Ken Cuccinelli: the Anti-Chris Christie

Ken Cuccinelli may be the darling of the spittle flecked Christofascists who want a Christian theocracy in Virginia and the knuckle draggers of the Tea Party, but the recent polling suggests that Cuccinelli - or Kookinelli, as I prefer to call him - isn't gaining need traction among moderates and independents to win in November (I hope this trend continues).  In stark contrast, Republican Chris Christie appears headed towards a landslide reelection in New Jersey.  Some suggest that Kookinelli should learn a thing or two from Christie.  I would argue that such a transformation is impossible for Kookinelli, especially given his documented record of extremism.  A piece in The Daily Beast looks at the night and day differences between the two GOP candidates.  Here are highlights:

Chris Christie and Ken Cuccinelli are both New Jersey natives, Republicans, and their party’s gubernatorial nominee in their respective states. Beyond that, they share little else.

Christie, the governor of New Jersey, is a moderate conservative cruising to reelection; Cuccinelli, currently the attorney general of Virginia, is the darling of the GOP base and not much more. Christie has a double-digit lead over his Democratic challenger, State Senator Barbara Buono; Cuccinelli is down by about five points to former Democratic National Committee Chair, Clinton crony, and alleged grifter Terry McAuliffe, according to the latest pair of polls.

Christie’s strength in the reliably blue Garden State and Cuccinelli’s weakness in the Old Dominion are about persona, policy, and political reality. Christie knows that he’s the governor of a state that has consistently gone for Democratic presidential candidates over the last two decades. On the other hand, Cuccinelli fantasizes that Virginia voted for John McCain and Mitt Romney, and that ethnic-slurring George Allen made it to the Senate.

But Cuccinelli’s problems go deeper than that. Right now, he is underperforming even Romney’s showing in Virginia. Romney lost the state, but still managed to win its upscale voters and white women—Cuccinelli is losing both blocs to McAuliffe.

Cuccinelli owned stock in Star Scientific, the very same company whose chief, Jonnie Williams, showered both McDonnell and Cuccinelli with gifts—gifts that Cuccinelli has refused to return in kind or in cash. In all, only $18,000 or so is involved, and yet Cuccinelli cannot find it in himself to cut a check. Not surprisingly, McAuliffe hammers away on this sore point, leaving Cuccinelli trailing and the story festering.

More worrisome for Republicans is Cuccinelli’s incapability of eliding over hot-button social issues. As Virginia’s outgoing Republican Lt. Governor Bill Bolling sees it, Cuccinelli is a “rigid ideologue who thrives on conflict and confrontation and tends to be drawn to the more controversial and divisive issues of the day.”

Christie, meanwhile, is tradition-minded but not mired in debates over ultrasound wands or sodomy. He flatly stated that sexual orientation is a matter of biological predisposition.  . . . . He hasn’t dabbled with birtherism, in contrast to Cuccinelli.

Christie is of the modern world; Cuccinelli less so. For Republicans in Virginia and nationally, that is a problem. As one Republican White House veteran and Virginian put it, “the race is between a crook and a kook, and I expect the crook to win.”

Sadly for Cuccinelli, while voters may say “ugh” about “the Macker,” they have yet to walk away from him. Much as Cuccinelli may try to talk about taxes and roads, not enough voters are buying. A well-funded McAuliffe ad blitz is cementing an image of Virginia’s attorney general as fixated on social issues.

Cuccinelli’s struggle is compounded by the fact that Virginia’s demographics dramatically shifted, making it emblematic of the New South. Indeed, nothing tells the story better than a recent Quinnipiac Poll showing Hillary with comfortable leads over Christie and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in a hypothetical 2016 presidential matchup. She polls ahead of Christie by nine, and crushes Cruz by almost 20 points.

The times are changing, and the question for Cuccinelli and the Republicans is whether they can change with them. The GOP cannot continue to behave as if the whole country were a Republican primary—not if it endeavors to recapture the presidency.

Read More

The Other Race Virginians Need to Watch This Year

The following is a cross posting of an op-ed I wrote at LGBTQ Nation that looks at GOP attorney general Mark Obenshain's dishonest effort to paint himself as a moderate.  The man is just as extreme as Ken Cuccinelli and the utterly insane "Bishop" E. W. Jackson.  Here's the piece in its entirety:

Given its off year elections, Virginia is attracting a good deal of attention among political observers.  LGBT Virginians, women and minorities likewise ought to be paying close attention. Why?  Because the Republican statewide ticket — which was nominated at a convention dominated by far right religious extremists and Tea Party fanatics (who usually also identify as “conservative Christians”) — is the most extreme in Virginia’s history.

There has been a great deal of media coverage of the GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli who has a bizarre fixation on reinstating Virginia’s “crimes against nature statute,” is a climate change denier, and who has shown himself to be ethically challenged at best as he has taken gifts and campaign contributions for those who have sought a quid pro quo from the Attorney General’s office, which Cuccinelli currently occupies.

Likewise, there has been plentiful media coverage on Lt. Governor candidate E.W. “Bishop” Jackson who has made off the fall anti-gay statements, insulted civil rights leaders and generally shown himself to inhabit some strange alternate universe from sentient persons.
In fact, Jackson makes AFA’s Bryan Fischer and FRC’s Tony Perkins appear to be fairly rational in comparison.

Lacking in similar coverage has been the GOP nominee for Attorney General, Mark Obenshain, who, if one knows his background and voting record in the Virginia General Assembly is every bit as extreme and – I would argue insane – as Cuccinelli and “Bishop” Jackson.

Despite his extremism as evidenced by his past record, Obenshain has been trying to reinvent himself as a “moderate” and even claimed that he doesn’t support discrimination against anyone (more on this later).
As a recent article in the Virginian Pilot noted, the attorney general race deserves much closer attention than it is currently receiving for several reasons.
First, the next attorney general will help frame the national perception of Virginia, and his name is likely to appear at the top of the 2017 ballot because historically Virginia’s attorney general has run, or resigned to run, for governor in every election, including this one, dating to 1993.
Second, under Virginia law, the Attorney General interprets Virginia’s statutory law and determines which laws meet constitutional muster under both the Virginia Constitution and the United States Constitution.

For example, Obenshain has pledged to continue fighting President Barack Obama’s Affordable Health Care Act (a.k.a. “Obamacare”), either by filing briefs in a pending legal challenge or by filing a new lawsuit.

Also, his Democrat opponent, Mark Herring, has said he wouldn’t defend Virginia’s anti-sodomy statute because it’s clearly unconstitutional while Obenshain will likely seek to defend it despite trying to pretend to be noncommittal.

Like Cuccinelli, Obenshain refuses to recognize the full scope of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and is so thoroughly under the thumb of the Christofascists at The Family Foundation (an affiliate of Focus on the Family and registered hate group, Family Research Council) that he will no doubt refuse to accept the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuits’s decision striking down Virginia’s sodomy statute for a second time.

Why do I come to this conclusions? Obenshain’s record in the Virginia General Assembly confirms that he is every bit as extreme as Ken Cuccinelli and “Bishop” Jackson.

