Hey, Pat Herrity opened this can of worms when he said would never vote to increase taxes. If your going to be a congressman, don't run away from the repercussions of your votes.
1. The official minutes of Fairfax County Board of Supervisors show Pat
Herrity voted with every Democrat on the board to “set the real property tax rate at
$1.04 per $100 of assessed value.As a result of this action, the real
property tax rate for calendar year 2009 will increase by $0.12 over the
real property tax rate for calendar year 2008 of $0.92 per $100 of
assessed value.” Supervisor
Herrity voting “AYE.” (emphasis added by me)
Washington Post wrote, May 1, 2009, “Local officials have
promoted their efforts to keep the average tax bill from rising. But
not everyone was spared: More than 150,000 households in Fairfax County
alone will owe more than they did last year.”
This is not rhetoric. It is fact. Pat Herrity can
object to the facts, but it does not make them any less true. Pat
Herrity voted to raise the real property tax rate on Fairfax County
homeowners by 12 cents per $100 of assessed value. This rate change
amounts to $550 on the average homeowner in Fairfax County.
Obama unleashed the full power of the federal government to help with an environmental disaster in the Gulf Coast (which he should). BUT, for the last two years the Arizona border has been as open as a storm drain, and they do nothing? Arizona passes a law because it has too, because as a state they do not have the money or means to control their border. When its an environment disaster, we get action. But when it involves the illegal flooding of a state Obama and Co. not only shrug their shoulders but call them racists and will likely seek litigation. The real reason of course is that these illegals will somehow get a job with a government either local, state, or federal and be able to join one of the public sector unions.
You don't like what Arizona did, libs? They had no choice! The federal government, from the day Obama took office, has failed in spectacular fashion to maintain the integrity of our borders. In fact, I dare say the progressives infesting the executive branch want these folks here. Instead of calling Arizona racist, how about you do your job?
Charlie Crist ceased being a Republican the moment he publicly embraced President Obama and his tragic bailout agenda (both literally and politically). Its time now that Marco Rubio can paste him up and down Florida. Crist is the epitome of a politician who's principles are simply personal gain. There are thousands of people who spent precious time and money to help his political career. This has nothing to do with the usual arguments of "the party left me behind" or crap like that. Its about Charlie Crist wanting to be a US Seantor just so he can sign his name Senator Crist. That's it. He has no over-arching principles, no real reason for running.
Both Marco Rubio and Kendrick Meek, at this point, are far superior men for this seat. Of course I strong support Rubio, and this has to be a bleak day for Meek. Whatever crossover and independent votes he was hoping to win are gone. But I predict Crist will crash and burn. This isn't like Joe Leiberman, who put decades of work into the party and had built a resevoir of good will with the voters of his state. Crist just wants this for himself.
This is also a huge blow to Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, and NSCC. These guys went out of their way to recruit Crist and backed him to the hilt. Rubio has gone out and won the argument within the Republican Party, and instead of taking his medicine and moving on, Crist will now seek to once again put himself above everything else. This puts into serious question that judgement of Cornyn, McConnell and Co. Remember, they sought out Crist after he appeared with Obama. This is on top of the NSCC last year backing Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey until he switched parties. How can we trust their hand-picked choices like Dan Coats, Jane Norton, among others?
On top of what a mess the RNC has turned in to, now this with the NSCC? Its like we are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory with these guys? Specter, Crist, who's next? The House Republicans under Pete Sessions seem to have things in order, how did a reliable conservative like Cornyn fall for these guys? Its so frustrating to see what's going on in the country and know that this could be are year, and then clowns like Cornyn and McConnell read one poll and decide the "moderate" must be supported every time. But its the conservatives like Marco Rubio and Pat Toomey who have hit the ground hard and won the argument with the voters. Why is it so hard for the DC crowd to just get the hell out of the way?
