Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Va. Senate: A Golden Opportunity for Democrats

Sen. John Warner's (R-Va.) decision not to seek a sixth term in 2008 places his seat in serious peril next November, with Democrats expected to clear the way for popular former Gov. Mark Warner and Republicans headed toward an ideological primary.

"Everything has gone well," said Warner in the announcement at the University of Virginia. "My work and service to the state of Virginia as a senator will conclude on January 6, 2009."

Sources familiar with Mark Warner's thinking say not to expect any formal announcement from the former governor about his political plans for a week or more. But from all indications, Warner is set to run for the seat. Warner is itching to get back into the fray following his shocking decision to take himself out of the presidential race in late 2006, and an open Senate seat may be too tempting to pass up.

Two considerations complicate Warner's decision.

First, he made no secret that serving as governor was the best job he ever had and repeatedly said that if the state didn't limit its governors to a single term he would have continued serving. The seat comes open again in 2009 and Warner would clearly be the preferred candidate for Democrats. He may not want to wait that long or face the comeback bid of former Sen. George Allen (R) who has expressed interest in a gubernatorial bid.

Second, Warner is regularly mentioned as a potential vice presidential pick in 2008 thanks to his popularity in a former red state. If Warner decides to run for Senate, he likely takes himself out of the veep pool. Of course, a one term governor with limited (at best) foreign policy experience wouldn't likely be the choice of either Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) or Barack Obama (Ill.).

Mark Warner released a statement shortly after John Warner's announcement but made no mention of his future plans. "I'm proud to call John Warner a friend and wish him nothing but the best in the years ahead."

Mark Warner's political adviser Monica Dixon added: "Today is about Senator Warner. Governor Warner will make his plans public in a week or so."

We believe Warner (Mark, that is) remains likely to run.

On the Republican side, Rep. Tom Davis has been waiting for this chance for years. Need evidence? At the 2006 Shad Planking -- a must-do event for any political junkie -- Davis was the lone northern Virginia pol in attendance. He has also been raising money feverishly, ending June with more than $1 million in the bank.

Like Warner, Davis was unwilling to make his intentions known, releasing a statement that said in part: ""Today's a day to celebrate and honor John Warner. An announcement from me on my future plans can wait for another day."

Davis will enjoy the support of the John Warner machine and possibly even the Senator himself. Davis won the incumbent's undying loyalty back in 1996 when he was the lone member of the Virginia delegation to openly support Warner in his primary race against former Reagan administration official James Miller. (Oliver North, whose senate candidacy Warner refused to endorse in 1994, strongly backed Miller in an attempt to exact revenge.)

Davis, a moderate, would likely face a challenge from his ideological right -- most likely in the form of former Gov. Jim Gilmore. Gilmore ended his quixotic bid for president last month but said he would definitely return to campaign politics. The Senate race makes more sense for Gilmore since he wouldn't likely be seriously challenged from the right; in a run for governor he would have to navigate a field that could include Allen as well as Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling and state Attorney General Bob McDonnell.

Gilmore is widely seen as a man whose time has passed inside-the-Beltway; his tenure as chairman of the Republican National Committee was widely panned. But, he remains a known figure in the Commonwealth and has won two statewide elections -- for attorney general in 1993 and for governor in 1997. Gilmore's biggest problem will be fundraising; Davis has been working at it for years while Gilmore has never been a prolific fundraiser. Gilmore raised $391,000 for his presidential campaign but ended June with $62,000 in the bank and $129,000 in debts. The donors who maxed out to Gilmore's presidential bid -- his loyalists of backers -- would not be able to give more money to his Senate bid, creating a major question about where Gilmore's money would come from.

The key to the race could well be whether the state party chooses a convention or a primary to pick their nominee. A convention would give Gilmore his best shot as it is a far smaller electorate and typically attracts the most conservative element within the party. In a statewide primary, Davis's financial advantage would seem to make it difficult for Gilmore to compete. A decision on convention versus primary could come as early as this fall and will be made by the state Republican party's central committee.

Regardless of the eventual Republican nominee, if Warner is the Democratic standard-bearer he will start the general election as the favorite. Democrats have made considerable strides in Virginia, gains that began with Warner's election as governor in 2001. The state's massive growth in the Democratic-friendly northern Virginia suburbs has turned the red state to purple, and the demographic shift has shown no signs of abating over the past few years.

This is a major Democratic opportunity.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 31, 2007; 2:37 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Midnight Riders
Next: Craig Bows to the Inevitable

Comments

I think Tom Davis would do very poorly statewide against Mark Warner. If anything Davis has a much more liberal record on the issues - he could count on the Country Club Republican vote but not much else. On gun rights issues Mark Warner has a very good record and Tom Davis a very poor record.

Gilmore versus Warner may also be tough but I think Gilmore would not lose as many gun rights voters due to his association with George Allen and generally good public stance on gun rights.
Mark Warner would suffer from association with Tim Kaine who is proving to be a real embarressment as Governor.


Posted by: Gun Rights Guy | September 5, 2007 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Will Mark Warner enter a tough race against Tom Davis, or will he bow out choosing to leave the door open for a run for VP in 08 or governor in 2009? M. Warner has a friendship with John Warner, and J. Warner has made it clear he is supporting Tom Davis for his seat in 08. It is possible, rather than face the John Warner machine against Davis, that M. Warner may opt out of the senate race for John's seat.

Posted by: reason | September 4, 2007 3:53 PM | Report abuse

JD,
I hail from Fairfax, Tom Davis' district as a matter of fact. My impression is that he tries to do the right thing as well as listen to his constituents (at least as far as politicians go). He has been one of the few people to work on a solution for the DC voting issue. The assertion that he is interfering with local issues when it comes to Tysons or Vienna (VA) is rediculous. Both were Metro issues and Metro is under congressional jurisdiction.

I am not one that is overly impressed by Mark Warner. During his election I recall thinking that if he did what he said he was going to do, he'd be a decent governor. He campaigned on eliminating the car tax and not raising taxes. Instead, he spent the billion dollar "rainy day" fund that Gilmore built up, upped my taxes by 1.5 billion and we still pay the same car tax as when Gilmore left. What exactly are Mark Warner's great accomplishments? One day our state was in dire financial straits, so dire that Warner needed to go back on his no tax promise. But amazingly, after the new taxes were figured in, the budget called for an increase in spending of 19% over two years. Great leadership or bait and switch? Mark Warner is the definition of a tax and spend Democrat and an examination of his record will easily prove that.

Posted by: Dave! | September 3, 2007 10:22 PM | Report abuse

What I got from most of your comments are that Mark Warner and Tom Davis would give VA two good choices, which is what we should want.

Considering that there are big shoes to fill here that is even better news. I say "good luck" to both of them.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | September 3, 2007 12:11 PM | Report abuse

These southerners like to call everyone on the coasts and in cities Commies but they have never turned down a handout. And boy do they love the services the gov't provides...they use use them all the time and everyday

Lets give 'em what they want. Let the states keep their own money and we'll see if some of the poorest states (all in the South) in the US can truly compete in the capitalist environment they claim to hold so dear (which they don't).

Posted by: Gr | September 3, 2007 9:44 AM | Report abuse

I think this rules out Mark as a VP choice for the dems need to pick up around five [5] seats now held by repubs, and this is one I think is not to hard with Mark running. Davis has done a pretty good job and I have my doubts he will want to take a chance by giving up a seat that is his for as long as he wants it. Va. has been one of my top "To watch" states, along with Co. and Minn.

Posted by: lylepink | September 2, 2007 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Out of DC, not sure if I know what you're talking about ('getting my trial balloon shot down'), but whatever...

The point is, yes Warner has the name recognition downstate, but Davis has the R. In that part of Virginia, I'd rather have the R.

Think of this as a 'reverse Warner'; as Colin has suggested, Warner did well downstate 'for a Dem'. I submit Davis will do suprisingly well in NoVa 'for a Repub'.

Posted by: JD | September 2, 2007 10:53 AM | Report abuse

ALLEN, put an end to the panderer, Timmy Kaine's harebrained tax scheme that is HB 3202...

Come back to the commonwealth as Virginia's faithful U.S. Senator and give James "Hothead" Webb the boot on your way in!

Posted by: Austin | September 1, 2007 9:54 PM | Report abuse

Re: Tom Davis
First he has to get Jeanmarie re-elected, which won't be easy.

Posted by: NoVA | September 1, 2007 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Whenever that disgrace of a President currently occupying the White House signs into law a national car tax, Gilmore has nothing of substance to run on.

Hopefully this is beginning of Virginia's purging of the likes of Falwell and Robertson and all of their ChristoFascist followers and we can return to centrist politicians like Webb and Warner. Heck, even Tom Davis wouldn't be so bad. Even though I am a Democrat, I proudly voted for John Warner. He is a man of principal and not a rubber stamp to the current Nazi party operatives that control the GOP.