Here’s an overview of Obenshain’s record:

1.   Obenshain has previously introduced a bill that would have required any woman in Virginia who has a miscarriage without a doctor present, to file a report it within 24 hours to the police or otherwise risk going to jail for a full year.  Obenshain’s bill read in part as follows:

When a fetal death occurs without medical attendance upon the mother at or after the delivery or abortion, the mother or someone acting on her behalf shall, within 24 hours, report the fetal death, location of the remains, and identity of the mother to the local or state police or sheriff’s department of the city or county where the fetal death occurred. No one shall remove, destroy, or otherwise dispose of any remains without the express authorization of law-enforcement officials or the medical examiner. Any person violating the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

For those unfamiliar with Virginia law, a Class 1 misdemeanor cares a 1 year jail sentence and a fine of $2,500.00.

2.  Obenshain has supported a “personhood” bill that would outlaw all abortions and grant full constitutional rights to a fetus from the moment of conception.

3. In 2013 Obenshain sponsored a bill requiring limited types of photo identification as part of the Virginia GOP’s active effort to disenfranchise minority voters. Acceptable forms of ID include a government-issued photo ID that includes their address, a photo ID from a Virginia college or university, or a workplace ID featuring a photo.  Regular Voter ID cards would not be sufficient.

4.  Obenshain has consistently voted against Democratic measures that would assure employment non-discrimination protections for homosexual state employees under Virginia’s anti-discrimination law.

5.  In January, 2013, Obenshain walked off the Senate floor rather than support former Richmond prosecutor Tracy Thorne-Begland, who is openly gay, for a Richmond General District Court judgeship.  In 2012, other GOP extremists in the House of Delagate blocked Thorne-Begland’s appointment but were out maneuvered by the Richmond Circuit Court judges who appointed him on an interim bases after Thorne-Begland received unanimous backing from the five largest mega-law firms based in Virginia.

In short, despite his recent pretenses, Obenshain is anti-gay, anti-minority and anti-women’s rights. 

If Virginians want a quasi-theocracy in Virginia, they can vote for Obenshain and his fellow extremists on the GOP ticket.  If, instead, they believe in the principles of Thomas Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers from Virginia, their choice is clear: vote for Mark Herring for Attorney Genaral, Terry McAuliffe for Governor, and Ralph Northam for Lt. Governor.
 

Read More

More GOP Hysteria Over Boyd Marcus Defection from GOP

The Republican Party of Virginia has nominated the most extreme - and my opinion mentally ill - slate of statewide candidates in Virginia's history thanks to Ken Cuccinelli's maneuver to have the nominating process done through a state wide convention dominated by Christofascists and Tea Party lunatics.  Anyone sane should have seen that many long time Republicans simply would not be able to hold their noses and vote for individuals better suited for incarceration in a mental institution that state wide elected office.  Among those fleeing this GOP created nightmare is Boyd Marcus (pictured at left), a long time GOP operative who simply could not stomach the thought of Ken Cuccinelli in the Governors mansion.   The fall out of this notable defection continues as noted in a column in the Richmond Times Dispatch.  Here are column excerpts:

To Virginia Republicans, he is the “Prince of Darkness.” To veteran reporters, he is the “smiling assassin.” His watchwords, from Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar,” were framed on his office wall: “Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the dogs of war.”

Boyd Marcus runs Republican campaigns. He can run opponents into the ground with tough talking points and slasher direct-mail. He ran state government as Gov. Jim Gilmore’s chief of staff. He ran off allies as partisan enforcer of the budget-busting no-car-tax plan.
 

Marcus is on the run from a Republican Party he no longer recognizes.  He is doing the unthinkable: crossing over to the Democrats. He’s taking a job, paying up to five-figures a month, as a strategist for gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe. It follows a months-long courtship, direct and indirect, that accelerated after the fight over new road taxes.

Marcus, a reflexive Republican, said in a written statement he is supporting McAuliffe, a reflexive Democrat, because the candidate is a pragmatic bipartisan. Marcus also cited McAuliffe’s business credentials . . . .

The Marcus defection is no laughing matter.  For Republicans, it feeds a troubling narrative about Ken Cuccinelli that he, alone, composed: The Republican candidate for governor — heartthrob of tea partiers and Rand Paul-ites who have no use for suburban, business-oriented R’s such as Marcus — does not work or play well with others. This is a dominant feature in the broad-strokes portrait Democrats are painting of Cuccinelli in their nonstop television and online advertising.

Cuccinelli depicts the Marcus break as a grab for cash by a guy who could use some. Further, Cuccinelli says Marcus is motivated by spite, having seen Bolling, who was waiting in line to run, lose the nomination to someone who jumped in front.

“If there’s one thing people don’t like, it’s a Benedict Arnold,” said Chris LaCivita, Cuccinelli’s lead adviser. “You’re either a sore loser or a sellout. Boyd Marcus happens to be both.”

Cuccinelli can spin all he wants.  The bottom line is that he's a detestable individual who is unfit to be governor.  Marcus sees this and it drives Cuccinelli crazy (or at least crazier).

Read More

Changing Virginia Demographics: An Ill Omen for the GOP

As noted in many posts on this blog, the Republican Party, both at the national level and in Virginia, has increasingly focused its efforts on older white voters and white supremacists and far right Christian elements.  The unfortunate thing for the GOP is that these groups as a share of the over all population are declining.  Meanwhile, the GOP policies that excite the GOP base repel the population groups that are increasing as a share of the overall population.  A piece in The Atlantic looks at how this demographic change could spell disaster for the Virginia GOP this November - a potential made all the greater by the extremism of the GOP statewide ticket.  Here are article highlights:

If things keep going the way they have in Virginia for the past 36 years, Ken Cuccinelli will win the governor's race. As The New York Times pointed out Thursday, the party that occupies the White House consistently loses the governor's mansion in Virginia. In 2013, however, the state's changing demographics are giving Democratic contender Terry McAuliffe an advantage. He knows this, and he's running on it.

Right now, McAuliffe is leading Cuccinelli 48 percent to 42 percent, according to a Quinnipac poll released Wednesday. The poll also showed that more Democratic voters intend to vote in this midterm election than usual — likely Democratic voters outnumber Republicans 39 percent to 32 percent. The Washington Post notes that's the same split that caused the state to swing for Obama in 2012. 

The Times reports that there's been a decrease in white voters in Virginia since 2009 — from 78 percent to 75 percent. Suburban, minority voters make up more of the electorate than ever before. And the makeup of white voters is also changing — more of them are young, recent college grads, who are more likely to vote for a Democrat because of the party's stance social issues.

Republicans are naturally worried about these shifting demographics, and Democrats are trying to ride the wave.

In Virginia, McAuliffe has especially reached out to Latino voters. At a July campaign stop in Woodbridge, he met with Todos Supermarket owner Carlos Castro, and called him an example of the "American Dream":

We can’t grow our economy unless we ensure that Virginia is an open and welcoming state to everyone. I’d love to see thousands of more Carloses by the end of my term as governor. We need to help the Carloses of the future grow and diversify this economy.

McAuliffe has vowed to enact a state-level DREAM Act. He also also campaigned to Asian-American groups, and he hasn't been shy about calling out his opponent's often less-tolerant party. McAuliffe told Politico earlier in August:

This is probably the starkest difference you’ve had between two candidates running for governor. My opponent is on a social-ideological agenda. In my bones, you cannot grow an economy and diversify it when you have these hate-filled statements — as it relates to women’s  health centers, gay Virginians, the issues on immigration . . . I want to stop all that.

So Cuccinelli will keep pretending demographics are no big deal, and McAuliffe will continue to call for more "Carloses." And with the white vote shrinking nationwide, what happens in Virginia in 2013 could be a peek at what's to come nationally in 2016.