Northrup Grumman will move their world headquarters to Virginia after fierce competition from Maryland and DC. This is a major win for McDonnell and for Virginia, proving that his philosophy of limited open-government, a business-friendly attitude, and low taxes that not only keeps business in Virginia but attracts major global companies to our area. Look at what NG President Wes Bush had to say as why Virginia got the nod:
"Our final decision was driven largely by facility considerations,
proximity to our customers, and overall economics."
I get that politics is a tough sport. If you don't win, your out. I get that. I even understand the decision by the FCRC leadership boot Mychelle Brickner out. Springfield has not performed the way we needed it too in the Herrity special election and in the Hunt and Bolognese elections. All three could have been won had we performed better in our strong areas. If Pat Herrity could have gotten out Springfield the way Sharon Bulova got Braddock out, he could have won. But we didn't, and combined with the special elections this year that took some steam out of races I suppose it is time for new leadership in Springfield.
But that begs the question, why is Mychelle Brickner being held to a different standard than Pat Herrity? Yes, Brickner is the chair of the distirct, but Herrity is the elected supervisor and head of the party. If Brickner didn't do enough, what about Herrity and his organization? Shouldn't they share the blame in all of this? How come nobody is asking why Pat Herrity's organization didn't get out the vote for Steve Hunt in Springfield? Why is it now Brickner's fault? Pat is working very hard to establish himself as the leader of the local party, the heir to Tom Davis. If you ask me, Pat Herrity should shoulder even more of the blame than Brickner because he is the elected, visible leader of the local party who clearly did not do enough. If he wants to be Tom Davis, he's got a lot of work to do. And while I get why Brickner is being removed, it seems like another way to help Herrity save face and dodge the responsibility of the lagging campaigns in Springfield.
Then there is Chairman Bedell, who has nobody to blame but himself for the attacks being levied at him with regards to this. First off, if the Fimian folks take the line that Bedell is anti-women, they need to stop. This has nothing to do with gender. But when a powerful county chairman takes sides in a contentious local race like this, every single move he makes will be questioned and second-guessed, seen through the prism of his endorsement rather than the true justification of the move. I don't feel sorry for him for one minute, he decided to take sides and alienate large parts of his party. He didn't have to do this. He didn't have to allow his name to be put on an endorsement list. Lyle Beefelt in Prince William didn't do this, and neither did Jim Kaplan in Fairfax City. What does Bedell expect? He chose sides while holding a position that is suppose to be a leader for all. And yeah, I know, he endorsed Cuccinelli blah blah blah - but this is much different and if you don't think it is your a fool. He has nowhere near the power in a statewide race that he does here, as proof by his appointments of district chairman. The narrative now is Bedell endorsed Herrity, then fires Brickner for endorsing Fimian. If Bedell had stayed out of it, it would have been Bedell doesn't reappoint Brickner for poor Springfield performance. Yeah there would have been whispers, but not like this.
This whole mess is so distasteful and so avoidable. Mychelle Brickner has been a tremendous Republican leader of the last fifteen years and deserves better than this. Anthony Bedell is the best chairman this county has ever seen since I've been active but has alienated many of the people who want to support him fully by taking sides in this. And Pat Herrity, the golden boy, gets a pass for his own responsibility in the problems in Springfield because he gets to hang Brickner out now.
Ugh. Its enough to make you want to live in the 8th.
Oh, I think I've found my 2012 candidate. Barbour, Thune, Perry, Palin - all good choices but nobody that I can tell has done more in the trenches in DC to fight Obama's takeover of America every day on every issue than South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint. I haven't talked about him before in this regard because before this, DeMint has balked at talk of running. Not only his work in Congress, but his work in attempting to nominate strong, fresh-faced conservatives to the Senate (Rubio in FL, Buck in CO, DeVore in CA, Toomey in PA, and Stutzman in IN). DeMint is attempting to not just elect Republicans, because that is not good enough. We need to elect authentic conservatives in the seat we can so we can make sure the second failures of the last GOP regime doesn't happen again.
