« Creigh Continues To Be National Laughingstock | Main | Do You Want To Buy This Car? »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b13369e20120a81f4e62970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Did Bob McDonnell Break The Law Last Night?:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Wouldn't it be the soldier who broke the law, not McDonnell if this were the case?
Posted by: Mr. Jefferson | January 28, 2010 at 05:03 PM
You have to be kidding me. Do you think we are suckers?
On Obama's guest list....
"First Class Army Sergeant Andrew Rubin-served four combat tours in Iraq and served two years in Afghanistan"
I think every President since Reagan introduced Lenny Skutnick has had at least one service member in his SOTU entourage. It is disingenious to call out the responder for including the same.
Bob McDonnell and his daughter have served the military honorably and are strong and consistent supporters of our servicemen and women. They view our military patriots as something much more than a political photo ops or background props for a service academy speech. Bob has respected the military since he was a child, and served while Obama was wasting away his college days smoking dope.
This post and its republication are demeaning biased and wrong-headed.
Posted by: Let's Be Free | January 28, 2010 at 05:26 PM
Let's be free: the difference is that while the President's speech is not implicitly a partisan speech. The "Name of Party Response" is, by its very definition, a partisan activity.
Which is why I was also interested to see the Republican member of the State Board of Elections - Harold Pyon - on stage behind McDonnell.....
Posted by: John Kenwick | January 28, 2010 at 05:34 PM
You are right Mr. Kenwick, the president's speeches, every single one of them are not implicitly partisan, they are explicity paritisan. Couldn't agree more.
Just keep up the attacks on McDonnell's association with the military and I am sure everyone will ignore his record, just like they did when you attacked him for being sexist. Bring it on.
And by the way last time I looked Governors had official duties extending to the national guard. Nice to know that when it comes to the military you consider a President non-partisan and a Governor partisan. We'll remember that the next time a Democratic governor calls out the NG.
Posted by: Let's Be Free | January 28, 2010 at 05:41 PM
Reaching to say the least…
I suppose when Obambi had soldiers lined up behind him and stated that it was a “pretty good photo op” is was not partisan…
Liberals should try to get an agenda that is accepted by the American people and not reach for bogus issues such as this.
They have complete control of government since last year, they have had complete control of both houses since 06, and still look for a reason to blame somebody else for their inability to get something done.
In a word… PATHETIC… simple and true…
If this is all the democrat party has 2010 elections should be a walkover…
Posted by: change | January 28, 2010 at 09:53 PM
I think we'd have to discuss what it means to "participate" in a political event. By my account, he just sat there and listened to a speech.
Is it because the speech he was in attendence for was political? If so, how far does this extend? Is a soldier in uniform allowed to listen to a speech on the radio? Can he listen live? If a political speech randomly starts up in his proximity, must he get up and walk away?
Is it because he was in the audience behind the Governor? If so, what does military law perscribe as the legal distance away where he is permitted to sit?
Is it because he clapped? If so, what does military law perscribe as acceptable behaviors while watching a speech?
Is it because he was put on camera? If so, does military law extend to camera operators, or is it the responsibility of the soldier to evade camera lines-of-sight at all times? Surely there are better uses for stealth training.
Posted by: Inquiring Mind | January 29, 2010 at 09:44 AM
I suppose the even-handed liberals will be digging through the blogosphere to find photos and video footage of Tim Kaine with service men and women shot while he was serving as Governor and Chairman of the DNC, perhaps the most partisan job in the country. Waiting to see those links.....
Posted by: Let's Be Free | January 29, 2010 at 09:58 AM
Heck, why wait...Here is a photo of Tim Kaine at the Commissioning of an Aircraft Carrier after he was named Chairman of the DNC.
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/HZBZcMatrIt/Navy+Commissions+George+HW+Bush+Aircraft+Carrier/3IZzBsww1km/TImothy+Kaine
Think of the thousands of seamen and women involved in this scheme who could be implicated by the liberals, er, I mean progressives.
Posted by: Let's Be Free | January 29, 2010 at 10:16 AM
The right wingers doth protest too much.
Posted by: Kevin in Arlington | January 29, 2010 at 11:58 AM
Technically speaking, while it is a "partisan response", it is part of the entire "State of the Union" event as a whole...which is an overall non-partisan/bi-partisan event.
At least, that would be the defense I would put up if I were a Republican Party official.
Posted by: Phil Chroniger | January 29, 2010 at 12:10 PM
Except Phil, that the presidential address/report is a constitutional thing (Art. II, Section 3), but a response is nowhere to be found in that document.
Posted by: Mr. Jefferson | January 29, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Lets see what we know, the picture shows, an african american woman, an asian man, a soldier, a young girl, and ole blue eyes in the middle.
They just happened to get the best seats in the house, cause, let's see they got there first?
Not exactly the face of the Virginia Republican Party now is it? The big umbrella of the Republican Party,
Posted by: Just a Bubba | January 29, 2010 at 04:14 PM
One of the "pundits" called McDonnell's speech inconsequential. Several pointed out that McDonnell nust not have listened to the President's speech because some of the points the Gov. made that Republicans wanted were addressed in the POTUS speech. NBC's Gregorey and Williams were almost laughing when talking about the folks placed behind the Gov. This rebuttal was not a shining moment for the Governor.
Posted by: notsophialoren | January 29, 2010 at 04:49 PM
Kevin in Arlington,
How do you defend Ed Fendley's fund raising activities on behalf of Democrats while on the Federal Payroll in a non-political capacity? No double standards or evasion of laws or regulation by the Democrats in your neck of the woods, eh? Tell me please that he gets a free pass because he is a greenie.
Posted by: Let's Be Free | January 29, 2010 at 05:03 PM
Bubba.
The three non-military types "just happen" to be members of Bob McDonnell's cabinet. In terms of Governor McDonnell's leadership, and hiring practices did you bother to look at the make-up of the AG's office during his tenure, or do you just go by the flap trap that gets published on the editorial page of the Washington Post?
Good thing that most of the voters in Virginia were not suckers for the propaganda put out by our elitist friends across the Potomac.
Posted by: Let's Be Free | January 29, 2010 at 05:09 PM
Kevin,
Where ever did you get that quote???
Why does it bother the left so much that AA’s and women support McD? or any R for that matter? Do all of the liberals believe that AA’s and women can not think for themselves and must be followers of the democrats?
That type of assumptive arrogance cost you elections in NJ, VA, and finally MA. Better rethink that assumption.
Did anyone notice Obambi used the vulgar term democrat instead of democratic in his conversation with the R’s today…lol
Posted by: change | January 29, 2010 at 06:04 PM
This is ridiculous. This wasn't a political event, any more than McDonnell's inauguration was a political event, and that was crawling with uniformed servicemembers. HuffPo is hit or miss - sometimes they write good stuff, other times they write nonsense like this that is poorly sourced and poorly reasoned.
Posted by: Brian W. Schoeneman | January 31, 2010 at 12:47 AM
Ben once again demonstrates why everyone should be thankful that he never tried to become a lawyer. Good god, son, try not to be be such a dumbass.
Posted by: I.Publius | January 31, 2010 at 03:36 AM