Find out how Cooch took $55,000 from the disgraced "U.S. Navy Veterans Association," in apparent exchange for his promise to get the Virginia Office of Consumer Affairs (which had "notified Thompson's group that it no longer qualified for an exemption from state registration requirements") off the group's back. Can we say "pay-to-play?" Find out more.
"HBO filmmaker Josh Fox arrested at the February 1, 2012 House Science Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment fracking hearing (Source: House Science Committee Democratic Staff)." For more on the Republicans version of the First Amendment (corporations have unlimited "speech" rights, individuals have only those the corporate masters and their political puppets decide individuals should have), see here and here and here. Utterly pathetic.
As a diehard Democrat and Teddy Roosevelt progressive, I don't usually praise anything Sarah Palin does. To the contrary, I usually try to ignore her, or if I pay any attention at all, to mock her. Still, I've got to admit, she's got a following among the Teahadists. Check out her Facebook page, for instance, where she has nearly 3.3 million people who "like" her. Also, check out the response to her latest Facebook post, entitled - no, this is not a joke! - "Cannibals in GOP Establishment Employ Tactics of the Left." First, a sampling of Palin's argument:
...The Republican establishment which fought Ronald Reagan in the 1970s and which continues to fight the grassroots Tea Party movement today has adopted the tactics of the left in using the media and the politics of personal destruction to attack an opponent.
[...
But this whole thing isn't really about Newt Gingrich vs. Mitt Romney. It is about the GOP establishment vs. the Tea Party grassroots and independent Americans who are sick of the politics of personal destruction used now by both parties' operatives with a complicit media egging it on. In fact, the establishment has been just as dismissive of Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Newt is an imperfect vessel for Tea Party support, but in South Carolina the Tea Party chose to get behind him instead of the old guard's choice. In response, the GOP establishment voices denounced South Carolinian voters with the same vitriol we usually see from the left when they spew hatred at everyday Americans "bitterly clinging" to their faith and their Second Amendment rights. The Tea Party was once again told to sit down and shut up and listen to the "wisdom" of their betters. We were reminded of the litany of Tea Party endorsed candidates in 2010 who didn't win. Well, here's a little newsflash to the establishment: without the Tea Party there would have been no historic 2010 victory at all.
[...]
...Many of these same characters sat on their thumbs in '08 and let Obama escape unvetted. Oddly, they're now using every available microscope and endoscope - along with rewriting history - in attempts to character assassinate anyone challenging their chosen one in their own party's primary. So, one must ask, who are they really running against?
Hahahahahaha; is this great stuff or what? Go read the comments on Palin's Facebook page, and you'll see that most of her fans agree. Sample comments: "Very well said Governor....Thank you and God Bless." "OUTSTANDING!" "Amen, sister!!!"
Based on all this, would it be fair to say that there's a wee bit of a clash between the "grassroots Tea Party movement" and the Republican Party establishment? Hmmmm...gotta go ponder that one -- for about 2 seconds. Answer: yes! And to that, I say, "OUTSTANDING!" :)
This morning in the Republican-controlled Virginia House of Delegates, a nasty piece of voter disenfranchisement legislation, HB 9, passed out of committee on a 15-6 vote. Sponsored by Del. Mark Cole (R-Spotsylvania), this bill would effectively "suppress the vote of the elderly, the young, the poor and minorities," whil addressing the non-existent, figment-of-Republicans'-fevered-imaginations problem known as "voter fraud." Here's what ProgressVA has to say about this abomination. Also, check out the audio of Del. Cole admitting that he has no knowledge of any instances of voter fraud. Finally, check out what AARP Virginia thinks, which is that "Passing this measure could disenfranchise nearly one-fifth of the older population because nearly one in five people over age 65 do not have a government issued photo ID." Wow, I wonder what Republican seniors will think of this?!?
ProgressVA Statement on House Privileges and Elections Committee Vote to Report HB9
ProgressVA, a progressive advocacy organization, released the following statement from Executive Director Anna Scholl on the House Privileges and Elections Committee vote this morning to report HB to the full House. HB 9, sponsored by Delegate Mark Cole, would make it significantly harder for thousands of Virginians to vote.
