The Virginian-Pilot
©
RICHMOND
In his first public comments since a graduate thesis he wrote in 1989 made headlines over the weekend, Bob McDonnell on Monday sought to distance himself from some of the inflammatory language in the research paper as the controversy spilled into a second day.
McDonnell submitted the thesis two decades ago, at what is now Regent University in Virginia Beach, to fulfill requirements for law and master's degrees.
The Republican candidate for governor was 34 when he wrote the paper, which recommended government policies to combat the factors he viewed as harmful to American society.
Among them: feminism, working women, nontraditional families, and public school instruction "increasingly oriented to humanist values and a secular philosophy."
On Monday, McDonnell, 55, said those words were influenced by national policy debates at the time and don't reflect his current views.
In particular, he said he "absolutely and fully" repudiated "any indication that I gave in that paper that I didn't think women should work.... That is not my position. Any statements that gave that impression are absolutely wrong."
Earlier in the day, his campaign issued a statement filled with testimonials from women who support McDonnell and have worked for him.
They include Janet Polarek, whom McDonnell hired to run his 2005 campaign for attorney general as she was also raising a 2-year-old daughter. "Bob McDonnell has consistently and always gone the extra mile in every way possible to make sure I can balance work and family," she said.
Democrats continued Monday to hammer McDonnell on his words.
"The fact is for 20 years, Bob McDonnell has promoted a social agenda that is outside of the mainstream," said Mo Elleithee, senior adviser to Democrat Creigh Deeds, McDonnell's opponent. "It's what he wrote his thesis about, and it's how he's legislated. He just hoped no one would notice while he was running for governor."
During a 75-minute afternoon conference call with reporters, McDonnell said he is "disappointed, but not surprised, that my opponent wants to make this a central issue in the campaign."
He accused Deeds of going negative instead of focusing on subjects such as the economy and transportation because the Democrat trails in the polls.
The Deeds campaign has spent considerable time in recent weeks hitting McDonnell on social issues such as abortion.
And the topics covered in the thesis provided campaign officials more ammunition to contrast the moderate figure the Republican has cast himself as with the far-right conservative they believe him to be.
Democrats used McDonnell's words of disagreement with a federal court decision giving unwed couples access to contraceptives to highlight McDonnell's votes in the state legislature to restrict access to birth control.
On the subject of working women, Deeds staffers noted that McDonnell opposed a 2001 measure drawing attention to gender pay disparity.
Democrats also pointed to a passage in the thesis urging Republicans to "fight any attempts to redefine family by allowing special rights for homosexuals or single-parent unwed mothers" as evidence of social views.
McDonnell said voters should judge him on his record in public life as a state delegate representing Virginia Beach and his more recent work as attorney general.
As the state's top prosecutor, McDonnell said he hired people based on job qualifications without regard to ethnic origins, religion, sexual orientation or other personal characteristics.
While he said some of his views have changed, McDonnell said he remains strongly pro-life, supports capital punishment for the worst crimes and opposes same-sex marriage.
Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
McDonnell wants a Nanny State
I do not want any politician, especially a Governor, to decide how I should live. As long as I am not hurting anyone else, I, not the Governor or the government, am responsible for my own body and my own life.
I do not want a Nanny state.
Freedom is for everyone or it is for no one. No one has the right to decide that some people enjoy only some freedoms -- unless of course that person has committed a crime then I agree that the government has a right to restrict their freedom.
I am an adult and I can make my own decisions, choices, and in some cases mistakes.
I do not need the government or the Governor to tell me if I can or cannot use contraception. If I were a woman, I would not need the government or the Governor to decide whether I can or cannot work, whether I should or should not have children, whether I should be married, whether I can get divorced, etc.
Discriminating against others because of race, religion, national origin, disability, sex, sexual orientation would be harming others so I accept the government's right to keep people from discriminating against others just because they are different.
We do not need a tool of Pat Robertson as Governor of Virginia
Mother versus the U.S. Government
'Republican concerns for fiscal austerity are easily impaled by an an additional $1.3 billion a year in expenses. .. the leadership recognizes that existing federal child care programs already cost more than $6.9 billion in 1988.Further expenditures would be used to subsidize a dynamic new trend of working women and feminists that is ultimately detrimental to the family by entrenching a status-quo of non-parental primary nurture of children.'
A simple, yet complex statement that is very true. McDonnell argues in his thesis that the woman is the matriarch of the family. The latter half of his thesis, in essence, places the mother on a pedestal. He argues that after increasing federal spending in government day care centers, the mother and father lose familial and moral authority by placing their children in Govt. day care centers. When the matriarch of the family enters the workforce, government influence is increased in the child's life and the Family role is decreased. When and if the mother's primary nurture child caring role is diminished (in this example by placing the child in govt. day care and entering the workplace) the child may suffer in ethical and moral instruction.
What is your point?
Who said that only men can work? I know functional families in which the woman works and the man takes care of the children.
Who said that only the mother is the primary caregiver?
Who said that when both parents work that the Federal Government pays for child care? I think child care is subsidized by the Federal Government in terms of tax credit.
I do not know of any child care facility that is run by the government except those provided/hosted by government agencies for its employees such as the U.S. military. In those cases, the government as the employer is providing a facility and service for its employees. Is that wrong?
Are you saying that you are opposed to anyone but a father or mother caring for his or her own children? So grandma or grandpa or an aunt or an uncle cannot look after his/her grandchild or niece/nephew?
