Virginia Right!

Today come to the National Day of Prayer at 530 and then afterwards head over to the Mechanicsville Tea Party to hear John Taylor of the Virginia Policy Institute speak on the Battle for the Soul of America:  The philosophy of the Founding Fathers v. progressivism.  Sounds like a great speech and I am sorry I can’t make it.  If you can be there, go there!

MTP is moving its meeting nights to Wednesdays!  Starting in June – first and third Wednesday!  7pm.

Also I have a report that the Mathews County GOP, following the lead of Gloucester and Middlesex County, has come out against Agenda 21.  The best thing would be a resolution at the state level – the GOP state convention in June.  If you are a delegate (I am too) that is a worthy goal.

OFFICIAL HINT:  I am hearing the head of Democrats Against Agenda 21 is coming to Virginia…more on a future posting…

Next time someone says, Ron Paul has not won a state yet, show them this article from a local MN newspaper (The Pierce County Herald):

Paul’s campaign swept all the delegate and alternate slots in Congressional District No. 2, which south metro suburbs and CD 4 which is St. Paul, Ramsey County and the east metro. Paul’s forces also won two delegate slots each in CD 1, which is southern Minnesota and CD 8 which is northern Minnesota.

All the CD conventions have conclude and Paul has won 20 out of the 24 delegate slots at stake and nearly all of the alternates.

TWENTY of 24!  WOW!   This media source speculated that Paul will probably carry the state convention.  But narrow losses reported in Missouri show we cannot be complacent!  The Paul delegates need to show no matter what!

The latest Gallup poll shows Mitt Romney leading Barack Obama by 5 points 48% to 43%.

As the Republican Primary draws to a close and everyone has come to the realization that Mitt Romney is going to be the Republican nominee, voters are starting to move away from the failed policies of Obama and are looking for real leadership.

As the Republicans have all but stopped ripping one another and focused their attention on Obama, the efforts are starting to move the needle.

And one of the biggest factors in the shift from Obama has been the focus that the Republican Party has begun to place on the failures and outrageous lies from the Obama Administration.

These two ads are having a big impact. And using Obama’s own words and promises to remind voters of all the rainbow promises this man made and has failed to deliver on has opened a lot of eyes.

And just as effective is the number of Administration officials and Obama cronies who are now being forced to testify in front of Congress about their misdeeds. And for an administration that has nothing but hatred and disdain for the US Constitution, it appears these Obama supporters have found a favorite amendment – the 5th!

Not since the last Democratic Administration have we seen so many people refuse to answer questions because they fear criminal charges.

Americans are waking up to Obama.

Finally!

Once again, President Obama took time today to press for a tax hike, his “Buffett Tax,” instead of addressing unemployment, high gas prices, or even this country’s debt crisis. Of course, the Buffett Tax would do basically nothing to help solve any of these serious problems.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell blasted Obama’s focus on this tax hike in a statement this morning, saying, “Sadly, an administration that promised it would focus on jobs is wasting yet another day on a political event that won’t take a single person off the unemployment line. With millions out of work, gas at nearly $4.00 a gallon, and the election still seven months away, Republicans are calling on the President to join us in support of the dozens of jobs and energy bills that have passed the House but are stalled in the Democrat-led Senate. We should be focused on jobs and energy legislation that can pass—not tax-hike show-votes designed to fail.”

The White House itself has said that the Buffet Tax “was never our plan to bring the deficit down and get the debt under control” and according to The Hill today, “Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) on Wednesday acknowledged GOP criticisms that the Obama administration’s Buffett Rule ‘isn’t going to balance the budget,’ but argued that the proposal was important as a matter of ‘values’ and ‘fairness.’ ‘This is an issue about fairness,’ Coons said on MSNBC. ‘It isn’t going to balance the budget, but it is important for values and for showing some fairness.’”

And National Journal wrote yesterday that “[i]f you’re an unemployed American . . . . you’ll realize the Buffett Rule has nothing to do with helping you, or 13 million other Americans looking for work as of March, find a job.”

Interestingly, the president was rather defensive about his tax proposal this morning. The AP notes, “President Barack Obama says his call for raising taxes on millionaires is not a redistribution of wealth . . . .” And Yahoo News writes, “President Barack Obama defended his ‘Buffett Rule’ proposal for higher taxes on the very rich Wednesday, denying it was a reelection campaign ‘gimmick’ that will do little to close the deficit or spur job growth.”

Of course, National Journal pegged the Buffett Tax yesterday, with an analysis piece concluding that it is in fact a political gimmick: “[I]t tells America’s job-seekers, don’t worry, we’re going to make the tax code look more fair to you. Lots of polls suggest that’s a good political argument. But that’s what it is: a political pitch.”

I like this resolution from the Denver County GOP on ICLEI and Agenda 21!  It’s short, sweet and to the point.  Here it is:

RESOLUTION 5 – Opposing the United Nations Agenda 21

Whereas, The United Nations Agenda 21 promotes international directives and agendas and such as “smart growth”
and “sustainable development” through the use of unrepresentative government boards to create taxes or otherwise
obtain public funds resulting in the regulation and management of Colorado citizens; and

Whereas, the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI, is a UN accredited Non-
Governmental Organization which helped author and whose design is the implementation of the action plan of
Agenda 21;

Therefore be it resolved that we support for the right of the citizens of Colorado to acquire, use and dispose of real
property. We reject any and all UN Agenda 21 programs, projects, treaties and contracts that jeopardize private
property rights and create unrepresentative local entities; and

Be it further resolved that we endorse AN ACT prohibiting the state of Colorado and the counties, cities and
municipal agencies of Colorado from implementing programs of, expending money for, receiving funds from or
contracting with the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.

(Sponsored by the Resolutions Committee)

Good!  Let’s see a resolution like that throughout our Commonwealth at our Congressional District and State Conventions!

What’s up, Sandy?  Hawai’i independence?  American Samoa, too?  Are you nuts? Hear me out!  I am not advocating independence.  But I was concerned about this article about American Samoa.  This attitude concerns me:

According to the AP, local GOP chairman Victor T. Tofaeono, a superdelegate, is hopeful caucus attendees will agree to commit all nine delegates to one candidate.

“That will be the aim of our caucus,” he said.

I can see one reason why many in American Samoa might like Romney (The islands are 25% Mormon) but a bit of history might offer another darker reason:  Colonial mentality.

The history of American Samoa is not pretty.  Basically, foreign powers decided that this group of islands should be divided into two colonies:  Western Samoa (Ceded to Germany and later New Zealand and now the independent nation of Samoa) and American Samoa (we know who got this colony).  Both Germany and New Zealand suppressed moves for independence:

The Mau was a non-violent movement for Samoan independence from colonial rule during the early 1900s. The word ‘Mau’ means ‘opinion’ or ‘testimony’ denoting ‘firm strength’ in Samoan. The motto for the Mau were the words Samoa mo Samoa (Samoa for Samoa).

