When Terry McAuliffe speaks, facts might take a seat


It's a standard nugget in Terry McAuliffe's stump speech, a tale of government procurement gone so bad that $800 taxpayer-funded chairs blocked the careers of 100 would-be nursing students.

Very little of it is true.

Here's how the Democratic candidate for governor has been telling it:

McAuliffe met a college president who grumbled about having to buy campus furnishings from the state. Assembled by prisoners under a training program, the furniture is overpriced, with some chairs costing $800. If the school, Piedmont Virginia Community College, could buy from private stores instead, it could use the savings to enroll the 100 qualified nursing students it turns away each year.

Here are the facts:

Piedmont hasn't turned away anything close to 100 applicants for nursing school. Even if it had, the college could not possibly squeeze the $400,000-a-year cost of instructing them out of its prison furniture purchases, which were below $100,000 last year. Piedmont is not even required to buy furniture from the state, although it must get a waiver to shop elsewhere.

As for the "$800 chairs," McAuliffe's campaign tried to back up that claim by providing information about a single $600 chair.

Whether McAuliffe or the college president, Frank Friedman, got the details wrong is unclear - and neither will say. Friedman declined through a spokeswoman to be interviewed. McAuliffe spokesman Josh Schwerin said only that the candidate never meant to suggest that furniture savings alone would solve the instructor shortage at public colleges across Virginia.

But the story fits a pattern of exaggerations and embellishments that have peppered McAuliffe's public pronouncements over the years.

In his failed bid for his party's gubernatorial nod four years ago, McAuliffe or his staff had to walk back comments about how many houses he had built and how many toilets he had personally inspected in a housing complex he owned. He claimed to have started five businesses in Northern Virginia; all turned out to be investment partnerships with no employees, registered to his McLean home.

And when he launched an electric car company in 2009, McAuliffe said it would create 900 jobs by the end of 2012 and 10,000 cars in 2013. Today, fewer than 100 workers produce about one car every two or three days, workers told The Washington Post.

Exaggerations are standard in politics. Fact-checkers have bestowed numerous "Pinocchio" and "pants on fire" ratings on both McAuliffe and his Republican opponent, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.

McAuliffe's story about community colleges is rooted in two real issues - state procurement rules and a shortage of nursing-school slots - that McAuliffe heard about on a tour of Piedmont.

"Terry has visited all 23 community colleges, and a consistent theme that he's heard from administrators is that there are inefficiencies like furniture purchasing mandates that are keeping much needed resources from being used to hire more teachers," Schwerin, the McAuliffe spokesman, said in an email. "No one's saying a governor pushing furniture procurement reform will by itself solve the instructor shortage and get more nurses certified - but in a budget where every dollar matters - it's certainly one part of the solution."

But in prepared speeches and in off-the-cuff remarks, McAuliffe has made it sound like furniture alone is the fix.

"Frank Friedman at Piedmont Virginia Community College said that he has to turn away qualified nursing students every year, but that if we gave him some flexibility to buy furniture from local suppliers, he could hire a new professor and expand nursing slots," he said in a September speech in Richmond.

Sometimes, as in that speech, McAuliffe adds this: "I've heard about $800 chairs and desks that are 20 percent more expensive than the market rate."

Jeffrey Kraus, spokesman for the Virginia Community College System, agreed with the concept that colleges could buy cheaper furniture and use the savings for instruction.

"In narrative form, this idea holds," he said.

It's in the details where the story breaks down.

First, colleges do not have to buy furniture from the state, although they must prove they can get the same item for less and get two state officials to sign off - a process Kraus called "a challenge."

Second, Piedmont is not turning away 100 qualified nursing students a year. The most any Virginia community college turned away this year was about 40.

And finally, savings on furniture could not pay for 100 nursing slots. The faculty cost alone would be at least $400,000 a year, since nursing accreditation standards require one instructor - minimum salary $40,061 - for every 10 students. Piedmont spent $99,802 on prison furniture last year.