Posted by: Mr. Plug | September 1, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

No one seems to be talking about the fact that Mark Warner's 2001 victory was actually based in large part on competing in downstate Virginia. Mudcat Sanders, who does rural outreach for Democrats, first came to prominence b/c of the work he did for Warner during that campaign. NOVA hadn't swung towards Dems as decisively in '01, so Warner HAD to make things closer downstate to win. Given that Davis is a moderate Republican himself, without statewide name recognition, I wonder whether he will actually be able to run up the kind of margins outside of NOVA that Republicans usually enjoy. If not, his being more competitive in NOVA could be a wash.

In general, I think Mark Warner starts a race against Davis as a narrow favorite. I don't see a blowout happening, but I think anone that argues that Davis is the favorite at this point is ignoring reality.

Posted by: Colin | September 1, 2007 12:51 PM | Report abuse

"Tom has good name recog in NoVa, and whoever said he'll get 45% up here is spot on. Then his R status will carry everywhere else except Hampton Roads."

JD, you floated this balloon a week or two ago and it got shot down then. Time to do it again.

Tom Davis can't compare to Mark Warner in name recognition. That should be a no-brainer.

Tom has lots of political chits he can call in due to his heading the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee multiple times. Unfortunately, many of them may have to be used in the 11th District as Tom and Jean Marie try to establish the Davis dynasty with Jean Marie running against Gerry Connolly for Tom's seat.

Sure, Tom'll get money, Mark will get more (he already has lots).

Significant advantage: Warner

Posted by: Out of DC | September 1, 2007 12:18 PM | Report abuse

For all of those with blinders on who think Tom Davis is so great take a look at Milbank's column from last week. Tom finally had to speak to an audience he couldn't con.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/23/AR2007082302011_pf.html

I'd like to see Gilmore run. Maybe this would be the final nail in the coffin and we could get rid "The Biggest Loser" once and for all. After all, how many more things can he fail at?

Let Albo run too. Does "Agressive Driver Fess" ring a bell with you? It will if he runs.

If Davis does win, does this mean no more pony rides and ice cream for Zouk at Tom's fund raiser?

Posted by: Out of DC | September 1, 2007 12:11 PM | Report abuse

ALL THAT GLITTERS IS NOT GOLD..

Posted by: BONNIE | September 1, 2007 10:20 AM | Report abuse

The Dems had better work hard in this state...Hope they do not messs up this opportunity.

Posted by: nhgal628 | September 1, 2007 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Boko, you're absolutely correct about Warner being popular (but forced out due to one-and-done), and Kaine getting the job based on coattails.

The Virginia GOP hasn't put up anyone worth voting for in awhile. This is still a pretty conservative state (both legislatures are very Republican), with pockets of liberalism (Arlington, Alexandria, Portsmouth/Chesapeake).

Posted by: JD | September 1, 2007 9:26 AM | Report abuse

And Georg Chell, your comment that anyone not a minority and/or dem voter, is 'an inbred'...

Ladies and gentlemen, the voice of the extreme left.

Posted by: JD | September 1, 2007 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Back on topic; Tom Davis is an excellent campaigner, can raise a lot of money, and is the perfect candidate to run against Warner. Federal Gov workers really like the guy, based on all he did for the District and as chairman/ranking member of the Gov Oversight committee.

The observations earlier are true; Mark W is a good guy, but he won against an R who ran an awful campaign. Tom has good name recog in NoVa, and whoever said he'll get 45% up here is spot on. Then his R status will carry everywhere else except Hampton Roads.

This should be a great race, pretty much a tossup (depending on how much cash Mark wants to bring to the table). And the best news is, Virginia cannot lose, whoever wins.

Now, since it seems there aint many DC-area people on this blog, I'd especially be interested in hearing from those who are (Loudoun Voter? Anyone else? For the record, I'm in PW County)

Posted by: JD | September 1, 2007 9:18 AM | Report abuse

"While I certainly hope (and indeed expect) a Repulican will take the WH in 08, the country can only benefit from getting the DEM party back on course and off the extreme liberal trajectory it has been on over the past 40 years. Liberalism is an extremely dangerous philosophy and, like cancer, needs to be stopped dead in its tracks."

A GOP in the White House and an enhanced Dem majority in congress means, the GOP will never control congress for at least a generation. Why? The party in power mostly losses seat in the midterms with 2002 and 1998 exceptions. Karl Rove would have ended up with a re-alignment alright...realignment towards the Dems.

Posted by: Georg Chell | September 1, 2007 8:51 AM | Report abuse

"Virginia is on the verge of becoming a blue state. Hurray! The GOP inbred supporters can move further to the south where their kind is welcome. GET OUT OF MY STATE!!!"

But first we need to run these inbreds out of Prince William and Loudon. We need to go to Montgomerry and Prince George's to convince US Citizens, particularly minorities to move down there. Maryland has enough Dems. Giving us some 200,000 new voters most of whom are minority US citizens wont hurt them. I have already convinced two to move from Howard to Loudon and they are Democrats and white!!!

Posted by: George Chell | September 1, 2007 8:46 AM | Report abuse

If Hagel retires the GOP's slimmest chance of re-capturing the Senate disappears.

Posted by: George Chell | September 1, 2007 8:42 AM | Report abuse

Calm Threats Against Iran, Kucinich Says

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the Ohio Democrat running for president, says a new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) indicating that Iran is cooperating with the nuclear watchdog agency and has agreed to provide additional information about its nuclear enrichment activities "should give serious pause to those who are beating the drums for possible military action against that country."

http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2007/08/calm-threats-against-iran-kucinich-says.html

Posted by: Anonymous | September 1, 2007 12:39 AM | Report abuse

If the Democrats want a true winner, go to Massaschusetts and help with the Big Dig. Virginia should maintain a Rep Senator in the state.

Posted by: David Welch | August 31, 2007 11:54 PM | Report abuse

Truth, it turns out [I have now read it] that the IA Constitution has a "uniform laws" clause like the Texas Constitution, among others. This is different than an equal protection clause. It is a clause that protects CLASSES of citizens from being treated differently under a uniform law.

It does not speak to gender or sexual orientation, but those certainly could be thought of as as "classes" of citizens in ordinary English.
-------------------------------------
I note that Rufi has learned the political trick of quoting completely out of context.
If he thought about it, he would not defend the government having a greater interest in a private domestic partnership than public health, property rights, and best interest of the children. I am sure he does not think government should have a role in the bedroom, or at the breakfast table, for examples, but if he does, I will stand corrected.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 31, 2007 11:29 PM | Report abuse

I'd much rather see Allen run for another term in Senate than either Davis or Gilmore -- he's one of the few lawmakers left with any grit.

I miss Allen's humble temperament and Cool-headedness.

Posted by: Austin | August 31, 2007 10:23 PM | Report abuse

It's obvious that kingofzouk has some deep seated anger issues, and I do think he doth protest too much.

Typical Republican-base bigot - spewing nonsensical gibberish day after day, the foam flying from his lips as he stutters and screams and screeches his hate and anger at everybody who doesn't want America to remain fascist, as it's been under the GOP.

Get a life young man, and read a book or two. And stop with the incestuous amplification day after day after day....

Posted by: yankee | August 31, 2007 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Mark in Austin... As I understand it, Hanson's opinion refers to Iowa' Defense of Marriage Act (passed by GOP legislature) which he holds to be against the Iowa Consitution. The Constitution calls for equal rights for all regardless of gender, etc. It will end up in the Iowa Supreme Court.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 31, 2007 8:46 PM | Report abuse

"The public interest is limited to the protection of: property rights, the best interests of children, and public health. Civil ceremonies that institutionalize these public interests need not be called marriages."

The gop loves to frame the debate. They like to ignore "what is" and tell you what is (with their usual spin).

You ask them a question. "That's not the issue this is." And americans used to buy it. The only power they have is the power we give them. No. Tha tis not the issue. No. YOu are lying. Their time is up. A year and a half of relevance. Use the time you are given wisely.

Posted by: rufus | August 31, 2007 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Colin - I have not read the opinion, but one IA paper described it thus:

"Hanson's 63-page opinion Thursday held that the denial of marriage violates the due process and equal protection rights of same-sex couples under the state constitution."

drindl - perhaps I should have been more direct - while many churches do not recognize homosexual marriage, some do. That was actually my point - as a religious covenant, marriage is defined by the sect. I invented an exaggerated name for a church to make the point.

The public interest is limited to the protection of: property rights, the best interests of children, and public health. Civil ceremonies that institutionalize these public interests need not be called marriages.

The word "marriage" is magic in a church, but is merely a convenient description in the civil context.

Colin, I agree with you that a state court invoking the Federal Constitution in these matters would smack of activism, but a ruling based on the state constitution might be a restrainist or an activist position, depending on the language of the state constitution.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 31, 2007 8:30 PM | Report abuse

An earlier post on Polk County, Iowa's same sex marriage ruling:

"I think it should remain a state's rights issue, but this two-bit Judge in Iowa is overstepping. Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 31, 2007 05:13 PM"

ProudtobeGOP - Although increasingly I can't understand the "proud" part - your shot at Judge Robert Hanson as a "two bit" judge is way off the mark.