The movement had its beginnings on the island of Savai’i with the Mau a Pule resistance in the early 1900s with widespread support throughout the country by the late 1920s.^[1] As the movement grew, leadership came under the country’s chiefly elite, the customary matai leaders entrenched in Samoan tradition and fa’a Samoa.^[2] The Mau included women who supported the national organisation through leadership and organisation as well as taking part in marches. Supporters wore a Mau uniform of a navy blue lavalava with a white stripe which was later banned by the colonial administration.^[3]

The Mau movement culminated on 28 December 1929 in the streets of the capital Apia, when the New Zealand military police fired on a procession who were attempting to prevent the arrest of one of their members. The day became known as Black Saturday. Up to 11 Samoans were killed, including Mau leader and high chief Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III with many others wounded. One New Zealand constable was clubbed to death by protesters.^[4]

So what did the United States do – surely an election to determine the fate of their section of Samoa, right Sandy?  No, the US authorities banned the Mau leader from coming to American Samoa:

After World War I, during the time of the Mau movement in Western Samoa (then a League of Nations mandate governed by New Zealand), there was a corresponding American Samoa Mau movement,^[7] led by Lauaki Namulauulu Mamoe, a World War I veteran who was from Leone village. After meetings in the United States mainland, he was prevented from disembarking from the ship that brought him home to American Samoa and was not allowed to return because the American Samoa Mau movement was suppressed by the U.S. Navy. In 1930 the U.S. Congress sent a committee to investigate the status of American Samoa, led by Americans who had had a part in the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii.  (emphasis added)

Allowing the folks who overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii to oversee what should happen to American Samoa is like letting the fox watch the hens.  I’ll have more to say on this matter below.  But here’s a fascinating and potentially disturbing account of how the Navy suppressed independence in American Samoa.  There has never been a vote in American Samoa concerning its status.

It is in light of this when I read this sort of quote associated with the election of 2012:

Electability is on voters’ minds in this race. Party Chairman Victor Tofaeono said his group is not yet committed to any candidates. Tofaeono says he wants to make sure American Samoa’s votes count.

“We don’t want to vote for somebody who will not be the nominee because then our votes will be wasted,” Tofaeono said. “So we have to pretty well decide by Tuesday who that nominee will be so that we can back the right person.”

In 2008, the GOP in American Samoa voted to send all their delegates to support John McCain.  Perhaps, with all due respect to the residents of American Samoa, this sounds like a “please the leader” colonial mentality.  Don’t rock the boat; find out the winner and vote for them.  It is reported that American Samoans have disproportionate causalities in Iraq and Afghanistan:

Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that a recent report published in USA Today on the death rates for each state, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories since the start of the Iraq war shows American Samoa continuing to have the highest rate of deaths per 1-million populations in all of the United States.  Published on March 18, 2009, the report (A Statistical profile of America’s war dead in Iraq) shows American Samoa leading the United States with a death rate of 138.8 per 1-million population, more than twice that for U.S. Virgin Islands which has the second highest death rate of 54.6, and more than four times that for Vermont with a death rate of 32.2 – the highest among the 50 States and fourth highest overall.

I realize that small groups can cause skewed statistics.  But economic hardship has affected American Samoa.  Peter Schiff argues in this video that minimum wage laws destroyed the American Samoan economy.  Maybe this is evidence of the colonial mentality.  Is this right?  Is it right to encourage this sort of thing?  Yes, American Samoa has an extensive local government.  But, are we encouraging dependency?  Why not let the Samoans decide local issues like the minimum wage?

I respect the American Samoans too much to go along with that.  The GOP in American Samoa should have voted for the clear anti-imperialist candidate: Ron Paul.

Now we turn to Hawai’i.  Hawai’i was an independent nation until annexed by the United States.  Not like Texas, where the people wanted to join the US right from the beginning.  It’s not pretty here either.  Here’s the story from Aloha Magazine:

In 1887, during the reign of Lili`uokalani’ s brother, King Kalakaua, a group of planters and businessmen, seeking to control the kingdom politically as well as economically, formed a secret organization, the Hawaiian League. Membership (probably never over 400, compared to the 40,000 Native Hawaiians in the kingdom) was predominantly American, including several missionary descendants. Organizer and fire brand of the league was Lorrin A. Thurston, a lawyer and missionary grandson, who would later be a leader in the overthrow of the monarchy, with many of the same men.

***

Kalakaua was compelled to accept a new Cabinet composed of league members, who presented their constitution to him for his signature at `Iolani Palace. The reluctant king argued and protested, but finally signed the document, which became known as the Bayonet Constitution. As one Cabinet member noted, “Little was left to the imagination of the hesitating and unwilling sovereign, as to what he might expect in the event of his refusal to comply with the demands made upon him.”

The Bayonet Constitution greatly curtailed the king’s power, making him a mere figurehead. It placed the actual executive power in the hands of the Cabinet, whose members could no longer be dismissed by the king, only by the Legislature. Amending this constitution was also the exclusive prerogative of the Legislature.

The Bayonet Constitution’s other purpose was to remove the Native Hawaiian majority’s dominance at the polls and in the Legislature. The righteous reformers were determined to save the Hawaiians from self-government.

The privilege of voting was no longer limited to citizens of the kingdom, but was extended to foreign residents — provided they were American or European. Asians were excluded — even those who had become naturalized citizens. The House of Nobles, formerly appointed by the king, would now be elected, and voters and candidates for it had to meet a high property ownership or income requirement — which excluded two-thirds of the Native Hawaiian voters. While they could still vote for the House of Representatives, to do so they had to swear to uphold the despised Bayonet Constitution.

The Hawaiians strenuously opposed the diminution of their voice in governing their own country and resented the reduction of the monarch’s powers and the manner in which the Bayonet Constitution had been forced on him. Hawaiians, Chinese and Japanese petitioned the king to revoke the constitution. The self-styled Reform Cabinet responded that only an act of the Legislature could do this – though their new constitution had never been put to a vote.

Now, we have a new sovereign in Hawai’i – a woman – Queen Lili`uokalani.  She was about to restore self-government for Hawaiians:

On Jan. 14, [1893] the first of four crucial days in Hawai`i’s history, the queen presided at noon over the legislative session’s closing ceremonies at the Government Building. She then walked across the street to `Iolani Palace for a more significant ceremony. She was about to proclaim a new constitution which she had written, restoring power to the throne and rights to the Native Hawaiian people.

Remember this is not a political magazine, it is a magazine for reading on an airline in Hawai’i!  But the new constitution was thwarted by those who wanted Hawai’i to be part of the USA – without the consent of the Hawaiian people:

In early 1892 Lorrin Thurston and a group of like-minded men, mostly of American blood, formed an Annexation Club, plotting the overthrow of the queen and annexation to the United States. They kept the organization small and secret – wisely, since they were talking treason.

Thurston went to Washington to promote annexation, and received an encouraging message from President Benjamin Harrison: “You will find an exceedingly sympathetic administration here.”

The Annexation Club went into action and secured the support of a gunboat in Honolulu harbor:

Alerted earlier of the queen’s intention by two of her Cabinet members, the Annexation Club sprang into action. A 13-member Committee of Safety was chosen to plan the overthrow of the queen and the establishment of a provisional government. As they plotted revolution, they claimed that the queen, by proposing to alter the constitution, had committed ”a revolutionary act.”

