Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

The Most Important Number in Politics Today



Can former state Attorney General Bob McDonnell withstand the negative publicity over a thesis he penned in graduate school? Photo by Jahi Chikwendiu/twp

54

That's the percentage of Virginia voters in a new Washington Post poll who said they had heard little or nothing about former state Attorney General Bob McDonnell's controversial master's thesis in which he advocated a strongly socially conservative view of government.

The thesis, which was first reported on by the Washington Post, has dominated conversation in the gubernatorial race between McDonnell and state Sen. Creigh Deeds (D) over the past several weeks, and is seen as the main reason for the Democrat's comeback in the polls with just over a month left in the campaign.

In the Post poll, Deeds trailed McDonnell by four points after being behind by 15 in August. Much of that gain came from independent women who went from supporting McDonnell by 28 points in August to backing Deeds by three in this month's poll.

That more than half of voters had heard "just some" (20 percent), "hardly any" (28 percent) or "none" (six percent) about the thesis suggests that Deeds still has significant room to run on the issue unless McDonnell can find a way to stop the bleeding.

Given the gains Deeds has made by hammering McDonnell on the thesis -- with a particular emphasis in the vote-rich northern Virginia suburbs -- you can expect a heavy rotation of television ads in the final weeks of the campaign that seek to inform (or re-inform) voters about the stances McDonnell outlined in the thesis and why those views put him outside of the mainstream of Virginia voters.

As evidence that the Deeds' thesis attack is hurting, McDonnell is now on television with an ad in which he acknowledges the thesis but seeks to contextualize it by noting his voting record in favor of women's rights in the legislature.

McDonnell's response ads are a risky proposition. He and his campaign clearly believe that the thesis is hurting him and, therefore, he must address it. But, with more than half of the electorate having heard little to nothing about the thesis, McDonnell's ads may wind up introducing people to the issue who had not heard about it before.

What's clear from the Post poll is that the thesis and how the two campaigns deal with it over the last weeks of the race will be the make or break moment of the contest -- barring, of course, some sort of political earthquake we can't envision today.

Deeds, who was at a standstill before the thesis story broke, is likely to ride it out in hopes it can carry him to the governor's mansion. McDonnell has to inoculate himself and move on -- making the race a referendum on the Virginia economy and President Barack Obama.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 21, 2009; 11:00 AM ET
Categories:  Most Important Number  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Fix: The White House Plays (Political) Hardball
Next: Wag the Blog Redux: A Conversation On Race Worth Having?

Comments

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Also with G&T as the constant refrain that Republicans are idiots, moonbats, mentally deranged, etc. is as interesting as claims of a Kenyan birth.

==

By 2004 the Republican Party had come to embrace a host of morally abhorrent ideas. For example making war as a matter of unmotivated choice, killing scores of civilians in pursuit of goals not related to our own security, and most of all, torture. That election was very much a referendum on the use of torture and I am ashamed to note that tens of millions of my fellow citizens were willing to join in that embrace and were sufficiently untroubled by Iraq and Abu Ghraib to vote for more of the same. This is in addition to the usually lunatic ideas about money and privilege.

And that was five years ago.

The GOP of today has gone far past merely approving preemptive invasion and waterboarding, now the party has unreservedly embraced dishonesty, and not only on hate radio but up to its most senior elected officials.

<MainPoint>Anyone still a Republican has made the choice to accept all that.</MainPoint>

It'd be nice if I could say I've met Republicans who were still on board in hopes of a return to a less barbarous party, but I can't honestly say that. Every Republican I meet is a seething angry a-hole. Every single last one.

So, BB, if you want to claim that this position is on a par with Jake's birth certificate nonsense then I can't say I take your rejection very seriously. I have no intention of pretending that there remains any mitigating virtue in these people.

There isn't.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 23, 2009 11:59 PM | Report abuse

RESOLVED: Adultery should be made illegal again because 1) we have all witnessed the negative effects on society (and children, in particular) of selfish parents, "free love", no-fault divorce, step-families, etc., 2) "marriage" is much more than just a civil contract and society has an interest in promoting and protecting it, 3) we need to set some standard and allowing heterosexuals to exceed the bounds of marriage has led to a slippery slope with all other kinds of deviant behavior, and 4) to balance out the liberal direction unelected judges have taken us and provide a uniform "rule" that all married and unmarried people will be aware of before they decide to fornicate.

Historically, adultery has been considered to be a serious offense by many cultures. In some countries, adultery is still a crime punishable by death. In the United States, laws vary from state to state. In those states where adultery is still on the statute books (although rarely prosecuted), penalties vary from life sentence (Rhode Island), to a fine of $10 (Maryland), to a Class I felony (Wisconsin). We should have a more uniform system so that everyone knows what is expected of them.

For example, New York defines an adulterer as a person who "engages in sexual intercourse with another person at a time when he has a living spouse, or the other person has a living spouse." North Carolina defines adultery as occurring when any man and woman "lewdly and lasciviously associate, bed, and cohabit together." Minnesota law provides: "when a married woman has sexual intercourse with a man other than her husband, whether married or not, both are guilty of adultery." In the U.S. military, as well, adultery is a still a court-martial offense -- here are plenty of secular reasons for this -- do I really need to provide more SECULAR reasons?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

(cont.)

Based on ample proof, collected over centuries, society has deemed "one man and one women" as the most efficient foundation for raising families, with children being the most important outcome, as they are our future productive citizens. Same reason as we allow the State to take children away from abusive parents, society should reduce the number of broken homes by encouraging couples to stay married and have sex only within said marriage. The collective costs of deviant sexual behavior are evident all around us. Please don't tell me that you are one of those would deny most STDs and lots of other problems would virtually go away overnight if everyone simply waited for sex until marriage. That's an allowable societal goal, even if we know some will fail to meet that goal.

There were over 21 million 15-19 year olds in the U.S. in 2000 —- setting a high standard will encourage SOME of them at least -- even just 1% (210,000) more teens waiting for sex until marriage would be a significant improvement to society as a whole, not just for those teens, their friends and family, and also future spouses. As always YMMV. If you disagree about this, however, you probably like the further sexualization of teens and Ms. Spears having a baby as an unwed teenager.

There's also a slippery slope argument, once heterosexual immorality is sanctioned, society needs to decide whether it will also allow "gay marriage" or ADULT polygamy and ADULT incest because there will be no going back once we go through this door (not to mention abuse of children increasing or bestiality, since that will probably happen too). Again, I am happy to discuss with anyone willing to answer my questions too.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Would you, at least, agree that if sex was ONLY within one marriage for life, SDTs and HIV would no longer be a problem?

