan support?
Let's face it: This Con Con idea seemed a sure winner to Ken and his posse, but now, thanks to some of us who have been willing to speak analytically about the law and facts involved, the idea has been defeated for this year.
Will it be back in 2016? Absolutely, if not before. But if you read our Post column, and then the Cuccinelli rebuttal, you will realize his column actually supports our analysis.
(UPDATE: The comments on this are scathing. - promoted by lowkell)
For anyone who remembers Webb's 2006 campaign for U.S. Senate, you undoubtedly recall that he talked constantly about the poor getting poorer, the rich getting richer, and the "middle class getting squeezed." Yet now, for some bizarre reason, he's not a "fan" of the "'middle class' lingo" or apparently of "class" rhetoric?!? Sorry, but Jim Webb has now officially jumped the shark. WTF?
I'm not sure if Virginia Republicans simply have little knowledge of history or no sense of self awareness, but to see them praise Martin Luther King, Jr., despite opposing much (most?) of what he stood for, is truly striking. For instance, Rep. Barbara Comstock cites the King quote, "The time is always right to do what is right." Yet Comstock is a diehard right winger, anti-progressive, tool of the most powerful in our society at the expense of the most vulnerable, proponent of MORE economic inequality, supporter of minority voter suppression techniques (such as a stringent photo ID law she voted for in 2013), etc.
Not surprisingly, Martin Luther King, Jr. recognized that the Republican Party "geared its appeal and program to racism, reaction, and extremism," something they honed during the 1970s and 1980s with its infamous "Southern Strategy" of Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, etc. Today, has the Republican Party changed very much, when it uses the fabricated, fallacious excuse of "voter fraud" to push minority voter suppression laws across the country? How about when its Tea Party wing holds rallies at which you don't have to look very far to see the most vile, racist imagery about Barack Obama, Michele Obama, etc. on their signs? Even worse, in some ways, is the deafening silence, the lack of condemnation, of these signs and rhetoric by leading Republicans. Of course, one of the top Republican House leaders was recently found to have spoken at a white supremacist conference organized by David Duke, and he has NOT been booted out of leadership. Hmmmm.
As for MLK, Jr.'s views on economic fairness and social justice, how many of these quotes or these or these (or manymore) do you think Barbara Comstock - or other Virginia Republicans (e.g., Dave Brat, Ed Gillespie, Ken Cuccinelli) would be comfortable with?
*"Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism."
*"True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring."
*"So it is obvious that if man is to redeem his spiritual and moral 'lag', he must go all out to bridge the social and economic gulf between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' of the world. Poverty is one of the most urgent items on the agenda of modern life."
*"A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom."
*"The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty."
*"We must create full employment, or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position, we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available... Work of this sort could be enormously increased, and we are likely to find that the problem of housing, education, instead of preceding the elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first abolished"
*"I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin-we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered."
There's actually been a Democrat campaigning for Delegate Joe Morrissey's seat in the 74th District since July. Meet Kevin Sullivan from James City County, a proud union man and former Political Coordinator for Teamsters Joint Council 83, Labor Liaison for Attorney-General Mark Herring, and President of the Charles City Ruritan.
This is Kevin at the annual Mathews Democratic Crab Steam last August, so that's the pounding in the background. He has been pounding the pavement because he wants to represent the interests of blue collar workers in Richmond.
There are not enough people in government who have punched a time clock or carried their lunch in a bag or lived paycheck to paycheck. That's what I want becoming a legislator. I want to represent regular people.
His platform emphasizes Medicaid expansion, education, worker protection, and legislative ethics. He has pledged not to accept the state health coverage provided to Delegates until the Medicaid coverage gap is closed. Educational innovation, technical training opportunities, the cost of higher education, and student loan debt concern him. As a worker's voice in the legislature, he wants to focus on Workman's Compensation and worker misclassification. Saying there is too much "big money" in politics, he is trying to fund his campaign with small donations. In the legislature he would work to limit contributions and gifts to state officials.
At the time we met, Sullivan wanted the opportunity to face Morrissey in a primary. We'll see if that comes to pass.
Back in September 2007, after gearing up (and then quickly shutting down) a presidential campaign, former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner opted instead to run for U.S. Senate following Senator John Warner's retirement announcement. At the time, most Virginia Democrats (myself included) loved Mark Warner and were excited about his candidacy, in large part because we figured he was a shoo-in to win the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by John Warner.
In addition, Mark Warner had generally been a strong governor from a progressive perspective, for example vetoing repeal of Virginia's estate tax and signing an executive order (albeit when he was on the way out the door, in December 2005) protecting gays from discrimination in state hiring. So, when people like me saw national progressive blogger Matt Stoller attacking Mark Warner for his "disgusting Lieberman-esque [campaign announcement]" video," as well as for being a "centrist, not a partisan," we were offended. In response, I went after Stoller, writing what is in hindsight a cringe-inducingly rah-rah post defending Mark Warner's honor. Barf.