Posted to: Governor Race News Politics Virginia

How to be civil in comments:

 No name-calling, personal insults or threats. No attacks based on race, gender, ethnicity, etc. No writing with your Caps Lock on – it's screaming. Keep on topic and under 1500 characters. No profanity or vulgarity. Stay G- or PG-rated. Read the full rules here.

is there anything we don't know about Cuccinnelli?

I guess even the Washington Post (who decides what northern Virginia thinks) figured out they and us voting public no little about McAuliffe.

Anyone want to wager that this days old story from the Washington Post has been sitting on a desk (figuratively) for sometime. How else to keep motivation and readership up if the polls are wide but to tear down the front runner.

This election is not going to be won by the base but by those voters throughout the state who are motivated to vote.

About cuccinnelli

Its quite troublesome that Virginia's Attorney General would personally and publicly accuse a citizen of quid pro quo for his own political gain. Surely the charge of QPQ implies illegal activity on the part of the accused. And here we have our state AG throwing those charges around. Its pretty amazing. Someone with a track record of QPQ no less. But to accuse a citizen of that sans legal action on the part of the AGs office is unsavory at a minimum, if not slanderous at the worst.

Could someone truthfully

Could someone truthfully tell me one good thing that Terry has done that would make him the best choice for governor without using a negative against his opponent. Just one thing. Has he ever been elected to any position?
Vote for Sarvis, get rid of these establishment party people.

sarvis wants to play in the big leagues

but he's not ready.

Maybe but

even Starvus would be better than Cuccinelli.

Neither is McAuliffe, that leaves one that is ready

Crooked Terry threatened to shut down the state government if the General Assembly didn't pass Obamacare's medicaid expansion 100%. Terry has no experience in political office, his administration would be a gridlock nightmare for Virginia.

I for one want a functional state government for all people, not just for political allies, and a Governor that is willing to negotiate with all sides. Therefore I will be voting for Ken Cuccinelli.


Cucc is ready to take more money fraudulently collected in the name of veterans.

one good thing that Terry has done

He's not Cuccinelli?

Point made

Now that you have admitted that Terry brings nothing to the table, it is time for you to do your own research into Cuccinelli and not blindly believe the Democrat party machine's lies.

A vote for Cuccinelli

is a vote for the the oppression of women. Like most Republicans, he want to do away with not only abortion but birth control and equal pay. I remember how he threatened members of the State Board of Health saying that they would be denied state legal counsel and have to pay for their own defense if they attempted to relax his draconian abortion clinic rules by daring to grandfather in existing clinics. No woman in her right mind could vote for him or his ilk. A vote for the Cucc is also a vote for climate denial, harassment of scientists and for more coal. The GOP ticket this time around is as bad as it could possibly be. If Bolling had been nominated, he might be the better candidate but we do not need misogynist, racist fundamentalism.

Terry is the real sexist

"..Terry said, about his wife, "She’s got a great life. Listen, her credit cards are paid and all that. She knows I do very well. But she has no idea. Myself and my accountants are the only people who know.’”

He views women through the lens of a sexist who thinks it's still 1920 and treats his wife like a child, giving her an allowance. Disgusting.

"treats his wife like a child"

Would that be like Cucc and Bob McD blaming their families for their own lack of integrity?

Not at all

The way he treats Women in his family explains how Terry McAuliffe views Women in general. In my house my wife and I are equal partners, we work together to solve problems she is my sounding board and I'm hers. If we initially disagree we talk it through, then talk it through some more. Sometimes we can't agree, when that happens we compromise, each giving up a little, and getting a little.

He gives his wife a credit card and says "have fun shopping honey and have a fun play date with your girlfriends!"

It is disgusting and sexist, but because he is an abortionist in the eyes of the partisans he is automatically pro Woman and the pro lifer is automatically sexist. Bizzaro world.