"We're deeply disappointed by this vote to advance unnecessary legislation that will make it harder for thousands of registered Virginia voters to cast a ballot. Both Delegate Cole, the sponsor of this measure, and Justin Reimer of the State Board of Elections have admitted during debate on this bill that they know of no documented cases of the voter fraud. Quite simply, our voting system isn't broke, so why on earth are our representatives advancing unneeded and potentially expensive solutions to "fix" it? Voting is a fundamental American right and freedom. Making it harder for Virginians to vote in order to fix a problem that doesn't exist is a waste of the legislature's time and taxpayer money."
Background:
During a January 12th meeting of the House Privileges and Elections Committee Elections Subcommittee, Del. Sickles inquired as to whether Del. Cole was aware of any instances of voter fraud, which HB 9 is designed to combat. He responded "No, not to my knowledge." (Audio of that meeting is available online.)
During the House Privileges and Elections Committee hearing this morning, Delegate Alexander asked Justin Reimer of the State Board of Elections: "Do you have a quantified number, do you receive numbers from the registrars or others that report to you that they have had voter identification fraud at their polling places?" Mr. Reimer responded: "Delegate, I have no specific statistics on that.{
"President Obama is not letting congressional gridlock slow economic growth. Here are the actions he has taken to support the middle class."
I'd also remind everyone that, in spite of utter obstructionism by Congressional Teapublican'ts, we're actually better off by almost any metric than we were three years ago. Thank you Democrats, thank you President Obama, and NO thank you Eric Can'tor et al!
Polls close in South Carolina at 7 pm. Feel free to use this as an open thread to discuss the results of this primary, and also of the Teapublican primaries in general. Interesting, the early exit polls indicated that "Nearly 2/3 say recent debates -- where Gingrich got rave reviews -- were an important factor," and also that "about 1/2 of voters made up their minds in the last few days, backing up Gingrich poll gains." Looking good for Newton over Willard, but we'll see soon enough! By the way, if Gingrich does beat Romney in South Carolina tonight, that will mean Romney's only won a single primary, and that was in his de facto home state, so it really shouldn't count for much. Not impressive.
UPDATE 7:01 pm: ABC and NBC News call it for Newt Gingrich. Hahahahahahahaha. Lovin' it. :) :) :)
UPDATE 7:02 pm: CNN exit polls have it at Gingrich 38%, Romney 29%, Santorum 17%, Paul 15%. Will Santorum drop out? If so, then it will essentially be mano a mano between Newton and Willard. Boy, would that be a hoot!
UPDATE 9:12 pm: According to CNN, with 68% of precincts reporting, it's Newton 41%, Willard 26%, Mr. "Man on Dog" 18%, and the crazy conspiracy theory/racist/"get off my lawn!" guy 13%.
UPDATE 9:17 pm: As Loudoun Insider points out, "Of course the collapse of Mitt Romney in the South Carolina polls had little to do with Bob McDonnell, but it certainly does not help McDonnell's VP campaign to endorse and campaign for Romney there just as Romney collapses and loses pretty significantly." Hahaha.
UPDATE 9:18 pm: According to Intrade, Willard now has a 66.9% chance of being the Republican nominee, compared to 26.0% for Newton and 0.7% for Surging Santorum. Willard was over 90% just a few days ago.
UPDATE 7:08 am Sunday: With 99% of precincts reporting, Newton Leroy won with 40% of the vote to Willard "Mitt"'s 28%, Surging Santorum's 17%, and Conspiracy Freakazoid 13%.
UPDATE 11:41 am Sunday: Check out Andrew Sullivan's fascinating thoughts on Newt Gingrich, Willard Romney, and the "crack-up" of the Republican Party. That includes this comment, with which I agree wholeheartedly: "If I were a Republican, I'd be ashamed. But Gingrich won, I think, because shame is alien to him. Especially when it comes to race."