Read More

Why the GOP May Lose Virginia’s Statehouse

The more one knows about GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli and his equally extreme running mates - E.W Jackson, in my opinion needs to be in a mental ward - the more one should be disturbed by the fact that this trio of crazies (pictured above) were even nominated.  This year's GOP statewide ticket speaks volumes about just how far the Republican Party has fallen.  Ignorance, bigotry and frightening religious extremism and a contempt for the U. S. Constitution are deemed virtues in today's GOP.  And with luck, Virginians will defeat these extremists in November and save Virginia from retreating into a lapse back to the 1950's or earlier.  An story in The Daily Beast looks at why the GOP may crash and burn in November.  Here are highlights:

The conventional wisdom on the Virginia gubernatorial race can be summed up in a single sentence: Terry McAuliffe is too weak to beat anyone other than Ken Cuccinelli, who likewise is too weak to beat anyone other than Terry McAuliffe. This, however, is a little unfair to McAuliffe.

Tea Party-favorite Cuccinelli is a rigid extremist, whose slavish devotion to his ideology has made him vulnerable in a state that prides itself on political independence. Which is why, if the latest poll from Quinnipiac University is any indication, the conventional wisdom is wrong—McAuliffe is stronger than expected, and Cuccinelli is much weaker than anyone imagined.

According to Quinnipiac, McAuliffe leads Cuccinelli by six points among likely voters, 48 percent to 42 percent. This is big news. So far, Quinnipiac is the only pollster to look beyond registered voters, where Democrats have an edge. The likely voter pool, by contrast, is smaller, whiter, and in the case of Virginia gubernatorial elections, much older. If past elections are any guide, a likely voter poll should have given Cuccinelli a small advantage over his opponent. For now, however, he’s at a significant disadvantage.

There’s more. At the same time “the Macker” is winning almost every Democrat (only one percent opposed), Cuccinelli is losing six percent of Republicans.  And indeed, recent news suggests that the state’s GOP establishment—or at least, a portion of it—has turned against the attorney general, repelled by his extremism and rigidity.
Cuccinelli has one other problem, and that’s his connection to the “gifts” scandal that has engulfed Gov. Bob McDonnell with questions, controversy, and a federal investigation. 

As always, it’s still early, and there are a lot of things that can change. Right now, however, the conventional wisdom doesn’t look so wise. The Virginia gubernatorial race isn’t one weak candidate against another, it’s one weak candidate against a disaster of an opponent, representing a Virginia Republican Party on the verge of collapse.

Turn out is critical and it is crucial that every sane Virginian, every woman who wants control over her own body, ever minority voter who fears disenfranchisement, and every gay who doesn't want to be re-criminalized needs to get out and vote against the GOP ticket in November.  We cannot sit back and assume that Cuccinelli, et al will lose.

Read More

Dozens of Improper E-mails Surface from Cuccinelli's Office to Gas Company

Yesterday I wrote about the growing scandal that Ken Cuccinelli is facing arising from his office's improper assistance to a gas company litigant in a lawsuit brought by Virginia landowners to recovery gas royalties.  As noted in that post, from my experience as a former in-house attorney to an oil company who is familiar with Virginia's Oil and Gas Act, there is no legitimate basis for the AG's office to have been assisting the gas company litigants.  Now, the Bristol Herald Courier is reporting that a slew of additional e-mails from one of Cuccinelli's assistant attorney generals assisting an oil and gas company owned by one of his biggest campaign contributors have surfaced.  The bottom line message to be learned is that Cuccinelli is lying about his involvement in what increasingly appears to be improper intervention in a private civil lawsuit in exchange for over $100,000 in cash contributions.  If Bob McDonnell has a problem with the feds, then Cuccinelli does as well, but even more so.  Here are highlights from the Herald Courier:

ABINGDON, Va. — Court records show that an assistant attorney general sent dozens of emails to lawyers representing the two energy companies now being sued in a federal class-action case over natural gas royalties in Southwest Virginia.

This is in addition to a series of five emails that came to light months ago, when a federal magistrate judge criticized the staffer for appearing to advise the lawyers on how to fight the lawsuits.

With the larger batch of emails, the magistrate judge eventually ruled that nearly half failed to meet the common-interest legal doctrine that state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli now insists allowed his staff member to ethically communicate with those lawyers.

Pigeon sent at least 52 emails to lawyers of defendants EQT Production and CNX Gas since the lawsuits were filed three years ago, reveals a Herald Courier review of court documents filed in U.S. District Court in Abingdon.

In June, the attorney general said his office joined the court cases only to fight constitutional challenges to the Virginia Gas and Oil Act, which is at the heart of a series of lawsuits seeking at least $28 million in natural gas royalties now held in state-mandated escrow accounts set up and monitored by the Gas and Oil Board.

Speculation over the relationship between the state’s highest legal office and corporate lawyers has become a political hot topic: Cuccinelli is the Republican candidate vying with Democrat Terry McAuliffe for the governor’s seat, up for grabs in November.

Adding to the fire is the role CNX parent company CONSOL Energy has as one of the top financial contributors to Cuccinelli’s campaign. The company has funneled $111,044 into his campaign coffers since 2012, according to campaign watchdog Virginia Public Access Project.

Last week, the state’s inspector general confirmed to the Herald Courier that his office is conducting an investigation of whether Pigeon wrongfully advised the energy company lawyers and said it could take months to wrap up.

As for Pigeon’s emails, it was early 2011 when the lawyers seeking the royalties on behalf of a group of Southwest Virginia landowners began to ask for her communications with the corporate attorneys.

Cuccinelli’s office fought the release [of the e-mails] and argued that the common-interest doctrine allows lawyers representing separate clients to trade information as long as they have similar interests.

U.S. Magistrate Pamela Meade Sargent wrote that none of the dozens of emails Pigeon traded with defense lawyers seemed to touch upon any constitutional issues.

Instead, Pigeon’s emails appear to have focused on such topics as the effect of a jury pool, judicial orders and other case issues, suggest references in court documents. She sent many of those emails months after a senior judge ruled on the constitutional challenges and after the attorney general’s office dropped out of the case.

 The AG’s office jumped back into the lawsuits only to fight the plaintiff’s request for the emails.

Something is clearly rotten in this picture.  Personally, from all my dealings with the Attorney General's office over the years, I find it hard to believe that Pigeon advised the gas companies without direction from above.  One can only hope that Pigeon will opt to not fail on her sword and will come clean about who was directing her to assist the gas company defendants.   If that happens, I suspect the feds will be opening an investigation of Cuccinelli. 

Read More

Longtime GOP Operative and Consultant Endorses McAuliffe

While far too many of my former Republican compatriots continue to guzzle down Christofascists Kool-Aid, some are waking up to the reality that the 2013 GOP statewide slate is not only frightening but also poisonous for Virginia's future.  Now, Boyd Marcus, campaign consultant to Jim Gilmore, George Allen, and other true remotely sane conservative Republicans, has come out and endorsed Democrat gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe.   Even more stunning, he is now advising the McAuliffe campaign.  Not surprisingly, the GOP Kool-Aid drinkers are livid with Marcus.  Here are highlights from the Miami Herald:

Boyd Marcus, a veteran Republican political consultant whose client list has included U.S. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and former Gov. Jim Gilmore, is endorsing Democrat Terry R. McAuliffe and advising his campaign against GOP nominee Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia's neck-and-neck race for governor..

