According to the Inside Nova, Rep. Thomas M. Davis III, R-11th, who once hoped to be the Republican nominee for Senate, will not attend this weekends nominating convention in Richmond. From the chatter on the local conservative blogs it appears that Marshall has a lock on the nomination. Apparently, Gilmore’s more centrist stance which would actually help win him the election has been shunned. Of course, this approach will backfire in November and Mark Warner will win the Senate seat but the Republican Party will maintain their ‘principles.’

So anyways, it will be interesting to see what transpires today at the Convention.

37 thoughts on “Nation Steps Left, Virginia Goes Far Right

  1. junkyard dog

    I know who Mark Warner wants to win the Republican nomination. Then he can mop the floor with extremist Bob Marshall. All one has to do is view the yourtube video where Marshall discusses the frat boys and the love canal in his diatribe against the morning after pill to see what he is all about. Disgusting. Mainstream Virginia will not support him.

  2. FYI, Bob Marshall is actually supported by League of Conservation Voters and Sierra Club.
    And also, Like most Hispanics, He is radically pro-life.
    You hate Immigrant’s Culture and Beliefs, What a Sham.

  3. Censored bybvbl

    Wow, PWConservative, what stunning leaps of logic! And a big paint roller to boot. Should I say that Bob Marshall hates women – half of Virginia’s population?

    I think Warner will have no trouble winning. Afterall, voting Virginians will be making the choice in November and not the far right wing of the Republican Party. Tom Davis may have stood a chance at becoming our Senator but, no, the extremists had to guarantee that he wouldn’t be their representative. If they (wingnuts) are afraid of what a moderate in their own party can do, they should be afraid of what the voters of Virginia can do as well in November. They seem to be unable or unwilling to analyze the political movement in the country. Afterall, Virginia is not Mississippi.

  4. Ruby

    Here you go “chemical love canals for these frat house playboys in Virginia”

  5. The irony of reproductive extremism goes both ways. You have Obama who voted to allow partial birth abortions. Then you have Marshall who voted against the day after pill. Look, if we don’t come to some middle ground here, more and more women and babies will die one way or the other. Prevention and education are the way to go. And let’s fix that adoption system, shall we?

    As far as people sleeping around, well, that’s their prerogative, but I wouldn’t endorse it. That’s part of education. I’m certainly not an abstinence-only person, but I’m not in favor of using abortion as birth control or encouraging anyone to sleep around, either.

    It’s no wonder our young people (and older people, too) are so damn confused. Talk about extreme mixed messages!

  6. “frat house playboys in Virginia”

    How bout those Capital Hill Playboys?

  7. Ruby

    k-
    Capital Hill Playboys. Very funny. I hope BM never sees the likes of Capital Hill as a Senator for Virginia.

    Prevention and education are the way to go. Unfortunately enough don’t practice proper birth control. I still think more men could their stuff snipped. The bottom line is people will have sex one way or the other. There are many out there ready and willing to bring a child into their loving home. I have several adopted friends. I would’ve never known any of them were adopted, had they not told me.

    The thing is k, only the extremist seem to voice there opinion. Meanwhile, those of in the middle voices get lost. The truth of the matter is I believe the vast majority are in the middle of most topics.

  8. Yes, snipping is good! Men should take the plunge, and women shouldn’t have so much badgering to do so if they want to. I know in many cases, women aren’t allowed to get tubals until they reach a certain age or have a number of children first. Then they have to get their husband’s signature to get it done! Come on. If we really want prevention, then let’s support it.

    Of course people have sex. Bob Marshall did several times, obvioulsy. He’s a smart and interesting guy, but I don’t think his stance on this is very smart.

    I agree most people are in the middle. Unfortunately, this tends to be an apathetic group. We need to get more “middle” people motivated!

  9. Emma

    For every loudmouth conservative like Marshall who rails against “frat boys” and “love canals,” there is an Eliot Spitzer lurking somewhere in the shadows. Those who seem to cast the most stones about other people’s “sins” seem to have the most sin in their own backyards.

    I agree with kgotthardt that there has to be some middle ground here. I detest the idea of partial-birth abortion, but I would never want to deny a rape victim a means of preventing the pregnancy in the first place with the morning-after pill. That’s just insane.

  10. Ruby

    I want the woman’s health and life to considered, not just the unborn child. One really doesn’t know what they might do if they were faced with some horrible tradgedy such as rape or even worse incest.
    Middle ground is the voice of reason usually, and that just gets lost with extremists on both sides being so vocal.