"The way he treats Women in his family"

Like Cucc and Bob McD blaming their families for their own lack of integrity.

ohhh lol

You just copied your same post over again. I'm getting a picture of you as the ugly American in an American flag wind breaker touring the Louvre, wait not the Louvre you wouldn't go to Museum, the Eiffel tower repeating yourself again louder and louder when a French shop vendor doesn't understand your English thinking he just can't hear you.

He pointed out the sexism that McAuliffe demonstrates through his actions in his personal life. Reply to that, or you can just repeat again louder, try using all CAPS!!!!

I'm getting a picture of you

complaining about the frequency of the comment but not disputing the truth of the comment.

Before you listen to the

Before you listen to the millions of dollars of smear ads done by planned parenthood maybe you should check your facts, contrary to popular belief every commercial you see is not true. TM is nothing but a sleazebag that wants to boost his ego by obtaining a governorship, plain and simple. Oh and if you dont think our esteemed mayor endorsed him over light rail your incredibly naive.

You Are Wasting Your Time

Try to have an educated exchange with the lowest common denominator only brings you down. The same masses also believe the economy is getting better.

The economy is getting better

for the 1%.

Indeed — Obama and

Indeed — Obama and Bernanke are working their "magic" to the tune of $85 billion/mo.

Wall Street

Keep voting Democrat and they will keep printing money, which makes the rich richer, and makes the working class poorer.

She is right

I haven't seen any of the commercials as I don't watch much TV but I have paid attention over many years. Cuccinelli's strong-arm ideologically focused record speaks for itself. A woman voting for Cuccinelle is like a Black voting for Lester Maddox.

A woman voting for

A woman voting for Cuccinelle is like a Black voting for Lester Maddox.

...and a man voting for a Democrat is like a Jew voting for Yasser Arafat.

And fish riding bicyles

are like "John Locke" and rational discussion . . .

A Democrat

You do realize that Lester Maddox was a Democrat, right?

a southern democrat

Thank God you republicans won that war back in the 1860s.

Yes, a Dixiecrat

Today's Republicans are yesterday's Dixiecrats.

Liberal Myth

Only 10% of Dixiecrats switched to the Republican party.

Dixiecrat - Senators that stayed Democrat
VA Harry Byrd, VA Willis Robertson, WV Robert Byrd, MS John C. Stennis, MS James O. Eastland, LA Allen J. Ellender, LA Russell B. Long, NC Sam Ervin, NC Everett Jordan,OK Thomas Pryor Gore, AL J. Lister Hill, AL John J. Sparkman, FL Spessard Holland, FL George Smathers, SC Olin D. Johnston, SC AR John McClellan, GA Richard B. Russell, Jr., GA Herman E. Talmadge, TN Herbert S. Walters

Switched to Republican
NC Jesse Helms, SC Strom Thurmond

Oh those pesky historical facts, they just don't line up to the propaganda.

It was the ideals that were

It was the ideals that were changed. Republicans at one time were actually compassionate towards people who needed help and were for peoples rights, when the Republican party started to change some of them didn't like it and defected to the other side.

The Republicans still are the party of the peoples rights

2nd Amendment Freedoms: Republicans for, Democrats against
After any tragedy they try to take advantage of peoples emotions in order to disarm the populace

4th Amendment Freedoms: Republicans for, Democrats against
The NSA, AP phone tapping, etc

Fair and free elections: Republicans for, Democrats against
The Democrat party opposes any policy that ensures one citizen one vote

Personal property rights: Republicans for, Democrats against
Democrats are in favor of seizing private property to develop for private gain, see the stories on Norfolk Radio.

Equal education for all: Republicans for, Democrats against
Democrats oppose any type of legislation allowing for school choice
etc char lmt

Have you ever considered you might not have all the facts?

You think it is shocking that a woman would vote Republican, they are all obviously mysoginst woman hatters.

You think it is shocking that a minority voter would vote Republican, they are all obviously racist.

You think it is shocking that an elderly voter would vote Republican, they are obviously willing to push granny over a cliff.

You think it is shocking that anyone who enjoys the Earth would vote Republican, they want to pollute the rivers and oceans and make more global warming to make $.