The announcement by McAuliffe's campaign, confirmed to The Associated Press on Tuesday in a phone interview with Marcus, rocked Virginia politics and exposed the clearest sign to date of bad blood within the GOP between its establishment and the tea party conservatives who comprise Cuccinelli's ardent army and control the state Republican Party machinery.

Marcus, who most recently guided the aborted gubernatorial campaign of Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, became a paid adviser to McAuliffe knowing it would sever many longtime GOP ties for him. But he felt it necessary.

"I was looking at the candidates, and I saw Terry McAuliffe as the guy who will work with everybody to get things done," Marcus told the AP in a telephone interview.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/20/3574358/veteran-gop-strategist-endorses.html#.UhOGunHHvUk.twitter#storylink=cpy

In a statement announcing the endorsement, McAuliffe's campaign quotes Marcus as saying, "I've never before supported any Democrat, but this election Terry is the clear choice for mainstream conservatives."

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/20/3574358/veteran-gop-strategist-endorses.html#.UhOGunHHvUk.twitter#storylink=cpy

Democrats were giddy at Marcus' defection. A Democratic National Committee noted the news in a blast email, gloating that it was "just the latest example of dysfunction and infighting within the GOP, and the Civil War that is pulling the party apart."

Marcus's defection struck even the GOP's establishment figures as a breathtaking apostasy, an action tantamount to Marcus forever forsaking the party.

"How can you ever go back?" former Lt. Gov. John H. Hager, a moderate Republican, said in a telephone interview. "Basically, it's Boyd's move to hang it up. Maybe this is his ultimate move."

Virginia GOP Chairman Pat Mullins was furious over what he viewed as a betrayal.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/20/3574358/veteran-gop-strategist-endorses.html#.UhOGunHHvUk.twitter#storylink=cpy

Marcus was the architect behind the 1997 campaign in which Gilmore harnessed public hatred for the personal property tax Virginia localities assess on privately owned cars and pickup trucks, allowing the Republican to win in a rout behind the slogan "No Car Tax!"

Marcus served as the governor's chief of staff during Gilmore's term from 1998 to 2001. He earned the nickname "the Prince of Darkness" among political adversaries — and even a few allies — who grudgingly acknowledged his ability to almost invisibly achieve political or policy objectives. 

I love it!!  Would that some of my former compatriots would wake up to reality and flee the Cuccinelli-Jackson-Obenshain triumvirate.  Yes, Karen, I am talking about you among others.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/20/3574358/veteran-gop-strategist-endorses.html#.UhOGunHHvUk.twitter#storylink=cpy

Read More

Ken Cuccinelli's Gas Royalties Scandal

While there are growing calls for Bob McDonnell to resign from office due to the growing "Gift Gate" scandal - McDonnell's defense basically sounds like Sergeant Schultz  in Hogans Heroes: he heard nothing, he saw nothing and knew nothing about his wife's raking in loot and receiving loans for Jonnie R. Williams, Sr. - to date, Ken Cuccinelli has continued to refuse to return any of the loot that he received from Williams.  But perhaps the biggest scandal that has yet to fully unfold surrounding Cuccinelli is his office's improper provision of legal assistance to  the subsidiary of one of Cuccinelli's $100,000 plus donors in a civil lawsuit against Virginians.  

Cuccinelli has tried to claim that the subordinate in the Attorney General's office gave legal advice to his donor's subsidiary as part of her representation of the Virginia Oil and Gas Board.  Pardon my French, but this story line is BULLSHIT.   Why do I say this?  First, I am well familiar with the Virginia's Oil and Gas regulatory scheme.  In fact, when Virginia's statutes were enacted in 1982, one of my fellow attorneys at the oil company I worked for at the time was on the advisory committee working on the legislation (Union Texas Petroleum was at the time the largest holder of oil and gas leases in Virginia).  Since I was a member of the Virginia State Bar, I was involved in reviewing proposed legislation that implemented the current regulatory scheme.   I suspect I know more about oil and gas law in Virginia and elsewhere than anyone on the current Attorney General's staff.  There was NO NEED for the Oil and Gas Board to be involved in this lawsuit.

In addition, in private practice, I have been involved in litigation with leaseholders from the lessee/oil company perspective.  NEVER, EVER in such litigation did the state oil and gas board or the state attorney general's office provide legal assistance to my law firm or our oil company clients.  NEVER, EVER.   In short, there is no legitimate way to explain why an Assistant Attorney General was giving legal advise and assistance to oil company litigants in a civil lawsuit.  A $100,000 contribution to Cuccinelli's gubernatorial campaign is seemingly the only explanation.  Cuccinelli sold out Virginia landowners and taxpayers in exchange for cold cash.  Democrat Attorney General Candidate Mark Herring explains it all well:

“At a time when Virginians deserve the truth, Ken Cuccinelli and his office continue to fight to keep the public in the dark about the help they gave to out-of-state gas companies trying to deny Virginians millions in mining royalties," Herring said. “It’s shameful that Ken Cuccinelli aligned with the gas companies to keep their emails out of the public view. And it’s shameful that Cuccinelli would think it’s acceptable for his office to offer legal advice to an out of state company, instead of working on behalf of Virginians.

“It seems every day we have more proof that Ken Cuccinelli is more concerned with sweeping his scandals – whether it’s Star Scientific or this mining royalties scandal – under the rug instead of revealing the truth. It’s shocking that his ticketmate Mark Obenshain sits quietly on the sidelines while Ken Cuccinelli puts the interest of a company that donates to his campaign over the interests of Virginia taxpayers. This is why Virginians are ready for a change in the Office of Attorney General,”

Oh, and did I mention that Cuccinelli's office fought to block the release of the e-mails that revealed the extent of the Attorney General's office was in this civil litigation?  Cuccinelli is a lying douche bag in my opinion.  Like most of the far right faction that likes to wear their religiosity on their sleeve, Cuccinelli makes a tawdry whore look virtuous.

 

Read More

Ken Cuccinelli’s Fuzzy Math - An Economic Plan That Doesn't Add Up

There's a lot wrong with both Ken Cuccinelli (including mentally, in my view) and his proposed policies.  On social issues, he'd pretty much bring back a religious inquisition to inflict his own bizarre beliefs on all Virginians while policing bedrooms across the Virginia.  On the economic front, his proposals are yet more of the GOP's failed voodoo economics which involve sound bites that excite the deranged GOP base while not adding up if one looks beyond the smoke and mirrors.  In a main editorial the Washington Post slams Cuccinelli's bogus economic plan.  Here are excerpts:

[T]he 2013 Cuccinelli economic plan relies on magical thinking.

The main difference between the two blueprints is the effort that went into drafting them. Mr. McDonnell’s [2009] plan was 19 single-spaced pages, resplendent with bullet points, subsections and wonderfully precise dollar totals. Mr. Cuccinelli’s plan consists of one sentence, plus four very brief bullet points. Grandly known as “The Cuccinelli Economic Growth & Virginia Jobs Plan,” it fits neatly onto about half a page.

The Cuccinelli economic plan, for all its brevity, does contain one idea. By slicing business income taxes by a third and personal income taxes by 13 percent, Mr. Cuccinelli would slash $1.4 billion in revenue — about 8 percent of Virginia’s overall annual tax base.

Yet somehow — here’s where the magical part comes in — Mr. Cuccinelli insists that, under his plan, revenue would hold steady and the state’s already lean budget would be held harmless.