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Fine, if you don't want to debate my answer to mark_in_austin's question about birth control, I said that I would debate the secular reasons for making adultery illegal again, or even doing away with government-run welfare -- just let me know -- I really need another topic to add to my "six" on endless repetition ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

I haven't gone anywhere. I felt that JakeD spammed the comments section during the August lull. How many times does one need to hear about long vs short form (outside of a teenage boys locker room). I also noticed that Jake liked to ask questions, but rarely answered them. I found myself getting into silly back and forth exchanges and the comments section was overrun with them. So, I decided to stop engaging in them, specifically with Jake. Also with G&T as the constant refrain that Republicans are idiots, moonbats, mentally deranged, etc. is as interesting as claims of a Kenyan birth.

As far as the fertility rate goes, there was a low point in the mid-70s and a steady rise through the 80s. The native birth rate (2.01) was near the replacement rate (2.1) in the late 80s at the time when the thesis was written. This also neglects that the United States remains a country with significant legal immigration, obviating the need to have a match between births and deaths. Banning birth control on the thin thread that the birth rate was 5% below the replacement rate is more nativism than concerns about a wasting away of the U.S. population. I'm amongst those who feel plus ça change. Having stated my views, I won't be returning to the subject.

Adios amigos,

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 22, 2009 11:09 PM | Report abuse

(Instruct the reporter to read back the last question and answer)

QUESTION: Is the pill a bad thing? Is birth control bad/ Why?

ANSWER: The Pill is a "bad" thing because 1) it gives a false sense of security and control, 2) it can cause side effects like breast cancer and abortions, 3) it can cause under-age sexual promiscuity, and most importantly, 4) society needs children for civilization to continue, with the minimum replacement rate being the average number of 2.1 babies being born to each woman ...

You may disagree with the answer, but an "answer" it is.

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Rewrite:

Letting mark_in_austin decide whether HIS question to me was answered or not is hardly a "dodge".

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Letting let mark_in_austin decide whether I answered his question or not is hardly a "dodge". Pointing out that there are more than 7 billion square MILES, not yards, in the world and the back-up cite that 46% of the earth's surface is untouched wilderness -- in response to your uncited contention of overcrowding up to our armpits -- is not a "dodge". Maybe you are hearing voices in your head again.

Either way, perhaps it would be best for both of us if you go back to following DDAWD's advice.

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

You'll just [] run with the first dodge that you can contrive.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite

==

Nailed it, huh?

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Up to their "armpits" hardly -- first of all, I'm happy to let mark_in_austin decide whether I answered his question -- for anyone else still here interested in this tangent, there are more than 7 billion square miles, not square yards, in the world. Conservation International's own study revealed that 46% of the earth's surface was untouched wilderness, that is land areas not including sea:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive%5C200212%5CCUL20021206b.html

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

This has been an illuminating exercise. The troll bunches his fists and declares himself ready for some real arguments, once he gets past a few dozen "you didn't answer MY questions" dodges.

What follows is some of the most rambling and incoherent drivel we've seen on here in some time ... we're running out of people, illegal aliens are having children who don't "fit" our culture, birth control pills have side effects.

And when that fell flat, some straw man about genocide and everyone can live in each others' armpits and life is great.

And there we have it, JakeD's debating skills, finally presented in all their glory.

Someone get a shovel and a scoop and clean that up.

<state ignore="on">

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Top Scientist Advocates Mass Culling 90% Of Human Population

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/030406massculling.htm

Fellow professors and scientists applause and roar approval at elite's twisted and genocidal population control agenda.

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

No human being needs more and a single square yard and 1800 calories per day to lead a fully functional existence!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

While the sheer number of abortions have been declining, we still kill more unborn babies every year than Hitler killed Jews. It doesn't help the teen pregnancy (and abortion) rate either that unwed teen mothers like Ms. Spears get celebrity treatment (at least Bristol Palin sees the error of her ways now). I'm not saying that the Pill is the only thing wrong with society, but since mark_in_austin asked ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 6:17 PM | Report abuse

I also want to make clear that I have never disputed the children of illegal aliens are, legally, U.S. citizens -- obviously, however, to someone who believes that the world is already over-populated (we could fit 7 billion into an area no bigger than Texas), even genocide seems acceptable -- the "Final Solution" here we come!!!

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Trying to blame the forum for your woefully incoherent answer is just pathetic.

Yeah we're in danger of running out of people. You're nuts.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 6:03 PM | Report abuse

For anyone else who wants to see a defense of McDonnell's Thesis, may I suggest we start at the very beginning:

"(1) Continue to work for passage of strong state anti-abortion laws, while, in the alternative, supporting a human life amendment or statute."

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

McDonnell's Thesis does not even argue for outlawing birth control -- it's clear that you haven't read the 15 point plan either -- what I was doing was answering ONE of mark_in_austin's questions to prove that The Fix is not a forum that allows for easy and unlimited discussion (let alone of the FIVE questions he asked). As I said in the posts, I had to condense the argument, so it is definitely NOT everything ever written against birth control; you might as well try posting a law review article complete with 100 footnotes. That was really my only point.

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

You can post all the widdle winkies you want Jake but the fact of the matter is that you boasted about what a great job you could do defending McDonnell's damning thesis but when the time came you fell completely flat in the one (1) point out of fifteen that you tried. Some utter nonsense about running out of people, some Buchanan bigotry about "illegal aliens," a few asides about complications of one form of contraception .. nope, you're not up to it. Not at all.

All hat, no cattle.

Stick to reminding us how coooooool you are.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

As I said, The Fix is not a forum that allows for easy and unlimited discussion (just re-read the last 6 posts ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

You are right that we need Conservative and Republican posters and we aren't acquiring any that are willing to stay the way Jake and snow white have (but isn't Andy a fine addition). If only jake and snow white made less noise and more sense -- it isn't that I want them to go away, I'd just like them to go away sometimes.

==

As long as they've been posting and as frequently as they post, and all this time not a single reasonable argument or position? When exactly do you think either of them is ever going to break out of form and do a real contribution here?

They only post to get attention and derail conversation. We regulars have acquired scrolling habits that enable avoiding them, even the determinedly equanimous BB.

I just want them both gone. They're nuisances, and that's all they are, and it's not accidental.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Poor whittle mark is "disappointed".

"den put some bip bip onna boo-boo baby"

Posted by: JakeD

==

Remember when Jake would call out to Mark and FairlingonBlade when he was cornered? The only two who dignified his dumb questions with reasonable answers? Both gone.

Nobody can stand JakeD, you really need to wonder what he gets out of making such a nuisance of himself here with endless rotation of the same six posts.