(Interesting...Paul Goldman argues that Republicans actually HELPED Chap by purging him. - promoted by lowkell)
Well, that didn't take long for Virginia Senate Republicans to start abusing their newfound power, going for the power grab, acting in an arrogant/high-handed manner, etc. Kicking the superbly qualified Chap Petersen off the Courts of Justice Committee simply epitomizes what they're doing here. I sure hope Virginia voters are paying attention!
Senate Republicans Remove Petersen from Courts of Justice Committee
RICHMOND, VA - Today, in a widely anticipated move, the Republican leadership of the Virginia Senate seized majority control of the chamber with the tie-breaking vote of Lt. Governor Bill Bolling.
In consolidating power, the Republicans removed Senator Chap Petersen (D-Fairfax) from the Courts of Justice committee, where he sat on the Civil Laws subcommittee. Senators are typically assigned to committees based on experience and interests.
Senator Petersen has practiced law for 18 years and is an equity partner in the firm of Surovell, Petersen, Isaacs & Levy, PLC. He was recently commended as one of the top 30 Virginia "Leaders of the Law" by Virginia Lawyers Weekly. He has served on the Courts of Justice committee since the 2010 legislative session.
"Obviously I would have liked to stay on the Courts of Justice committee, where my experience and legal analysis could be best utilized. I will continue my efforts to represent the people of Virginia in my other committee assignments."
The Senate Courts committee is now composed of eight Republicans and seven Democrats.
Senator J. Chapman "Chap" Petersen (www.FairfaxSenator.com) represents Virginia's 34th Senate district, located in Fairfax County. The district includes the City of Fairfax, the Town of Vienna, portions of Fairfax, Oakton, Dunn Loring, and portions of Centerville. Currently serving his second term in the Virginia Senate, Senator Petersen has previously served as Delegate and City Councilman for the City of Fairfax.
The Court finds that there is a strong likelihood that the Court will find the residency requirement for petition circulators [in Virginia] to be unconstitutional. The authorities make clear that circulating petitions for candidates is a form of protected speech, and that the Commonwealth has a heavy burden to justify the restriction on speech by showing not only that the limitation achieves a valid state interest but also that the limitation is no broader in scope than necessary to achieve that purpose...For this reason, the Court believes that the plaintiffs have a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits, at least on the issue of the validity of the residency requirement.
In other words, the Virginia Republican primary ballot will likely have more names on it than just Ron Paul and Willard "Mitt" Romney. On the other hand, Willard should have clinched the nomination long before then, so it won't really make a difference in this election. As for future elections and other candidates, well that's a different story.
If you have been a regular reader of Daily Kos over the past few years, you will have few earthshaking moments while reading this book - almost all of the points Frank makes have appeared here, in front-page stories and in posts by reader. Nevertheless this book may qualify as essential reading for how much it brings together, and in the fashion it provides a coherent explanation of what has happened, from the strategy and tactics of those who have already destroyed trillions of the wealth of others in America and abroad, in the failure of Obama and Cogressional Democrats to have prevented it from happening and in allowing it - at least until recently - to continue pretty much unabated. Or, as Frank puts it near the end of his Introduction,
This is the story of a swindle that will have terrible consequences down the road. And although it sounds curious to say so, the newest Right has met its goals not by deception alone - although there has benn a great deal of this - but by offering and idealism so powerful that it clouds its partisans' perceptions of reality. (p. 12)
And if there is a key, brief takeaway that can be learned from how they operated, it is found on p. 33:
I love it, now that Democrats are in the White House, making recess appointments is "peeing on the constitution," according to drug-addled bigot and corporate tool Rush Limbaugh (and many others of his ilk). But wait, when Republican'ts controlled the White House, not only were recess appointments the greatest thing since sliced Wonder Bread (Rush's favorite food group, along with Twinkies and other crap that makes you obese?), but anyone who opposed those recess appointments was a "Stalinist." Got that? That's the Republican't Party line these days, apparently, so we might as well get used to spending some energy demolishing it.