He's a respected jurist who got his undergraduate education from Stanford University, and then went to the University of Iowa for his law degree in 1981. He clerked for the Iowa Supreme Court and then practiced law privately prior to his appointment in 2003 by Gov. Vilsack.

This ruling, by the way, applies to Polk County only and Hanson today issued a stay on his own ruling.

Speaking of "two-bit".... Mitt rushed to pander to conservatives (especially in Iowa) by advocating his support for a federal amendment that would ban same-sex marriage saying it's "essential for our future"... while most other candidates (except perhaps Fred) think it is a matter best left to the states.

Guess Mitt wants states rights only when he agrees with those rights.... is that a true conservative position?

Just saw CC on MSNBC's Olberman... so much for vacation.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 31, 2007 8:21 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if zouks' knuckles are bleeding from the dragging on the ground. I'm amazed at the mentalty level from these MORONS. Libs allowing sex in grade schools, you know how stupid that sounds. I guess not, or he wouldn't have wrote it. Are you on the Bushco payroll by any chance? I just don't understand how and why people think like that. Nothing good to say about his "party", so he bashes the dems, brilliant!
Hey zouk, tell me some of the good things that your party has done in the last six years, I guarantee that I can top that 10 fold with the bad thats happened in the last 6yrs. Total moron! I bet you're watching faux news and drinking that kool-aid.

Posted by: jime | August 31, 2007 8:06 PM | Report abuse

tAKE NOTE GOP. This is how you hold people who wrong americans and the country accountable. Something the gop has been unwilling or unable to do in 15 years. You people only are held accountable if it comes out. What if you are a liar and inserting your politics into your job? The dem's hold their accountable. how about you gop? Is it up to the individual or the party? I say it's up to the LAW. Opps. Gop's are above the law. I forgot. Hypocrites.

"DURHAM, N.C. - Mike Nifong, the disgraced former Durham County district attorney, was held in criminal contempt of court Friday for lying to a judge when pursuing rape charges against three falsely accused Duke University lacrosse players.

Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III sentenced Nifong, who has already been stripped of his law license and has resigned from office, to a single day in jail. He had faced as many as 30 days in jail and a fine as high as $500.

"If what I impose with regard to Mr. Nifong would make things better or different for what's already happened, I don't know what it would be or how I could do it," Smith said.
"

Posted by: RUFUS | August 31, 2007 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Davis would have the bad luck to be picking the worst time possible to run. One of his primary patrons is Sallie Mae (HQ in Reston), and this is the year when 40 years of student loan scandal finally bubbled up into the mainstream press. Davis even got W to appoint his wife to the board of Sallie Mae for a while (earlier in the decade). (After setting up a campaign photo-op for Rove at Sallie Mae during 2000.)

In addition, Davis has walked a fine line supporting private govt contractors' trade group while claiming to support senior level civil servants who live in his district. (He has been careful not to appear pro-union or pro-employee.) Many contractors are headquartered in his district, and one could make a strong argument that his position on competitive sourcing was identical to Rove, Cheney, Thompson, etc.

Posted by: Cesar | August 31, 2007 7:36 PM | Report abuse

350,000 muslim voters in Virginia will ensure that a democrat is elected the next senator in Virginia. Bye bye GOP trash.

Posted by: Ahan | August 31, 2007 7:31 PM | Report abuse

'By the same token, the "High Church of Homosexual Christians" could celebrate covenantal marriage just as it sees fit.'

That seems a bit snarky for you, Mark, I'm sure you're aware that a great many Christian and Jewish congregations [on the progressive side] welcome gays.

I am a member of a Reconstructionist Jewish group, from whom my daughter received her Bat Mitzvah, that celebrates all unions of committed couples. The point is to embrace all those who are willing to accept their responsibilities to each other and to the community.

I simply cannot undersstand why some people want to deny these individuals the basic right to live with the person you love.

Posted by: drindl | August 31, 2007 7:23 PM | Report abuse

I meant CHRIS, not Dan. Irony? what Irony?

Posted by: jhbyer | August 31, 2007 7:22 PM | Report abuse

'From a policy standpoint, I think it's ludicrous that anyone cares whether same-sex couples get married. Never quite got how that "denegrates marriage" when Britney Spears getting married for 8 minutes -- or Rudy Gulianni getting married three times and cheating on his first two wives -- doesn't.'

Well said, Colin.

Posted by: Cassandra | August 31, 2007 6:56 PM | Report abuse

'I think it should remain a state's rights issue, but this two-bit Judge in Iowa is overstepping.'

Tell me why you think that is so, proud-- and I agree with you that John Warner is an honorable man. I wish that there were more like him, n both parties.

Posted by: drindl | August 31, 2007 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, Dan, for referring to Virginia as a commonwealth. Such niceties bespeak an admirable commitment to accuracy.

Posted by: jhbyer | August 31, 2007 6:48 PM | Report abuse

I've been away from the computer for a few days. Did the Iowa Court base its decision on the STATE constitution or the Federal constitution? If it's the former, then I think Proud's remarks about "judicial activism" are silly, as it should be quite easy to more clearly articulate the state's views on the issue if they're so counter to the Judge's decision. If it's based upon the US constitution, that's more complicated.

From a policy standpoint, I think it's ludicrous that anyone cares whether same-sex couples get married. Never quite got how that "denegrates marriage" when Britney Spears getting married for 8 minutes -- or Rudy Gulianni getting married three times and cheating on his first two wives -- doesn't. That being said, I tend to think marriage issues ought to be regulated by the States. Looking at Demographic views on this issue, the "liberal" position is going to win in the near future anyway.

Posted by: Colin | August 31, 2007 6:47 PM | Report abuse

on point, a question for Loudoun Voter and any other VA residents... how would you characterize the typical John Warner voter? Does he/she support the Senator for reasons having to do with fiscal conservatism? or social? and what will that say about the ability of Mark Warner to win those voters over?
Also, to Jason, who pointed out that "When he won the governor's election, he (Mark Warner) did it with only 52% of the vote" - I thought I saw somewhere that by the time he left office, Gov. Warner was popular enough to have won reelection easily if it had not been for the term limits... is this correct? I also seem to remember that he got Kaine elected over a strong GOP challenger pretty much on coattails - again, accurate?

Posted by: Bokonon | August 31, 2007 6:31 PM | Report abuse

proudtobeGOP, it seems to me that the DOMA - in Iowa or anywhere - is a crude attempt at social engineering. As would-be social engineers everywhere have learned, all that will result from that is hostility. People will do what people will do, seems to me, and to try to make it illegal will only generate ill will without achieving the desired result. Look at Hitler, or the purges in Russia, or apartheid... in each case, the policy did not have the desired effect, but in each case the policy was the source of much violence and disorder. If you don't approve of marrying someone of the same gender, you can still marry someone of the opposite gender. Hetersexual marriages in Massachusetts, where I live, have continued pretty much unaffected - in fact, LIFE in general has not been affected by the legality of same sex marriage. NOTHING HAS CHANGED, at least nothing noticeable to me, a straight person. The sky didn't fall, straight people didn't magically become gay... nothing. That leads me to think that the only reason not to allow 2 people of the same gender to get married is catering to prejudice.

Posted by: Bokonon | August 31, 2007 6:18 PM | Report abuse

"...his shocking decision to take himself out of the presidential race in late 2006"

Shocking!!! I'm still shocked! So shocked I can barely type! My head is reeling! My fingers are all discomboobulated and it's hard to find the "home row." Proud, prescribe me a valium pronto! No, I don't care if it endangers your license because I'm still so shocked!!!!!

Word choice: 'surprising' would've been more accurate and a lot less hyperbolic.

Mark Warner is Virginia's next Senator. It's a lead pipe cinch.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | August 31, 2007 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Zouk, please refrain from your posting to this blog until you learn some manners. I will go further and say, please refrain from your posting to this blog until you come up with some logically defensible positions.

Or maybe you should just refrain, period.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 6:05 PM | Report abuse

See. I told you I had zouk scared. :)

What do gop fascsit dittoheads when they get scared? Fear is internal not external. So when the gop is scared what do they do? Silence or kill that which is differant. What they see as the cause of their fear. Not knowing that fear comes from inside you. I cannot make you afraid zouk, only you have that power. When you understand that you will realize that fear doesn't even really exist.

Who are you trying to convince. Who are you talking to when you say," Ignore the trolls." Who are you? Do you think one person here cares about your facsit sell-out opinion?

Ok then. So post your garbage. Stop telling others, as differant names, what they should listen to and not. What are you afraid of? Coward. What aren't you in the military? I did my time in there. I fought for my country as an army infantry soldier 11B. Stop fight your own country. If you are such a believer go fight, as the ghost writer has suggested. You have no power over me. The only thing stopping me from coming back here and destroying you all day is me. Not you. You fascsits no longer have a vise gripe on this country. You fascsim has been pointed out now. AS a results the gop is about to be eliminated for a generation./ Haven'tI been telling you people this for months now.

Haven't everything I told you, thus far, becasme reality. You can see the future also. You just need to but the time in. YOu have to ignore the propogating lying fascsits. Their only goal is growing their own pockets. How does bill oreilly/rush/hannity making millions off propoganda help you?