By Mr. Cuccinelli’s facile account, squaring this circle would simply require eliminating loopholes and deductions for those who are coddled by the state’s tax code. That sounds great in the abstract, but which loopholes and deductions does Mr. Cuccinelli have in mind? Naturally, he isn’t saying.

Just as Mr. McDonnell’s proposal, for all its detail, was gobbledygook, so too is Mr. Cuccinelli’s — unless what he is really planning is a frontal assault on state spending. That would mean eviscerating education, public safety, infrastructure and social services, which together account for a large majority of that spending.

Mr. Cuccinelli suggests that cutting corporate income taxes by a third would transform Virginia into an irresistible magnet for businesses, which would grow at lightning speed. But what businesses, and which employees, would be content to live in a state whose budget starves its schools, social services and public safety?

At the heart of the Cuccinelli vision is the same fantasy that animated the McDonnell plan four years ago — sacrifice is for suckers; popular and vital services can be had for free; and Virginia voters are saps. In fact, revenue cannot be summoned from thin air, either by Mr. McDonnell or by Mr. Cuccinelli.

The editorial also fails to ask the question of what businesses and what employees would want to live in a state which has social policies that would like they were devised by the ayatollahs in Tehran?

Read More

Ken Cuccinelli's False Attacks on Terry McAuliffe

Cuccinelli = Dishonest Liar

In the 2013 Virginia gubernatorial contest, there is lots of real evidence of Ken Cuccinelli's ethical failures and influence peddling: $18,000 in gifts from Jonnie R. Williams, Sr., stock dealings in Star Scientific, $100,000 from the parent of an energy company that received improper legal assistance from the attorney general's office in a lawsuit with Virginia landowners and tax payers, etc.  And then there are all of Cuccinelli's frivolous lawsuits that have gone down in flames squandering Virginia taxpayer resources in the process.  Oh, and then there's the significant growth of the AG's office under Mr. Small Government Cuccinelli.  What does one do if you are Cuccinelli?  Attack his opponent with innuendo and claim that there's fire of scandal where there isn't any.  If Cuccinelli's lips are moving, it is safet to assume he's lying. A column in the Washington Post looks at Cuccinelli's dishonest attacks on McAuliffe.  Here are excerpts:

My first concern is the furor over Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe’s misadventure with GreenTech Automotive, which makes small electric cars in Northern Mississippi after skipping past Virginia during its search for a plant site.

The campaign of Republican contender Kenneth Cuccinelli is making  a lot of hay over some rather vague accusations’ involving McAuliffe, and that seems to be as much as they have on Terry. The New York Times and The Post have weighed in with stories about the car company and a related financial firm that involves Hillary Rodham Clinton’s brother.

Basically, McAuliffe got into business with a man named Charles Wang to build little battery-powered cars. Part of the strategy involved getting visas for some business people from China under a legal program that has been around for about two decades. McAuliffe may have done a bit of informal lobbying to expedite the visa processs, as far as I can tell.

In sum, at least from what we know so far, McAuliffe got involved in a business that didn’t live up to expectations. He should have told voters he’d bailed on the firm sooner than he did.

A little perspective. There are lots of business problems out there. Here in Richmond, the region lost some big companies during the Great Recession, including mass retailer Circuit City, mortgage firm Land America and chip-maker Qimondo. The Post has such financial problems that it is being bought by Jeff Bezos of Amazon.

Where’s the smoking gun in these cases?

And then, as noted above and in the column, there's Cuccinelli's own record:

The attorney general bought stock in a firm involved in a tax case his office was prosecuted. He did not immediately disclose the holding. He also accepted $18,000 in gifts from the owner of the firm . . .  One of his assistants was criticized by a federal judge for acting as an advocate for two large energy companies in a legal battle over natural gas rights. One of the firms is a major contributor to Cuccinelli’s campaign.

Nothing here is going to send Cuccinelli to jail, but how do McAuliffe’s problems with GreenTech measure up as ethical transgressions when compared to Cuccinelli’s?

The fact is, they don’t, barring more revelations about GreenTech.

Read More

Ken Cuccinelli Seeks to Amend Virginia Constitution To Allow Taxpayer Funding of Religious Schools

I have said for a long time that GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli is a religious extremists who if given his way would destroy the separation of church and state handed down from the Founding Fathers.  Now, Cuccinelli is proposing that the Virginia Constitution be amended to allow taxpayer funding of religious schools thereby diverting funding from the Commonwealth's public schools.  This type of proposal was anathema to the Founding Fathers who wanted to established religion and no mandatory public support of of sectarian institutions.  In contrast, what Cuccinelli is proposes gives the theocrats at The Family Foundation a veritable wet dream.  Here are highlights from Think Progress:

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R), his party’s nominee in this November’s gubernatorial election, unveiled a 12-point education plan Tuesday. Among his proposals: Virginia should amend its constitution to allow public funding for religious education.

Cuccinelli, who has blasted the Catholic Church for creating a “culture of dependency on government, not God,” proposed that Virginia should divert taxpayer funds from public education to parochial school vouchers. He claimed that the separation of church and state provisions in Article IV, Section 16 of Virginia’s constitution were merely anti-Catholic bigotry:

Virginia has provisions in its constitution that explicitly bar government aid to “sectarian” schools or institutions, including the so-called Blaine Amendment. The Blaine Amendment was passed as a result of anti-Catholic bigotry in American politics in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, which made clear that the federal Constitution permits aid through school choice programs, Virginia’s Blaine Amendment restricts the ability to enact broad-based school choice programs. A state constitutional amendment is needed that is narrowly drafted to allow for school choice programs that do not restrict parents’ choices about what is best for each of their children.

  [P]ublic finding to any sectarian institutions . . . [is] explicitly prohibited by Virginia’s constitution.

While the nation and Virginia were founded on the belief that religions should be free from government interference in teaching their beliefs, it has also been the longstanding view that the government should not pay for religions to do so.

Cuccinelli seemingly ignores his [Thomas Jefferson's] 1779 Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom. In that law, passed by the Virginia General Assembly in 1786, Jefferson wrote, “to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical,” and that “even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness.”

Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom is still part of the Code of Virginia even though the GOP controlled General Assembly has repeatedly ignored its principles and enacted blatantly religious based laws that marginalize gays and others who do not conform to Christofascist religious beliefs.  Here are more quotes from the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom which is one of three things Jefferson wanted to be remembered for (the other two are founding the University of Virginia and authoring the Declaration of Independence):

Almighty God hath created the mind free,and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from theplan of the Holy author of our religion, . .

the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time . . .

to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own . . . .

What Jefferson so eloquently condemned is precisely what Cuccinelli and the extremists at The Family Foundation seek to inflict on all Virginians.  Cuccinelli MUST be defeated in November.  Otherwise, the days of religious freedom for all in Virginia is numbered.  

Read More

Bob McDonnell Scandal: The Sharks Are Turning on Each Other

Frankly, it has been entertaining to watch the festering of Bob McDonnell's self-inflicted political wounds.  The greed and sense of entitlement - especially on the part of Maureen McDonnell - has been shocking.   The only down side has been that the scandal has not hit Ken Cuccinelli - Virginia's would be Adolph Hitler like figure - harder.  Kookinelli is just as dirty as McDonnell and only received less generosity from Williams because he doesn't wield the power the governor holds in Virginia.  Now, Bob "Taliban Bob" or "Rolex Bob" McDonnell and erstwhile buddy and lavish gift giver Jonnie R. Williams, Sr., seem poised to go for each others throats.  A column in Bacon's Rebellion looks at this turn of events.  Here are excerpts:

You know something bad is up when Gov. Robert F. McDonnell starts turning on his gift-giving pal Jonnie R. Williams Sr. of Star Scientific and federal prosecutors.