Ironically, if he does run, Sen. DeMint might have the same problems that John McCain had but the exact opposit. While DeMint fires up the base, the mere existence of the Senate Conservative Fund has put him at odds with John Cornyn and the NSCC where they were behind the recruitments of Crist, Norton, Fiorina, and Coats. If DeMint's gamble pays off - he nominates his conservatives and they win - he will be in a very strong position. If it fails, it won't look good. Logic has it that Mitt Romney is the favorite, but that's before anyone has really started talking about what needs to be done.
Anyways, of DeMint decides this is what he wants to do I'm all in.
Look for an absolute barnburner tonight on Showtime at 9pm when the second leg of the second round of the Super Six World Boxing Classic takes place in Denmark. Though the opinion isn't universal, I have loved every second of the super middleweight round-robin tournament. Its done a number of things well, most importantly putting top fighters in the ring with each other over and over again in compelling match-ups. There have been some nagging problems - Jermain Taylor bowing out and Allen Green replacing him, the Froch-Dirrell decision, the end of the Abraham-Dirrell fight - but that's boxing. It happens. This fight has the makings for a potential fight of the year candidate. Both defy the reputation of European fighters - they are monsters, fierce punchers, and rugged fighters with tough chins and great gas tanks. Froch is bruising Brit who does whatever it takes to win, while Kessler is the more polished fighter with a deep resevoir of experience. Froch is undefeated with his best wins against Jean Pascal, Jermain Taylor, and Andre Dirrell. Kessler has 42 wins to his name against only 2 loses.
Froch, the WBC world champion, is as tough as they come. To watch him fight, he's not impressive when you look at the raw talent. He does nothing fancy and frequently falls behind in fights (see Taylor and Dirrell). But he's probably the toughest man in the tournament, has a fire hydrant chin, and serious knockout power. He's also rough in the ring, willing to throw a hip toss, lead with his head, and fight on the inside. In the Dirrell fight, he was losing the early rounds then decided to get a little dirty and threw Dirrell off his game. In the Taylor fight before the Super Six, Taylor boxed circles around him but Froch kept coming forward and wore Taylor down before TKOing him in the final seconds of the last round. He is undefeated and is one of the most mentally tough fighters out there. He never believes he's out of a fight.
Kessler is the more experience and polished fighter. He's fought nearly 50 times and has two losses to his name, to the great Joe Calzaghe and last year to Andre Ward in Oakland in the last of the first round fights. Kessler was seen as one of the favorites (with Abraham) in the tournament, but he was thoroughly outclassed by the athletic Ward in the Oakland fight despite a couple of accidental headbutts. In many ways, physically, Kessler is as close to a perfect fighter there is. But though he has some good wins (Andrade, Mundine), in his two major fights in America Kessler has failed. His superfight with Calzaghe was between two undefeated champions that saw Calzaghe outclass a game but outgunned Kessler. Then last year in the Ward fight, his first in America, he came out slow as Ward danced circles around him to take his title.
This could be the difference in the fight. They complement each other well and it will be an intriguing fight. Kessler has struggled with the limelight of big American fights, and showed in the Ward fight he doesn't do well with some of the dirty tricks of boxing, of which Froch is a master. But Froch has shown an ability to fall behind badly against polished boxers like Taylor and Dirrell, but neither were able to finish him. For reference, Kessler has 32 KO/TKOs in his career and clearly is a finisher. So what wins out? Froch's rough and tumble style, or Kessler's polished power boxing? I think it comes down to the old saying, mind over matter. Kessler has not done well in big fights and one has to wonder how he comes back from the pasting Ward put on him. Froch is the strongest mental fighter out there, he never believes a fight is over and that is how he has overcome his lack of natural ability. Kessler starts strong, like everyone does against Froch, but the Cobra hangs in there and starts stealing rounds mid-way through the fight and ends it in the 12th.