Oh, that's right. It's for the "lurkers." All zero of them.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse

We are a multicultural nation of immigrants--worrying about our "cultural identity" is just code for bigotry.

==

Pure Pat Buchanan. Spanish-speaking families aren't "real Americans," right? Neither are gays, neither are men without beer guts, neither are people who have sex without procreation as the object.

Re: population collapse: it took tens of thousands of years to reach one billion, eighty more years to reach two, thirty more for three, and now we get another billion mere years. The world can't sustain more than TWO billion, any suggestion that maintaining the current vast overpopulation is an imperative is one step away from drinking cyanide.

Jake's outdone himself, or whoever he pasted from has .. what complete idiocy.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Under McDonnell's plan, I'm really excited about the government-provided rewards I am going to reap for not fornicating. Did McDonnell say anything specific about that? How much not fornicating would I have to do to qualify for these benefits? If I fornicated, but my husband didn't, would we get half the benefits? We are married, after all. And I have a whole lifetime -- 53 years -- of NOT having ANY homosexual sex. I bet that gets me something good.

==

Well *I'm* not going to get a red cent!

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

McDonnell is right to address the issue squarely.

==

Yes, running from his own words and his own record, yup, that's some head-on addressing the issue, all right.

McDonnell should move to Afghanistan and join the Taliban, he's way more morally aligned with them than with his own country.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Under McDonnell's plan, I'm really excited about the government-provided rewards I am going to reap for not fornicating. Did McDonnell say anything specific about that? How much not fornicating would I have to do to qualify for these benefits? If I fornicated, but my husband didn't, would we get half the benefits? We are married, after all. And I have a whole lifetime -- 53 years -- of NOT having ANY homosexual sex. I bet that gets me something good.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 22, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

When I was growing up, the US Population was 200 million. Now it's 300 million. The fact that the "replacement rate" went below 2 for a few years isn't going to reverse that trend. And those children of illegal aliens are U.S. citizens, btw. We are a multicultural nation of immigrants--worrying about our "cultural identity" is just code for bigotry.

Correlating teenage pregnancy rates in this decade to the Pill is ridiculous. It's been available for over 40 years--there is no reason for it to cause increase pregancies in '05-'06. More likely is the restrictions in sex ed since 2000 bearing fruit. No pun intended.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 22, 2009 3:27 PM | Report abuse

McDonnell is right to address the issue squarely.

Deeds' poor performances in the debates and garbled post-debate interviews have convinced the Democrats the Thesis card is their only hope. They will spend whatever it takes to spread the word to uninformed voters.

McDonnell needs to speak from the heart, state who he is now and who he was then, and explain why he's changed. He cannot seem robotic or aloof, but must convince audiences of his admiration and respect for his wife, his daughters, and the women he's worked with in his professional career.

Posted by: VirginiaIndependent | September 22, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

The assertion that the human race is in danger of underbreeding is a world-class example of "removing all doubt." We could do JUST fine as a species with the global population of 1900, the idea that we need to maintin seven billion is so wrong it's creepy.

Jake, you are an IDIOT.

Second, the suggestion that teenagers are encouraged by birth control pills to have sex and perhaps won't without the pills is completely disconnected from any semblance of reality and cannot possibly come from anyone who has led anything like a life including contact with other humans.

Without birth control teenagers will still have sex. They just won't have as many children, or as many abortions.

I knew you couldn't do it. Not even ONE point, much less fifteen.

Stanford Law? Yeah, right.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

OK. No offense to our gracious host, but just to prove that The Fix is not a forum that allows for easy and unlimited discussion, I wrote out a very long post answering mark_in_austin's FIRST question (however it was too long, even with just short quotes and the maximum of three links for each post, so I had to condense it even further and still break it into three posts; you might as well try posting a law review article complete with 100 footnotes, which was the extent of my "point" earlier), and I was simply quoting chrisfox8 for effect re: "disappointment". Have fun with it -- I see that this task put me out of commission on the other threads for over an hour -- which is why I enjoy writing shorter posts more often:

RESOLVED: The Pill is a "bad" thing because 1) it gives a false sense of security and control, 2) it can cause side effects like breast cancer and abortions, 3) it can cause under-age sexual promiscuity, and most importantly, 4) society needs children for civilization to continue, with the minimum replacement rate being the average number of 2.1 babies being born to each woman. Anything below that rate WILL eventually lead to the end of civilization, it's just a matter of how long. You guys can laugh every time I bring up the "worst-case" scenario movie (Children of Men) but it's much more likely to happen than your worst-case "Day After Tomorrow ; )

Since the introduction of "reliable" birth control, the U.S. has now just barely recovered (mainly due to illegal aliens giving birth) and 2007 actually marked the first time since 1971 that the replacement rate returned to that crucial benchmark of population growth: the ability of each generation to replace itself. For more info and history of this trend:

(cont.)

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/20/AR2007122002725.html

A lower "replacement rate" impacts just about every segment of society, especially the economy with lower demand but also not enough "productive" workers to sustain Social Security, Medicare, etc. While the other extreme with large populations like China can lead to a host of other problems, currently the U.S. is the "healthiest" is terms on population growth. "Europe, Japan and other industrialized countries have long had fertility rates far below the replacement level, creating the [ed. very real] prospect of labor shortages and loss of cultural identity as the proportion of native-born residents shrinks in relation to immigrant populations."

"The nation's total fertility rate hit a high of nearly 3.8 in the United States in 1957 during the postwar Baby Boom. But it fell sharply through the 1960s and 1970s with the introduction of the birth control pill and other trends, including women delaying childbearing to attend college and pursue a career [ed. sound familiar?]. The rate dipped below replacement level in 1972 and hit a low of 1.7 in 1976". So, you don't have to believe just me, because sociologists will tell you the same thing. It's the most important SECULAR reason against the Pill.

Another SECULAR reason against the Pill is encouragement of under age promiscuity, the flip side to the replacement rate argument presented above. Although "mature" childbearing is desireable for society, immature childbearing causes more problems than it solves (higher poverty rates, STDs, school dropouts, increase in crime, etc.). With the seeming decline in consequences, more and more teen-aged girls are experimenting with sex at earlier ages:

"The rate at which teenage girls in the United States are having babies has risen for a second year in a row, government statistics show ... Nationally, the birthrate among 15-to-19-year-olds rose 1.4 percent from 2006 to 2007, continuing a climb that began a year earlier. The rate jumped 3.4 percent from 2005 to 2006, reversing what had been a 14-year decline.

Although researchers will have to wait at least another year to see whether a clear trend emerges, the two consecutive increases signal that the long national campaign to reduce teen pregnancies may have stalled or even reversed.