The fact is, this current false "outrage" is utter hypocrisy by a party famous for it. It's just like how, when Reagan raised taxes a dozen times as president, while also racking up trillions in debt and growing government by leaps and bounds, it was hunky dorey for Republicans, who have pretty much sainted ol' Ronnie. But when Democrats like Bill Clinton slashed the deficit, or when Democrats like Barack Obama cut taxes for 95% of Americans, they're commie/pinkos/socialists/blahblahblah. Or, when conservatives pushed the individual mandate and "cap and trade" as enhancing personal responsibility and harnessing the power of the free market, that was fine. But the second Democrats start to push those conservative ideas?Oh, then they're EVIL! Sensing a pattern here? Hmmmm...gee, ya think?
In Eric Can'tor's hyper-ideological, immune-to-facts world, Ronald Reagan is a mythological hero who never compromised on his principles. In reality, as pointed out on The Ed Show, Reagan raised taxes 12 times in his presidency, including a 3-year, $100 billion tax hike (largest since World War II) and the largest corporate tax hike in history to that point. Reagan, of course, also backtracked and ended up negotiating with the Soviet Union (offering to give up all our ballistic missiles, no less!), which he had earlier called "the Evil Empire." Reagan also signed a large-scale amnesty for "illegal immigrants" into law, expanded government greatly, racked up huge amounts of debt, and pretty much violated every "principle" Eric Can'tor and his merry band of Teahadists holds dear. It's truly astounding that someone this hollow, this ignorant, and this mindlessly ideological can be House Majority Leader, in line to possibly be the next Speaker of the House. What an embarrassment (to Virginia, humanity, etc.).
I have no predictions about the Iowa Caucuses because they do not matter, not to me, and not to the matter of who will win the GOP nomination. Tradition notwithstanding, the Iowa Caucuses are one of the biggest bad jokes ever foisted upon Americans. An atypical electorate (Iowa Caucus goers are considerably more conservative than the population as a whole, even in Iowa) is so unrepresentative of Americans that it almost unAmerican to vest Iowa with so much clout in our electoral process. But here we are again, with the supposed Republican "presidentials" giving Iowans far more attention than nearly any other state gets. And nowhere else, but Iowa and New Hampshire do the candidates go door-to-door, routinely drop by diners in towns of any minor consequence and give voters such access. They give that kind of attention to voters who would turn on a dime. It would be laughable, as this article suggests, if it weren't so undemocratic. Send in the clowns (again).
If the Iowa caucuses have ever gotten it "right" (defined by voting for the one who actually got elected), prior to 2008, you had to go all the way back to 1976 to find Iowa predictive, in a Democratic caucus, not a GOP one. So bereft of any thinking capacity or any real conviction, person-on-the-street interviewees (and opinion poll responders) cannot make up their minds. They claim to be values voters and yet have so little conviction they keep moving their support with each new gust of political wind. As just one example, read the rationale in the article I link above. Yeh, I know, a single case does not an electorate make. But polling shows how very malleable are the Iowa voters who warm up to one and then another and then another candidate in a manner only ditzes would. Anyone can change his or her mind and do so reasonably--no question about that. BUT, this year Iowa has brought new meaning to the word "indecision." They are indecision on steroids. When that happens, voters no longer shape their own vote.
Essentially, the media are in charge and Iowa caucus goers are only too happy to dumb it up for them and allow the so-called mainstream media to influence them. Of course, they are then more susceptible to negative ads as well.
Hilarious. Now, what about DPVA (ok, ok, clearly it would have to be someone else!) doing one of these for Felix Macacawitz, Ken Kookinelli, Sideshow Bob, Eric Can'tor, and all other fine Teapublican'ts here in Virginia?
Although they have only two candidates on the ballot - Willard "Mitt" Romney and Ron Paul - the Virginia Republican Party apparently feels it needs to work even harder to reduce turnout for its presidential primary.
At the request of the Virginia Republican Party, the State Board of Elections voted 3-0 today to close the March 6 presidential primary and require a loyalty oath for participation.
That means anyone who wants to vote must sign a form at the polling place pledging to support the eventual Republican nominee for president. Anyone who refuses to sign the pledge will be barred from voting.
So much for Democrats flooding the polls en masse - not that this was ever likely to happen, but whatever - to vote against McDonnell's/Bolling's favorite, Mr. "Corporations are PEOPLE!" Gotta love these guys.