On Friday, the troubled dietary supplement maker filed securities documents saying that the firm has been told by federal prosecutors that it would not be charged criminally in their probe of McDonnell’s acceptance of gifts and loans.

Rich Galen, the Sherpa McDonnell has hired to get him through the scandal, has said that the feds are giving Williams “a free pass” which apparently means that Williams will turn state’s evidence against McDonnell. And that apparently means that the chances of McDonnell’s being indicted are higher, not lower.

According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Galen “contrasted” McDonnell’s 37 years of public service with Williams, whom Galen said  “has been in trouble with government entities since the earliest days of his business career.”

Now that is a mouthful. And it is very strange given that McDonnell, who told me that he has known Williams for five or six years, has been such a close personal friend with Williams that he has accepted $165,000 in gifts and loans from him, has stayed at his lakeside vacation home, his wife has flown around in his airplane and has gotten a New York City shopping spree (including a $6,5000 Rolex for Bob). The McDonnells have given the goodies back.

Now it seems that McDonnell is going on the campaign trail this week to prop his reputation. One would think he might be going on the hustings to help Cuccinelli. But, no, Cuccinelli is trying to distance himself as much as he can from McDonnell even though Cuccinelli got $18,000 in gifts from Williams. Unlike the governor, the attorney general is not giving them back.

Chris LaCivita, a Cuccinelli advisor, actually gave this bizarre explanation for Cuccinelli’s decision to keep the stuff. The attorney general has seven kids and has to manage his family budget. Ethical transgressions are acceptable if you have a lot of children. Who knew?

The upshot is that McDonnell appears to be in very deep trouble with the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s office.

Seven kids, and it still didn't turn Cuccinelli straight.   The man is a slime and a closet case.

Read More

In Leaked Audio, Cuccinelli Affirms Support For E.W. Jackson

Homeschool Tele-Townhall from Jack Hertzfedlt on Vimeo.

E.W. Jackson has to be one of the most insane and delusional nominees for statewide office in Virginia's history.  One would think that anyone who hopes to come across as rational and of sound mind would be running screaming away from Jackson.  But not Ken Cuccinelli, the GOP's gubernatorial nominee.  In a leaked audio, Cuccinelli has affirmed his support for Jackson.  This event confirms what I have long maintained: Cuccinelli is a crazy and as much of a religious extremist as Jackson who clearly wants a theocracy.  Talking Points Memo looks at Cuccinelli's lapse in what he thought was a private conference call with home school extremists.  Here are highlights:

Ken Cuccinelli, the attorney general and Republican nominee for governor in Virginia, told supporters recently they should have no question about his support for E.W. Jackson, the GOP's polarizing nominee for lieutenant governor in that state.

Cuccinelli made his comments over the weekend in private conference call with a group called Homeschoolers for Ken after a woman asked why he hadn't "linked up" with Jackson or made a formal endorsement. TPM obtained audio of that call.

"I am calling to find out why so far you have not linked up with E.W. Jackson for lieutenant governor. I'm really excited about him," the woman said. "I'm very encouraged by his pro-life stance. I feel like the two of you are on the same page and I'm wildly excited that you could both be elected, but I'm not sure what will happen if you don't endorse him and I just want to know why there hasn't been a linkup."

Cuccinelli responded by disputing the notion there was any split between him and Jackson, and promising they will spend more time campaigning together in the final weeks of the election.

Of course I'm supporting both Mark and E.W.," Cuccinelli said. "I don't think there's ever been any question about that. And there shouldn't be on this call."

Cuccinelli previously made attempts to distance himself from Jackson, including during a radio interview in June where he said he "absolutely" wants to be judged separately from Jackson and added, "E.W.’s going to have to introduce himself individually to the rest of Virginia.

Since winning the lieutenant governor nomination in May, Jackson has made negative, national headlines for past statements criticizing gays, accusing President Barack Obama of harboring “Muslim sensibilities,” comparing Planned Parenthood to the KKK, praising the Constitution's original clause to count blacks as three-fifths of a person, and for his efforts in the late 1980's to fight desegregation in Boston.

Listen to the audio of the conference call below, which was posted on Vimeo under an account using the name "Jack Hertzfedlt." Cuccinelli begins discussing his support for Jackson at about 26:50.

Read More

Slate: Ken Cuccinelli’s Sodomy Obsession

Ken Cuccinelli's obsession with sodomy continues to make Virginia a laughing stock around the country and also shows the way Kookinelli would govern if Virginians are stupid enough to allow him to be elected to the Governor's mansion by the right wing extremists that nominated him for governor in the first place.  Time and time again, Cuccinelli has demonstrated that laws and mean what he wants them to say, not what their plain language states, and that he thinks he is above the rulings of the highest courts in the land.   In his frivolous appeal the the United States Supreme Court, Cuccinelli asks the Court to utterly ignore the plain, unequivocal wording of Virginia's "crimes against nature" law which as written applies to EVERYONE, gay or straight, adult or minor, married or unmarried.  Who is guilty and who can be prosecuted is left purely to the whims of prosecutors. Policing every bedroom across Virginia is not what I'd call an example of smaller government.  But then again, a smaller government less intrusive government is not what Cuccinelli wants.  He wants a theocracy.  An article in Slate looks at Cuccinelli's insane and very dangerous arguments for making all sex outside of the so-called "missionary position" illegal.   Here are excerpts:

Ken Cuccinelli, Virginia’s attorney general, has garnered more than his share of national attention over the years, with high-profile legal crusades against global warming researchers, Obamacare, and abortion clinics. But it’s his recent war on consensual sodomy in the commonwealth that has raised the most eyebrows as the gubernatorial candidate has made the issue a centerpiece of the final months of his campaign.

His critics, including the ladies of The View and Jay Leno, have responded to Cuccinelli’s quest to reinstate Virginia’s anti-sodomy or, “Crimes Against Nature” law, with snickers and winks. The law is plainly unconstitutional—according to both a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision and a federal appeals court—and giggling about the attorney general’s creepy preoccupation with Virginians’ consensual oral sex makes for an easy comic target. But that focus obscures the real—even original—sin undergirding Cucinelli’s latest legal push: It’s a call for judges to read statutes to mean what they don’t say; a call for outright judicial activism, for freewheeling judicial interpretation—qualities legal thinkers on the right usually deplore.

It has long been the mantra of Republican politicians that judges—especially elitist federal judges—should never, ever legislate from the bench. Now consider Attorney General Cuccinelli’s approach to Virginia’s sodomy law. The anti-sodomy statute, 18.2-361, applies to “any person” that “carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth.” Yes. It bans all oral and anal sex. And for those who partake, the legal consequence is a felony conviction, possible imprisonment, and lifelong status as a sex offender.

In March, the federal court of appeals struck down the Virginia sodomy law and threw out MacDonald’s conviction for reasons clear to anyone who’s ever watched Ally McBeal. Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 Supreme Court decision about Texas’ anti-sodomy statute, held that states can’t regulate private consensual sexual activity amongst adults. The court of appeals’ position, that state anti-sodomy laws simply do not survive post-Lawrence, is the same position taken by attorneys general in other states, including the prior Virginia attorney general. That should end it, right?