"We've now had two years of increases," said Stephanie J. Ventura of the National Center for Health Statistics, which issued the report yesterday. "We may have reached a tipping point. It's hard to know where it's going to go from here."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/18/AR2009031801597.html

There are also potential medical consequences to taking the Pill:

http://women.emedtv.com/birth-control-pills/side-effects-of-birth-control-pills.html

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

(cont.)

While some of these side effects are minor, other trends are major and even life-threatening. These symptoms may indicate a serious disorder, such as liver disease, gallbladder disease, stroke, blood clots, high blood pressure, or heart disease.

Scandinavian researchers have even noted a marked increase in breast cancer among a group of women that were currently taking or had recently taken birth control pills. Longer use of the Pill seemed to only increase the risk:

http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/guide/pill-breast-cancer-risk

While abortion is also intertwined with religious considerations, taken in light of the "replacement rate" argument above, it is clear that secular reasons exist to ban abortion as well -- any medical procedure or prescription that causes abortion should be reviewed for the harm it is causing to society as a whole -- when the Pill fails to prevent ovulation, the other mechanisms come into play that can cause a fertilized embryo to not implant in the uterine wall, causing an abortion:

http://www.ccli.org/nfp/contraception/pill.php

Despite all of this, of course, exactly how effective the Pill is depends on whether the woman takes her birth control pills every day -- just missing 1 pill significantly raises the chances of getting pregnant -- on average, about 5 out of 100 couples will still implant and get pregnant in a year while using the Pill. This false sense of security leads to all sorts of problems, some outlined above, but also abuse, a sense of worthlessness, heart-ache and depression. A breakdown of the various types of birth control and "failure" rates can be found here:

http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/birth-control-pill

All of these SECULAR reasons are why I believe that the Pill should not be legal. Besides the false sense of security and control, it can actually cause serious side effects like breast cancer and abortions, promote under-age sexual promiscuity, and most importantly, negatively impact our population replacement rate.

While those recap the SECULAR reasons, of course, I believe there is a religious reason for outlawing the Pill (reasons which God gave to us because He knew the consequences otherwise). That's the Natural Law component -- not limited to just the Judeo-Christian perspective -- that being said, if there's no secular reason, regardless how I feel about the religious reasons, I am still glad that the First Amendment prevents ANY religion from using government to establish purely non-secular rules. As I said, a course on Natural Law would take even longer than my "simple" answer about the Pill. Assuming you are still reading this far down, I am always happy to answer any questions about my posts, as long as you answer my questions to you.

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

FairlingtonBlade:

It seems from your comment that you do not believe there is any secular basis to "replacement rate" in a given population -- I've brought this up before, but I don't recall you dismissing it out of hand -- that's just one reason why I am against birth control (yes, even for married couples). I would love to debate the secular reasons for that or making adultery illegal again, and even doing away with government-run welfare, but I thought that you were "boycotting" me. If that's not the case anymore, just let me know.

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

As the thesis was written on the eve of his legislative career, it does serve as a basis for his philosophy coming into government. I don't really think the thesis needs to be attacked or defended. Simply made available and discussed. I doubt that there are many undecided or weakly leaning voters who are willing to take the time to read through it. Ample space for The Fix, Drudge, Kos, etc.

Although this was not in the 15 action points, there was a comment that the ultimate goal of conservatives would be to remove social welfare programs and return this sort of support to the community. That's pretty much a call to end AFDC, Medicaid, and other programs and replace them with private charity. I doubt that McDonnell would defend that sentiment. But, I'd be happy listen to anyone around here do so.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 22, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

Poor whittle mark is "disappointed".

"den put some bip bip onna boo-boo baby"

Posted by: JakeD | September 22, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Mark (not Mike), I'm with you, and I thank you for trying to force jake into more than just pronouncements. I hate it when we talk about race and religion -- Bono says that he avoids talking about his faith because it is so hard to say what you mean and so easy to look like a prat. I feel this applies to race as well.

You are right that we need Conservative and Republican posters and we aren't acquiring any that are willing to stay the way Jake and snow white have (but isn't Andy a fine addition). If only jake and snow white made less noise and more sense -- it isn't that I want them to go away, I'd just like them to go away sometimes.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 22, 2009 8:47 AM | Report abuse

margaret, in Jake's non-response to my questions for social conservatives he said that he would not discuss these points with me if I had not read the "thesis", and that this was not the forum for a college level discourse on "natural law". A survey of "natural law" would reveal that there is no consistency of thought about it across time or culture, that some notions of it within the RC Church and Islamic history are inextricably bound to the faith, and that Hobbes' rationalist view in the "Leviathan", which bears the closest relationship to the Anglo-American common law is more easily squared with your views of the "thesis" than with Jake's.

I know that JakeD is an actual human being who really is a Stanford Law grad and who is a lawyer in SD, no longer practicing, and 48 years out of law school. I assume that he is intelligent, in the academic sense, at least. I believe he is devoted to his world view and undisturbed by great doubt. I hoped he would perform here as an intelligent voice for social conservatism, or at least as an interesting gadfly.

Without a social conservative posting thoughtfully here we miss the chance for an exchange of ideas with persons with whom we disagree. Some of us are truly fiscal conservatives and we can argue those positions from historical facts and economic theory with fiscal liberals who posit different priorities. But most social conservatives present a conundrum for dialogue with those who do not share their assumptions, in the most cordial of circumstances.

All this to say that JakeD is a disappointment for me.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 22, 2009 7:39 AM | Report abuse

Thank you , Mike, BB and others for driving Jake from the field yesterday.

He says, over and over he says, he wants you to answer his questions. He says he wants an intelligent debate, but then he says that cannot possibly be done here, in this forum, right now, with you -- and then he goes away to heckle another forum about not answering his questions.

The thesis is so out-of-step with the way Americans have lived since WWI that even the Constitution, a glacier at reflecting society's progress, has passed it. His agenda for society pleases the Jakes of the world, but it leaves the Mikes, Pauls, Marks and Margarets of the world disbelieving.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 22, 2009 6:54 AM | Report abuse

Now look who is talk to himself alone

==

Whwn you boasted that you could defend McDonnell's fifteen points I figured you were just blowing smoke. My guess is that this petty goading is all you can manage since 90% of what you post here is either about yourself and how coooooool you think you are, or it's snide crap about other posters.