You think it is shocking that the very poor or unemployed would vote Republican, they want poor people to starve.

Yet the Republican party is made up of Women, minorities, the old and young, rich and poor. Perhaps you have been lied to.


So there are no more pressing issues in this state than your birth control? It's really that bad here? If so, why hasn't it been mentioned as much as this election cycle.

You know it must really be bad. I hear all women complaining all day long they can't have sex, can't have abortions, can't get birth control. In fact, it's so bad I see women laying in ditches from illegal abortions.

With what we have in the White House I'm not surprised that a con-man and snake oil salesman will have a chance to be our governor.

There are better Democrats out there than this liar.


Cuccinelli is ready - but he spent too much time thumping abortion and gays and has driven people like me from the GOP

Sarvis has never served office - but gets my vote

McAuliffe is a train wreck - but will get elected because once again the GOP allowed the thumpers to elect our slate at a convention.

Bolling - wish there had been a primary or that you'd run as an independent.

Here lies the silly and very dead canard......

..."librul meedeeuh". Please frothers, let this be the end of that silliness.

the media

The truth has a liberal bias.


I guess Obama isn't a liberal than.


He's a corporate centrist. His prosecution and suppression of whistleblowers and journalists is hardly "liberal" nor is his foreign policy which is a continuation of previous administrations. That he is less racist and homophobic on domestic issues than the GOP may make hi look "liberal" to some but that's more a matter of perspective. In Europe, he would be classified as "center right."

Old left vs right

You are looking at left verses right in some odd philosophical way. What policies of his are conservative?

BTW The definition of conservative isn't "anything you disagree with."

-Tapping the phones of the Associated Press isn't conservative, it's criminal.
-Giving military grade weapons to Al Qaeda in Syria isn't conservative, it's criminal.
-Using the power of the IRS to intermediate and impede political opponents isn't conservative, its criminal.
-Giving ACA waivers to big business donors but not to the American people isn't conservative, it's criminal.
etc etc

He isn't a leftist ideologue, because while he is without a doubt a liberal progressive he doesn't put those policies first, he puts political power first.

Left vs Rightis most accurately seen

as public interest vs corporate. Obama continued the corporate bailouts started by his predecessor sans re-regulation of finance. His recovery has been a success for the top percentile but nothing has "trickled down" to the rest of us where jobs remain scarce. Obama managed to pass a republican version of insurance reform after taking single payer off the table and arresting those who spoke out for it, once again, prioritizing corporate interests over public.
While the President talks populist, his actual policies favor corporations from Monsanto to Big Pharma, Insurance, and fossil fuels over public interests, even making it a crime to investigate and expose them. Now it's the TransPacific Partnership he's pushing. Hardly "leftist."

Obama is not only a leftist,

Obama is not only a leftist, he is a radical left-wing extremist.

Once again

a matter of perspective, in this case, more telling of your own.

Actually, it says more about

Actually, it says more about your retro political dichotomy. Karl Marx’s ideology has been debunked by the historical facts of reality.

Yeah, he was obviously mistaken

about capital accumulating to capital forming mega-monopolies that run governments. He was obviously wrong to assert that the laws of the market would impoverish working people while creating a small class of extreme wealth, or that capitalism would knock down national barriers and despoil the land. And it is obvious that workers are not made so desperate by the brutal greed that they organize and resist. Nor was he prescient in writing that the overthrown ruling classes would do everything in their power to destroy revolutions and return with a vengeance if they weren't properly dealt with. But then, why are you even bring Marx up when we are discussing the Virginia election or a center-right corporatist president?

Well, the so-called

Well, the so-called left/right paradigm always seems to work its way into politics and I find your classification of the President as being “center-right” totally absurd. For clearly the guy is a homicidal left-winger of the highest degree.

Obamacare is all about power and control, i.e., the power to employ the IRS as a medical "hit squad" against his political opponents.

Utter Nonsense

The IRS doesn't have political opponents, also their singling out a particular party has been discredited if you had paid attention.