The American warship USS Boston was in port at Honolulu Harbor. With an eye toward landing troops, Lorrin Thurston and two others called upon the American minister in Hawai`i, John L. Stevens, an avowed annexationist. Stevens assured them he would not protect the queen, and that he would land troops from the Boston if necessary “to protect American lives and property.” He also said that if the revolutionaries were in possession of government buildings and actually in control of the city, he would recognize their provisional government.

The queen was overthrown by the combination of the plotters and US military power:

Simultaneously, at the mass meeting called by the Committee of Safety at the armory, the speeches were incendiary. Lorrin Thurston vehemently denounced the queen and asked the crowd to empower the committee to act as it deemed necessary. The resolution passed amid cheers. No one had mentioned overthrowing the monarchy, but the unspoken was apparently understood by all.

The Committee of Safety delivered a letter to Minister Stevens requesting him to land troops from the Boston, stating that “the public safety is menaced and life and property are in peril.”

At 5 that afternoon, 162 fully armed troops from the Boston came ashore. A few of the marines were posted at the American Consulate and Legation, but the main body of troops marched through downtown Honolulu past `Iolani Palace. They were quartered less than a block from the Government Building and the palace. While the troops were ordered ashore ostensibly “to protect American lives and property,” their placement close to the palace was threatening. Members of the queen’s Cabinet hastened to Stevens to protest the troops’ presence, but it made no difference.

The queen came to America and found a sympathetic ear in the new anti-imperialist President, Grover Cleveland, who investigated the facts and sent this message to Congress:

“This military demonstration upon the soil of Honolulu was of itself an act of war; unless made either with the consent of the government of Hawai`i or for the bona fide purpose of protecting the imperiled lives and property of citizens of the United States. But there is no pretense of any such consent on the part of the government of the queen … the existing government, instead of requesting the presence of an armed force, protested against it. There is as little basis for the pretense that forces were landed for the security of American life and property. If so, they would have been stationed in the vicinity of such property and so as to protect it, instead of at a distance and so as to command the Hawaiian Government Building and palace. … When these armed men were landed, the city of Honolulu was in its customary orderly and peaceful condition. … “

But Congress cravenly refused to restore the queen and the annexationists set up a Republic.  After defeating a local rebellion to restore the queen, the native Hawaiians begged the US not to annex Hawai’i in a petition signed by 29,000 natives.  But William McKinley, an ardent imperialist, did annex Hawai’i in 1900.

You do not to take the Aloha Magazine’s word for it:  Try our own Congress here in this law [42 USC 11701 (7) through (11)]:

(7) In the year 1893, the United States Minister assigned to the sovereign and independent Kingdom of Hawaii, John L. Stevens, conspired with a small group of non-Hawaiian residents of the Kingdom, including citizens of the United States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful Government of Hawaii.

(8) In pursuance of that conspiracy, the United States Minister and the naval representative of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian Nation in support of the overthrow of the indigenous and lawful Government of Hawaii and the United States Minister thereupon extended diplomatic recognition of a provisional government formed by the conspirators without the consent of the native people of Hawaii or the lawful Government of Hawaii in violation of treaties between the two nations and of international law.

(9) In a message to Congress on December 18, 1893, then President Grover Cleveland reported fully and accurately on these illegal actions, and acknowledged that by these acts, described by the President as acts of war, the government of a peaceful and friendly people was overthrown, and the President concluded that a “substantial wrong has thus been done which a due regard for our national character as well as the rights of the injured people required that we should endeavor to repair”.

(10) Queen Lili’uokalani, the lawful monarch of Hawaii, and the Hawaiian Patriotic League, representing the aboriginal citizens of Hawaii, promptly petitioned the United States for redress of these wrongs and for restoration of the indigenous government of the Hawaiian nation, but this petition was not acted upon.

(11) In 1898, the United States annexed Hawaii through the Newlands Resolution without the consent of or compensation to the indigenous people of Hawaii or their sovereign government who were thereby denied the mechanism for expression of their inherent sovereignty through self-government and self-determination, their lands and ocean resources.

And from this Apology, passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton.

3) apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination;

(4) expresses its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people;

This has been a long blog slog today.  But it reveals how one of our early interventions in foreign affairs went very wrong.  But for Grover Cleveland (one of my favorite Presidents due to his personal integrity and anti-imperialism) annexation would have been done with no conscience.

Our policy toward our territories needs review.  I would like to see Ron Paul speak out about it.  I would suggest that the self-government for American Samoa and statehood for Hawai’i is an important step in the right direction.  I would think the standard of living is better in American Samoa than its sister republic and certainly in Hawai’i it is so.  Samoa (and maybe Hawai’i, too) was saved the fearful consequences of Japanese invasion and occupation.

It’s doubtful the Hawai’ians will ever vote to leave the Union but if they did, they should have that right.  (Hawai’i did vote twice on the issue but independence was not a given option) We stole their nation from them.  It may be foolish, just as the Southerners were foolish to try to break the Union, but there is a difference between foolish and illegal.  The Lincoln Doctrine that the Union can never be broken is anti-historical and anti-libertarian. What American Samoa and our other territories probably need is more power over their own local matters.  There are benefits, both material and political, to being part of the United States.

Let’s remember Hawai’i when we debate what sort of government Iraq or Afghanistan should have or what leader a nation should have or what civil war to intervene in.  It’s wrong to intervene where the compelling US interest does not require such intervention.  It’s imperialism to deprive other nations of self-determination and sovereignty.  As a great man once said recently, “We just plain don’t mind our own business!”

I was gratified at this blog’s endorsement of Ron Paul and Tom White asked me to share a few words of my own.

I am voting for Ron Paul tomorrow.  I am voting for Paul because:

I believe liberty is in danger from NDAA military indefinite detention without an attorney for anyone accused of being affiliated with terrorists

I believe some aspects of the USA Patriot Act go too far and threaten liberty.

I believe we must stop starting wars and placing our soldiers in harm’s way for regimes such as Afghanistan where we are hated and where Christians are persecuted.  We need to (unless the national interest is imminent) to mind our own business!

I believe we need to stop most interventions and work to balance the budget, pay down the debt and get our financial ship back in order.

I believe if a central bank is needed it must be strictly supervised and audited.

I believe President Paul will reverse many Obama and Bush era executive orders

I believe President Paul will fight Agenda 21 and ICLEI and many other UN threats to our sovereignty

Perhaps there are other reasons to vote Paul but those are just a few.  I invite the reader to look about you at this blog in my prior writings about Ron Paul.

I realize I am a bit like the commander [Katsumoto] in The Last Samurai who dies in the final battle fighting for his nation that had lost its way.  But we must do what we can, pray for our nation and its leaders in that I believe in a God who rewards right and punishes the wrong and I want to believe in the right. I know the Lord Jesus is coming again and will make things right but the time of tribulation preceding that will be terrible.  (If you do not know Jesus, you cannot escape that judgment.  But here‘s where you go to know Jesus!)