P.S. In related news, RPV Chair Pat Mullins says he followed the rules "by certifying the candidates who met the statutory requirements."
This is really turning into a freak show with the late return of "THE PLEDGE". RPV is demanding that voters in the Presidential primary sign one of their ridiculous pledges, and the SBE, chaired by longtime RPV fixture Charles Judd, voted to allow this. Unfortunately, as pointed out by Vivian Page, this is supposed to happen 90 days prior to the election date and may not be enforceable. Looks like another lawsuit coming down the pike.
The more I see of this whole process the more it stinks of an establishment push to help Romney at the expense of the other candidates.
Will the whining by these whiny waaaaaambulance-chasing Republican'ts never cease? First, we had megalomaniac Newt Gingrich comparing his failure to get on the Virginia Republican primary ballot as analogous to the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor (Tora! Tora! Tora! Incoming from the pissed-off Newt-ster at 12 o'clock!). Now, we've got the Missing Village Idiot joining the fray:
Texas Gov. Rick Perry filed a lawsuit today in the Eastern District of Virginia challenging the validity of a state statute that keeps him from appearing on the primary ballot, a news release from his campaign said.
Perry's Complaint for Declarative and Injunctive Relief names three members of the Virginia State Board of Elections, plus Republican Party of Virginia Chair Pat Mullins as defendants, claiming that they somehow violated Perry's "freedoms of speech and association protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution." Of course, Rick Perry is a quasi (or not so "quasi?") secessionist who fancies himself as a fierce defender of another Amendment - the Tenth - and a champion of "states' rights." How does Perry square his fidelity to the Tenth Amendment, which would presumably give Virginia and its Republican Party the right to set its own rules for primary ballot access, with his newfound support for the Fourteenth Amendment, which "protects a person's civil and political rights from being abridged or denied by any state"? Got me, but if asked, Perry would undoubtedly come up with three reasons, at least one of which he wouldn't be able to remember, and the other two of which he wouldn't understand. Gotta love the Republican't field for president this cycle, huh? Definitely NOT the "A Team," let's just put it that way.
P.S. This is also idiotic because Perry's most stupidest candidacy should be long gone by Virginia.
Speaking of discontent with the Republican field, I talked the other day to a pretty prominent conservative officeholder who's constantly been discussing with people around the country the possibility of a new entrant or a push to draft someone. But who?... It's hard to argue, though, with the bottom line of this conservative: In an election with enormous consequences for the future of our country, "we don't have our A team on the field."
Actually, this isn't tragic at all, except insofar as it indicates the decline and fall of the once-serious "Grand Old Party." Today, it's more like the "Gone Off (the deep end) Party." Bottom line: you know you're not a serious party when your front runners are: 1) a long-time political loser and champion for the 1% (0.1%?) who's flip-flopped on everything, including his support for cap and trade legislation, the individual mandate, abortion rights, gay rights, even his real first name; and 2) a bizarro, paranoid, conspiracy freak who hates gays, brown people, black people, Jews, Israel, the gub'mint, and black helicopters (but LOVES Mahmoud Ahmedinejad!). A few more comments courtesy of Whiskey Fire:
*"The fact that the GOP presidential field is only capable of coughing up a gang of clownish shysters and a laughably phony hack indicates that the GOP is not a political party, but Fox News by other means."
*"[W]e can throw out all statistical models about prior elections because the modern GOP has gone off the charts nuts."
*"Romney will probably win the nomination, but he is anyhow an astonshingly bad candidate."
That about sums it up. Feel free to pile on, or disagree (although I can't imagine a factual, reality-based reason for doing so) in the comments section.
(Rep. Connolly quote: "Speaker Boehner and the Tea Party Republicans capitulated to overwhelming public disgust with their intransigence." - promoted by lowkell)
BREAKING: Talking Points Memo reports: "A top Senate Democratic aide says House Republicans have privately offered up the terms of their surrender on the payroll tax cut."