If money is to be collected from citizens the IRS is the only branch that does that, otherwise they have no involvement in the ACA.

The IRS doesn't have

The IRS doesn't have political opponents,

There political opponents are those that are natural threats to their power, i.e., those who favor limited government.

also their singling out a particular party has been discredited if you had paid attention.

You need to expand your information gathering processes. For there is an inordinate amount of information that debunks your assertion.

Their political opponents

Their political opponents are those that are natural threats to their power, i.e., those who favor limited government.

Once again, you are wrong

WASHINGTON -- The Internal Revenue Service targeted progressive groups applying for tax-exempt status in addition to conservative ones, according to IRS documents released by congressional Democrats on Monday.




In case you hadn't noticed, which apparently you did, that is why the IRS scandal became a non-issue.

Yeah, that's why this hag

Yeah, that's why this hag took the 5th ------>http://media.aclj.org/ccp/RTXZWM5.jpg?v=6

It'll be over when she's in jail. The discovery process has revealed quite a bit.


If it was any other administration we would still be having wall to wall coverage. People are still upset when Nixon threatened to use the IRS as a weapon, Obama actually did it.

People will end up in jail, it's only a matter of time. Just because you don't hear about it anymore or think it is a non issue only proves how one sided you are in your choice of news sources.


The IRS Inspector General found that the supposed "targeting" of liberal or progressive groups did not occur.

It is astonishing to me that Dems are willing to excuse this targeting as long as it is done for their side. If Dems in government can use the IRS to target their enemies, then Repubs can do it to their enemies when they are in power. How can anyone, of any political affiliation, believe this is ok? It is wrong, no matter who does it, and if an investigation shows that IRS employees were directed by administration appointees to do this, those appointees should be indicted & brought to trial. Fair minded people of both parties should welcome the truth, not try to spin it.

Are you not a proponent of the opposite extreme?

Would that not tend to occlude your thinking vis-à-vis a broader, balanced perspective?

Are you not a proponent of

Are you not a proponent of the opposite extreme?

No, I am not an anarchist, I just believe that state’s only legitimate function is the protection of individuals from aggression.

So you basically want to

So you basically want to turn back civilization and live in a free for all anything goes world?

"...protection of

"...protection of individuals from aggression."

Isn't that what the second

Isn't that what the second amendment is for?

Just aggression?

What if a company decides that it is cheaper to dump effluent into the Chesapeake Bay under your new rules of governance?

Can coal fired plants remove all of those costly scrubbers even though our air may not be breathable with out long term consequences?

Shall be go back to the pre "Jungle" days of Upton Sinclair's expose of the meatpacking industry?

How about company towns for many industries where children labor and families are paid in scrip only good at the company store?

Or any myriad of issue that arise in a very complex industrial society.

There is no utopia of a completely detached government from society and business.

Government is the contract agreed to among citizens setting and enforcing rules of societal living.

The grievances you list are,

The grievances you list are, in fact, aggressions and it is a legitimate function of government to protect citizens from such things. However, the fedgov’s 130,000 plus pages of regulations are primarily for the purpose of giving the rich, powerful and connected a leg up on the average citizen.

Furthermore, government bureaucrats insist that government regulations create jobs. Their rationale was that that more regulation resulted in more bureaucrats and that businesses are also forced to hire additional people to fill out the government forms and jump through the assorted bureaucratic hoops.

It would be funny if it weren't destroying our country. These policies must be ended by ANY means necessary.

"By any means necessary"?

Where have I heard that before?

A Machiavellian idea that was embraced by communist leadership and perfected by the revolutionaries through terror.

Only the phrase was "the end justifies the means".

We have a system in place that protects us from periodic bloodshed to settle partisan differences. Not always perfect nor always popular, but it has lasted longer than just about any other system in the world.

Dismissing because you feel frustrated and looking toward violence, or hinting at it (wink, wink), is going backwards rather than challenging the world we are in today.

We are better than Syria or Iraq or Libya or any number of nations that have tried to change governance through violence.