He better, because this fight is in Denmark, where the Danish Kessler has never lost. Froch got a hometown decision against Dirrell, that won't happen this time.
I wanted to take a few days and collect my thoughts on the rumors of former Rep. Tom Davis is mulling a bid to return as Chairman of Fairfax County. Most know that I don't hold the fondest feelings for Rep. Davis, but not necessarily for his politics. What has bothered me is Davis taking to anyone who will listen about what Republicans need to do to win, but when times got tough in 2007 and 2008 he basically abandoned us. It is what it is.
At first I thought it was nonsense, I was surprised to think that he might challenge Sharon Bulova, whom he has gotten along with. But the more I thought of it, the more things started to make sense. Whatever you think of Davis, his career did not end well. In 2007, he sacrificed every other Republican in Northern Virginia to get his wife reelected in a district that was entirely inside the 11th district and lost by ten points. He told anyone who would listen that he was all in for a US Senate run but ceded the nomination to Jim Gilmore by convention rather than fight it. He then refused to run for reelection for Congress, sending that seat crashing down to the Democrats. It was a bitter end to a charmed political life. Just four years earlier, Davis watched election returns from the White House as NRCC chairman. He has a lot to prove and still has something he feels like he has to do.
The Chairman of Fairfax County is a powerful position. The county is gigantic and powerful, with a budget of its own that clears half the states in the Union. Someone could run for governor from this position. Or even the US Senate. Its also a position that works best for Davis's strengths - the budget, taxes - and does not deal with a lot of the social issues that have caused him problems with conservatives. I can see Davis seeing himself coming into the chairmanship, cleaning up the county budget and going statewide based on this record and a huge base to run from.
But I'm still worried about the numbers. The county is very different than it was in 1991, 1994, or 2004. His wife's reelection race should prove that. This is a Democrat county, we can only rely on three magisterial districts (Springfield, Sully, Drainsville) to go our way. Sharon takes Braddock no matter what, and the rest of the county is overwhelmingly Democratic. If Tom runs, it won't be the slam dunk a lot of Republican insiders think it is.
I also don't want our party to once again become The Tom Davis Republican Party. The Party where we run, do, and say whoever and whatever Tom wants. I saw local campaigns get lazy and shrug "Tom knows what to do." I don't want the Republican Party to be the vehicle for Tom Davis's ambitions. He's not entitled to anything anymore than anyone else is. We've done and seen this before, back in 2007. If he wants to run to solve problems in the county, huzzah for him. But if he's running for himself, to heal the self-inflicted wounds of the last few years and to use it as a stepping stone for his own personal ambition, I say no. I'm tired of the powerful people in this party using it to support their friends over open competition and our entire candidates. We need a candidate for Chairman who's there not only to serve the county, but build the party, not just themselves.
Jay O'Brien for State
SenatePlease come join us
to kick off Jay O'Brien's State Senate campaign for the 39th Senate
District (Fairfax County/Prince William) on May 12th, 2010 at the
Waterford (6715 Commerce Street, Springfield, VA 22150) from 6-8PM with
honorable guest Governor Bob McDonnell. Sponsorship Levels: Host:
$1000 Benefactor: $500 Patron: ...$250 Friend: $100 Family: $40 Individual:
$25 Students: Free RSVP to Kerry O’Brien at (703) 629-8838 or
at firstname.lastname@example.org. Please make checks payable to “Friends
of Jay O’Brien” and mail them to PO Box 432, Clifton, VA 20124 or
donate online at www.jayobrien.org. Paid for and authorized by
Friends of Jay O’Brien
I don't know, seems like we still have some unfinished business in the 11th and 8th to get through in November. But the again, perhaps it shows he's ready to run full-on this year instead of coming on too late last time around. Maybe he's worried about the challenge from his right by Scott Martin. I don't know. All I know is fun blog speculation about who will run where is one thing, but having a formal kick-off 18 months before a state senate election? What do you think?