  11. To try to get this comment thread back on topic–I think Gilmore would also have been a disaster for the Republicans–remember, he was governor when Virginia was in a boom, and let the state nearly bankrupt with this tax-cut policies. AND, he had to step down from the RNC because President Bush thought he should “spend more time with his family.”

    The bottom line here is that Virginia’s Republican leaders, like most of the rest of the Republican Party, is self destructing right now. Mark Warner, who has a stellar reputation on leadership, should have a clear field in November.

  12. Censored bybvbl

    Some other NoVa political blogs are calling it a squeaker of a win for Gilmore.

  13. Poor Richard

    Gilmore apparently won the GOP nod by less than 1% of the votes cast.
    So, the decision will be to vote for a man (Gilmore) who left a fiscal mess
    when he left office or the Gov. who cleaned it up – Mark Warner.
    Let me think — hummm.

  14. Dolph

    I would never deny a woman having an abortion if their life were at risk or in the case of severe fetal anomoly. Partial birth abortion is a political term used to capture emotions. Late term abortion is nasty but sometimes horribly and sadly necessary. Does it matter what method is used if it is unavoidable?

  15. Juturna

    I see where Gilmore has taken the nomination for the Republicans. Honestly folks, I think this is the beginning of the end of the moral zealots control of the Republican Party at state and federal levels. Thank goodness.

    Not that I am a Gilmore fan and will most certainly vote for Mark Warner, however, this is great news on that particular issue that, in my opinion, is dragging this country down.

  16. Poor Richard

    From the early edition of tomorrow’s WaPo – metro section.
    Off topic, but, perhaps of interest.

    Speaking about a proposed ban on parking on front lawns in
    Loudoun County, Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio (R-Sterling)
    said ” A better solution would be to drive out the illegal
    immigrants, whose disregard for the community manifest
    itself in unkempt yards, crowding and cars parked willy-nilly
    in yards and on sidewalks. This is one way to preserve the
    pro-family, residential, single-family-home nature of
    Sterling Park.”

    “Willy-nilly” en Espanol? Que?

  17. I’m not one to want to overturn Roe. I tend to think abortion is a symptom of a larger social disease like poverty, violence, sometimes irresponsibility, desperation etc. I wouldn’t judge a woman who needed an abortion but if I could, I would try to give her options and like I said before, prevention is even more key. In the end, abortion is a horrible medical decision to have to make and not one I would wish on anyone. It’s a lose-lose situation unless it can be prevented.

    Dolph, with my pregnancies, I didn’t opt to do much testing because no matter what, I would have had my babies even if they had disabilities. I figured if God (or whatever power you believe in) didn’t want me to have my babies, I would miscarry, which I did not. I was meant to have my girls.

    That said, since there were some minor complications, I’m “all set with having kids” if you know what I mean. Two with some specific needs are plenty! : )

  18. Pat.Herve

    They throw the abortion issue around just to get people’s emotions running, and get them riled up to vote.

    Are you against abortion – then do not participate in one. Do not get one, do not cause one.

    For me, abortion is not an option – but if a pregnancy was due to rape – well then, maybe I would feel a little differently about it. Until I am in those shoes, for me, abortion is not an option. As far as the partial birth abortion, it is used in very rare and extreme circumstances – not as a regular abortion -usually when the womans life is at stake.

  19. Bring it On

    Well, the Team America PAC endorsement of Tancredo/Buchannen appears to be the kiss of death.

  20. Elena

    http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1413116

    Gilmore wins by less than 1%, very slim victory.

  21. Kenneth Reynolds

    Virginia Republicans really screwed themselves this time………lots of House Republicans want to change the party…and Davis is right there to step into a House Leadership position…..now, he’s gone, Hager’s gone, and they lose another U.S. Senate seat………We need to not take anthing for granted….but …..they are finally getting what they deserve for all the lies and innuendos!!!!

  22. Kenneth Reynolds

    You are so right about abortion Pat Herve….of course most of us…..maybe all…are ‘against’ abortion…..AND we are also against some idiot in Washington deciding when life will start and under what circumstances…1 mont…2 months…whatever….and if raped ok….but done by your dad, well no….that’s murder!! The whgole thing is ridiculous…….and at the end of the day…it IS and always should be a woman’s choice……period!!!

  23. Kenneth Reynolds

    And God Bless you K……i am right on board with you…we had 6 and 2 died and abortion was never on the table for US……and i wish not for anyone……but it isnt my call…..and it sure isnt Dick Cheney’s….hes Pres of the Senate….maybe he should decide when life begins!!!! and to think the bastards use this to get elected…….i believe they are using the immigration issue in the same way…….yo…lets deport 11 million people…yeah right!!!