Ron Paul has his flaws (I wish he’d never been involved in the newsletters as they do not reflect his heart) but I cannot vote in a primary for Gov. Romney.  I do think he is honorable and will be a vast improvement over the present occupant in the White House but he does not have the passion for liberty Paul does.

I wish there were more choices on the ballot.  But the Santorum and Gingrich supporters need to vote strategically.  Vote for Ron Paul here.  I heard on the radio this afternoon on the way home from work that former Rep. Hayworth from Arizona (who ran against Sen. McCain) called for Virginians to protest the ballot access and vote Ron Paul.  I agree.

Finally, I would like to see a brokered convention as the best way to get either Ron Paul, Sen. Rand Paul or Gov. Bobby Jindal for our standardbearer in 2012.  People in various states need to vote strategically to deny Romney needed wins.  Keep at it, keep fighting for liberty and sovereignty.

It is a fair question to ask, and frankly, one that needs to be discussed.

Over the last few days I have published several posts written by others expressing concern, disappointment and a lot of frustration at the behavior of Governor McDonnell, a man that these people worked so hard to put in office.

No one expected that we would agree on everything. Life is just not that simple.

But most were confident that they knew Bob McDonnell and what was in his heart, especially when it comes down to basic human values, the sanctity of life and his support of Christian values.

While we expected to have our differences on some issues, the sanctity of life was not one of those issues where we expected problems.

And yet, here we are, facing what can only be called a betrayal of trust and a crisis of faith in the man we thought we knew, Bob McDonnell.

The buzz has grown to an audible level as bewilderment turns to anger.

Redstate had a post on the issue this morning saying McDonnell has hung the Virginia GOP out to dry:

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, a Romney supporter and leading contender for the VP spot on a Romney-headed ticket, demonstrated his complete philosophical alignment with Romney yesterday by flipflopping on a bill he has championed and in the process hanging VA GOP delegates out to dry.

For those who haven’t been paying attention, Virginia’s legislature has been going after the abortion industry root and branch. Last year they passed a law requiring aborttoirs to be regulated as if they did what they do: perform a surgical procedure which can be life threatening. This year a bill is being finalized that requires a woman seeking an abortion to see ultrasound pictures of the baby. Somehow this bill, which does not require any medical procedure the woman was not going to receive in the first place, has the pro-abortion lobby in a tizzy. Dahlia Lithwick at Slate has predictably styled this as rape.

Up until yesterday, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell had unconditionally supported the bill.

There is an update on the post now which reads “I’m informed by someone very much in touch with the Virginia political scene that the root of the problem is that Bob McDonnell’s staff are, at the best, pro-life squishes and they are presently negotiating with themselves over the best way of selling out.”

Which, if true, is even more disturbing than the Governor simply going back on his word. If it is his staff that are running things, then it makes a discussion that I had with a couple of Conservative friends yesterday even more on point.

It is no secret that Bob McDonnell has his eye on a Vice Presidential nod by the Virginia Republican Establishment’s Anointed Candidate Mitt Romney. And while most of the nation’s and Virginia’s Conservatives watch Romney languish in his attempts to convince an electorate that has been burned by the failed bids of Bob Dole and John McCain, also Republican Anointed Candidates, that a New England Republican is a Conservative, most Virginians are in the same boat.

Romney can’t break out of the 30% range for good reason. And that tells the tale that 70% prefer someone not named Romney.

But even as our Lt. Governor has taken the helm of Romney’s Virginia Campaign and our Governor has taken to the air to campaign for Mitt, the General Assembly is in a delicate time. Lt. Governor Bolling has been focused on the session at hand and has done an outstanding job breaking tie votes and fulfilling his campaign promises as well as his promises during the last election to push through the Conservative agenda. Kudos for his focus on the Virginia Senate.

One of my friends yesterday recalled the criticism that McDonnell leveled against Tim “The Absentee Governor” Kaine as he flew around the country campaigning for Obama and his ilk and wondered if the nickname “Absentee Governor” was not also appropriate for McDonnell.

At best, it is ill conceived to have our Governor give even  the perception that he is focused on his political future and more interested in seeing Romney secure the Republican Nomination than the goings on in Richmond.

It seems that just when Conservatives have finally reached the top of the precipice and purged the obstructionist Democrat majority in the Virginia Senate that has log jammed the Conservative Legislation that has been thwarted for years, our Governor has gone squishy. Or just gone campaigning.

It is a crushing blow to have our star quarterback with his head in another game – and not the one we hired him to play.

Shortly after Bob McDonnell won the Governorship he held a conference call for his supporters. While the main purpose was to thank those of us who gave up sleep to make calls, walked miles and miles to knock on doors, provided accurate coverage to counter the media bias, the then Governor-elect asked us to do one thing for him. And that was to hold his feet to the fire should he appear to stray from his promises.

Well, Governor, most Virginians are not happy with your performance this session. There have been few reasons to level criticism – until now.

There are more important things going on right now in Virginia. Mitt Romney can wait. Most Virginians are not sold on him anyway and see him as an anchor to both your job performance now and your future career.

The Governor’s inattention just when we needed him most is a hard pill to swallow.

And to be honest, you can count me among those who are feeling betrayed. And this will not be an easy one to forget.

Thanks to Lynn Mitchell (SWAC Girl) for reminding me that the vote on HB 947, the bill that allows homeschoolers to compete in sports as if they were in the public schools.

Here’s Lynn’s FB comment:

“Tebow Bill” HB 947 will be voted on today in the House. I’m asking my delegate Dickie Bell to please vote YES. We’re hearing there’s a group of GOP delegates against it, and that it’s not popular with coaches. I’ll bet Tim Tebow’s coach is glad he gave him a chance, and that’s all homeschoolers are asking for….

Homeschoolers aren’t exempt from the taxes for education!  They should be able to try out.  Thanks Lynn!

Update – 1-18-2012 – The RNC Document condemning Agenda 21 is posted at this link.

I reported yesterday about the RNC resolution against Agenda 21 that actually mentions ICLEI as the agency implementing Agenda 21.

I got GOOD NEWS!  The anti-Agenda 21 resolution was unanimously, yes without dissent, PASSED!  RAH!  (If my family weren’t here I’d be jumping and cheering around the house like a madman!)  Here’s the report:

Great news. Some have seen my FB note about the Indiana committeeman verifying that the RNC passed a resolution exposing UN Agenda 21, unanimously. This is true. (See attached).  Now Oklahoma also verifies it. See below correspondence from Robert Semands, Govern Edmond Locally spokeperson, and please repost. Let’s hold our GOP elected officials at all levels accountable to adhere to this RNC resolution. Are they Republican or not? Time to hold them accountable.

This blogger also reports that last October, an even better resolution was passed by the National Federation of Republican Assemblies (a staunchly conservative group) that cites the unconstitutionality of joining ICLEI:

RESOLVED, that Article one, Section ten of the Constitution prohibits any State or subordinate governmental body from contracting with nondomestic entities such as ICLEI; and be it

RESOLVED, that the NFRA shall not endorse a candidate or elected official including the office of President that refuses to oppose the same.