Looks like Delegate Tim Hugo will take over as caucus chairman, winning it over John O'Bannon. Nothing wrong with O'Bannon, he's a great conservative but Hugo's impending election is an important move for the state party towards fully engaging Northern Virginia instead of playing it safe and trying to keep it around the margins. This is a job that one can do things with, as Brian Moran showed on the Democrat side. Real candidate recruitment and money can be funneled through this office its a big deal that we have one of our own that hopefully will ensure that our candidates get fully supported.
Am I the only one thinking that this primary for the 11th CD needs to be over and over now?
I still steadfastly support Keith Fimian, but the arguing between the two seems so petty and inconsequential. I support Keith mostly because he's his own man while Herrity, to me, is just another pol born out of the Tysons's business crowd. Not that I wouldn't support him, I would without a doubt. But while the two of them are messing around with earmak ban posturing and tax cut commitments, Gerry Connolly outraised both of them combined and has over $1 million on-hand. We seem to think that this district is still the same it was in 2000 or 2004 when George W. Bush won the district. Its not, and these guys need to start running seriously instead of trying to hit each other with "gotcha" moment. Gerry Connolly is an absolute beast to run against, and I'm wondering if both these guys think that since the cycle seems so good, they can coast. Nobody can coast against Gerry Connolly.
Chris Cillizza has more about the speculation of what Haley Barbour will do in 2012 and argues that right now Barbour is the most influential Republican out there. I'm beginning to think he is right. Barbour is the jack-of-all-trades Republican. He's an insider and an outsider. He's a parochial southern politician and a national powerhouse. He's a down-home governor and a former RNC Chairman. But most importantly, as a governor, he has performed and done so remarkably in a state not particularly known for talented executives. Like I said in a previous post, its ironic that perhaps the best candidates Republicans could run against the first black president is a "fat redneck" governor from Mississippi that is deeply conservative.
Right now, Barbour seems like one of the few people who could right now unite all the Republican factions.
Lately on several posts of mine on local and state issues, "Howie Lind" has become a frequent commentator. Many know Howie Lind as a 10th district activist, state central member, and someone running for the 10th district chairmanship. As a rule, I do not edit comments except for occasional language . . . my mother reads this blog afterall. I also don't make people wait for approval. My blog, for those kind enough to read and/or care about what I think, is an open forum.
Tonight, I was contacted by Howie Lind. I had some suspicion that this commenter wasn't him because I peruse many Virginia blogs and haven't seen him on there. He called me tonight to let me know that THIS POSTER WAS NOT HIM. Whoever is posting under his name, I have banned the IP address. Anyone else posting under "Howie Lind" will be banned as well.
I apologize to Mr. Lind for allowing my blog to be used to harm his campaign. I like Howie Lind and support his race for chairman. But what angers me even more is that this is just another check mark against blogs, turning what I believe is the most democratic form of individual free speech and citizen-journalism into another vehicle to defame and hurt somebody anonymously. I apologize to Mr. Lind and hope that everyone out there can respect what I'm saying irregardless of where you fall on local party issues. This hurts all bloggers. I know things get heated - which I like - but lets not due things that hurt people dishonestly.
Someone I trust did an IP search and the address for the person who was posting under Howie's name and here is what came up.
Not sure if that means anything.
UPADTE PART II
I'm confirmed that this IP address was used from a public library computer in Burke.
In responding to my George Allen post, Blue Virginia makes this stunning claim:
In the final analysis, I don't really see how "Felix Macacawitz" is significantly different than "Pat Robertson's Manchurian Candidate" or Kookinelli. They're all hard-right conservatives through and through, both on economic and social issues. The only real difference? McDonnell and Cooch won their last elections; Allen lost his. And there's nothing people like less than a "loser."
