« Primary Thoughts | Main | Photo Of The Day »

June 12, 2012



I was shocked Bolling included Bobby May in his list of his top 100 supporters. Not a very bright political move but I guess that could be said for Bollings whole campaign. voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2008/10/mcdonnell_condemns_bobby_may.html


Lots of 'former' people listed, that's true. But as to the comments alluding that these people are grotesques -- do we really need to go there?

Bolling is a good man. He was often the lone voice and vote for limited government, a champion of principled leadership. Never a self-promoter, he acted out of a deep respect for our people & our Commonwealth, and the storied history that is the bedrock upon which we survive today.

One cannot step twice into the same stream of moving water. I get that. His time may have eclipsed him, and I get that, too.

But to trash him & his supporters as an ash-heap of has-beens? That is so far beneath what we should be building from & working toward that I simply cannot find the terms to express how tired & tawdry that is.

Get over yourselves. KC & Co. should be grateful for the living legacy created by these people. Step up to elect Mitt Romney as our next President, & George Allen back into the US Senate. Or has the cult of personality subsumed principled leadership?



I assume that you don’t share the same opinion as the “person” you received an e-mail from, so I will refrain from directing my comments at you and discuss the greater points of the issue with this comment and moreover this post.

This list might contain a lot of “formers” but at least these people step up and actually work for the Party and its nominees, no matter who they are. That is the responsibility of being in leadership and I doubt very few of your readers actually understand or appreciate the time and service these people have given to the Party and Republican candidates.

As Republican activists, we have a responsibility to ensure the Party remains grounded in conservative thought and we nominate conservative candidates. Of course, conservatism is a “word” that gets tossed around as though it can be summed up and neatly packaged to provide a label for the candidate du jour. But, conservatism is much deeper than that and the use of the cliché “RINO” by some shows the ignorance of those that are so eager to dismiss qualified candidates whom they don’t agree with 100% of the time. This goes for candidates for both public and intra-party office.

I remember distinctly this blog vowing to support Jeff Frederick through his entire impeachment because it was the “establishment” who was seeking to oust the “grassroots” conservative Chairman in order to get a handpick replacement. No! It was because Jeff embezzled money from RPV and engaged in a multitude of other activities such as purchasing his personal Christmas cards with RPV resources and paying for his legislative office with RPV resources. How can you justify that behavior? You justify it by turning a blind eye to it and not reporting it but waste little time in providing a platform for people to attack folks you deem as part of the “establishment.”

Yes, there are divisive people on this list…Anna Lee is one that immediately comes to mind, and I readily admit that. However, for every divisive person on this list, I am sure I can identify one on Ken Cuccinelli’s list. My point is that politics is made of many different people and different personalities and it is easy to cast this list of individuals as divisive without looking at the other side. Here are a few names of divisive people who ultimately lost positions of leadership through incompetence:

·         Pat McSweeney

·         Jeff Frederick

·         Morton Blackwell (1996)

·         Howie Lind

Howie Lind? What is that you say? Yes, the wonderful former Chairman of the 10th District who sent us all so many e-mails was using a debit card that was linked to the 10th District’s bank account and reimbursing himself gas and hotel charges WITHOUT Committee approval. Why is this acceptable? I find it appalling that this blog has reported on none of this, while a Chairman was spending precious resources on himself without the appropriate authorization from his committee. And when you talk about divisive people, perhaps you add Howie to the top of your list because I have seen how he divided the 10th District up for his own selfish purposes.

Admittedly, Chris you come from a “wing” of the Party that hates the so called establishment. You hate them because you’ve never been part of the group, so it’s easier to rail against it than to work hard and earn a position of leadership. Though, if rumor is correct you used to be Vice Chairman of the City of Fairfax Republican Committee. Isn’t it ironic that when YOU held a position of leadership you weren’t part of the “establishment?”  That is the ultimate weakness of your argument. Anyone who becomes a leader in the Party, whether it be a District Chairman, or a Unit Chairman or a Magisterial District Chairman becomes part of the “establishment” when they earn a position that allows them to make decisions that impact the direction of the Party.

It is easy for those who aren’t in positions of responsibility to attack those who are. It is easy to armchair quarterback and it is easy to nitpick the decisions made by some as having some sinister purpose. It is far harder to pick up the phone and inquire as to why a decision was made a certain way or, more importantly ask the important question: How can I help be part of the solution. For your sake, I wish your blog was read as much as the National Review but it isn’t, so rather that blog about “all the e-mails you receive” maybe you could join those of us in the trenches fighting to keep a strong Republican Party that elects good conservative candidates.

I am not attacking you, Chris. I think you are a valued member of our Party and sometimes you make very cogent arguments on this blog. But other times I question some of the positions you espouse and more importantly those of your readers who seem more intent on destroying the Republican Party than building it, more focused on burning people to the ground rather than uniting together and more interested in an “all or nothing approach” to the governance of the Republican Party and the country.

It seems to this humble reader that many folks who write, blog and comment here at Mason Conservative are contrarian in nature. If I say the sky is blue, they say it’s pink. If I say George Allen is great, they say he is a R.I.N.O, even though in my decade of involvement I never thought I’d hear the words George Felix Allen and RINO in the same sentence.

One last point, which actually ties in to earlier comments made. Last night, Jamie Radtke had her backside handed to her in the Primary. And so, she sent an e-mail to her supporters thanking them for everything. I happen to be on her e-mail list (though I did not support her) and I was a bit shocked that rather than simply thanking her supporters and congratulating George on his win, and thanking Jackson and Marshall on a good campaign she never once mentioned any of that and instead embarked on a nasty tone that seemed to embody the way she ran her entire race: full of condescension, bitterness and paranoia. This attitude is corrosive to our Party and rather than allowing it to fester, we should endeavor to stomp it out wherever we see it.


I have to chuckle at this condemnation. I recall a time when endorsements lists were primarily filled with "formers" as the current chairmen and committee men did not endorse during the nomination process...


Locally - I guess the Stoekel's (longtime Cuccinelli supporters) noticed that Ken had not reciprocated their past support by supporting Becky's reelection as 11th district chair.

The comments to this entry are closed.