If you really would like to

If you really would like to understand this country, I urge you to read the Declaration of Independence. You see, Americans do not stand for tyranny. They will rid themselves of it "by any means necessary."

I understand this country

better than you can imagine.

I swore allegiance to become a citizen, served in the military and have owned my own business since 1976.

I know the value and virtues of the US.

I also know the flaws.

I appreciate your probably youthful enthusiasm for change. And we do need more of that to engage our political future.

And remember that the Declaration is not our law. It was a letter to the king of England outlining our grievances and desires to be independent.

But to jump on the "2nd Amendment solution" cure to our problems is not just dangerous, but a bit immature.


Simply by pointing out that

Simply by pointing out that the President is an extremist does not make John an extremist. The definition of extremist isn't anyone who disagrees with your personal ideology. It can be concretely defined by a legislators voting history which Obama has.

The question is, can you be bothered to do some of your own research, or will you continue to repeat what you are told?

Considering that Obama

is a relative conservative, calling him an "extremist" does reflect on the caller as it does on yourself for defending such a ridiculous claim.

You are not the center of the spectrum

He might be conservative relative to yourself, but not to the country as a whole. You calling him that simply tells us how far to the left you are.


and Corporatist does not equal conservative.

Calling Obamacare a "Republican" version of healthcare is a HUGE stretch, look at who voted for it. The ACA does reinforce your opinion that Obama is a Corporatist because it was written by and for big insurance at the expense of the health care system and the American people.

ACA was designed

by the conservative and largely Republican Heritage Foundation and first applied by Mitt Romney -- the last Republican presidential candidate. You are correct that it was written by and for big insurance with input by the Pharmaceutical industry as well.

Yes, corporate loyalty and corporatism are basic to right-wing, just as real populism, workers' womens's and civil rights as well as ecological sanity are basic to the left. True conservatism of course would be about conserving the environment as well as a fair balance between working people and top tier executives but what passes for "conservative" now is anything but. The word has been claimed by extreme-right radicals who are anything but conservative.

Ditto the word liberal

That word has been hijacked by those who want to grow government and restrain liberty, whereas its original use was to describe those who fought against the tyranny of monarchs and monarchies.

Go far enough out on either end of the political spectrum and the ends collide in one place - tyranny.

While I would disagree

about "liberalism" being taken over by anyone, I will agree that extremism leads to tyranny. The key is finding the balance between the public safety and the common good and individual freedoms.


There's the rub.

Here's a different take

Here's a different take on the Obama administration and Obama's policies. Not sure if this calls Obama a liberal or conservative, but it provides a scary look at the effect of his policies.


Many will dismiss because of the source, but that would be a mistake.

Tenor of Mr. Napolitano’s

Tenor of Mr. Napolitano’s summation is why I find myself agreeing with Republicans re this poll:


We are on a sad path

With the parties so divisive and the government seeking more and more power, I do believe we are headed to a constitutional crisis, hopefully that will be settled peacefully. Over the past 20 years or so our police have become more militarized and paranoid, and now we know the NSA has broken all its legal restraints in its efforts to spy on...who? It's supposed to be spying on foreigners only but we know they don't abide by the rules any more. We also know the administration will lie with impunity to Congress, which is supposed to be protecting the rights of the people but won't, and the admin will use fearsome agencies like the IRS and FBI to intimidate and limit the rights of law abiding citizens.

It's not a good path.

Who knew?

It's supposed to be spying on foreigners only

No foreigners live in the U.S?

No domestic spying

The NSA is supposed to be prohibited from spying in the United States - its charge is overseas surveillance. Thru broad interpretation of the law, thru lack of Congressional oversight, and yes, thru lies to the FISA court and to Congress, it has now become a domestic spy agency with chilling capabilities and apparently little inhibition when it comes to using them.

It is a tyrannical path and

It is a tyrannical path and I am astonished as blind sheep are hypnotically led by their government towards their own slaughter. As you pointed out, the NSA has been unleashed to listen to our phone calls, read our emails and literally watch our every move. But many simply do not want to hear it and they will literally twist themselves into pretzels to rationalize everything the government does.