I’d written it differently but the NFRA is correct!  Maybe now a GOP Attorney General will look into the constitutionality of ICLEI membership by the communities in its state.  Thanks to NOlathe and WE the people USA for the story!

State Senator Tom Davis, prominent conservative and former chief of staff for Governor Rick Sanford, endorsed Ron Paul today!

How important is it?  Ask Rick Santorum:

“To get an endorsement from someone like Tom Davis is a big deal,” said former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, who announced a White House bid in June. “It would speak volumes to folks and make them take notice and give us a look.”

Davis might have the ability to bring Sanford’s supporters without the Sanford trouble:

Last month, the news website Politico, based in Arlington, Va., named Davis one of “50 politicos to watch” and suggested his endorsement could “carry some of the weight the ex-governor’s might have without the ugly baggage.”

Davis could be a giant step toward more conservative support in the Palmetto State:

Of course if there’s any high-profile elected official in the Palmetto state who is willing to bite the bullet and support the only real fiscal conservative in this race … that person is Tom Davis.

Also, we suspect that Davis’ endorsement will bring several other fiscal conservative lawmakers along with it.

*  *  *

In addition to Davis, several other leading fiscal conservatives in the S.C. General Assembly are also rumored to be endorsing Paul in the coming days. So stay tuned …

All politics is local!  Will it help?  Tune in next Saturday!

UPDATE:  Here’s some excerpts from the wonderful endorsement announcement:

“It’s easy to campaign on lower taxes, less spending and fewer regulations – it’s another thing entirely to stand up for these limited government principles when the entire Washington establishment is aligned against you. Yet for more than three decades Ron Paul has cast thousands of lonely votes in our nation’s capital based on the constitutional principles that this country was founded on – and that the Republican Party has promised to protect. Yet while generations of politicians – including far too many Republicans – were losing their way or caving to the status quo, Ron Paul was standing as a Tea Party of one against a towering wave of red ink.”

More:

“Government activism and government intervention clearly hasn’t fixed our economy – which is why the Republican Party needs a nominee who isn’t wedded to that failed approach. We won’t chart a path to fiscal solvency or victory in November by running toward the failed ideas of the left – we will achieve those victories by returning to the principles that the Republican Party once stood for.”

“That is why I am proud to endorse Ron Paul for president.”

*  *  *

“I’m also endorsing him because unlike what the pundits have led you to believe, he is the candidate who gives the Republican Party the best chance to beat Barack Obama in November.”

RAH for Senator Tom Davis!

Apparently, there was an important Revolutionary War battle in South Carolina in January 1781:  The Battle of Cowpens.

The Ron Paul forces, using the symbolism of the liberation of the Palmetto State from the British, have set up a Money Bomb to commemorate that battle and bring much-needed resources to the RP campaign in SC.  There’s good news:  Three polls show that RP is surging in SC!  Public Policy, American Research Group, and Insider Advantage.

There are other good signs:  A prominent SC state senator hints at support for RP, an evangelical leader has openly done so, and the pollster Zogby says that with a heavy turnout, there could be a chance of a RP victory!

Check out this video from Columbia rally!  Here’s a report.

So, South Carolina is not hopeless!  Nor is this election.  Here’s an article about Puerto Rico, another about Idaho and a third about the Paul forces at work.

Let me encourage you with several quotes from the Puerto Rico article:

Puerto Rico will award 23 delegates when its citizens caucus on March 18. New Hampshire, punished for moving its election into early January, will award only 12. On Tuesday, roughly 245,000 people voted in the Granite State’s primary. During the 2008 cycle, Puerto Rico’s caucus resulted in a total vote count of 208.

With that many delegates at risk over that few votes, it would stand to reason that the current GOP field would be making manic maneuvers to shore up support in Puerto Rico. But so far, only one candidate seems to be doing much, if anything: Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).

Try this:

In Idaho, they have gamed out the math to securing all of the state’s 44 delegates — mainly, stacking attendance at county caucuses in hopes of getting more than 60 percent of the vote.

We can win!

This is pretty amazing. Just how much trouble is Obama in? National Journal has the scoop:

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, run neck-and-neck with President Obama in a general-election matchup, according to a new CBS News poll released late on Monday that shows the two front-runners in Tuesday’s New Hampshire GOP primary running stronger against the president than their fellow Republicans.

Romney posts a two-point lead over Obama, 47 percent to 45 percent, within the poll’s margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points. He leads Obama, 45 percent to 39 percent, among independent voters.

Obama’s lead over Paul is just one point, 46 percent to 45 percent, as Paul leads among independents by 7 points.

“Brickley/Sanders Spar over Sovereign Immunity”

SPAR over WHAT?  Sovereign Immunity?  Is this related to ICLEI?

No, I am afraid it is not related to ICLEI!  Sovereign Immunity is the legal doctrine that the state cannot be sued without its permission.  It is based on a perversion of the doctrine, “The King can do no wrong” (It is actually the King cannot be sued in his own courts)and in our Commonwealth, sovereign immunity is king!

There had been a terrible murder of a saleslady and part owner of a store in a Dale City strip mall.  The perpetrator was a prisoner who had wandered off a highway work crew.  He had violent tendencies to start with and it is not clear how he wandered off.  So there was potential negligence against the Commonwealth.  But due to the VA Tort Claims Act, the estate could only collect $75,000.00 maximum.  (Of course they could sue the perpetrator for millions but what can he pay a judgment with?)  I thought that was wrong and I said so to the reporter in a subsequent interview with the Potomac News reporter.  I started it to introduce a new issue to talk about.  The reporter then went to Brickley and the next day here it was – front page Potomac News:  Brickley/Sanders Spar Over Sovereign Immunity.  I thought I was sunk…

My treasurer said I did great!  Greg Cebula said I was on the front page and treated as the equal of the incumbent.  The story was not too bad, actually, Brickley seemed focused on the criminal action (The defendant got the death penalty and was executed) but agreed with me that $75,000 was not enough.  (Brickley was either about to or actually studied for the law in a law office and eventually took the bar and is now an attorney in Woodbridge.)

Menawhile, Newsom was busy – criticizing me!  I was not universally loved in the PWC GOP and I think part of it was I was a conservative Christian.  One prominent Republican decided to be Newsom’s campaign manager and immediately criticized me:  You are taking down Larry’s signs!

I was trying not to laugh at such an absurd charge.  First, my petition drive was no good and now this!  Considering what my signs loked like, perhaps I should have hired Newsom to take MY signs down!  They had SANDERS in small letters and were unreadable from the road.  Too much detail!  My slogan:  VISION for a NEW DOMINION was on the sign, too.  I was so disgusted with the signs I did not keep one after the election.

The day I put up what seemed like a million unreadable signs, I was at a major intersection and I found a Newsom sign all torn up and a stake on the ground with a red mark next to it.  I was resourceful!  I took the stake and put up an unreadable SANDERS sign.  I took the Newsom sign and deposited it in the trash.