I don't believe you can even begin to martial a clear argument, I think you'll just assemble some biblical tinkertoys with a hate-radio goad in every other sentence if not every one. If you had any ability to debate or defend your views we would have seen it by now, considering how much time you spend posting smilies and teenybopper acronyms.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 12:55 AM | Report abuse

Given the extreme and abhorrent positions expressed in his thesis and the corroboration of his many legislative efforts to Make It So, I don't think McDonnel could get elected in Alabama, much less in Obama- and Webb-electing blue Virginia.

The moral offenses aside, the thesis is simply ... nuts. We need to pass laws to encourage people to have children?!? We're in danger of going extinct?!?

I think NOT.

Well, actually, I take that back .. we are in danger of extinction, but more from breeding too much than to little, and long before we get there we'll be living in subhuman squalor.

I don't think McDonnell is sane. This "turn back the clock" BS is sick.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 22, 2009 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Said this before, McDonnell is dead-man walking, there is further revelation on the thesis, the fact that he tried to get funding from a right-wing group in order to publish it along with other juicy bits of his own..when you read or hear more on what McDonnell has to say on the subject of women, marriage, personal choice,work, etc, you won't believe it..This guy is about to implode..what out for the shrapnel!!!..

Posted by: ruraledcomm | September 21, 2009 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Now look who is talk to himself alone ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

So maybe McDonnell should come out advocating that unmarried people who have sex are criminals.

Yeah that should fly.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 8:32 PM | Report abuse

It's really hard to believe that someone as retrograde and punitive as McDonnell could even be taken seriously.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 8:21 PM | Report abuse

You can't even put together the simplest coherent line of logical reasoning, Jake, stop boasting about what a bangup job you *would* do if only people dignified your idiotic questions with answers.

You'll just trot out some hate-radio talking points and run with the first dodge that you can contrive.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Whew!!! As anyone reading the other threads can see, I have been quite busy single-handedly defending Christianity from attacks, but I must say that I never thought I would see GoldAndTanzanite (fka "chrisfox8" and "Cheopys1") ASK for more of my posts. DDAWD is going to be pissed to see this latest twist.

Needless to say, I've offered to defend the Thesis, and I am more than willing to debate it with anyone who actually reads it and answers my simple questions in return -- for instance, BB now knows that there are 15 specific family policy proposals that McDonnell argued the GOP should pursue, so I would be happy to debate any of them with him -- however, a college-level course in Natural Law far exceeds the scope of this forum.

Rest assured, anything contained in the Thesis can be justified on secular grounds -- in fact, McDonnell argues that vouchers be used in many instances and that federal RESTRAINT compels many of his other 15 points, i.e. repeal inheritance tax, and that includes the issues of birth control, man as head of the family, homosexuals and unmarried citizens (how many Va. Tech. undergrads are even going to vote this time around?) -- I would be more than happy to carry my side of a debate, but until he "deigns" to read the Thesis, perhaps Mr. Levbarg can get his questions answered in full by his other online discussion group of former and present posters.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 8:03 PM | Report abuse

I took a little time to read the thesis today, being that I DO live in Virginia and played a voting part is several close elections since moving here. For the most part, it's evangelical conservatism. There's a few interesting tidbits.

One comment about the rate of births being insufficient to sustain the current population. Hah!

The discussion of birth control appears mainly in a section attacking the Supreme Court for every decision that liberalized society. In this discussion, McDonnell appears to take a fairly clear stand in favor of criminalizing sexual conduct among non-married individuals. I wonder how THAT would go down at Va. Tech. One action item is for no special rights for unmarried couples, straight or gay. I'm guessing intercourse is one of those special rights.

Most amusing are repeated references to the Gipper mixed amongst a strong stand in favor of covenant marriage.

Overall, there's not that much new. McDonnell is a strong cultural conservative who is running to the center and trying to appeal to NoVa. Problem is that what was a quaint homage to 50s notions of family and marriage is seriously out of date, particularly in the DC suburbs.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 21, 2009 7:53 PM | Report abuse

After answering the four questions I asked, try to link your answers to a theory of constitutional government

==

In a shocking and unanticipated turn of events the racist troll has not deigned to respond.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Come on mark you're not only being cruel, demanding reason from someone incapable of it, but you're encouraging a troll to go on trolling. I thought we had an agreement here to let the troll talk to himself alone.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 5:42 PM | Report abuse

After answering the four questions I asked, try to link your answers to a theory of constitutional government.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 21, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

1] Is the pill a bad thing? Is birth control bad/ Why?

2] Is the husband the head of the family? Why?

3] Should homosexuals be punished? Why?

4] Should equal protection of the law not apply to the unmarried? Why not?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 21, 2009 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Not having read the thesis, not living in VA, and not caring to read the thesis I have adopted margaret's description of it as a fact for the purpose of my questions to any social conservative, including JakeD.

First, margaret on the thesis:
"No, the thesis doesn't say I can't work, it just says that my working undermines my family; that there's no reason for me to use birth control because that doesn't make sense; that my being a feminist undermines my husband's role as head of the family; that homosexuals should be punished; and that I should be given preferential treatment by my government because I am married and do not cohabitate, fornicate or engage in homosexual sex (does that mean I go to the front of the line at the DMV and the fornicators have to wait?)."

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 21, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Regardless of whether it is a "fact" (how could I type this question without a brain?) name-calling is prohibited. Ad hominem personal attacks are logical fallacies exactly because someone who is wrong 99 prior times may be right the 100th time.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

"GoldAndTanzanite:

I believe you claiming that I do not have a brain is prohibited "name-calling"."

Joked: I believe that is actually non-prohibited "stating a fact."

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

"Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves. He was a progressive. Or a liberal, if you prefer that term.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Liberals are always hilarious when they get all tangled up in words. In this case a Republican is not a Republican.

Please, puke. Where did he say Lincoln was not a Republican? I realize you have a very small brain, but those of us with larger brains know that Republicans in 1863 were very different from Republicans in 2009.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

"TO: JakeD @ 6:28 p.m.

This ain't no acoustic LRAD. We're talking "people cookers" here... "DEW assassination squad..."

...or is it the "Fryin' Legion"?

I jest, to contain my outrage...

[LINK OMITTED, BY ME, NOT BY THE GOVERMENT]

OR (if links are vaporized by laser weapon):

httpL//NowPublic.com/scirvener RE: 'GESTAPO USA"; "DOMESTIC TORTURE VIA RADIATION WEAPONRY"

Posted by: scrivener50 | July 11, 2009 9:03 PM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/hall-of-fame/hall-of-fame-the-case-against.html

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

scrivener50:

Maybe it's ZERO because there is not multi-agency coordinated action "program" that has deployed silent, harmful microwave and laser directed energy weapons. Even you have admitted that the LRAD doesn't qualify.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

THE MOST JOURNALISTICALLY BANKRUPT NUMBER IN POLITICS TODAY.