If true - and you never know with BONEr, Can'tor, etc. - it's about freakin' time, but the writing was on the wall with tremendous pressure from President Obama and a unified Democratic Party against the House Teapublican extremists. See below, for instance, as President Obama explains the importance of extending the payroll tax cuts into 2012. Also, see the video on the "flip" for Rep. Jim Moran hitting Republicans for refusing to extend the payroll tax credit. Among other things, Rep. Moran emphasizes the disarray in the House Teapublican't caucus, and also how important $40 per paycheck is to those in the middle class and those working to get there.
"Enough is enough. The people standing with me today can't afford any more games. They can't afford to lose $1,000 because of some ridiculous Washington standoff. The House needs to pass a short-term version of this compromise." - President Obama
In addition to the outrageous, cowardly behavior demonstrated by Republican'ts in this video (they won't allow a vote on the Senate payroll tax cut bill, because they're terrified it might PASS!), other Republicans are piling on. For instance, 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain says "the failure of the House to approve the bipartisan Senate bill to extend the payroll-tax cut is 'harming the Republican Party.'" Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) says, "It angers me that House Republicans would rather continue playing politics than find solutions...Their actions will hurt American families and be detrimental to our fragile economy. We are Americans first; now is not the time for drawing lines in the sand." And the silence by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) - who voted for the bill, along with most Senate Republicans, the House Republicans are now desperately blocking, is deafening. I'd say this was particularly crazy, but sadly it isn't; just business as usual for John BONEr, Eric Can'tor and their crazy band of Teapublicans in the House (aka, "loony bin").
A bit earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives finally voted, de facto, to raise taxes on 160 million Americans as a Christmas/New Years gift to the country, apparently. Why did they do this? Simple: John Boehner lost control of his crazy caucus, specifically the ultra-rabid parts of it, who wouldn't even agree to something that Mitch McConnell and the vast majority of Senate Republicans just voted for a few days ago (and that John Boehner supported as well, just a few days ago).
Still, isn't this crazy, you ask, even for people who are...well, completely off the deep end? Yes, but my theory is that the House Teapublican'ts simply can't abide three things: 1) cutting taxes for non-super-rich people; 2) paying for tax cuts for middle class and working class Americans by raising taxes on the top 1%; and/or 3) giving Democrats and, specifically, President Obama, any sort of political "victory," even if in doing so they hurt America's economy. In the end, this will be the Teapublican Tax Increase of 2012, make no mistake about it, and specifically the Eric Can'tor/House Teapublican't Tax Increase of 2012.
Speaking of Eric Can'tor, he was one of 7 Virginia Republican'ts (also Forbes, Goodlatte, Griffith, Hurt, Rigell, and Wittman) who voted "aye" earlier today on a bill that was the height of cowardice -- refusing to even vote up or down on the payroll tax cut, and instead punting it to a non-existent committee (non-existent, because the Senate left town after overwhelmingly passing the tax cut, expecting that John BONEr would uphold his end of the deal, which he clearly has now failed to do). The only Virginia Republican't voting "nay" on this bill? Frank Wolf, who apparently must not be worried about a Tea Party challenge this time around, and instead is back to his game of pretending to be a "moderate," which he hasn't been for many, many years.
Needless to say, every Virginia Democrat voted "nay" on this steaming pile of horse manure. In fact, not one Democrat in the entire House voted for this, even the Blue Dogs, demonstrating how completely, wildly irresponsible this was. Did we just watch House Republicans commit political suicide for 2012? It's certainly possible, and if so, it's well deserved, for one of the most cowardly acts in Congress in many, many years.
UPDATE: I'm loving these new poll numbers (e.g., by a 19-point margin, Americans say they have more confidence in President Obama than in House Republican'ts), can't wait to see what they do after Americans realize Republicans just hit them with a big tax increase, for absolutely no good reason, to start 2012.
Here's Rep. Connolly's statement, which I strongly endorse. What's wrong with these House Teapublican'ts exactly? Are they on crack, are they off their meds, or - more likely - are they only interested in cutting taxes if it's for the top 1% (screw the other 99%, the Koch brothers and Grover Norquist don't care about them)? Sure seems like it. Anyway, enjoy the (House) Teapublican Tax Increase, everyone, because they're 100% the ones responsible for this situation (perhaps we should all send snarky thank-you notes to Eric Can'tor?).