Think about that when the gop is trying to put up straw men. Think about, "How does this effect me." Watch. And when the propgandists do there thing, think about that.

How do gay people effect you , if your not gay. How does abortion effect you if you are elderly and can no longer have kids. Now look at the opther side. My brothers and sisters in uniform are sure being effected right now. Who's fault is ti

Posted by: rufus | August 31, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

"Keep in mind you should use legal arguments to refute the Judge's ruling"

I just love liberals...always telling others what they "should" do. Guess what b, the majority of the country cannot argue at the apellate court level why the ruling should be overturned, but they darn well support doing so.

This ruling is another example of an activist court and unelected judges trying to redefine marriage and disregard the will of the people as expressed through Iowa's Defense of Marriage Act.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 31, 2007 5:54 PM | Report abuse

In other words, I almost completely agree with bsimon - except that I think the use of the word "marriage" does not, by itself, implicate constitutional protections. "Marriage" is not in the Federal Constitution and family law is a state matter.

So the only constitutional implications are
whether or not a homosexual domestic partnership should be able to get the benefit of the same property, public health, and childrens' interests protections as heterosexual domestic partnerships. That does not require the word "marriage" to escape anyone's lips.

Question: Would you think an asexual domestic partnership, such as one formed by an adult child to take care of an aging parent within the home, should also have recognized status, regarding property rights, especially?

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 31, 2007 5:50 PM | Report abuse

rufas thinks rufas should learn some manners.


Coward and rufas, please refrain from your posting to this blog until you learn some manners.


Posted by: me again | August 31, 2007 5:50 PM | Report abuse

"Coward and rufas, please refrain from your posting to this blog until you learn some manners."

You have no control over anybody but yourself, zouk. YOu are not as smart as you think. You fascsit you. .

Posted by: rufus | August 31, 2007 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Coward and rufas, please refrain from your posting to this blog until you learn some manners.

this is good. take our blog back.

Posted by: all I have to say | August 31, 2007 5:47 PM | Report abuse

If the GOP knew what was good for it, it would nominate Davis.

Posted by: North VA resident | August 31, 2007 5:45 PM | Report abuse

The entire problem would be solved if ignorant coward and rufas returned home to Kos where they belong. compare the pre coward and rufas content to the post coward and rufas content for a good demonstration of their ability to ruin the blog. coward arrives as Jane at 3:51 or very soon after, the rest is degeneration into the mire.

Post this at the bottom of your text:

Coward and rufas, please refrain from your posting to this blog until you learn some manners.

Posted by: it's me | August 31, 2007 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Game on, Republican motherf*ckers!

Run, Mark, Run!

Posted by: Joe | August 31, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Am I rufas or zouk? coward, you seem to have lots of experience with multiple personalities help me out here.

I am confused by the post - do not feed the trolls, posted by the troll. should we feed you or not ignorant coward? never mind. Can you please post a bunch of useless garbage for us to sift through. che hasn't been here for a while and this blog thrives on anonymous junk from liberal loons like you.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Seconded!

Posted by: DCAustinite | August 31, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

proudtobeGOP writes
"bsimon wrote "I think the Iowa judge ruled correctly...Trying to deny to same-sex couples benefits that are granted opposite sex couples seems to be discriminatory"

That's ridiculous. There are better ways to go about ensuring couples' rights than taking it to the mat this way. They will lose. Nine other states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples. This approach is reasonable and doesn't fly in the face of what many, many Americans consider non-negotiable. "


So, its the ruling that's ridiculous, not what I said? Because what I said is basically what you later call a 'reasonable approach'. My point is that 'marriage' as a word should be saved for the religious ceremony. From a legal perspective, a civil union is nothing more than a contract, in which the genders of the participants seems irrelevant.

But, regarding the 'ridiculous', here's what's reported in the strib:

"Judge Robert Hanson... ruled that Iowa's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which allowed marriage only between a man and a woman, violated the constitutional rights of due process and equal protection of... gay couples.

Hanson ruled that the state law banning same-sex marriage must be nullified, severed and stricken from the books, and the marriage laws "must be read and applied in a gender neutral manner so as to permit same-sex couples to enter into a civil marriage ...''"


What parts of his ruling are 'ridiculous'? Keep in mind you should use legal arguments to refute the Judge's ruling - that's what the Appeals court will have to do, should they choose to overturn his ruling.

Posted by: bsimon | August 31, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Both of you should really just f*ck off (zouk and rufus) so we can have a balanced discussion between republicans and democrats who are interested in working together and (in this case) talking about the career of a distinguished senator and his repalcement.

This is not about defending honor or exposing lies. You people need to get a life, and if you care that much about politics, go volunteer. Otherwise, let adults have a conversation.

Who here wants them both to shut up?

Posted by: Tired of your crap | August 31, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

" i am so looking forward to another glorious presidential win like last time, I mean the time before, wait anyone got a calander. how long have we been the party that can't be trusted to defend the country?"

Like I said. YOu people HAVE run the country compleatly for 30 years, clinton is a closet r. Without clinton to point to as an excuse what would the current gop do?

You won when people believed you lies. You won when you were the "religous" right. The religous right is no longer represented. You can no longer count on their stength. The right was never a christian movement. The sheep were tricked by propogating lying fascsits. Your party is about to be eliminated. Now continue to bash. I'm done. Good luck. don;t believe the gop hype.

Posted by: rufus | August 31, 2007 5:31 PM | Report abuse

make the left look moonbatty and deranged.

Like that is hard. you do this without any help from others.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Off point, to bsimon and doug - If an Appellate Court rules in IA on this issue it will have some precedential value. As it stands, it remains a local story, only.

Let me suggest two theories of marriage to each of you.

First, religious bodies usually see marriage as a covenant or contract celebrated among two members of the sect and God. Sometimes the rule is relaxed if the couple agree to raise their children in the faith of the sect member.

The second theory is based on the notion that the state has an interest in marriage that revolves around establishing property rights, best interests of children, and public health.

A long time ago the sectarian interest and the state's interest became confused. To completely "unconfuse" the interests and separate them, civil ceremonies would be sufficient for creating domestic partnerships between hetero- or homosexual couples. We would not be required to call any civil ceremony a "marriage". The state's interest in either case would remain the protection of property rights, the best interests of children, and public health.

By the same token, the "High Church of Homosexual Christians" could celebrate covenantal marriage just as it sees fit.

On point: congratulations to Sen. John Warner, who has served America with distinction for 50 years. May his successor be worthy.

Posted by: Mark in Austin | August 31, 2007 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Joe Nash (Who is not probably from the South) wrote:

"Virginia is on the verge of becoming a blue state. Hurray! The GOP inbred supporters can move further to the south where their kind is welcome. GET OUT OF MY STATE!!!"

Wait a minute, Joe. With all due respect, those so-called, "inbreds" (as in REAL southerners) were here well before you and your ilk chose to migrate here. Southern Virginia--NOT Northern Virginia--is what makes the Commonwealth my home. And I say this as a Black progressive from Charleston, SC. It's comments like that that makes it hard for us to retake the South. We treat them as if they're animals.

Posted by: ProgressiveYes | August 31, 2007 5:28 PM | Report abuse

zouk again or rufas - same thing

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Everybody knows I am not zouk. I always post as rufus. Zouk posts as, who knows. Don't put me in the same category. I speak truths. Zouk is a liar. I love this country and have served it as a army infantry soldier. Zouk hates this country and our freedom and would like us all to live in a "conservaitve" hell. I want a democratic socialist utopia.

Zouk and I are polar opposites politically. He got into your head, brave blank poster. He got you paranoid. Zouk turn you on me is the plan. That is his goal. Silence the left. listen to who you choose. don't let these thought policie sway your thiniking. They have been doing that since the red scare in the 50's. Think for your self. Down with the dittoheads.

Posted by: rufus | August 31, 2007 5:27 PM | Report abuse

IThe liberal mutual admiration society is called to order.

that pesky truth telling zouk has fled and we are now free to live in our lalaland without interuption. that bush sure is a meany isn't he? i am so looking forward to another glorious presidential win like last time, I mean the time before, wait anyone got a calander. how long have we been the party that can't be trusted to defend the country?

first order of business - how can we lose this war right away before the troops win it and spoil our election?

Second, we need to find a new word for raise taxes that makes it sound like something everyone wants.

third, we need to expunge the Hillary record she is running on so she seems squeaky clean. anyone got some bleach? Lots of bleach?

Posted by: moonbat society | August 31, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Hilary and Obama have already chosen each other. Isn't that quite obvious by now? Warner should run for the Senate as the VP slot will be going to Obama. I believe it's all been decided already.

Posted by: ErrinF | August 31, 2007 5:25 PM | Report abuse

I apologize for the double post.

Posted by: Have a good weekend | August 31, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

"He's served this nation honorably as a US Senator and as a soldier. John Warner is truly an honorable man."

Amen, reason. Best of luck to the Senator for a long, healthy retirement. You definitely earned it sir!