Zero:

The number of mainstream journalism outlets that have reported on the secretive multi-agency coordinated action "program" that has deployed silent, harmful microwave and laser directed energy weapons...

...and a nationwide federally-funded community policing/town watch vigilante Gestapo...

...to terrorize and degrade the lives of many thousands of unjustly targeted American citizens...

...civil and human rights abuses spawned or expanded under Bush-Cheney and now ongoing due to the naivete of Team Obama and the dereliction of duty of its Bush-Cheney holdovers.

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

OR (if link is corrupted / disabled):

http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | September 21, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves. He was a progressive. Or a liberal, if you prefer that term.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Liberals are always hilarious when they get all tangled up in words. In this case a Republican is not a Republican. Kind of like Barry telling Stephenapolous that a tax hike is not a tax hike and the dictionary is not the place to look.

this is in the long line of liberals trying to avoid the truth. It all depends on the meaning of the word "is", you know.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Or, maybe he was starving for liver and "opi onions"

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

Is "opionions" how they pronounce it im NOLA?

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:20 PM | Report abuse

GoldAndTanzanite:

I believe you claiming that I do not have a brain is prohibited "name-calling".

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Nobody who has a brain gives a damn about the opionions and affiliations of someone who doesn't

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves. He was a progressive. Or a liberal, if you prefer that term.

Oh, and re-read Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Jesus Christ was a *flaming* liberal, in today's terms.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 21, 2009 3:12 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

I am not a Republican either -- I am a registered member of the American INDEPENDENT Party -- but a conservative member ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

That should have been Deeds needs to say where he'll get it. I jumped ahead a little.

I live in NoVa, have kids in school, and commute around here. Be honest with the choices we face and don't try to sprinkle magic fairy dust on the budget. Ask our neighbors in Maryland how that's working out for them. So, give it to us straight.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 21, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"Republicans were not always conservatives. Conservatives were not always Republicans. Hence the "Southern Strategy."

Posted by: mikeinmidland "

That's why he switched the terms. He was lying.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 21, 2009 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Republicans were not always conservatives.

==

I wouldn't offend the good name of authentic conservatism by identifying the knuckle-walking racist know-nothings in the GOP as conservatives.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Republicans were not always conservatives. Conservatives were not always Republicans. Hence the "Southern Strategy."

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 21, 2009 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Conservatives are like a sea anchor. In a gale-force wind, it can help steady the ship of state. But in fair weather or foul, they are always a drag.

Posted by: mikeinmidland


this entire line of argument is preposterous. a quick survey of history will inform you that is was Republicans who freed the slaves, who passed civil rights. who want school choice to free the inner cities from the oppression of government schools. who pushed welfare reform to free the downtrodeen from a lifetime of servitude to government forced inactivity.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

"The Thesis does not say that the government should force women to stop working." Jake is Professor Obvious today.

Yes, when the Post had a link to the PDF I read his thesis (link is gone now). No, the thesis doesn't say I can't work, it just says that my working undermines my family; that there's no reason for me to use birth control because that doesn't make sense; that my being a feminist undermines my husband's role as head of the family; that homosexuals should be punished; and that I should be given preferential treatment by my government because I am married and do not cohabitate, fornicate or engage in homosexual sex (does that mean I go to the front of the line at the DMV and the fornicators have to wait?).

Time has shown that McDonnell is very ready to legislate his agenda: he has voted against equal pay for equal work, has voted against the tax credit for day care costs, has voted to prevent access to abortion 35 times, and has wasted money by putting forward Covenant Marriage laws 4 times. He has made lots of other proposals that he feels 'strengthen the traditional family' but that I think looks like a lot of government intervention coming from a small government kinda guy.

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that if McDonnell does have this agenda then he should put it forward and stand by it. If he has actually changed his mind and is against all this, then he needs to come clean with his supporters who think this is his agenda.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 21, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

When you're behind, knock your opponent down and then build yourself up. Deeds stalled McDonnell (or rather, McD did it to himself by bringing up the thesis). How was he to know a Post reporter might actually *read* it. It's fair enough in that McD benefited by appealing to social conservatives in the past.

However, part 2 has not happened. Deeds fumbled the debate and made it worse in the post-debate Q&A. If money, that's right, M O N E Y, is needed to expand and repair roads in NoVa, then Deeds needs to

Whoever wins the race (I'm handicapping 60/40 for McD) will have to deal with a budget in crisis. I'd give serious consideration to either candidate if he showed the courage to give us some straight talk about what can and cannot be done. The days of lollipops are over. It's time to tell us about the spinach. Perhaps I'll vote for Potts.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | September 21, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

mikeinmidland:

That's a strawman argument -- I am not advocating a return to shanty towns and lynchings -- we can all agree that SOME progress is good : )

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

See, it's like building a vacation cottage. As soon as you've got YOURS, you want to stop anyone else from moving in. And keep the lake just the way it is.

If had electricity and running water in '55, then to heck with progress, I. Got. Mine. There weren't any lynchings in MY (all-white) neighborhood, so there was no problem.

It really is all right there in the labels: progressives want progress. Conservatives want to conserve the status quo, or return to the status quo ante.

Conservatives are like a sea anchor. In a gale-force wind, it can help steady the ship of state. But in fair weather or foul, they are always a drag.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 21, 2009 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Wilder's endorsement would be important in a close race. Hard to see him going for McDonnell, but Wilder insists on never being taken for granted.

Posted by: nodebris | September 21, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

I can say with full confidence that I turned out far better than all of these people

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

the liberal mindset on full display.

when I say "mind", I am speaking metaphorically, of course.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

maybe you could explain how pumping hundreds of rousing speeches into the tv audience and there would be no effect.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Come on koolkat nobody needs any more reminders that the trolls is a compulsive liar. Please don't respond.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 2:30 PM | Report abuse

And, millions STILL don't in Africa, so?

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

"P.S. we at least had electricity and running water in 1955 ; )"

Millions of homes, black and white, did not.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

angriestdogintheworld:

OK, now, have you even read the Thesis (thread topic today)?

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

For the record, I don't want to ban literacy, nor do I want a fundamentalist Christian society. The Constitution, and specifically the First Amendment, is the greatest protection ever penned by human hands.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

More interesting (to me at least) is whether Gov. Wilder will ever endorse Deeds. Does anyone else think it's strange that hasn't happened yet?
===========================

not necessary... Wilder supporters know who to vote for...

