Barriers to entry

I’ve been taking a lot of flack from self-defined “one-issue” voters lately. What’s annoying is that these are really not one-issue people at all, but they think they are. They (most of them) think “conservative” is an issue and the Tea Party defines “conservative.”

I refuse to vote the self-identified “conservative” candidate in the Virginia gubernatorial race.  Because every gun-rights group in the Commonwealth has endorsed him, I’ve been called stupid, a traitor, a “liberal” (as a pejorative, of course), misguided, and other terms.

What many of these people – people who have known me for years – fail to realize is that gun-rights is simply the barrier to entry.   After that, you other positions come in to play.  If you don’t support my gun rights, I don’t recognize your “right” to my vote, pure and simple.  That lets out Terry McAuliffe, though I have a strong handful of other reasons.  My only other absolute barrier is a conviction that the Tennessee constitution got it part right (“Whereas Ministers of the Gospel are by their profession, dedicated to God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions; therefore, no Minister of the Gospel, or priest of any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to a seat in either House of the Legislature.”) and I’d carry that to “any elected office”.  Those are the barriers to my vote.

After the barriers comes the curtain – the other civil rights.  Candidates can pass the curtain if I disagree with them on these issues, but only if they have very very strong credentials and a record of respecting others’ beliefs and practices.  Among these are the right to marry the person I choose; the right to confer with my doctor and elect those medical procedures best for me; the right to speak my mind even if that speech might offend your god; the right to be treated equally under the law; and the right to insist that your religious preference not affect mine.    In other words, believe what you want, but don’t restrict others.  After that, I assess life experiences and personal characteristics.  And I consider whether my votes can help keep the government split.  That is, all else considered, let’s assure that no one party controls the Governor’s mansion and both houses of the legislature.

It’s that latter set of criteria that many of my gun-rights acquaintances don’t understand.  I believe that in their minds, those rights are inextricably linked, and individuals can have differing opinions on each and every one of them.  It’s a matter of prioritization, and deciding which have to be met and which can be squishy.  In my mind, the gun-rights question must be met, and a combination of the others must be met.  Cuccinelli can’t meet any of them.

Both barriers are in place for LG.  That’s a shame, because the LG is an important person in Virginia, with tie-breaking authority in our evenly divided State Senate.  “None of the Above” as a write-in is the only option.  I feel this is a cop-out, but it is the only way an American has to show that no candidate is acceptable.   We are literally prevented by election law from expressing our opinions.  Even a “none of the above” is seen only in the category of “write-ins” – also-rans – unless there are enough of them the same.   If all voters would write in, maybe the message would be carried, but there are just too many who are happy to select all the people with the same letter after their names, no matter their qualifications.

I am still seeking the election that has a slate of candidates without barriers.

Advertisements

Cuccinelli the politician

The saint of the social busybodies, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, sponsored a brief in the DiGiacinto v. the Rectors and Visitors of GMU case. The wording in the brief came eerily close to a page from the Brady Bunch’s playbook.   It went so far as to assert that preschoolers would be at risk if a gun owner carried into a campus building.   This after he told the Virginia Citizens Defense League last year the case was “indefensible.”

Well, yeah, it was indefensible, thus the emotion-laden, “think of the children” far-out scenarios.  This is the page from the Bradys — if you can’t use logic, then scream with emotion, invent situations, and portray gun owners as idiots who turn from polite citizens off campus to raging lunatics the moment they step on campus.

Guess the Brady’s made a bigger campaign contribution.

There’s one good from this, albeit a small one.  Cuccinelli’s silent.  That is also unusual.

One-issue voters, and party voters

I’ve written before that I cannot in good conscience vote for an Attorney General who only wants to enforce laws he agrees with, who thinks the AG should be involved in the legislative process, and who expresses such vehemence against fellow humans who disagree with his worldview.  I was once again reminded since I’m a gun owner and advocate of 2nd Amendment rights, I must vote for Cuccinelli.  Bullshit.    Since he’s right only on guns, I cannot reward his arrogance, pigheadedness, and pandering.  The other candidate is not only wrong on guns, but has shown an amazing willingness to read laws with a preconceived notion of how he wants to interpret them.  He has been negative, and has been sponsored by single-issue organizations I’ve spent much of my adult life opposing.