 

But even with the tide of legal authority against him, Cuccinelli decided to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that Virginia’s anti-sodomy statute has no constitutional problem, if—as he concedes, and only if—the high court would just interpret the terrifyingly broad sodomy law to apply only to sex involving 16- and 17-year-olds.

The legal position Cuccinelli pushes creates truly bizarre results, which is normally a sign for reviewing courts that something smells funky. Asking a federal court to turn a state anti-sodomy law into an anti-statutory rape law means that if MacDonald had engaged in ordinary intercourse with a 17-year-old girl every day for a month, he would not face a felony conviction or be a sex offender. He’d just be that guy. But his decision to solicit oral sex, even his decision to just phone her and ask for it, under the imaginarily rewritten law, requires both.

Cuccinelli’s proposed revision to Virginia’s sodomy law would also mean that those older than 15 can legally consent to sex, yet, have no right of sexual privacy in actually having sex. Or, to put it differently, Virginia could charge any 16- and 17-year-old with felony sodomy simply because they happened to choose oral or anal sex over vaginal sex. That’s a scary prospect for all parents in Virginia, but especially for those parents raising gay teens. Leaving a statute of that sort on the books doesn’t protect children over the age of consent. It criminalizes their choice of conduct and leaves the state to decide when it’s benign.
For what possible reason should we give Cuccinelli, or the federal courts, open-ended discretion to go after some acts of consensual sodomy, but not others—when he’s made plain that he thinks one particular class of sodomy is “intrinsically wrong?” And in light of that fact that exactly such back-from-the-dead “crimes against nature” statutes are being used right now in states like Louisiana by overzealous and vindictive police officers to openly harass gay couples, what possible reason could there be to reinstate them?

It’s hard to tell whether Cuccinelli is now begging federal courts to legislate from the bench because he needs a campaign boost, or because he really does want them to police—on an ongoing, “trust me”—basis, the private sex lives of all Virginians and the sexual conduct of all its teenagers. The first scenario is an example of the sad state of Virginia politics. The second is just plain scary. Either way, begging out-of-touch, elitist, liberal federal courts to make ad hoc decisions about which private sex acts are “unnatural” could not be a less conservative goal.

When all is said and done, Kookinelli's ultimate target is gay Virginians.   He is a zealot who cannot be trusted and, in my view, is down right insane.  We do not need someone like him in the governor's mansion.  We don't need him in any elected office whatsoever.  The Constitutional Daily, after asking whether or not Kookinelli has ever committed sodomy with his wife gets to the real issue plaguing Kookinelli:

But we will speculate about Ken Cuccinelli. There's a good chance he's had a little bit of sodomy at some time. And maybe it was a bad experience for him. In fact, it's quite likely it was a bad experience for him, because anyone who's ever followed the story of an ardent anti-gay advocate knows how the story always ends. Ken Cuccinelli is probably gay.

His anti-gay campaigning is probably a manifestation of his own internal struggle. Most people don't feel that strongly about gays, even your typical redneck who will agree with the most homophobic stuff you can think of at the end of the day really doesn't care. The people who do care are the ones fighting their nature because for them homosexuality is an issue that dominates their own lives, and so they think the rest of the world is as concerned as they are.

Read More

Cuccinelli Sued By Former Assistant Attorney General for Wrongful Firing

 

GOP gubernatorial candidate and certifiable egomaniac/nutcase Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli has been sued in federal court by a former Assistant Attorney General who had worked in the AG's office for six years before being fired by Kookinelli because he "suspected" she might have been the author of an anonymous post that called Kookinelli an "egomaniac."  Worse yet, the anonymous poster said Kookinelli was "NEVER" in the office and that he was merely using the post of Attorney General for "self-promotion."  Note, it was apparently never proven that the fired Assistant Attorney Genaral had in fact been the author of the post.  Mere suspicion was what Kookinelli and his henchman cited to justify the firing.  With over 300 attorneys and staff in the AG's office, why did Kookinelli's suspicions focus on the fired staffer?   There were plenty of people who saw how Kookinelli was abusing his office.  Here are highlights from the Washington Post:

An ex-assistant attorney general in Ken Cuccinelli II’s office is suing her former boss, claiming he fired her inappropriately after she was suspected of posting unflattering comments about him on a Washington Post blog.

In a lawsuit filed late last week in federal district court in Virginia, Samantha Vanterpool claims that Cuccinelli fired her about a month after comments appeared online that called the attorney general and Virginia gubernatorial candidate an “egomaniac” who was “NEVER in the AG’s office and solely uses the position for self promotion.” The comments — posted anonymously by the user “bzbzsammy” — came in response to a May 2012 Washington Post blog about Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling’s criticism of Cuccinelli’s planned trip to Iowa.

Richard Patrick, Vanterpool’s lawyer, said officials in the attorney general’s office told Vanterpool as they moved to fire her that they suspected she had posted the comment as “bzbzsammy.” He said they also gave her a copy of the office’s media policy, which prohibits attorney general staffers from talking to reporters without permission.  

The suit — which names Cuccinelli and his former chief deputy Charles E. James Jr. as defendants — claims she was unfairly retaliated against for exercising her free speech rights and asks that she be reinstated and awarded damages and back pay.

Patrick declined to say whether Vanterpool — who worked for the attorney general’s office for about six years — had posted the comment. Since she was fired, Vanterpool, of Annandale, has not been able to get another job, he said. 

Cuccinelli of all people ought to know that "suspicion" does not equate to the legal standard required in a civil suit.  He ought to also know that one is innocent until proven guilty.  Do we really want a petty tyrant/egomaniac in the Governor's mansion - especially after Bob "Pay Me a Bribe" McDonnell?  The only good news for Cuccinelli is that he wasn't accused of sexual harassment.  Of course, if he were to engage in sexual harassment, the closeted Cuccinelli would probably have been harassing cute male Assistant Attorney Generals (Note: the staff in the AG's office includes a chief deputy attorney general, five deputy attorneys general and about 150 assistant attorneys general, 40 additional full-time lawyers appointed as special counsel to particular agencies, and 140 legal assistants, legal secretaries and other professional support staff).

 

Read More

Ken Cuccinelli's Sodomy Obsession. Would He Prosecute Grandmothers?

As I have noted in prior posts, my own conjecture on why GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli is so obsessed with Virginia's unconstitutional sodomy statute is because he is a self-loathing closet case (college contemporaries thought he was gay and I continue to receive a trail of rumors) who takes his marching orders from the Christofascists at The Family Foundation.   To mask the real source of his obsession, Cuccinelli has made it a campaign claim that the sodomy statute be saved to allow the Commonwealth to protect minors from sexual predators.  This, claim, like most of what Cuccinelli claims, is untrue.  A post at the Bilerico Project expands on some of the issues I addressed previously that cut Cuccinelli off at the knees on these dishonest lies.  And a post in Huffington Post underscores that long married heterosexual couples would be made felons under the statute that Cuccinelli seeks to reinstate.   The man is mentally ill in my view.  Here are excerpts from the Bilerico piece:

To my understanding, it's your perspective that if you don't criminalize me, a professional in my mid 30s, from butt-loving my 31 year old boyfriend, that it will open the door to legalize sodomy between adults and minors.