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | September 21, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

"maybe you could explain how pumping 3 billions tons of carbon
and CO2 into the atmosphere and there would be no effect.
Please note I grew up in Alaska, so I've seen the change first
hand, where the rubber meets the road.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld"

He won't. He'll reply with some stupid one-liner and then begin his search for another passage to cut and paste.

Because hey, he's "debating"!!

Posted by: DDAWD | September 21, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

this poster never fails to indicate its own expertise in every post. the attempt is to point at others but the effect is always to illuminate its own perspective.

Posted by: snowbama

==

Big talk for a lifer in a mental institution

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

So McDonnell would rather go back 50 years, not 500 years. Got it. Of course, if this is all based on the Bible, perhaps we should all go back 2000 years or so.

(Nah, we'd have to give up GUNS, and that's just crazy-talk.)

==

Oh my no then "only criminals would have guns"

See, we don't give up any technology that helps us kill people or spy on people or determine what people are thinking against their will.

We just need to roll back 2000 years of social progress. No doubt the RRR wing of the GOP would like to start by banning literacy.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

clamoring for special attention or are mentally ill.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite


this poster never fails to indicate its own expertise in every post. the attempt is to point at others but the effect is always to illuminate its own perspective.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Screw the traditional family. Both of my parents worked and I can say with full confidence that I turned out far better than all of these people who feel the need to assail feminists and homosexuals. It's not even close.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 21, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

New thread whether pResident Obama thinks most of his opponents are "racists":

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/wag-the-blog/wag-the-blog-redux-a-conversat.html

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

So Deeds needs to highlight some of the thesis' more offensive points in his ads.

Americans don't want a fundamentalist Christian society. Those who say they do are either clamoring for special attention or are mentally ill.

Posted by: GoldAndTanzanite | September 21, 2009 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I've seen the change first
hand, where the rubber meets the road.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld


and I see dead people. that is quite a skill.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

There's a funny skit I've seen about Jesus AND Moses killing the Romans off with AK-47s ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

The deal with the thesis isn't even so much what it says (although that certainly doesn't help McDonnell). It's that it advertises his association with the Pat Robertson wing of the party.

That's not broadly known, since the GOP did not run a primary but instead chose McDonnell quietly in a convention dominated by right-wing activists. Tom Davis, a politician far more typical of Virginia Democrats, withdrew from politics altogether in disgust at the process. A lot of other Republicans are going to feel equally queasy about McDonnell once they learn more about him.

The real battle in VA state politics isn't between the Democrats and the Republicans; it's among the Republicans (witness the recent state GOP chairman travesty). The Thesis hits right at this fault line.

Posted by: nodebris | September 21, 2009 2:11 PM | Report abuse

So McDonnell would rather go back 50 years, not 500 years. Got it. Of course, if this is all based on the Bible, perhaps we should all go back 2000 years or so.

(Nah, we'd have to give up GUNS, and that's just crazy-talk.)

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 21, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

angriestdogintheworld:

Have you even read the Thesis?

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

But the sun's recent activity, or lack thereof, may be linked to the pleasant summer temperatures the midwest has enjoyed this year, said Charlie Perry, a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Lawrence.

The sun is at a low point of a deep solar minimum in which there are little to no sunspots on its surface.

Imagine that, the sun warms the Earth. someone ought to tell Al Gore. Now if only we can figure out how to tax it.

Darn facts, interfering with my Green religion.
===================================

maybe you could explain how pumping 3 billions tons of carbon
and CO2 into the atmosphere and there would be no effect.
Please note I grew up in Alaska, so I've seen the change first
hand, where the rubber meets the road.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | September 21, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

"koolkat_1960:

Unfortunately, your ad hominem personal attacks, and refusal to answer my questions to you on prior threads, prevent me from answering your question to me now. Perhaps you should have thought of the consequences back then.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse"

Not a problem, joked. I'll answer for you.

Emmitt Till, a 15-year-old black kid from Chicago, was brutally murdered by two rednecks in Money, Mississippi, for allegedly whistling at the wife of one of the rednecks. After a short, laughable trial of the rednecks, the all-white jury deliberated for about one hour (long enough to get lunch, they later explained) before coming back with a verdict of not guilty.

An elderly relative of Till, for the unspeakable "offense" of identifying the killers in open court, was forced to leave Mississippi as soon as the trial ended before he too would be murdered.

The rednecks later cheerfully admitted to the crime in an interview with LOOK magazine.

Medieval mindset? Nah -- prehistoric is more like it.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Keep in mind that Disneyland opened in 1955.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

The Middle Ages of European history (adjective form: medieval) was a period in history which lasted for roughly a millennium, commonly dated from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century to the beginning of the Early Modern Period in the 16th century. No one, not even Bob McDonnell, is suggesting we go back that far.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

P.S. we at least had electricity and running water in 1955 ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960:

Unfortunately, your ad hominem personal attacks, and refusal to answer my questions to you on prior threads, prevent me from answering your question to me now. Perhaps you should have thought of the consequences back then.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Joked: For an allegedly educated person, your knowledge of 1955 is quite weak.

Does the name Emmitt Till mean anything to you? Perhaps you can tell us how many years his confessed murderers were sentenced to.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Joked: For an allegedly educated person, your knowledge of 1955 is quite weak.

Does the name Emmitt Till mean anything to you? Perhaps you can tell us how many years his confessed murderers were sentenced to.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

More interesting (to me at least) is whether Gov. Wilder will ever endorse Deeds. Does anyone else think it's strange that hasn't happened yet?

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Joked: For an allegedly educated person, your knowledge of 1955 is quite weak.

Does the name Emmitt Till mean anything to you? Perhaps you can tell us how many years his confessed murderers were sentenced to.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Joked: For an allegedly educated person, your knowledge of 1955 is quite weak.

Does the name Emmitt Till mean anything to you? Perhaps you can tell us how many years his confessed murderers were sentenced to.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Only one problem Libs, this guy's daughter went into the infantry. hardly makes the case you are desperately trying.

I wonder what we would find if we ever got to see any of Barry's writings. I mean the ones he actually wrote. the Liberal curiosity ends when their guy is in question.

Wasn't he supposedly an editor, a scholar, an activist, a lawyer, a brilliant student, etc. but not a single publication? not a term paper? no that's not unusual at all. unless of course the writing is so infantile or communist it would wilt under the light of day.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

It is, I suppose, the definition of "conservative." Just because it's "tradtional" doesn't mean it's better.

Women working and controlling their own bodies may indeed be detrimental to the "traditional family." But we aren't about to go back to the traditional family. Or I should say, most people aren't. Those of you who want it can live that way, and leave the rest of us to live the way we want.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | September 21, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

dycinca:

That's exactly why McDonnell needs to DEFEND conservatism. The liberals in the northern part of the State weren't going to vote for him any way. If he keeps getting attacked by the elites, he will get a massive turnout in what would have otherwise been a lower off-year election.