Within two hours or so, I got a call from Newsom’s campaign manager:  BUSTED!  You took down Larry’s sign and placed your sign there!  I told her it was absurd.  “How do you explain that YOUR sign was on LARRYS post!?  HUH!?  All of this was done with a BUSTED tone of voice.  I contemplated this as I asked:  Where did this happen?  It was at the major intersection exactly where I thought it was:  The stake was Larry’s and it had the red mark on it.  I carefully explained and she snarled, “You ought not have used Larry’s stake!”  I said I did not take down Larry’s sign and basically hung up on her.

It was about this time I got my campaign manager – an older woman I admired from GOP politics named Helen Tobey.  Tobey had been in the GOP committee for many years and when she discovered I was running for delegate she said Brickley would win but she’d help me, especially if some of the old stalwarts were against me.  (It is ironic that Newsom was standard right-wing social conservative and they were social liberals.  One of them decided in 1992 to support Clinton!  They apparently did not like the fact I mentioned in my bio that I was a deacon at Lake Ridge Baptist Church.  I was trying to show integrity and leadership qualities.)  I did have support:  A Manassas Park City Councilman came out for me and so did the older couple Uriah and Ruby Kroh on the committee.  The paper reported in our first article that I seemed to be the establishment candidate.  But I never asked people to help me or give me money.  Newsom, to his credit, took off time, asked every committee member for help, did door to door campaigning and a phone bank!

Tobey had a major thing about another stalwart member of the GOP committee and told me to watch her carefully.  She also invited me to church – the Seventh Day Adventists.  I got a call early in Saturday AM and Tobey said – meet me right away at the Seventh Day Adventists for a campaign.  So I was sitting on a Saturday morning in church and was introduced by Tobey to the small but fervent congregation.  I just acknowledged the introduction and offered to stay afterwards and met a couple of nice people.  No workers or sure votes, though.

Meanwhile, I had been deeply involved in a semi-pro bono (That’s legal speak for free work) manner for a group of African-Americans who wanted to honor an African-American woman named Jennie Dean who started churches in the 1800s and raised money for a school for her people in 1893:  The Manassas Industrial School.  I liked the idea both for political and better reasons (I admired a fellow believers’ effort for spiritual and educational betterment) to help them with their cause.  We wanted to save the Jennie Dean site (no way BUT the City of Manassas did come up with a nice memorial on the front yard of the Jennie Dean ES in town) and honor her memory in a museum (No way but the Manassas Museum decided to do a permanent Dean part of its museum).  We also did in 1990 an event honoring the 125th anniversary of the Thirteenth Amendment ending slavery; this event was at a black church in Dumfries.  I say semi pro-bono because I volunteered my time but I was at an event for the Jennie Dean effort and a prominent African-American lady stood up and asked:  What’s been done for Attorney Sanders?  Nothing?  She immediately wrote me a check for $500 right on the spot!  I was touched and greatly honored.

So I had some support in the African-American community.  I, being a Jack Kemp Republican, was elated to attempt to reach out to the African-American community with the GOP message of hope.  The GOP is the true party of civil rights!  Well, these African-American leaders, many of whom had offices or were prominent in the NAACP, had a “press conference” to discuss the museum plans AND to endorse ME for delegate.  There was in the Manassas paper and a weekly suburban paper in Woodbridge a nice photograph of this endorsement.  Another mistake:  Not in the Potomac News!  The Woodbridge paper everybody reads!  (Some cynical political observers said my courting of the black vote in a GOP primary was a huge mistake!  In effect a waste of time.  BUT I am proud of my efforts to reach out.  I’d do it again.)

Tobey approved the black vote effort and told me the Dems were worried (I do not know how she knew) about the black outreach.  At least Newsom had nothing to say.  Apparently no effort to find me a sign thief or vandal!  But the article led to my appearance on a Sunday AM in a black church.

I was invited my the pastor at the behest of one of my African-American supporters (who I had discussed the possibility of a follow-up to the endorsement) to speak briefly in the pulpit of this venerable old black church.  I was there, with Tobey, I think, and was introduced by the pastor on the basis of the work I had done for the Jennie Dean effort.

I had decided that church on a Sunday morning was no place for an open political speech.  I then talked about how I was a fellow Baptist (a previous denominational permutation) a fellow Christian, a deacon in my church and believed in the cause of trying to help honor Jennie Dean.  I also suggested that this was a good time for African-Americans to commit political heresy:  Vote in a GOP primary.  (Especially after their candidate, Lt. Governor Wilder said stay out of the GOP primary!  Another error…)  Make sure you have a friend on both sides of the general election ballot.  (I was implicitly saying – where’s Newsom?  You’ll never see him here asking for your vote!)

Again, I met a few people after church and people were nice but not effusive in support.  I do not know if it was the injection of politics into church or if I was an evil Republican!  I would like to say I rocked the church but I didn’t.  Tobey liked it.  The pastor liked me.  BUT I am proud of my effort.

There was a debate, which was sponsored by the GOP, Women’s Club.  I actually got flowers from one of the ladies I had met during the campaign.  The debate was attended by about twenty people and the reporter for the suburban newspaper.  Michele McQuigg presided and I realized she was not my friend (at the time – I have completely made up with McQuigg).  We talked about the issues.  Newsom was for simplistic ideas like contraflow lanes.

A Republican member of the PW board of supervisors asked about the issue that Metrorail could not cross the bridge into DC without a waiver of punitive damages.  Shall we waive them?  I explained how punitive damages worked and how rare they are but felt strongly that there should be no waiver of punitive damages – the jury should decide that not Metrorail.  Newsom said, no big deal, waive the punitives.

Should residents of public housing be kicked out for drugs?  Yes, I said but we need to have protections in place to make sure families did not get kicked out for “just one joint”.  Newsom:  Unlike my opponent, no drug use is acceptable.

Divorce?  Get rid of the wheel that crushes women and children. Shorten the separation period.  Make child support like domestic violence – a crime and get the non-payers arrested.  “If men at a construction site see one being arrested for non-support, they’ll start paying again or keep one paying!”  Newsom:  Let’s not encourage divorce but try to keep people together.

Drugs:  Strengthen the first offender statute.  Newsom:  More money for lab reports to come back quicker.

See what I mean?  I am sure I offered up the abolition of parole and cut the car tax somewhere in my opening.

After the debate, the majority thought I won, (I had packed the place with Sanders supporters which was reported by the suburban newspaper but I did not get it into the Potomac News (Another mistake!)) I went for a coke with the woman who sent me flowers.  She was excited about the debate and I thanked her for the flowers.

Next post -the campaign wraps up…

The secret meeting – Dirt on Brickley and the forum before the GOP committee.

Are divorce law reform and sovereign immunity important issues like transportation?

Working the polls on election day…

Election night and the surprise after my concession speech

Once upon a time, when Reagan was ending a most successful Presidency, there was a political activist who had the itch for running for office.  This activist did not realize how sexy local government is and wanted to run for House of Delegates or state Senate.  Elwood Earl “Sandy” Sanders, Jr., was an attorney in private practice, single and very politically active.  This activist had managed (because nobody else wanted it) to become the Occoquan magisterial district chair of the GOP and watched the committee membership increase in two years from 18 to 35 members.  Sandy’s representative on the Prince William BOCS was the legendary Kathleen Seefeldt, who won many elections and was the power in PWC politics.  In the 1988 Democratic Presidential caucuses in Fairfax County, Supervisor Seefeldt actually received a vote for President!