  24. Kenneth Reynolds

    Good point Poor Richard…….we had parking on the lawns in Dale City long before any Latinos got here…..now the same damn rednecks who used to and or still do are bitching about the Latinos…….ALL of them are illegal you know!!!!

  25. Moon-howler

    Kenneth, Thanks for mentioning all the other ethnicities who aren’t good neighbors. Somehow they are escaping having to be accountable for their behavior during all this immigrant fray.

  26. “Poor Richard,” there’s a typo in your post. Warner didn’t “clean it [a fiscal crisis] up”; he “dreamed it up” to justify his own tax and spending increases.

  27. Not Me, Bubba

    :>) Let them all (The Republicans) march off a cliff in their principaled, Moralist stance. (Lack of) Values voters – keep on keeping on! Yee ha!

    Best news I’ve read in a long while. :>)

    And for KG – Obama voted against the “PBA” ban because it endangers the lives of women. But since the party of “life” and their so-called moral proponents would prefer late-term, dead or severely deformed fetuses to be surgically dismantled in utero (thereby endangering the health and future fertility of the woman) and then extracted, I guess the party of “life” won out; all lives of women in extreme circumstances be damned.

    Lastly, there are physicians who will do a tubal on a woman if she asks. The days of a husband’s permission are OVER. I should know. I’ll be getting one in a week and a half, and I didn’t need his consent at all.

  28. “The days of a husband’s permission are OVER. I should know.” Well that’s good! I had mine in 1999 and it wasn’t like that.

    Why would removal of a dead fetus even be CONSIDERED an abortion? I’ve heard sad stories that some women are induced when this happens.

  29. Not Me, Bubba

    “Why would removal of a dead fetus even be CONSIDERED an abortion? I’ve heard sad stories that some women are induced when this happens.”

    It isn’t – but to the anti-choice crowd any termination of pregnancy – be it necrotic tissue or a severly deformed fetus is an abortion and must be prohibited at all costs.

    I’ve been active in the reproductive rights movement for years. Those who call themselves “pro-life” are anything but, and I’m not just talking about their assasination of physicains and assaults on clinics.

    I have read stories whereby pregnant women have found out the fetus they carry is dead and their physican as well as local hospitals refused to do a D&X because of their “pro-life” beliefs ~OR~ because of fear of retribution from the so-called local “pro-life” community. These women lost far more than their pregnancy. Some had to have hysterectomies because of what the necrotic tissue did to them. The idea a woman barges into a clinic or her doctor’s office in her 7-9th month wanting an abortion for a reason that is anything OTHER than to save her life or end a doomed pregnancy (severly deformed fetus – anencephaly comes to mind) is a LIE put out by the forces who would be more than happy for women to return to the back alleys and/or unwed mother homes.

    But this is another topic entirely. I woudl be more than happy to discuss reproductive issues with you on another site, whereby that is the main focus. But what Dolph said is 100% true. PBA is an emotional and political term to whip people up in an election.

  30. Yeah, I could talk about this longer, too. There’s too much spin all around when it comes to this, and the cases you cite are medically driven, not a means to be rid of an “unwanted” pregnancy. There’s a big difference in my mind, and when it is medical, government doesn’t belong in the conversation.

    Even many Catholics will tell you that if it’s a choice between the mother losing her life and the baby, you would morally probably have to choose the mother, especially if she has other children. So that kind of extremist spin doesn’t make much sense to me. My goodness, this country lacks some serious balance!

    Admin, can you start a thread on this topic?

  31. You Wish

    “The days of a husband’s permission are OVER. I should know.” Well that’s good! I had mine in 1999 and it wasn’t like that.

    Where did you get yours done? I doubt that’s the truth. Can you show that you had to get a husband’s signature? Unless you weren’t of legal age at the time of getting the surgery, you wouldn’t need a husband’s signature.

    And as for your comments about “many Catholics will tell you that if it’s a choice between the mother losing her life and the baby, you would morally probably have to choose the mother, especially if she has other children.” Which Catholics are you talking to? The Catholic religion teaches that abortion is murder and birth control is a sin – get your facts straight.

  32. Aside from the fact that this thread has gotten entirely off track, it’s really entertaining to read some of this stuff. You guys really believe your caricatures, don’t you?

    I was particularly impressed by the excuse for “moderate” Obama’s vote against banning the ghastly procedure of partial-birth abortion: “Obama voted against the ‘PBA’ ban because it endangers the lives of women.” Since the premise is false (the PBA ban “endangers the lives of women” only to the extent that one considers the burden of raising a child to be “endanger[ing] the lives of women,” and mere convenience should not be enough to justify killing another human being), my guess is more like “Obama voted against the ‘PBA’ ban because” he heard his mistress’ voice from the radical pro-abortion movement.