They scoff at the comparison, but the paradigm is eerily similar to what occurred in Germany in the 1930s. Every government in the history of the world ultimately turned on the governed and it is beyond my realm of comprehension that so many cannot see that it is happening to us in real-time.

The tyranny at its root

is the controlling influence of banks and industry in their own interest.

I agree; however, the

I agree; however, the solution is not more government, for government begets tyranny.

Lord Acton's maxim is government's reality.

The lack of Government

The lack of Government oversight is what begat the crisis in the first place.

Wrong, it was too much government

It was the federal government that forced lenders to lend more money to people than they could afford in order to increase home ownership among African Americans.


There is a nice chart for you to see that, surprise surprise, the progressive liberal policy of forcing lenders to provide "low doc" "no doc" and zero down mortgages to increase AA home ownership has had the unintended consequence of actually decreasing the home ownership rate.

Who could have possibly thought that giving someone a loan they couldn't afford would...gasp...wait for it...not be able to make the payments!!

The vast majority of bad loans

were made by mortgage companies that had no government pressure to lend to bad credit borrowers. Players like Countrywide were not under those regulations.

That is a right wing canard that has been spread for years.

Besides that, the push for higher risk lending was accelerated under Bush in order to make prosperity apparent, though not real. In addition, no one was told to make loans "no doc", which originally were loans to the wealthy which really needed less onerous documentation. But to lend to people with no income, that was an institutional decision based on greed and phony accreditation of loan packages by Moody's, etc.

True Freddie and Fanny were complicit through corruption.

Not only are you correct,

Not only are you correct, but the RWNJ's can't comprehend the fact that below prime loans in the U.S over a relatively short period of time could not have had a significant affect on the world economy.

Correction, should be

Correction, should be effect.

It isn't a matter of more

government or less. It is a matter of what kind of government and in whose interest. The republic is based on the ideal of representative popular self rule. The unregulated, unbridled rule of money is feudalism at best and fascism at worst. It takes the popular rule, via government, to apply that bridle via regulations that protect the public interest against the rampant unlimited greed of a system based on unlimited growth and accumulation at any expense.

It is a fact that

It is a fact that governments produce zero commodities of value; rather, they suck the vitality from the lives of the governed. The rich, powerful and connected write the rules; therefore, it is, in fact, a matter of more or less. For the rules that are written facilitate the rampant unlimited greed that you correctly rail upon.

Still, it is not so much a question of which politico economic system, as it is a question of the morality of the human beings who are employing it. If humans were perfect, any system would work. Unfortunately, human beings are flawed creatures, so their power to control the lives of others must be limited. That, of course, necessitates less government.

Another clarion call for 2nd Amendment solutions

An armed revolution is not a TV serial, folks.

It means insurgents executing neighbors who don't agree with them. It means the loss of medical facilities, a loss of courts, poisoned farm land, destroyed infrastructure, the end of education, the end of commerce both internal and global and decades of reprisals among winners and losers.

And all because a few folks disagree with some of the policies and events of the last few years.

The last crisis that we tried to solve with violence rather than politics was the Civil War. And the results of that still divide this country today.

I have a lot of complaints about our present government, but I will defend this nation against those who would overthrow it.

Hey, if you choose to

Hey, if you choose to blindly march into a death camp, that is your choice. I will not stand in your way. Just don’t point your and try force me to march with you. For I will defend myself against the facilitators of tyranny.

Did I say I would march into a death camp?

I said I would defend this nation against overthrow and insurgency.

Familiar with the Whiskey Rebellion? Unhappy with taxes that they had to pay, they staged a rebellion against the brand new government headed by President Washington.

Washington called on several states to gather their "well regulated" militias and put down the rebellion with overwhelming force. An irony some folks would rather ignore, BTW.

The traitors were tried, some sentenced to hang. All were eventually freed by Washington.