In the early spring of 1989, I decided to run for the House of Delegates.  I had not expected to have a primary opponent.  Del. David Brickley (D) was the long time incumbent in the 51st district.  He was not a liberal, in fact Brickley was somewhat conservative in some areas.  He actually supported some sort of moment of silence law in the schools.  I had not met Del. Brickley prior to running against him.

I decided to run against Del. Brickley.  I first needed a campaign treasurer.  Greg Cebula was my treasurer for the sole reason that he was the most popular Republican in the Occoquan District by virtue of a nice showing against Kathleen Seefeldt in 1987 and I helped him tremendously.  I wanted all my stuff to say:  Authorized by Sandy Sanders for Delegate, Greg Cebula, Treasurer.  It was like having Greg as my running mate.  Some said this was my first mistake as Cebula had a mortal political enemy:  Michele McQuigg, who rose to have a wonderful political career as Occoquan Supervisor after Seefeldt went to be the first elected Chairman of the BOCS, was a member fo the House of Delegates and is now Clerk of the Court.  I have immense respect for McQuigg and maybe the critics were right.  We basically read her out of the party because she endorsed Seefeldt.

My platform was simple:  (Please be seated as you read this or injury may result)

CUT THE CAR TAX – I proposed a deduction in the personal property tax up to the average cost of a vehicle for each commuter in a family.

ABOLISH PAROLE – I proposed a substantial abolition of parole.

And you lost, Sandy?  Yes, I lost.  Now that you are being revived with smelling salts, it’s true:  Yes, I lost.  I know now – George Allen won in 1993 with the Parole Abolition and Jim Gilmore crushed his opponent in 1997 with Cut the Car Tax!   That should cure me of politics for ever.  But it didn’t.  I wonder if I was the Preston Tucker of politics.  Had a better car but couldn’t manufacture it!  Maybe blogging is safer…

In the spring of 1989, a law suit was wrapping up that I was involved in as counsel.  Five citizens from the Dumfries area were fighting a land development near the huge Montclair subdivision and decided to appeal the decision of the Board of Supervisors.  They approached me and I agreed to take the case.  I loved to tangle with the Establishment even then and I litigated a hearing to fight the BOCS decision.  We lost on the grounds that the five did not have standing to sue as they did not have an actual injury to their land or rights.  It was going up to the state supreme court when the developer sued the five, now called in the local press The Dumfries Five.

One night in March 1989, I was the guest of honor at a dinner and dancing event designed to raise money for the legal defense for the Dumfries Five, e.g, me!  (First and only time my legal fee was paid for by a public event!)  I was indeed there.  I had a date – one of the first dates I got as a result of my increased notoriety caused by the lawsuit and the campaign.  I had gotten my petitions in (with the help of an older couple in the committee who thought the world of me, a resident of a senior citizens’ community who collected signatures in her building, my parents and Greg Cebula) but discovered I had an opponent!  (I actually knew before the dinner but A political unknown who was two years younger than me – a paralegal named Larry Newsom.  He got first spot on the ballot as a result of him getting his petitions in earlier than I did.  I barely made it but they were in!  Newsom was married but no kids.

I got a call several days after the deadline, after we were both approved for the ballot, from a reporter for the local Woodbridge newspaper (The Potomac News) who asked me about Newsom’s complaint:  I was an unworthy candidate because I barely got my petitions in but he had had them in several weeks prior.  He was the best candidate.

I was stunned.  It was a silly complaint.  I had never heard of such a thing.  The only thing I could think to say was:  I invoke the Eleventh Commandment of my hero, Ronald Wilson Reagan – Thou shall not speak evil of a fellow Republican.  Nevertheless it was an interesting interview because I got to mention things I stood for:  No not the car tax or abolishing parole but three other aspects of my platform:  Divorce law reform (I called our long separation periods for divorce a “wheel that crushes women” unfair to women and the poor), better child support enforcement, and changing the first offender drug statute to stop giving offenders a free ride – maybe a misdemeanor instead of a felony after a probation period but not a complete dismissal.

Newsom discussed transportation and wanted to do such things as contraflow lanes to better manage traffic going into Fairfax or the nation’s capital.  On most things he was not studied on the issues and had simplistic answers.  He also regurgitated the right-wing talking points.  Then there was a story that got me on the front page of the Potomac News with the incumbent delegate:

“Brickley/Sanders Spar Over Sovereign Immunity”

Spar over WHAT?  Find out next post…more highlights:

African-American activists associated with the NAACP endorse a Republican for delegate?

Sandy speaks in a black church?

Who tore down whose signs where?

Who got flowers from a different young woman before his first political debate and a date afterwards?

Find out next blog post…

It looks like the news is very good:  Breaking news – BOTH the AG and the Governor will support remedial legislation to correct the Virginia Primary Joke!

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is intervening in the Virginia presidential primary dispute and plans to file emergency legislation to address the inability of most Republican presidential candidates to get their name on the ballot, Fox News has learned.  *  *  *

Sources told Fox News that Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnellis expected to support the emergency legislation as well.

Cuccinelli’s proposal is expected to state that if the Virginia Board of Elections certifies that a candidate is receiving federal matching funds, or has qualified to receive them, that candidate will upon request be automatically added to the ballot.

He [Cuccinelli] also happens to be a Republican. He is drafting “Emergency” legislation. GOP is all hands on deck with their separate set of rules for the insiders. We do not need to ask what would have occurred if Ron Paul fell short of the needed signatures:

This is an encouraging sign that people are starting to listen.  From the Asbury Park Press:

“I’m not attacking the need for planning and I’m not attacking the need for good environmental stewardship,” said David Sharp, 75, of Waretown. “What I am concerned about … a thing called Agenda 21 that has crept into the policy making of many government agencies.”  *  *  *  “Under the U.N. plan, the role of the government is to control the individual for a greater good in a global community,” Sharp said. “Quote, ‘Rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.’ That scares me and I see that happening in our country.”

The county board was eager to listen after being primaried in earlier GOP elections:

The five, all-Republican freeholders, who in recent years have weathered tough primary challenges from candidates questioning their conservative credentials, seemed eager to show support and deference to the Tea Party.

This is what a few activists can do – can do in YOUR town too!  See, when people study the issues and avoid name calling and be respectful, things can happen.  I wish this had been the strategy in Missoula, MT!  Try this GREAT response from a activist:

“I’m never going to say Agenda 21,” said Connie Sherwood, a Berkeley resident and founder of Ocean County Citizens for Freedom, a local Tea Party chapter. “But there’s a lot of sustainable growth, and sustainable development and the state seems to be pushing it even though we have a Republican governor. So we really need to get in there and question what exactly is going on.”

Thanks to the New Jersey Patriot Blog for this story.