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 31, 2007 5:21 PM | Report abuse

When Zouk shows up Rufus shows up. They are one and the same, People. Zouk uses Rufus as a sock-puppet to make the left look moonbatty and deranged. A straw man who falls for every baited thing he says. His own personal echo chamber. Do NOT FEED THE TROLLS

Bsimon:

I agree about Hillary hurting the downticket substantially.

As for warner, I echo the sentiments about his bipartisan years of excellent service. I thank him and hope he enjoys his retirement. Perhaps we can replace him with another affable bipartisan Warner?

Posted by: DO NOT FEED TROLLS | August 31, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

When Zouk shows up Rufus shows up. They are one and the same, People. Zouk uses Rufus as a sock-puppet to make the left look moonbatty and deranged. A straw man who falls for every baited thing he says. His own personal echo chamber. Do NOT FEED THE TROLLS

Bsimon:

I agree about Hillary hurting the downticket substantially.

As for warner, I echo the sentiments about his bipartisan years of excellent service. I thank him and hope he enjoys his retirement. Perhaps we can replace him with another affable bipartisan Warner?

Posted by: DO NOT FEED TROLLS | August 31, 2007 5:20 PM | Report abuse

See that was zouk everyone.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:18 PM | Report abuse

run, macaca, run!

Posted by: elmerg | August 31, 2007 5:16 PM | Report abuse

About Tom Davis: Let's not forget his monumental failures as all-powerful chairman of the most important investigative committee in Congress. He either ignored or whitewashed the major government disgraces during his chairmanship, from colossal corruption in Iraq war contracts to government incompetence in Katrina. HE ran the committee charged with getting to the bottom of these failures of government, and he skirted all of them to protect the White House. He cannot run from this.

Posted by: Jim A. | August 31, 2007 5:15 PM | Report abuse

"Welcome back, Rufus! WAY too much annoying Zoukiness in your absence"

YOu see. He is scared of me. He cannot combat your truths with lies and propoganda. I'll give zouk his day's in the sun.

Keep up the good work ghost writer. You got this handled. I'll give zouk some time.

But I'll be watching the facsits. Better act right. You don't me to come back on here an lock this site down? Stop propgating and lying zouk. I don't want to have to come back and waste hours balancing out you garbage. Right your ship zouk or I will.

PEace. Have a good weekend all. Sorry if I hurt your feelings, if it's any condolence the last 8 years have hurt my heart/feelings. Everything is not the d's fault. The r's have had full control for 15 years and most control for 60. Now your party is about to be irrelevant for a generation.

Posted by: rufus | August 31, 2007 5:15 PM | Report abuse

I am so bi-curious about zouk. I just can't get him out of my mind. do you think he is a wide-stancer like me. i am overjoyed that finally this has hit the press and my urges seem mainstream. I will continue to attack him at every opportunity. it is not because I have nothing else to offer, which most of you think. it is because i secretly think he was in the stall next to me last night in Union station but I got my tapping confused with knocking and my signals got crossed. zouk, if that was you, can you return tonight. All I ever wanted was a little attention. I have so few friends, as i am sure you can tell.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

As a Dem (and a former Republican), I just want to say that I am sorry to see John Warner retiring. He served the Commonwealth well and this Nation well. His leadership will be sorely missed. The Republican party changed so much over the years to such an ugly thing, I always found comfort that there were sane Republicans like Warner around.

Someone questioned the "John Warner money machine". Make no mistake, John Warner's support was wide and deep. Should he decide to transfer such support to Tom Davis, it would benefit the Congressman greatly. Having said that, should Mark Warner run, it will be a helluva race. The question remains, however, whether Davis and Warner (John not Mark) can ensure a primary rather than a convention. Conventions would ensure a Gilmore victory most likely. That would ensure, logically, a landslide for Mark Warner.

Posted by: Political Junkie | August 31, 2007 5:14 PM | Report abuse

bsimon- "I think the Iowa judge ruled correctly...Trying to deny to same-sex couples benefits that are granted opposite sex couples seems to be discriminatory"

That's ridiculous. There are better ways to go about ensuring couples' rights than taking it to the mat this way. They will lose. Nine other states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples. This approach is reasonable and doesn't fly in the face of what many, many Americans consider non-negotiable.

I think it should remain a state's rights issue, but this two-bit Judge in Iowa is overstepping.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 31, 2007 5:13 PM | Report abuse

this is john warner's day. he deserves the kudos of all the people of the commonwealth as though he was a conservative he was no radical. his profile in courage stand against ollie north won him at least my vote for as long as he chose to run. a great man of principle and fairness whose stature in the senate enhanced our state. we shall miss him and his wise and measured counsel. tom davis would do better to wait for 2012 and challenge webb if he has a mind too. warner is a shoo-in in 08 as the republicans are going to take a real ass-whipping nationwide. senate 55-45 dems

Posted by: dem*tothecore | August 31, 2007 5:09 PM | Report abuse

reasonn, I completely agree with you. John warner is what conservatives USED to be about -- back when I could still vote for one.

Posted by: drindl | August 31, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

LaurelIMDexVA writes
"I can imagine Davis pulling an upset against late polling if Hillary is the presidential candidate. I'm a strongly anti-Hillary progressive because I think the unstoppable "clinton hatred factor" will rev up right-wing turnout."


Put the word out. Dem primary voters need to think very, very carefully before saddling themselves with that candidate.

.

Posted by: bsimon | August 31, 2007 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Laurel, you neglect one thing. Al of the worst of the very worst, the slimiest swiftboater consultants are fully employed this election, and whichever Dem is finally the nominee is going to have high negatives among the credulous, so it won't make much difference.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:07 PM | Report abuse

I personally hate to see John Warner go. Although I figured his retirement would take place in 08, I really hate to see him go. He's served this nation honorably as a US Senator and as a soldier. John Warner is truly an honorable man. In my view his greatest quote ever was when he was promoting M. Warner's tax hike for the good of Va. "Partisan politics be damned, let's do what is right for the people of the Commonwealth." If every elected official took that attitude, just think of where our nation would be!

Posted by: reason | August 31, 2007 5:07 PM | Report abuse

You must be new to this blog, Laurel. zouk is here every day, all day, postig every 2 minutes or so. He has no life.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:03 PM | Report abuse

we don't need no stinkin facts -- we're zouk... and all the voices in his head.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Zouk's deranged ramblings are hopefully going to get his IP banned if he keeps it up. He's the one who started the degradation of this thread with his moronic statement that Nova was the "communist" part of the state. People like Zouk, please stick to the echo chambers of the "conservative" blogosphere.

Thanks to (most) everyone else who tried to keep on topic. J, I agree Warner vs. Davis would be an exciting, close race...particular in NOVA, where both have crossover popularity. I can imagine Davis pulling an upset against late polling if Hillary is the presidential candidate. I'm a strongly anti-Hillary progressive because I think the unstoppable "clinton hatred factor" will rev up right-wing turnout.

Posted by: LaurelMDexVA | August 31, 2007 5:01 PM | Report abuse

There is no 'John Warner machine.'

Posted by: Jackson Landers | August 31, 2007 5:00 PM | Report abuse

"what kind of conservative you were (larcenous; diapers; wide stance)"

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:59 PM | Report abuse

This is a huge opportunity for Dems. If anyone but Tom Davis wins the Republican nomination, Mark Warner walks into the end zone with a win. If Tom Davis is the Republican nominee, I believe he wins the seat against anyone but M. Warner, and it's hard to predict a winner if that's the race. Although, I give the edge, even over M. Warner, to Tom Davis b/c J. Warner will be his largest supporter.

Posted by: reason | August 31, 2007 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Welcome back, Rufus! WAY too much annoying Zoukiness in your absence.

Posted by: Rufus fan club | August 31, 2007 4:57 PM | Report abuse


SEMEY, Kazakhstan (CNN) -- Kazakhstan's nuclear orphans are a distressing sight.


This young child slept at an orphanage, his deformities the result of nuclear testing in the region.

1 of 3


The first child I met in the local orphanage was lying limply in his crib. His giant, pale head was perched on his tiny shoulders, covered in bed sores, like a grotesquely painted paper-mâché mask. Peering out, a pair of tiny black eyes darted around.

It took me a few seconds to understand what I was seeing. The doctor told me he was 4 years old.

Through the bars in the next crib, I saw another child, twisted with deformities. His fragile legs and arms turned in impossible contortions.

These are the children of Kazakhstan's terrifying nuclear past.

Decades of Soviet nuclear testing unleashed a plague of birth defects. When the Soviet Union tested its nuclear devices, it chose eastern Kazakhstan, one of its remotest, most desolate areas. But no one bothered to evacuate the people living there.

eeting people was proving hard. The genetic defections and illnesses that afflict so many here are frequently a source of shame. The doctor told me that people hide their deformed family members from outsiders. For decades, they have felt like animals in a zoo, she said, and had grown to distrust prying eyes.

The region also has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, according to local health officials. Tragically, many young men who discover they are impotent -- one of the effects of nuclear fallout -- end their own lives.