Everyone else can contribute to his campaign here:

https://donate.bobmcdonnell.com/initiative/main

Or, of you'd prefer to send a donation the old-fashioned way:

McDonnell for Governor
2819 North Parham Road, Suite 210
Richmond, Virginia 23294

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

sverigegrabb:

1955 was hardly a "Medieval mindset".

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris, while I know you probably can't diss the reporting of your own newspaper's poll (a don't bite the hand that feeds you kind of thing)....

One has to point out the obvious. The poll itself shows that the only place the thesis issue has had any traction is in Northern VA. And while that is important for Deeds to remain competitive, Deeds was likely to close the gap there regardless. It is the natural Dem stronghold in the state and most of those voters had soft support for Deeds, but were never really going to support McDonnell anyways.

However, as Kaine and Warner showed with their successful bids, a Dem candidate cannot win on just support from Northern VA. Deeds needs to make inroads into other areas of the state and in those places, a Democrat wins by moderating on social issues - not highlighting them. The thesis is in essence a double-edged sword for Deeds. It boosted morale and turnout for him in Northern VA, which he badly needed. But at the same time it made a big deal of the very issues which alienate him from the much more conservative areas of VA where he will need to make significant inroads in order to get above the 50% support mark.

Posted by: dycinca | September 21, 2009 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

The race tightens! The latest poll was McDonnell/Deeds 51/47, wasn't it? If Deeds doesn't keep up the momentum, he deserves to lose.

And if the residents of VA (you included, CC! Let's hear it for 50+ percent of the population!) are so foolish as to vote for someone as far to the right as McDonnell, you deserve him as your governor!

Any objective observer would say that the person who wrote that thesis has a Medieval mindset, 20 years ago or not! (that was 1989, after all!)

Posted by: sverigegrabb | September 21, 2009 1:12 PM | Report abuse

He is not a "retrograde nutbag" for pointing out the simple fact that (overall, I know there are exceptions to every rule) working women and feminists are "detrimental" to the traditional definition of family -- the government SHOULD favor married couples over "cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators" -- that doesn't mean we outlaw the Gays.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Deeds is a pretty weak candidate, but we can't afford this retrograde nutbag as Governor.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 21, 2009 1:08 PM | Report abuse

margaretmeyers:

The Thesis does not say that the government should force women to stop working.

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 1:04 PM | Report abuse

The people who don't know about it aren't paying attention at all. I wonder how the demographic splits between Occupied Norther Virginia:-) and the rest of the state. I'm sure Northern Virginia and women voters are rejecting him in light of their new understanding.

McDonnell made this himself -- 18 years ago he described his action plan to get more Christianity into government and for the past 15 years he has been pursuing that action plan. He can say his views have changed, since he is now OK with the women in his family working (I'm glad he's OK with it), but that was only one deeply out-dated position he had in his action plan.

The fact is, McDonnell can no longer present himself as a moderate candidate because he isn't a moderate candidate. He's going to have to live with his longstanding and ongoing relationship with a religious right rejected by most voters.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | September 21, 2009 1:01 PM | Report abuse

angriestdogintheworld:

Maybe because there's nothing "wrong" in the Thesis? It's not like he calls for the repeal of the Nineteeth Amendment (darn ; )

Posted by: JakeD | September 21, 2009 12:58 PM | Report abuse

"I'll be far more attuned to complaints about a liberal media bias when ABC copies Fox and organizes its own protest in DC.

Posted by: nodebris"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/19/fox-news-producer-caught_n_292529.html

Fox News Producer Caught Rallying 9/12 Protest Crowd In Behind-The-Scenes Video

Now Glenn Beck can promote whatever the hell he likes, but when the actual news people pull this nonsense, that's just really bad.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 21, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse

But the sun's recent activity, or lack thereof, may be linked to the pleasant summer temperatures the midwest has enjoyed this year, said Charlie Perry, a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Lawrence.

The sun is at a low point of a deep solar minimum in which there are little to no sunspots on its surface.

Imagine that, the sun warms the Earth. someone ought to tell Al Gore. Now if only we can figure out how to tax it.

Darn facts, interfering with my Green religion.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 12:38 PM | Report abuse

You would think that McDonnell would have learned from his friend George Allen. The commercial he is running now should have been out the day this story broke, instead he tried to distance himself from it. You have to meet a problem head-on in politics, deal with it, and then move on. This is going to linger and drag on especially now that Deeds looks like he has life again.
Expect the donations to come in fast for Deeds since the national big donors can smell blood in the water. That means that the 54% who haven't heard about this most definitly will by the end of October, and if independent women break by 10% to Deeds then he wins. That is the same group that Warner and Kaine rode to the governer's mansion.

Posted by: AndyR3 | September 21, 2009 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Obama throws himself at national networks like so much flung confetti saying, "I didn't even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money." He said that. He actually said that

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Seems to me, the easiest thing would be to say the thesis was wrong, but I've not heard that. Only that it was written as a "student" and McDonnells daughter has served in Iraq. That is confusing. It is either what you believed then and were wrong or what you believed then and were right.

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | September 21, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I'll be far more attuned to complaints about a liberal media bias when ABC copies Fox and organizes its own protest in DC.

Posted by: nodebris | September 21, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

There's your "liberal" media for you...

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl1 | September 21, 2009 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Clearly the Post needs to print this story on the front page above the fold every day until the Democrat wins.

Posted by: snowbama | September 21, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

There's a sharp divide in the Virginia GOP between activists, who are overwhelmingly from the religious far right, and the rank and file, many of whom are not at all comfortable with the Pat Robertson tail that wags the party. There's the party of John Warner and Tom Davis on one hand, and Ollie North and Pat Robertson on the other. They aren't very comfortable with each other.

Deeds truly is a conservative, middle-of-the-road candidate; it would be very hard to paint as a fire-breathing yankee liberal. If the Democrats can successfully paint McDonnell as the candidate of the religious right, tie him to Robertson, and portray him as outside the mainstream, Deeds is in excellent position to pick up a big, fat middle of moderate voters.

That's why the Thesis is such a big deal.

Posted by: nodebris | September 21, 2009 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Well, if people are introduced to the issue by McDonnell's ads, they are introduced to it in the most favorable light. First impressions are big and if people's first impression is in a more positive frame, that may hurt him less than if it is introduced to these people outside of the positive frame. Deeds needs to ensure that McDonnell doesn't have a chance to inoculate himself.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 21, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company