This is a fascinating column in Blue Virginia by noted VA Democratic political adviser Paul Goldman.  Here’s the summary:

Moreover: There is still time to make this change this year. The Governor should order the State Board of Elections to wait before starting to print the ballot. Based on my experience, they can wait until the middle of January 2012. This gives time for the General Assembly to change the law.

Democrats should help out here. It is not about Bachmann, Gingrich, Huntsman, Perry or Santorium. It is about the people and their right to choose. The shoe might be on the other foot someday for us Democrats. It also helps underscore the risk with all these ID laws which seem to have a partisan motivation.

We need as open and fair a process for the people, that’s the goal. Right now, the projected GOP presidential primary ballot doesn’t meet this standard. We can change it in time for the March GOP primary in 2012. The people win, no one loses. It just takes a little extra work.

I agree with Paul Goldman (may be first and last time I do so!  But he’s right!) we need to prevent this being a joke.  I think the RP campaign should take the initiative and ask the RPV to allow at least Gingrich and Perry on the ballot and look into legal options.

Another view, this time from Bearing Drift, from a respected colleague Rick Sincere, looks into a different aspect of the primary crisis – ballot access

The most obvious reform would be to reduce the signature requirement. One possibility is to change the statewide threshold to 5,000 signatures, with 200 signatures from each of 6 of the 11 congressional districts.

Absent that basic reform, I recommend that Virginia offer these as alternative methods of entry to the primary election ballot:

(1) Candidates may choose to meet the current requirements of 10,000 signatures statewide plus 400 in each of the eleven congressional districts.
(2) Candidates may choose to present 5,000/200 signatures, plus a filing fee of $5,000.
(3) Candidates may forego the signature requirement entirely and instead pay a filing fee of $10,000.
(4) Candidates may forego the signature requirement entirely and instead present an affidavit showing that, according to the Federal Election Commission, they have received a minimum of $100,000 in contributions from Virginia residents.

These suggestions are not exhaustive. Other permutations might be possible.

Let the conversation begin so that we can produce substantive reform to the process well before the beginning of the 2016 presidential campaign cycle (that is, by Wednesday, November 7, 2012).

I say don’t even wait that long.  And finally we have thanks to Rick Sincere and Bearing Drift, a blog view from an election lawyer (which I am not!) that Virginia’s ballot access laws are in deed “unreasonable”:

Virginia’s statutory ballot access requirement is, quite simply, one of if not the most daunting in the country:  A minimum of 10,000 petition signatures collected statewide, including at least 400 from each of its 11 congressional districts.  That’s hard enough.  But then there are the additional restrictions:  The petition circulators must be registered or eligible to vote in Virginia.  The signatures must be gathered using the State Board of Elections’ official form, a two-page document which must be reproduced as double-sided.  (Single-sided stapled forms are not accepted.)  Signatures must be collected on forms that are specific to each city, county and congressional district.  Only “qualified” voters may sign a petition.  And every single petition form must be sworn and notarized.

Chris Ashby, Esq., also suggests that the RPV’s presumption that if you have 15,000 signatures and 600 from each congressional district you are in compliance and they do not check signatures violates the Equal Protection Clause in Bush v. Gore.

Let me add my two cents worth.  When I ran for Delegate in 1989 in the primary, I had to pay a fee equal to 3% of the salary of the office I was running for.  (I think it was $300 and my campaign treasurer paid it for me!)  When a recent candidate for Commonwealth’s Attorney in Hanover wanted to run in the GOP primary, he had to pay 3% of about $150,000.  (That’s $4500!  I think he paid $3500 so it must have been less than $150,000.)  That also hinders ballot access based on ability to pay but I understand you can run as an independent and not pay the fee.

Something must be done.  The Virginia primary is a joke.  If Ron Paul wins, and he can do so as the anti-establishment candidate or the protest candidate, he carries the state delegates (subject to proportionality rules) at the national convention.  (There are other delegates selected at the eleven congressional district conventions, too.)  But I want the process to be right and Ron Paul win!  Time to do something.  Either a lawsuit or a bill passed quickly in the new GA session.

Newt Gingrich was eliminated from the possibility of having his name on the Virginia Republican Presidential Primary ballot for 2012.

Virginia requires at least 10,000 signatures which must include 400 from each Congressional District.

Mitt Romney and Ron Paul remain as the only candidates whose name will appear on the ballot in the Republican Presidential Primary.

This news was released a few hours ago as State GOP workers counted well into the wee hours.

This dramatically changes the landscape of the primary. With the early state primaries now required to appropriate delegates in relation to the vote, meaning these will not be “winner take all” primaries, it will make a big difference to some candidates who failed to qualify in Virginia. They will not be able to pick make up any ground in Virginia.

And for the many Virginians hoping for a “not Mitt” candidate, they will not have a choice in the primary. Ron Paul has a strong base of support, but he does not appeal to true Conservatives. Paul’s liberal views on foreign policy and drugs are seen by many as radical, irresponsible and dangerous. Ron Paul is probably the only Republican candidate that mainstream voters, particularly Republicans and Conservatives, will not “hold their nose” and vote for. Many believe that Obama would be preferable. The Devil we know. They won’t vote for Obama, but they also won’t vote for Paul, should he be the Republican nominee. They will either stay home or consider a third party candidate, which opens an interesting door.

A third party candidacy by someone like Donald Trump has no chance of success against a Republican and Obama. Unless that Republican happens to be Ron Paul. While any third party run will almost certainly ensure a second term for Obama, someone like Donald Trump would probably stand a chance, albeit small, to defeat Obama. And would probably come in second with Paul a distant third. I really see no way at all that Ron Paul could possibly defeat Obama. With most of the conservatives refusing to vote for Paul, and virtually none voting for Obama, a run by a Donald Trump might give them enough incentive to vote, as opposed to letting Obama simply defeat Paul in a landslide.

Apologies to the Ron Paul supporters who think Paul actually has a chance to win. Most of his supporters assume that Conservatives will vote for Paul if there is no other option. But they underestimate the Republican and conservative voters. Paul will get no more than 25% of the vote in a head to head match-up with Obama. If that.

Right now, Paul is averaging about 40.5% to Obama’s 48.2%. But the focus has never been on Ron Paul. And it has destroyed every candidate as they rose to the top. One by one. Drip by drip.

And Ron Paul has a big problem that is about to explode. One that he and his supporters don’t want to talk about.

Ron Paul is perceived as a Jew Hater. Now, I’m not accusing him of being anti-Semitic. I am simply reporting the perception. He published a newsletter a few years back that is the topic of this post.

So now, for Virginia, the choice for Conservatives has been per-determined. Republicans will rally around Mitt Romney, who, for most, is a “nose holding” alternative to either Obama or Paul.

Prediction: Mitt Romney will win Virginia. Ron Paul will fail to pick up any additional support outside of his base. Republicans will show up and vote for Romney in the Virginia Primary as the only option defeat Obama in 2012.

(Again, for the Paul supporters, this is simply an honest analysis of the Republican and Conservative point of view. You will disagree, of that I am certain. But by the time the primary rolls around, Ron Paul will have been thoroughly dissected in the media. If you think the hell-storm that hit the other fallen candidates was bad, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet! Just sayin’.)