I assume you took the Virginia Bar Exam. The criminal law portion of it ensures that you know that the age of consent in Virginia is 15 (unless a detainee in a detention center). While I don't agree with the age difference of the man you're trying to convict and his "victim," it could have still consensual in Virginia, since the girl was 17. However, you don't need a "Crimes Against Nature" statute to convict the man. There are other statutes you could use, such as the statute against solicitation. This covers sodomy.

In addition, if you want to protect people under the age of consent, there are already statutes in place for that, including: § 18.2-61. Rape. § 18.2-63. Carnal knowledge of child between thirteen and fifteen years of age. § 18.2-64.1. Carnal knowledge of certain minors. § 18.2-67.1. Forcible sodomy. § 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration; penalty. § 18.2-67.3. Aggravated sexual battery; penalty. § 18.2-67.4. Sexual battery. § 18.2-67.4:1. Infected sexual battery; penalty. § 18.2-67.4:2. Sexual abuse of a child under 15 years of age; penalty. § 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual battery, and sexual battery.

The only reason these don't protect minors between 15 and 17 is the age of consent. If there are already all of these laws on the books to protect people under the age of consent, but they don't protect all minors, why not raise the age of consent if you're so concerned? That would be a narrow tailoring of the law to suit your purpose. It would also be something that doesn't affect consensual relations between people of voting age.

If the government's purpose is to protect minors, criminalizing consensual adult sexual activity is irrational. Your question of the age of consent and the definition of what types of sex are allowable between consenting adults are completely different questions.

Why would you make consenting adults criminally liable for something that's already criminal if non-consensual, and why would you use government funds to do it? You'd have to hire more police and more prosecutors to handle the increased caseload and increase the already ridiculous expenditures on corrections facilities.

As for the impact of Cuccinelli's quest to save the unconstitutional law, a piece in Huffington Post underscores the pernicious nature of the statute:

Never in my 79 years, nearly 59 of them married to the only man I have ever known, did I imagine being able to say -- much less write -- this:

I am guilty of sodomy.  For that matter, so is my husband, pleasurably so.

We live in Virginia, home base for all our married -- as well as courting -- years. And in Virginia, the state's anti-sodomy law is again front and center. The law describes sodomy as "crimes against nature," which include all oral as well as anal sex, even between consenting adults, and is to be prosecuted as a felony. In other words, ordinary human behavior, criminalized.

Having the statute invalidated by the Appeals Court could easily have been have been the end of the matter. But it's Virginia. And it's an election year.  .  .  .  .  So, the present Attorney General and Republican candidate for governor, Ken Cuccinelli, has appealed the Fourth Circuit's decision to the Supreme Court and requested a stay of the ruling pending the appeal. The Chief Justice has asked the other side for a response by next Monday. We shall see. That I might conceivably be guilty of sodomy had never remotely crossed my mind until the issue bounced brashly into the news. 

[T]he net effect of the Attorney General's attempt to reinstate the Crime Against Nature Law has been to make Virginia once again a laughing stock, open to legitimate ridicule.

What outrages me is that this law is a not-even-thinly-disguised attack on homosexuality and plays into only sometimes-coded anti-gay rhetoric. Indeed, all the anti-sodomy laws that remain on the books fit that description. Apparently, legislatures are not removing them even though they are effectively unenforceable because too many politicians fear the effect that would have on their reelection chances.  Cuccinelli's views on homosexuality are widely known. 

This grandmother is correct.  Gays are the real targets of the sodomy statute and it is used to impose harsher sentences and longer prison terms.  That's Cuccinelli's real goal.  He wants to punish those who are having the kind of sex he knows in his heart he desperately wants himself.  The man needs to be not only defeated in November but outed.  

Bring me a credible witness who will sign a sworn affidavit and let's take this closet case down.

Read More

Founding Father Quotes Against Religion

We hear over and over from the demagogues of the Christian Right how America was supposedly founded as a Christian Nation and/or that the Founding Fathers supported a far right Christianist approach to religion intertwining with the secular laws.  Like most of what the "godly Christian" crowd says, these claims are a lie - it's yet another example of if these people's lips are moving, it's almost certain they are lying.  Addicting Info has compiled 35 statements by various Founding Fathers that basically blow the "Christian nation" myth to Hell.  Here is a sampling (be sure to read the full piece):

The separation of church and state is one of the cornerstones of America’s foundation. Conservative Christian fundamentalists have sought to crush this cornerstone in the hopes of establishing Christianity as the state religion, an action that would threaten the rest of the foundation that makes up the Constitution. These conservatives contend that the Founding Fathers dreamed of making America a Christian state at the expense of those who practice other religions or none at all.

So here are 35 quotes from the Founding Fathers. Perhaps your first thoughts are the first four Presidents and maybe Benjamin Franklin, but there were many other Founding Fathers. Many were signers of the Constitution and The Declaration of Independence. They were lawyers, judges, soldiers, merchants, farmers, and some were even clergy. And the great majority of them signed the Constitution knowing that matters of government and matters of religion would be separate.

1. “If I could conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure, I beg you will be persuaded, that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution.”
~George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789

2. “Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by a difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society.”
~George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792

3. “We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition… In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man’s religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States.”
~George Washington, letter to the members of the New Church in Baltimore, January 27, 1793

5. “The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.”
~1797 Treaty of Tripoli signed by John Adams

6. “Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”
~John Adams, “A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America” (1787-88)

7. “We should begin by setting conscience free. When all men of all religions shall enjoy equal liberty, property, and an equal chance for honors and power we may expect that improvements will be made in the human character and the state of society.”
~John Adams, letter to Dr. Price, April 8, 1785

9. “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. It is error alone that needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”
~Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814

10. “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, then that of blindfolded fear.”
~Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

12. “History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.”
-Thomas Jefferson: in letter to Alexander von Humboldt, December 6, 1813 

13. “Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person’s life, freedom of religion affects every individual.  State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the “wall of separation between church and state,” therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society. We have solved … the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.”
~Thomas Jefferson: in a speech to the Virginia Baptists, 1808

15. “The civil government functions with complete success by the total separation of the Church from the State.”
~James Madison, 1819, Writings, 8:432, quoted from Gene Garman, “Essays In Addition to America’s Real Religion”

20. “When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its professors are obligated to call for help of the civil power, it’s a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”
~Benjamin Franklin, letter to Richard Price, October 9, 1780

23. “That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forebearance, love, and charity towards each other.”
~George Mason, Virginia Bill of Rights, 1776

These are hardly the words of men who allegedly believed that America should be a Christian nation governed by the Bible as conservatives constantly claim. On the contrary, the great majority of the Founders believed strongly in separation of church and state. So keep in mind that this country has survived for over two centuries under the principle of separation and it is only now when conservatives are attempting to destroy that very cornerstone that we find America becoming ever more divided and more politically charged than ever before. If this right-wing faction has their way, America as we know it will cease to exist and the freedoms we have enjoyed because of the Constitution will erode. The Founding Fathers had a vision of this nation and trusted that the people would protect that vision and improve upon it. Now is not the time to fail them. Because the day the people fail, so does America.

Ignorance of accurate history is the Christofascists best friend when it comes to their quest to turn America into a theocracy.  Unfortunately, nowadays, too few Americans know history they way the need to in order to defend constitutional government from religious extremists.  Here in Virginia, the GOP slate of statewide candidates - Ken Cuccinelli, E. W. Jackson, and Mark Obenshain - and their supporters at The Family Foundation would destroy the religious freedom the Founding Fathers so strongly supported.

Read More