Posted by: the legacy of 'nukes' | August 31, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

We don't need no stinkin facts, We're Dems

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Doug,

We'll see.

Posted by: vajent | August 31, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

The GOP will soon miss John Warner...

Jed Babbin of Human Events on political radio at 5!
http://political-buzz.com/2007/08/31/political-buzz-radio-live-today-at-5-pm-eastern-2/

Posted by: matthew | August 31, 2007 4:54 PM | Report abuse

• The investigators are particularly focused on whether Goodling and other Justice officials were using personal political questions when making hiring decisions. Investigators want to know if all interviewees were asked:

- to name "your favorite president, legislator, public figure, or Supreme Court justice"
- "what kind of conservative you were (law and order; social; fiscal)"
- what was "your position on the war on terror"

what kind of 'conservative' are you [lawless and corrupt, gay homophobe, or borrow-and-spend? or all 3?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

"massive spending and corruption is de riguer for Libs"

Republican presidents ... 25 consecutive deficit budgets (and counting). How appropriate is it that their color is red?

Posted by: Former Repub | August 31, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Thank you bsimon. I couldn't agree with you more, and you've made my Friday!

Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | August 31, 2007 4:50 PM | Report abuse

"Well John, I can see you're a typically deranged braindead dittohead-- so I won't bother to point out your many fallacies, because you just won't grasp it. What I will say is that the modern 'conservative' movement is damn close to fascism and that if isn't drowned in a bathtub, will succeed in utterly destroying everything this country ever stood for, as well as getting us all killled. "


On point analysis. Miss my posts yet?

Posted by: RUFUS | August 31, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

vajent,

I hope you're right. I hope it is Davis. Because when Mark Warner beats Tom Davis, you'll understand that people are fed up with the cronyism, corruption, and lack of competence of the GOP. Those of us here in Fairfax can see this increasingly clearly, and even from the likes of Tom Davis, who has disastrously damaged his reputation in NoVA by getting involved inappropriately in several local issues, including MetroWest, and the Tysons Tunnel (Tom "I Was Against the Tunnel Before I Was For It" Davis).

Also, if the VA GOP base is so gung-ho, how do you explain the recent losses by GOP "moderates" in Senate primaries downstate?

The GOP base, if it operates consistently with its recent past, would nominate Jimmy "Ransacked VA & the RNC" Gilmore.

Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | August 31, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

"So, how would you "handle" the issue?"

I think the Iowa judge ruled correctly. From a legal perspective, a marriage is nothing more than a legal relationship recognized by the state. The genders of the participants seems irrelevant. Trying to deny to same-sex couples benefits that are granted opposite sex couples seems to be discriminatory, and thus unconstitutional.

I think the religious right recongizes that last point - and thus their desire to constitutionally codify the definition of 'marriage' as between a man and a woman. If religious organizations want to restrict the types of unions they will bless as a 'marriage', let them do what they believe.

Posted by: bsimon | August 31, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

you've never had an original thought in your life, zouk. you are a parrot, a trained seal, a shrieking harpy, with no life.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

'I will now start my campaign of long boring news articles meant to relieve my sense of shame for never coming up with a single original thought.'

I thought you'd already done that today, zouk.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure happy that the American Cancer Society has decided to spend its $15 million ad budget telling people there is a healthcare crisis in this country.

It's about time. I'm one of those lucky people who has insurance. And Blue Cross has decided to deny the $4000 test I had last fall which determined I had invasive breast cancer as "not medically necessary." I am, of course, fighting it. Meanwhile, I'm being harassed by phone calls from a company called Grant & Weber. They are a collection agency that "specializes in healthcare accounts receivable resolution." Which means basically terrorizing sick people and threatening them with financial ruin who can't afford healthcare in George Bush's America.

Vultures.

Posted by: healthcare is this country is a joke | August 31, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I will now start my campaign of long boring news articles meant to relieve my sense of shame for never coming up with a single original thought.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Under the Code of Professional Responsibility, there are certain circumstances when a lawyer is not ethically permitted to appear and advance arguments that a client wants him to make. One is when the client is appearing in court advancing claims of fact that the lawyer knows to be untrue. Another is when the client wants to make arguments as to law which are not well grounded in the law, or in a good-faith argument for its reversal, modification or reinterpretation. In connection with Guantánamo, the Justice Department already has a very long track record of prevarication in submissions to courts. So much so that the Fourth Circuit, the most conservative Court of Appeals in the country, recently raked it over the goals for making misleading statements.

And indeed, Judge Michael Luttig, often considered high on the short list for a Supreme Court appointment under the Bush Administration for his tightly held and extremely conservative judicial values, went out of his way to indicate that he felt Justice Department lawyers had been misleading the court over detainee treatment issues. Similarly, on the law, the Justice Department has lost three straight cases before an extremely conservative Supreme Court on detainee treatment issues, and is preparing to lose a fourth.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

"you can't call Libs hypocrites about anything to do with s*x because they think anything goes and it should be encouraged EVEN IN GRADESCHOOL"

zouk, you are clearly not very bright. To insinuate this is actually more "anything goes" than anything liberals ever try to educate on sex. Do you actually think people believe you when you say clearly ignorant things like this?

Here's another GEM!

"since massive spending and corruption is de riguer for Libs"

Umm, check the facts zouk. Your facist administration has cornered the market on tax-n-spend.

Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | August 31, 2007 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Lawyers in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) appellate division have refused to take the government's side, in detainees' appeals of Guantanamo imprisonment.

The government's legal arguments justifying the detention of hundreds of people at the Guantánamo Bay naval base have been repudiated three times by the U.S. Supreme Court. But it's not just outsiders who take issue with the U.S. Justice Department strategy: Up to one fourth of the department's own civil appellate staff has recently opted out of handling the government's cases against detainee appeals, two sources familiar with the matter tell U.S. News.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Even if the GOP chooses a convention over a primary as its nominating vehicle, Davis will win. Again, folks who don't know Virginia politics don't know that Gilmore's ride had pretty much come to an end by the end of his term as governor. Warner won in large part because enough people wanted a change and viewed Earley as just a continuation of the Gilmore administration (although even with everybody talking about a change wave, Warner still only got 52% of the vote).

Everytime John Warner had to go through the convention process, there were people (mainly in the non-Virginia press) who made noise about how a moderate like Warner would have trouble in what they naturally believed was an ultra conservative environment. And everytime, it was demonstrated that these folks didn't know what they were talking about.

Gilmore will have his supporters, but he's yesterday's news. Davis is the polished rising star that Gilmore used to be, and most conservative GOP folks downstate who one would think would back Gilmore know it and are pretty okay with it. Davis is gonna be the guy.

Posted by: vajent | August 31, 2007 4:39 PM | Report abuse

rebel yell...i want to remind you that Virginia went from a red state to a very popular blue governor, and a more popular blue senator and a very unpopular red senator who plans to resign, and will soon have two blue senators. BTW, isn't red the color of the commies? Anyone?

Posted by: Joe | August 31, 2007 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Your last post was classic zouk. It's amazing how many lies, baseless insults, moronic fantasies and rabid vitriol and pure hatred you can put into a couple of paragraphs. I have seen some deranged bloggers, but you are the stupidest and most hateful of them all.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:37 PM | Report abuse

bsimon:

Good question. I'm afraid that regardless of the decision by the Iowa Supreme Court, nobody in Iowa will be jumping up and down to do the right thing--create equality in civil marriage for all loving couples.

So, how would you "handle" the issue? Why does this country insist on holding back on the granting of civil rights to all its citizens? I guess we haven't learned yet that we are at our best when we let the bright shining light of all God's children into every heart and home, and into every law, equitably.

Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | August 31, 2007 4:36 PM | Report abuse

I see the ignorant coward has emerged from under his rock, or group therapy or wherever he goes between 2 and 4. so much for a sensible discusssion for the rest of the day. he seems to have some clones in Jane and loud and dumb - the angry wing of the party that is determined to set upon itself if it needs to to lose the next election.
rant on losers

Posted by: kingofzouk | August 31, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

It is easy not to be labeled a hypocrite when you either have no morals to begin with or are willing to accept anything from your representatives.

for example, you can't call Libs hypocrites about anything to do with s*x because they think anything goes and it should be encouraged even in gradeschool.

Yes Libs, it is difficult to have standards you uphold. Once in a while, an individual or two lets them down. but you would never know this coming from the party of anything goes.

since massive spending and corruption is de riguer for Libs, no hypocrisy there either. cheating on your wife - great. lyiny about s*x or really lying about anything - perfectly understandable and forgivable. Selling pardons and Lincoln bedroom - to be expected, why else run for office.

Posted by: kingofzouk | August 31, 2007 4:28 PM | Report abuse

I just love how when people point out the obviously incorrect or blatantly stupid things that any given blog commmenter makes, "conservatives" strike back with lines like "does it make you feel good to be so bitter and dark of heart" and accuse them of being angry.

OK, those of you with IQs incapable of processing this, please stop reading. Otherwise, take note: there's a big difference between intelligent thinking ability, and "dark" and bitter anger.