Some women work because of the necessity of earning an income -- I hope you agree that is better than if they did not work and relied on hand outs.
Some women work just because they want to. That is their decision.
According to McDonnell's logic no parent should allow his/her child to go to public school because that is a government institutio
loulouthia
I agree w the poster below plus...........
what evidence do we have that the 34 yo does not still share opinions w the current McDonnell?
Naturally, his word is so flexible that we need to look at his record--enough said, ladies? Is Bob the man you want deciding for you or your daughters?
Submitted by boblakeman on Tue, 09/01/2009 at 11:40 am.
Here you have a candidate that harkens back to the times of plantations, a white good ol' boy, with his rifle rack and pick up truck and a perfect record of endorsement by the NRA; and that is the Democratic candidate! On the Republican side, you have Old McDonnell who fights for equal rights for wealthy white men. Bob uses women as window dressing and believes women should be seen but not heard. Bob believes racism doesn't exist because all his supporters and friends are white. Bob will decide what a woman can do if she is the victim of rape or incest. Bob will even follow the Pope's teachings in denying a woman the use of contraceptives. A woman's place in the world of Regent and Bob McDonnell is barefoot and pregnant no matter what he may say today.
You have got my vote Bob. I
You have got my vote Bob. I am sick of these hypocritical socialist democrats ruining our economy, weakening our military, destroying our intelligence community, and taking away our freedoms. Every person that I have talked to that voted democrat in the election last year has changed their mind after seeing what the democraps are now doing. Should be a landslide for McDonnell.
Not True
I do not know of anyone who voted for Obama or Warner or Nye who now regrets his or her vote.
The Democrats are trying to fix the economy that was ruined by the Republicans, specifically by Bush, Greenspan, Chris Cox (then supposed head of the SEC), and Paulson. I do not like TARP or bailouts for banks, non-banks, and GM and Chrysler, but those were all Republican ideas which unfortunately the Democrats have allowed to continue.
The intelligence community was destroyed by Bush and Cheney when they told the IC to break the law. Investigating what was done should not "destroy" the IC. Holding people accountable is an American value.
As to anyone taking away American freedoms -- look first at what was done by Bush and Cheney.
McDonnell proposed taking away American freedoms.
I do not want any politician, especially a Governor, to decide how I should live. As long as I am not hurting anyone else, I, not the Governor or the government, am responsible for my own body and my own life.
I do not want a Nanny state.
Freedom is for everyone or it is for no one. No one has the right to decide that some people enjoy only some freedoms -- unless of course that person has committed a
STINGING INDICTMENT OF LBJ'S GREAT SOCIETY
I have read the 93 page thesis in its entirety.
'Every level of government should statutorily and procedurally prefer married couples over cohabitators, homosexuals, or fornicators," McDonnell wrote in one passage. Nothing new here. The government has preferred this policy for several decades. When you fill out your 1040 tax form do you file single or married? Filing married get's more of a simple tax deduction. Also, with regards to homosexual marriage and its threat to traditional marriage, 30 states have voted and passed constitutional amendments that define marriage as between a man and woman. Five states have passed amendments declaring homosexual marriage to be valid. Gay marriage proponents, you lost that battle, big time. So, in effect, the majority of the country has validated and approved of this specific McDonnell social/political stance with regards to married couples and homosexuals, Virginia included.
Cohabitators and fornicators? Whatever, the majority of us have lived as cohabitators and fornicators.
You should be commended for
You should be commended for having read every single page that McDonnell wrote.
So if a majority has done something, then that act is right? Then that majority should not be discriminated against? It is only when a minority has done something that it should be discriminated against? It is right to deny constitutional rights to a minority but not to a majority?
Yes the government discriminates in favor of married people as opposed to singles. However, some people claim that the tax code is more generous to singles than to married couples.
The government also discriminates in favor of people with children whether they are married or not.
Same sex marriage is not a threat to opposite sex marriage. How can it be?
I will accept your claim that 30 states discriminate against gays and same sex marriage. So far that is usually a decision made by politicians though in some cases there have been votes.
There has not been a national referendum regarding same sex marriage so there is no proof that a majority oppose same sex marriage. On the contrary, reputable polls show that a majority support same sex marriage.
At one time a majority of states support slavery. At
REPLY
Thanks for the reply. Marriage is not a constitutional right; it's not even referred to in the Constitution. Biologically, economically, and socially gay marriage is a threat to traditional marriage and greater society as whole. Gay partners cannot procreate and pass on their traits and adaptations to their lineage. It is impossible for gay partners to further mankind's evolution of the species. If and when they artificially procreate (adoption or sperm donor) only 50% of the inherent DNA can be passed down. The Y chromosome (male deposit) and mitochondria (female deposit) cannot be transferred by both gay partners. Also, humans as a whole adapt over many years.(thousands and thousands)They acquire certain traits, behaviors, and adaptive mutations that allow humans to live healthier and longer lives. Gay relation is not a positive acquired behavior or mutation. It does not increase the number of years lived among the human, it decreases the number of years lived, if the said human engages in that behavior.(HIV/AIDS)Your polls are clearly incorrect as the referendums throughout the country have indicated.
Future Taliban Governor
I'm voting for him. Women shouldn't be working outside the home, taking birth control or wearing revealing clothing. The Bible says they should be veiled in public. Let's live according to the Bible.