    Similarly, kgotthardt, if you think a D&C for a miscarried child is “abortion,” then you’re either not sufficiently informed on the issue, or you’re intentionally attempting to confuse the issue.

    But thank you, “Not Me, Bubba” for your anecdotes. When Ronald Reagan did it, it was rejected as such. When pro-abortionists do it, it’s supposed to be the basis for re-writing the Constitution.

  33. Not Me, Bubba

    Ah, a fine voice of anti-woman babble from the anti-choice crowd.

    “Since the premise is false (the PBA ban “endangers the lives of women” only to the extent that one considers the burden of raising a child to be “endanger[ing] the lives of women,”

    Yes, because so many women run screaming into a clinic in labor screaming “kill it! kill it”…so many women forget to have that abortion early on they need to hurry up and do it in their 7th-9th months…

    Your low opinion of women has been dually noted. Perhaps you know of women who would resort to actions like that above. But I am sure it comforts you and your ilk more knowing a LTA is now only able to be performed whereby the fetus is dissected in utero and may cause permanent infertility in the woman due to destruction of her cervix.

    But do continue to show everyone your “pro-life” colors…apparantly women don’t count in your definition of “life”

    Tsk, tsk…

  34. –Similarly, kgotthardt, if you think a D&C for a miscarried child is “abortion,” then you’re either not sufficiently informed on the issue, or you’re intentionally attempting to confuse the issue.–

    HUH? Who said I thought that? You must be confusing me with someone else. D&C and abortion…not the same thing.

    You Wish 3, I grew up Catholic and attended Catholic school. These folks aren’t endorsing abortion. They were discussing what happens in childbirth when either mother or baby would die.

  35. you wish

    “I grew up Catholic and attended Catholic school. These folks aren’t endorsing abortion. They were discussing what happens in childbirth when either mother or baby would die.”

    Then you need to clarify – in your post, you start by talking about getting rid of “unwanted pregnancies”, which would lead most to believe that you are talking about abortion. Then you say that “many Catholics” would chose the life of the mother over the life of the child.

    Read what Pope John Paul II stated about Catholics and abortion –

    Please get your facts straight when posting like this.

  36. you wish

    “I know in many cases, women aren’t allowed to get tubals until they reach a certain age or have a number of children first. Then they have to get their husband’s signature to get it done!”

    Can you show me the Virginia law that states this? I have searched the Code of Virginia and haven’t found anything –

  37. My “low opinion of women,” “Not Me, Bubba”? Oh, foresooth. I guess that, rather than addressing the point, you decide to cast aspersions, and contrived ones, at that.

    To be sure, I have a “low opinion of [some] women,” but then again, I have a low opinion of some men, probably in equal proportions to the population as a whole. Rest assured that my “low opinion” of both cohorts has nothing to do with their sex.

    Were it that your contrivances ended there, but they don’t, of course. You even manage to caricature those (“many women run screaming into a clinic in labor screaming ‘kill it! kill it’…so many women forget to have that abortion early on they need to hurry up and do it in their 7th-9th months…”) whom you make pretense to “protecting.”

    And women do count in my definition of “life”: particularly the tens of millions of women murdered by abortionists since 1973. Make all of the pretense that you want — it seems to be what you and the entire pro-murder crowd are best at, other than terrifying politicians — but your defense of partial-birth abortions demonstrates better than anything else just how radical and intellectually dishonest the pro-abortionists are.

    Aside from that fact, my main concern about the whole issue isn’t even whether allowing abortion is a good idea. That’s a fairly debatable point. I have my position, and you clearly have yours, and I don’t expect either one of us to persuade the other.

    My contempt for and low opinion of the pro-abortion crowd has less to do with their advocacy of what I view to be an evil public policy, but for the violence that they have done to the Constitution to achieve their goals. I am happy to align myself with the late John Hart Ely who, while he shares the views of NARAL on the utility of abortion, despised Roe v. Wade for the unconstitutional monstrosity that it is. I wonder whether he had come to terms with the implications of that level of intellectual dishonesty to the question as a matter of public policy before he died?

    kgotthardt, my apologies. I was confusing you with “Not me, bubba.” It was he/she who was attempting to confuse the issue, not you, and I suppose that I confused the two of you as I was bouncing back and forth as I wrote my post. But then, that is apparent in every one of his/her posts.

Comments are closed.