Clearly, you're incapable of distangling your fantasies about who is suffering from which.

Good luck to Senator Warner, and thank you to him for 30 years of honest and truthful service.

I hope Mark Warner runs. He'll win and continue John's tradition.

Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | August 31, 2007 4:28 PM | Report abuse

"wide-stance Yankees"

Uh, rebel yell, I think it has been proved just this week that a wide-stance is the sign of a Republicrat.

Pay attention, OK?

Posted by: theRealCalGal | August 31, 2007 4:27 PM | Report abuse

vajent:

I agree Davis is a formidable candidate. The question is whether he'll get the nomination over Gilmore. I think Davis will, but it may depend on the nominating rules chosen by the state party leaders.


rebel yell:

I neglected to mention that elements of the Union Army of the James under Godfrey Weitzel occupied Richmond on 5 Apr 1865.

Posted by: J | August 31, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

zouk calling someone a troglydite--priceless.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

"name-calling, vitriol and paranoia"

Sorry, John, but you just described one person to a T -- Richard Nixon. And he wasn't a liberal Democrat.

And I don't think you can point to any Democrat who can name call or spew vitriol as well as your everyday Republicrat.

Just shows the tendancy to ascribe your own attributes to those you dislike.

Posted by: CalGal | August 31, 2007 4:22 PM | Report abuse

karma/zouk -- you're the one that's on here every single day, al day, insulting 'Libs' and 'dems' -- you are so ravaged with hate you have no other life but to type insults.

'ecause your name-calling, vitriol and paranoia -- though classic leftist M.O. -- is not very persuasive.'

then why do you do it every day? Your mother clearly failed you terribly, you are one of the world's biggest losers. You pray every day for a dictator like Rudy to come along and tell you what to do. You love fascism, well your'e gonna love Rudy...

Rudy Giuliani: "Freedom is Slavery"
"Freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

Freedom is about authority. Ever read Orwell? Or can you read?

Posted by: Jane. | August 31, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Why would Mark Warner want to be VP when he can win the White House on his own some day? It's good to see the ascendancy of Northern Virginia as the political as well as economic driver of the Old Dominion.

Posted by: JTSpangler | August 31, 2007 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Davis vs Warner = a close one and I kind of feel cheated that we can't have them both and toss Webb.

Gilmore vs Warner = proof that the VA GOP is suicidal

PS I thought the term liberalism originated with people campaigning to give non-property owners the right to vote and abolish the corn tax. Very few modern parties are traditionally liberal anywhere in the world (free market econ, limited state, strong emphasis on individual rights and privacy). The only traditional liberals in this country call themselves libertarians. The word 'liberal' as used by US politicians mostly Rs means whatever it is that the R in question doesn't like and wants to wail about and is mostly a mythical creature.

Posted by: bluemeanies | August 31, 2007 4:20 PM | Report abuse

Hypocrisy, thy name is Zouk.

"busy alienating and offending the voters you are going to have to count on"

Posted by: He really said this! | August 31, 2007 4:19 PM | Report abuse

You sound like you have been on the pig end of that transaction many times Joe.

Posted by: rebel yell | August 31, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

One more word on Davis that shouldn't be overlooked. There's a reason why a guy like Gerry Connelly won't run against Davis for his current congressional seat - he knows he can't beat him. Connelly has big name recognition in Davis's district, a lot of financial backers, and has taken more than a few swipes at Davis over the years. But he won't run against him in what otherwise appears to be a very favorable district for a guy like Connelly. This is very telling for anyone who thinks Davis is not very formidable. Davis is very smart, very tough to beat in a debate, and comes across very well on camera. And judging from Connelly's nervous unwillingness to get off the sidelines and actually take Davis on directly, Davis clearly seems to have the ability to make politically safe districts out of districts that ought to be in play. It's true that the advantages of incumbency play into that, but it's also true that accepted wisdom about the political demographics of Davis's district shouldn't translate into routine Davis victories every 2 years, even when Republicans are in a down cycle. Warner's gonna get all he can handle, and maybe more.

Posted by: vajent | August 31, 2007 4:17 PM | Report abuse

rebel yell:
Just as an aside, for historical accuracy.

Robert E Lee surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia on 9 Apr 1865.

Joe Johnston surrendered the Army of Tennessee (I think they still called it that by then) in Durham, NC, a few weeks later.

The last battle of the Civil War took place in Texas.

Posted by: J | August 31, 2007 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Loud and dumb - all the insults in the world won't convince anyone here that you have anything interesting to say. you and your troglydite friend Joe are clearly from the Jane wing of the party that is busy alienating and offending the voters you are going to have to count on to propel your socialist agenda on the country. good luck with that. considering your people skills, you are going to need every bit of help you can get.

but you can be proud of your accomplishment - you have gone from a two line insulter to a 6 line insulter. you have tripled your productivity. take the rest of the day off. You can use the time looking up dirty words.

In the meanwhile, can you keep the noise down, the adults are trying to have a conversation.

Posted by: kingofzouk | August 31, 2007 4:15 PM | Report abuse

"wide-stance Yankees"

I think a bow-legged walk is more typical of the west, as evidenced by Sen Craig (R-ID). Though those southern boys have their own brand of fun. Squeal like a pig, boy!

Posted by: yee-haw! | August 31, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Joe, I must remind you that even in an all out war, Virginia never did lose to you wide-stance Yankees. Only after every other state was occupied did we surrender. that is why we are still the greatest commonwealth in the country. We never did let you blue-bellies into the capitol. Remember that before you declare victory. we only allow you interlopers to occupy the area inside the beltway. the rest is ours.

Posted by: rebel yell | August 31, 2007 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Any word on how the gay marriage ruling in Iowa is going to impact the Pres race? For those who've not heard, a jugde tossed out Iowa's '98 DOMA. One same-sex couple married this AM, before a judge issued a stay, which will keep subesequent same-sex couples from marrying, while the legal process figures out what's going on.

http://www.startribune.com/484/story/1394227.html

My question is: how do the Pres candidates appraoch this issue? States' rights? Nat'l Constitutional amendment?

Posted by: bsimon | August 31, 2007 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Joe: I have also seen New Jersey and Connecticut listed as the richest states. Both very liberal and blue, of course.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | August 31, 2007 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Jane checks in with her typical insult laced garbage. what exactly did you hope to accomplish by this? does it make you feel good to be so bitter and dark of heart. Can you just once offer something positive and constructive. you really have anger issues that are going to eat you up inside, maybe they already have.

Posted by: karma | August 31, 2007 4:02 PM | Report abuse

A race between Davis and Warner would be fun to watch. And it would be close.

But this is the Virginia Republican Party we're dealing with, after all. I'm sure that they'll try very hard to find a way to ensure it's Gilmore instead of Davis.

Posted by: J | August 31, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Richest state in the Union? Maryland (Blue). Poorest state in the Union? Mississippi(Red). Enough said.

Posted by: Joe | August 31, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Rothenberg has had this race listed as a Toss-Up since July 27. Not bad.

http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/2007/07/2008-senate-ratings.html

Posted by: R. Theriot | August 31, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Pity that your mother wasn't smart enough to teach you that calling someone dumb is considered abusive. But of course, she didn't teach you much of anything worthwhile. She failed you, little boy.

Posted by: PS for zouk | August 31, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Richest state in the Union? Maryland (Blue). Poorest state in the Union(Red)? Mississippi. Enough said.

Posted by: Joe | August 31, 2007 3:59 PM | Report abuse

A$$hat zouk bleats further: "Let's examine all the high income parts of the US just too humor the foul-mouthed and utterly ignorant Loud and dumb voter.

My mother always said that ignorant, uneducated people with little to offer employ abusive and gutter language. mother was right. It must be frustrating to be so dim amongst the learned on this blog. you have my pity.

Hollywood, NYC, Boston, Conn. No VA, seattle, San Fran, chicago

Yep those sure are ultra conservative districts all right. don't you ever get tired of playing the fool?"

Ace, I will never play the fool when dealing with a moron like you because I know the difference between liberalism -- which is not incompatible with capitalism -- and communism.

You, a small-brained imbecile, do not. Now run along, mommy has dinner fixed for you.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | August 31, 2007 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Let's examine all the high income parts of the US just too humor the foul-mouthed and utterly ignorant Loud and dumb voter.

My mother always said that ignorant, uneducated people with little to offer employ abusive and gutter language. mother was right. It must be frustrating to be so dim amongst the learned on this blog. you have my pity.

Hollywood, NYC, Boston, Conn. No VA, seattle, San Fran, chicago

Yep those sure are ultra conservative districts all right. don't you ever get tired of playing the fool?

Posted by: kingofzouk | August 31, 2007 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I say that we start thumping any virginia republicans we see; the reminder would readily get on their hee-haw mobiles and set south ASAP!!!

Posted by: Joe | August 31, 2007 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Jane, please do point out my "many fallacies," because your name-calling, vitriol and paranoia -- though classic leftist M.O. -- is not very persuasive.