If you want to blow up buildings like McVeigh, shoot your neighbor, destroy our infrastructure then you will meet a lot of resistance from many good folks, well armed, who have little use for violence as a solution.

Easy to sum up that article,

Easy to sum up that article, the U.S needs to say please and follow conventional methods when there is a viable threat, just like the terrorists did prior to 9/11.
That article is written by a judge who condemns the Obama administration for not following the Constitution in apprehending foreign terrorists, guess what, the U.S Constitution is applied to U.S law within the U.S.

Those so called waivers are

Those so called waivers are temporary and expire before the end of 2014, but thanks for the hyperbole.

You Obviously Do Not Know What You Are Talking About

What European country would he be considered center right?


England, Belgium, France, Sweden, Spain, Holland . . .


Every lie Obama tells his ears get bigger!


You wouldn't know the truth if it slapped you upside the head.

Even if McAuliffe

never told the truth, he would be a better choice than Cuccinelli. The real issue here is that prisoners are working for private industries making about 14 cents an hour producing office and institutional furniture, eyeglass frames and other products. That a college is buying products made with prison labor, much less that it needs a waver not to, is far worse than the loose tongue of an opportunist politician.

A vote for Terry

A vote for Crooked Terry is a vote to bring the current culture of government shutdowns from DC to Richmond. He has stated that it is his way or the highway on the state budget and he will get his way no matter what...now who does that sound like?

Thank goodness in the Old Dominion we have a balanced budget requirement, he can only do but so much damage in following the orders from his Democrat masters.

Terry needs to take a seat

"Facts take a seat"? Terry needs to take a seat. Dont let the Press scare you about AG Kenny. The Press tried that tactic with Reagan and it did not work. Ag Kenny has served our State well and will make a fine Governor.

McAuliffe exaggerates?

Who cares? Think of the untold number of outright, easily refuted falsehoods told by Romney this last election. What's new about campaign lies? I wouldn't care if McAuliffe grew horns and sought the state's permission to marry a goat. I'd still vote for him. Anything, absolutely anything, but Cuccinelli.

Perfect Example

This is why partisan politics work, a large percentage of the electorate is so hard corps partisan that they will vote for "their guy" and against "the other guy" facts be darned.

Then there are the non-partisan

lesser evil voters. In this case the choice is clear. Cuccinelli is far more evil must be voted against.


Look in the mirror much Alex?

Too funny!

how's that kool-aide working for ya?

Like the ostrach with his burried. Enjoy the sand.

Va Pilot Blatant McAuliffe Bias

This story was buried on page 12 of Sunday's Pilot. Why wasn't this a front page story; or on the front page of the Hampton Roads section?

This is the second time (that I've seen) that a derogatory story on McAuliffe has either been published here online and not in the paper at all or it was printed and buried. And both items should have been on the front page (albeit below the fold) of the Pilot.

Just because the Pilot endorsed McAuliffe doesn't mean it abrogates all journalism ethical standards. Pilot editors: did you not think anyone would notice this editorializing by omission?

A politician stretching the

A politician stretching the truth should make front page news, like that doesn't happen every day? It is not as if he committed a crime, wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars on frivolous lawsuits, or was forced to give back gifts.

You are forgetting one

You are forgetting one significant little detail: The Pilot, like 85% of the media, is a left-wing entity. McAuliffe is their guy -- they endorsed him.

You shouldn't expect them to be too hard on him.

Dam I thought Maccauliff was a Democrat

I thought only Republicans disregarded the facts when they made their points. Or is a trait of ALL politiicians

Just normal terry, bigger lie, after big lie, after lie!

This explains it all when it comes to McAuliffe:"But the story fits a pattern of exaggerations and embellishments that have peppered McAuliffe's public pronouncements over the years." I'm not fond of either major party candidates but McAuliffe is just too much of a lier, cheat, conn artist and non-resident to be governor. So once again thanks to not having a good candidate to vote for we have to vote for lesser of the two evils again.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

Daily Deal |  | Promote your business