Mr. Speaker,
It's Grinch time in Washington, Mr. Speaker. One is incredulous that House Republicans would oppose a tax cut for 160 million Americans. But that is just what they are going to do today.
Is this bill perfect? No. There are aspects upon which both sides disagree. But it is the area of agreement that should be the most important - Congress stops playing hostage politics and halts the tax hike on 160 million fellow citizens.
Saturday's Senate vote was 89 to 10, not just liberals I say to my friend from South Carolina, with all members of the Senate leadership, Republican and Democrat, voting in favor. If House Republicans vote against this compromise, they will ring in the New Year with a tax hike of their own making.
If House Republicans were serious about wanting certainty as they claim, they would vote for this bill today - and guarantee that 160 million Americans won't pay higher taxes on January 1st.
Mr. Speaker, rejecting this bill and holding up the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits will be a true example of how the GOP Grinch stole Christmas for 160 million Americans.
Four years ago almost to the day, Virginia Democrats like Creigh Deeds were busy - not to mention eagerly - revving up to run for governor in 2009. For instance, check out the announcement above, by Creigh Deeds, from December 13, 2007 (at the same time, national Democrats were salivating at the prospects of taking back the White House, as Bush's approval ratings were in the toilet bowl and the economy was sinking into recession). In response, another Virginia Democrat running for governor, Brian Moran, responded by (strongly) hinting that he'd be announcing for governor as well, but not until after the early 2008 General Assembly session. In reality, of course, Brian and Creigh were both running hard at this point in the cycle 4 years ago. And soon to follow were numerous Democratic candidates for LG (Jon Bowerbank, Jody Wagner, Mike Signer, etc.) and one strong one for AG (Steve Shannon).
This time around? Basically, we've got the sound of crickets chirping on the Democratic side, even as Republicans galore - Bill Bolling, Ken Cuccinelli, Keith Fimian, Corey Stewart, Pete Snyder, Dick Black, Jeff McWaters, Bob Marshall, Rob Bell, Mark Obenshain, Jill Holtzman-Vogel, and who knows who else in coming months - come out of the woodwork to eagerly throw their hats in the ring, or hint at doing so, for 2013.
In comparison, who's on the roster for Democrats? Well, we've got Terry McAuliffe probably possibly running for governor. We've got Chap Petersen and Ward Armstrong mentioned as possible 2013 candidates. In the former case, however, there are no signs of any moves to gear up for such a campaign. In the latter case...after getting his butt kicked (and spending a ton of $$$ doing so) this past cycle, plus pissing off a lot of Democrats with his conservadem distancing from/dissing of President Obama, c'mon Ward, you MUST be kidding! Another possibility for 2013 had been (at least theoretically) Tom Perriello, but he de facto took his name out of contention last week, as he accepted a great job heading up the Center for American Progress Action Fund (congratulations Tom -- smart move!).
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, and "trolling" (NOTE: that includes outright lies, whether about climate science, or what other people said, or whatever) 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!
As a diehard Democrat and Teddy Roosevelt progressive, I don't usually praise anything Sarah Palin does. To the contrary, I usually try to ignore her, or if I pay any attention at all, to mock her. Still, I've got to admit, she's got a following among the Teahadists. Check out her 
Polls close in South Carolina at 7 pm. Feel free to use this as an open thread to discuss the results of this primary, and also of the Teapublican primaries in general. Interesting, the 
Well, that didn't take long for Virginia Senate Republicans to start abusing their newfound power, going for the 
Well, well, well, isn't 
or, if you prefer the complete title of the new book by Thomas Frank, 
Although they have only two candidates on the ballot - Willard "Mitt" Romney and 
Will the whining by these whiny waaaaaambulance-chasing Republican'ts never cease? First, we had megalomaniac Newt Gingrich comparing his failure to get on the Virginia Republican primary ballot as analogous to the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor (Tora! Tora! Tora! Incoming from the pissed-off Newt-ster at 12 o'clock!). Now, we've got the 
I must say, 