Then yesterday I got a stupid robocall “press 1 for …” political survey, which asked who I was going to vote for for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, and delegate, and whether I had favorable, unfavorable, or neutral opinions of various candidates.  Finally, it asked if I would vote Democrat or Republican.   No option, on any of the questions, for “other”.  To quote one of my favorite characters — DUMBASS!  I vote issues, not candidates.

In this November election, the Republicans won’t leave me alone, and only one Democrat has contacted* me, asked my opinion on anything, or asked for a vote (I think.  I wasn’t feeling well, and asked the volunteer to call back another time; she never did).

* – disregarding the junk mail that arrives 2-3 pieces, from each candidate, per day

“None of the above” will be my write-in as my candidate of choice.

Turn the tables …

Imagine, just for a second, this quote came from US Attorney General Eric Holder, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, or Democrat Steve Shannon:  “I will not defend what I, in my judgment, deem to be an unconstitutional law.”  (K. Cuccinelli, 4/4/09) [emphasis mine]

The fearmongers would be having a heyday.  Fox News would go national (probably giving it even a more tabloid spin).  Anti-liberals would be apoplectic, sputtering all over themselves about people who would ignore duly passed laws.  They’d be arguing that it’s not the government’s role to make those determinations, but the people’s.

So I cannot in any way comprehend why these same people are endorsing that attitude for the Virginia Attorney General seat.

What are they thinking????  Don’t tell me “conservatism” (in Cuccinelli’s case, conservatism manifests itself as anti-gay, anti- non-traditional family, anti-choice, holier-than-though power plays to control what choices you make for yourself), or logic.    Call it what it is … hatred of “liberals” – another undefined term.

ALMOST Anybody BUT Cuccinelli (or: I Made a HUGE Mistake)

I’ve been mistakenly supporting Steve Shannon for Attorney General in Virginia.

All this time, I thought he had voted to override SB1035, commonly referred to as the “restaurant ban”.  Virginia has a law that says you may not carry a concealed weapon in a restaurant that serves alcohol for consumption on the premises.  Thes, it’s open carry only.

Unless you’re a Commonwealth Attorney (whether or not you have a concealed handgun permit).

Or a Deputy Commonwealth Attorney (whether or not you have a concealed handgun permit).

Or other categories of privilege.

Shannon has in the past few days proven himself to be susceptible to the Brady Bunch’s attitudes, and appears to have taken his campaign ads from their website and from Omar Samaha.  (Yes, he’s the guy who took $5000 from ABC to “prove” he could buy a gun without ID.   Got news for ya, guy.  So can any criminal on the DC streets.)

Since I cannot in good conscience support Ken Cuccinelli, I need to find an AG candidate within the next 11 days.

What are the limits of the VA Attorney General’s authority?

One more piece of crap Cuccinelli is promising to do as Attorney General.  Apparently he has been unsuccessful as a State Senator at accomplishing any of them.  Does he have any CLUE what the AG job is?

Sen. Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican from Fairfax County who’s running  
for Virginia attorney general, has championed an open state budget  
process. He says – if elected – he’ll get the state budget online in a  
way that can actually be deciphered by "the citizens of the  
Commonwealth who own this government.”  

I”m really tired of his attitude, so I don’t want to watch it, but if you do, see here.

Published in: on October 19, 2009 at 11:46 am  Leave a Comment  

His vetting process is apparently as good as Obama’s

Once again I find myself informing the Cuccinelli campaign that they have convinced me to support his opponent.

If Ken is as good a lawyer as he is in selecting campaign staff, we better hope Steve Shannon wins the election.

This is the second time I have told THE SAME WOMAN (Audrey Berkshire) I would not give in to their begging and write a letter to the editor in support of a candidate who has convinced me he’s not capable of holding ANY office.

Published in: on September 8, 2009 at 8:24 pm  Leave a Comment