Posted by: John | August 31, 2007 3:55 PM | Report abuse

dem looking ahead writes
"if Davis is the GOP nominee, M. Warner cannot count on huge totals in Northern Virginia. Without such totals, and with Hillary potentially on the top of the ticket, Davis could take M. Warner by getting 40-45% in N.Va, edgeing him in the outer exburbs"


A very, very important point is imbedded in the quote above. Do not underestimate the ability of Sen Clinton to boost GOP turnout if she is the Dem nominee for President.

.

Posted by: bsimon | August 31, 2007 3:52 PM | Report abuse

'Liberalism is an extremely dangerous philosophy and, like cancer, needs to be stopped dead in its tracks.'

Well John, I can see you're a typically deranged braindead dittohead-- so I won't bother to point out your many fallacies, because you just won't grasp it. What I will say is that the modern 'conservative' movement is damn close to fascism and that if isn't drowned in a bathtub, will succeed in utterly destroying everything this country ever stood for, as well as getting us all killled.

Posted by: Jane. | August 31, 2007 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Folks who don't understand Virginia politics will naturally think Mark Warner is the frontrunner. But this is a very problematic assessment. Warner publicly supported a high-profile transportation initiative when he was governor that was soundly defeated in NoVa. When he won the governor's election, he did it with only 52% of the vote. While it's true that his favorability ratings were pretty good while he was governor, and while it's also true that he's a good campaigner and can convince non-liberals that he's not a product of the cultural left, Davis is also a very good campaigner who knows how to build strong coalitions and thrive in a non-conservative environment. Warner is not the frontrunner - it's very much a tossup. Davis has a very good chance of winning because he may very well get around 45% of the vote in Fairfax and that would be enough to solidify the gains he'll have downstate.

Posted by: jason | August 31, 2007 3:50 PM | Report abuse

A$$hat zouk bleats: "he has easily won re-election in a very communist part of VA over and over."

Yeah, it's so communist that it has one of the highest per-household incomes in the country. Great post, SFB!

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | August 31, 2007 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget that if Davis is the GOP nominee, M. Warner cannot count on huge totals in Northern Virginia. Without such totals, and with Hillary potentially on the top of the ticket, Davis could take M. Warner by getting 40-45% in N.Va, edgeing him in the outer exburbs, and swamping him in conservative, traditionally GOP southern and western VA. Kaine, Warner and Webb all needed huge returns in N.Va. to win statewide in VA.

Posted by: a Dem looking ahead | August 31, 2007 3:45 PM | Report abuse

don't forget that the D Warner ran against a fairly poor R candidate when he won the governor race. and he didn't win by much. He spent a lot of his own money to do it.

On the other hand, tom Davis is about the most brilliant man you could hope to meet. he is a walking database. he can appear clueless at times because he is already on to the next subject. he has easily won re-election in a very communist part of VA over and over. Even the rabid libs like him for his stand on DC statehood et al. When he ran the national election for Rs, we stomped.

gilmore was a one tune governor - eliminate the car tax. It was good at the time, but won't carry him very far nowadays. the entire party has moved in a Rudy direction.

Davis will easily carry the downstaters and will be able to compete in the people's republic of NoVa and Norfolk - the home of the Navy. the national agenda of the Libs in congress is not playing well in the Old dominion and outside of NOVa (which granted has lots of votes and can almost carry the entire state), we are very supportive of the military, smoking and limited government. We are confederates and like to stick it to you Yankees just for fun. I don't see a lot of Davis' previous voters jumping ship, even if they are Dems.

go Tom. I trust the Dems will be able to spin this gold into straw. they have a knack for that.

Posted by: kingofzouk | August 31, 2007 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Good opportunity for DEMS, but only if the nominee is Mark Warner. While I hope a Republican gets the seat, I wouldn't mind so much if Warner took it. In addition, Mark Warner could one day help fix the miserable and pathetic track record of DEMS to the WH: only two in 40 years! Plus, the two that got in did so under extenuating circumstances: Carter after Watergate and Clinton with the help of a strong 3d party candidate. In fact, Clinton never got a majority of the vote. While I certainly hope (and indeed expect) a Repulican will take the WH in 08, the country can only benefit from getting the DEM party back on course and off the extreme liberal trajectory it has been on over the past 40 years. Liberalism is an extremely dangerous philosophy and, like cancer, needs to be stopped dead in its tracks.

Posted by: John | August 31, 2007 3:38 PM | Report abuse

This will be an interesting race. Davis is a moderate Republican and Warner is a centrist Democrat. Davis is likely to face a challenge from his right and Warner is almost certain to have no primary opponent. Will the Republican nomination race see Davis forced to take stands to appeal to the party activists that will come back to haunt him in the general? Davis is the only potential Republican candidate who could cut into the increasingly Democratic vote in Northern Viriginia. Howver, a right turn for the primary could alienate large number of Northern Virginia swing voters who might otherwise be inclined to support him.

Posted by: JimD in FL | August 31, 2007 3:35 PM | Report abuse

This should put Virginia to the top of CC's Senate Line. Davis is a moderate, but there's little chance that he can beat Warner head-to-head. I could see Gilmore beating Davis, since the Southern VA Republican base is decidedly not moderate.

Posted by: Mjames | August 31, 2007 3:34 PM | Report abuse

This just blows me away!

So the Bush legacy is a Democratic Senate for at least the next 6 years, and possibly 10? This guy almost ties Carter!

How about a bailout for stupid voters who invested in adjustable principle politicians?

Posted by: Henri Nondeplume | August 31, 2007 3:29 PM | Report abuse

it is a good pick up opportunity for the dems..with that said though it's to bad the rest of the gop'ers in the senate don't carry themselves as John Warner does..seems to be a fairly level headed, straight shooting fairly moderate repub..

Posted by: TheIrishCurse | August 31, 2007 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Tom Davis is great.

I hope republicans realize that they need a candidate with decent support in Northern VA if they want to win a statewide election.

Anyone other than Davis on the Republican side is basically handing the seat over to the Dems as Warner would get votes a large number of votes from Norther VA Republicans (sad but true).

Posted by: Paul S. | August 31, 2007 3:23 PM | Report abuse

Just think -- if Mark Warner prevails, they won't even have to change the linens. It's going to be interesting, also in regard to Davis, as he appears to have been a leader in getting a congressional vote for DC. That is going to be a plus/minus situation for him in certain sectors of the Commonwealth. And, if it's Davis v. Warner, they're both Northern VA, and Warner has already carried the entire state (so to speak) when we won the Governorship. It won't be an easy ride for Davis, no matter how much he wants it and feels entitled to it.

Posted by: sec | August 31, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

The dominoes will quickly start to fall and NOVA will turn even more blue.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | August 31, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

Happy Labor Day zouk, your wish has been granted. I hope Davis can live up to your endorsement.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | August 31, 2007 3:15 PM | Report abuse

I hate double posts!! My apologies for mine.

Posted by: A Hardwick | August 31, 2007 3:08 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad to see the opportunity for Democrats, and I intend to support whoever is the Democratic nominee; but given their performance in Congress so far, I'm not optimistic. Even Mark Warner is going to have that baggage to carry.

Maybe we'll luck out and the Republicans will nominate Dave Albo.

Posted by: swheelock | August 31, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

An opportunity yes, but former Senator Allen had a golden opportunity to be both relected Senator and be a front runner for his Party's presidential nomination. There is many a slip between here and there, But M. Warner seems to be aware of that.

As a Democrat, I hope the Virginia Republicans do the RIGHT thing and nominate Gilmore (here again I am projecting way too much, as yourself, but Allen's MaCaca would not have disqualified him in 1997 Virginia, so I am hoping the reverse holds true of Gilmore in 2008).

Posted by: A Hardwick | August 31, 2007 3:07 PM | Report abuse

An opportunity yes, but former Senator Allen had a golden opportunity to be both relected Senator and be a front runner for his Party's presidential nomination. There is many a slip between here and there, But M. Warner seems to be aware of that.

As a Democrat, I hope the Virginia Republicans do the RIGHT thing and nominate Gilmore (here again I am projecting way too much, as yourself, but Allen's MaCaca would not have disqualified him in 1997 Virginia, so I am hoping the reverse holds true of Gilmore in 2008).

Posted by: A Hardwick | August 31, 2007 3:06 PM | Report abuse

This also makes Tom Davis's House seat, if he runs, a top-tier Democratic pickup opportunity.

Posted by: ae | August 31, 2007 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Virginia is on the verge of becoming a blue state. Hurray! The GOP inbred supporters can move further to the south where their kind is welcome. GET OUT OF MY STATE!!!

Posted by: Joe Nash | August 31, 2007 3:00 PM | Report abuse

Hi, Chris: As a fellow writer, I have a "talking shop" question for you. Did you have this column already written in anticipation that Warner would opt out of running again? If not, I salute your speedy writing skills. There's nothing wrong with it if you did; we all know newspeople do that for celebrity deaths and whatnot. I'm just curious. Thanks

Posted by: seth | August 31, 2007 2:55 PM | Report abuse

So Virginia can have uninterrupted Senator Warner.

Posted by: Helena Montana | August 31, 2007 2:52 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company