Well, now, seven years later, I'm read to come groveling to Matt Stoller with profuse apologies. Let me state it as bluntly as possible. Matt, you were right and I was an idiot: Mark Warner turned out to be everything you were worried he'd be, and worse. A few examples.
*Today's disgraceful vote for the Keystone XL Canadian tar sands export pipeline, which is utterly inexcusable any way you want to look at it.
*Warner's long history of pandering to coal, including his appalling speech to a coal "astroturf" rally on the Mall, at which he declared (among other idiocies), "we outta have this driven by the market not by government policy." My god, as if the government hasn't been subsidizing coal and letting that industry get away with murder for decades now?!?
*Warner's constant "dissing" of his progressive and environmentalist "base," something you'd never see a Republican do to his or her "base," yet which Warner appears to take glee in doing as a key part of his "schtick" as a "radical centrist" (whatever the heck THAT means).
*Warner's miserable Progressive Punch rating -- #47 out of 100 in the Senate, less progressive than all other Democrats other than conservadems Joe Manchin, Mary Landrieu (on her way out the door), Mark Pryor (ditto), Kay Hagan (ditto), Claire McCaskill, Joe Donnelly and Tom Carper.
*Warner's obsessive focus on the debt, rather than on job creation, infrastructure investment, and income inequality.
*Warner's incessant false equivalencies, "both sides" nonsense, Republican "framing," all of which are very damaging to the Democratic "brand."
*Warner's blind obedience to the NRA. As teacherken wrote in April 2013: "Mark Warner voted against the assault weapons ban. Mark Warner voted against limiting the size of magazines...It matters not to me whether Mark Warner believes the baloney of the gun lobby or merely lacks the guts to stand up for what is right. What is right is to stop the slaughter. If you are unwilling to step up to that, I am unwilling to offer you my support, my money or my vote."
Now, in fairness, Warner DID vote for the Affordable Care Act. But, of course there's always a caveat with this guy. In this case, not only did Warner oppose a public option, but he did so for the wildly false reason that "it could prove a budget-buster." In fact, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, "Creating a public option that all Americans could choose would save $68 billion through 2020." That's right, SAVE $68 billion, yet the guy who is obsessed with the budget deficit opposed it anyway? It makes no sense whatsoever, just as Warner's support for Keystone XL - a project that would create the whopping total of fifty (50) permanent jobs, none of which would be in Virginia, while encouraging development of the environment-destroying Canadian tar sands. Brilliant.
Bottom line: If Tom Perriello, Bobby Scott, or any other serious, strong progressive chooses to primary Mark Warner in 6 years, I will support that person wholeheartedly. I also, of course, would never support Warner for President or Vice President. It's not as if Warner's "radical centrism" b.s. guarantees him reelection anymore anyway, as Ed Gillespie's near upset victory a few weeks ago demonstrated. So why put up with Warner's Republican Lite garbage anymore? I just wish I had realized this back in 2007, instead of attacking Matt Stoller for hitting the nail on the head. Live and learn, I guess.
According to right-wing extremists (and overall nutjobs) Del. "Sideshow Bob" Marshall and Sen. Dick "Plastic Fetuses and Raging Homophobia" Black, Virginia should use its "police powers..to protect our citizens and residents from exposure to Ebola even if it means a timely court challenge against passenger airlines or the federal government if they continue to permit entry into Virginia of passengers flying from Ebola affected areas." Rather than, say, Republicans funding health authorities like the CDC and NIH, or maybe confirming a Surgeon General, or perhaps providing grants and training to equip hospitals, or...oh forget it, fearmongering is so much easier. By the way, as one high-ranking Virginia Democratic elected official sarcastically messaged me about this, "Does the governor control the FAA now?" Meanwhile, as the Washington Post reported, "In airports in all of the affected regions and across the world, passengers coming from flights from West Africa are [already] being screened for elevated temperatures," and "If a passenger is sick or has a fever, they won't fly." In addition, "More flight restrictions will only make it more difficult for life-saving aid and medical professionals to reach West Africa." As the World Health Organization explains, "Any discontinuation of transport will affect humanitarian aid, doctors, nurses and human resources entering the country, the transfer of biological sampling and equipment for hospitals." Other than all that, "Sideshow Bob" and Dick Black are really onto something here. (snark)
The purpose of Blue Virginia is to cover Virginia politics from a progressive and Democratic perspective. This is a group blog and a community blog. We invite everyone to comment here, but please be aware that profanity, personal attacks, bigotry, insults, rudeness, frequent unsupported or off-point statements, "trolling" (NOTE: that includes outright lies, whether about climate science, or what other people said, or whatever), and "troll ratings abuse" (e.g., "troll" rating someone simply because you disagree with their argument) are not permitted and, if continued, will lead to banning. For more on trolling, see the Daily Kos FAQs. Also note that diaries may be deleted if they do not contain at least 2 solid paragraphs of original text; if not, please use the comments section of a relevant diary. For more on writing diaries, click here. Thanks, and enjoy!