I was in college the first time the late singer Rick James was hitting the charts. I won’t go into details but there was a certain amount of ribbing that went along with introducing myself at my college fraternity functions.
Hi, I’m Ric James.
Rick James? Superfreak!
That was usually followed up with a chord or two from that person’s favorite tune by Mr. James usually ending up in, for some reason, a James Brown AAOOOWWWW! Go figure.
In the years since I’ve run into a number of folks who still remember those days and will still toss the “superfreak” label at me, all in good fun. I’m used to it. I had to smile, however, this morning when I came across this post over on Instapundit that points out a candidate for Circuit Court Judge named – Christians everywhere, take note – Pilate. No, not Pontius Pilate of biblical fame. This is Patrice Pilate. Candidate. For a judge, no less.
Man, I thought I had baggage. Good luck, Ms. Pilate!
Has there been a political campaign in recent history that compares, in terms of sheer disgusting nastiness, to what’s going on here in Virginia’s senate race between George Allen and Jim Webb? Rather than hear about what they’re going to do about national security, immigrations, taxes, energy – you know, the issues that face all of us – we get to hear about accusations of the use of a particular racial epithet, allegations about old, worthless stock options, the material in fiction works, and rumors about sealed divorce records. It’s crap and it’s beneath what I’d expect out of two supposed adults vying for the position to represent me for the next 6 years in the Senate.
It’s no secret I support George Allen. I consider him to be the better candidate for the Senate and he’s the only one of the two to actually address his plans for his term, if elected. Webb’s only shot is, “I’m not a Republican and I hate Bush.” That’s not a plan. Webb’s conduct in this campaign was wholely contemptible (it remains so, by the way) and his personal attacks on Allen merely highlighted Allen’s approach of continuing to speak to the issues.
Right up unitl Allen’s latest move of pointing out Webb’s fiction writing. I’ve never read Webb’s books and the excerpts I’ve read in the last couple of days confirms my opinion that I don’t need to. I don’t care if Webb’s books only have 1 or two of these scenes in them, it’s not the kind of stuff I want to read. But calling Webb out on them looks petty and has quite clearly put the both of them in a light that makes this look less like a campaign for a Senate seat and more like the kind of childish bickering you expect from the back seat of the family car while driving somewhere it takes hours to reach. Personally, I’m ready to pull the car over and use a belt on both of them.
Message to Allen and Webb: knock it off. You’ve got over a week to let the mud drop and start talking about the issues and not each others’ skeletons in the closet, and paper-mache skeletons at that. The nation is watching and, more importantly, Virginians are watching, too. Don’t be an embarrassment.
A story in the print edition of the Loudoun Independent reminds me that there’s going to be another referendum on the ballot this year and this one’s about roads. Having become tired of waiting for Virginia’s General Assembly to get off their collective rear-ends and provide some fixes for our road and traffic situation up here, the Board of Supervisors has decided to ask the county residents if they can take out loans (in the form of issuing bonds) to start building the roads themselves. I spoke about this back in July and the latest article does us all the favor of reminding us what’s coming.
In the time since the issue first came to my attention, I’ve not heard anything else on the topic in the public debate. (Plenty on the Dulles South CPAM, but nothing on this.) While I am also tired of the General Assembly’s inability to actually get something done, my mind hasn’t changed on the issue since I wrote about it. I do not see requiring Loudoun residents to pay for roads while still paying state taxes – a portion of that for roads, I might add – as a valid approach. Now, if someone were going to tell me that my state taxes would be reduced so I didn’t have to pay into the state for roads they should be building but aren’t then that would be a different matter.
Of course, they’d also need to tell me that the referendum has something in it that would keep the funds collected from being diverted to other uses. I’ve looked at the referendums that will appear on the ballot and there’s no such language there. I’m skeptical of issues written like this.
So, unless something changes dramatically in the next 10 days, I won’t be voting in favor of either one of the road issues on the ballot. Richmond needs to spend some of that $4 billion surplus on the stuff they supposedly collected it for, not make the local residents pay for their improvements again.
While it may not be true as a rule, there’s something I want to say about me, personally, to the people who have been putting political flyers in my mailbox that don’t have any identifying information on them.
I consider these political missives to be a sign of cowardice and you’re inducing me to oppose your position.
Yesterday, I got a bright orange flyer talking about the issue that’s consuming the county-level political scene lately: the Board of Supervisors’ approval or disapproval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPAM) that will adjust the number of homes that can be built in a region of the county called “Dulles South.” The flyer is directly targeted, talking about my specific supervisor, Bruce Tulloch. It says he should either vote against the CPAM or recuse himself from the vote.
The “why” of this suggestion isn’t my point. The point is that while it’s exorting me to the action of contacting Tulloch to tell him he needs to do one of these things, it does not tell me who wrote the flyer or who’s asking me to take this step on their behalf. I have a word for that: cowardice.
It’s not the first time I’ve gotten flyers like this. I know it won’t be the last, too, but it’s an ineffective tactic so far as this voter’s concerned.