He doesn't even try to figure out "why" McDonnell won and Allen lost. And its that attitude, the idea that McDonnell was the same as Allen and Kilgore and Earley, is the reason why we won and Deeds lost. McDonnell, and indeed Bolling and Cuccinelli as well, because they took the initiative on all the major issues out there and put forth the better argument. It was a campaign about jobs, and how government wasn't the answer. McDonnell talked endlessly about the need for government to support the free market, not usurp it. He put Deeds on the defensive, who was just waiting for a maccaca/death penalty ad moment. When it came, its all he had. McDonnell had built a level of credibility that protected him from the shrieks of the left.
I see things coming full-cricle. These guys talk about "Pat Robertson's Manchurian candidate" and "Kookinelli" because they have lost touch with where the people are. Its what we did over the last decade where we pointed at Webb, Warner, and Kaine and just yelled "liberal!" We didn't have anything else. We do now, and they don't. So as long as they thing McDonnell, Bolling, and Cuccinelli are just like Allen except they won and he lost, we will continue to win because its proof they still have failed to read where the population of commonwealth is and who they trust.
TC got the ball rolling this week with a thread discussing the likely possibility of George Allen making a comeback for his US Senate seat painfully lost to Jim Webb in 2006. Trust me, I was in the middle of it and it was painful. Had he been reelected as was expected, I for sure believe Allen would have emerged as the true conservative answer to the moderate John McCain and the charlatan Mitt Romney. One on one against Obama without maccaca, who knows what would have happened. And its the pain in that loss that I think many of conservatives and Republicans welcome the idea of Allen running again. Allen's lost helped lose the Senate, and we feel a lot of the crap he took wasn't fair. And it wasn't. But the reasons Allen lost are deeper than picking on a Democrat tracker with a strange word taken as a slur.
The Virginia of 2006, even 2010, was a much different place than the one George Allen came up in the 1980s in the General Assembly and in 1993 when he ran for governor. The explicit conservatism of the suburbs and new evangelical energy coming out the Reagan era into the Gingrich era no loner existed in 2006, and nor does it exist now. Though I wasn't around for the early campaigns, I've read about them and from what I can tell George Allen never adapted to how Virginia changed. Between 1993, 2000, and 2006 the state moved to the center. That is undeniable. The gains made by Democrats where based on a Mark Warner-style centrism based on making Virginia good for business and good for jobs. Warner succeeded in marginalizing the perception of Republicans a roughneck right-wingers more interested in abortion that jobs in Southwest or transportation funding in NoVA and Hampton Roads. A lot of the proof Democrats used in marginalizing Republicans is the style of conservatism that Allen ran and won on. Jerry Kilgore, the absolute low-point of Republican statewide candidates, was an Allen protege. Because Allen's Senate term stretched across this Democrat sweep, he avoided most of this. His reputation was still strong and his reelection was a shoe-in as long as he had weak opponents and stayed away from tough issues. But once he said what he said, it allowed New Virginia to take a second look at Allen and realized that he had lost touch with the commonwealth, and while on the surface it was about maccaca, in reality standing behind that were all the new issues facing Virginia that had exploded in the years after Allen was governor and that Democrats had won over the voters on the issues that mattered most.
I've gone over my theory of Old Virginia vs. New Virginia. I won't do it again. But I believe that in the Republican orbit, Allen is Old Virginia. We saw how Republicans can win in New Virginia in 2009. McDonnell, Bolling, and Cuccinelli showed us how you can be an aggressive conservative and use that as a solution to the every day problems of the folks out there. McDonnell talked about jobs, they all talked about jobs. Our candidates talked about jobs for the House of Delegates. And we won, we won big. McDonnell led the way, getting out ahead of an issue that mattered most in this bad economy. We can't turn our backs away from what we accomplished. It might sound harsh to some, but returning to George Allen is returning to the Republicanism of 2005 and 2006, where we talk about conservatism aimlessly without the glue of a real agenda behind it. And maybe I'm wrong, maybe Allen is the right man again, maybe he's learned. But at this stage of his career, can you believe he has?