Thanks Governor McDonnell

In what has been a very rocky first year, you got this one right.

UPDATE:  The WaPo weighs in with a great editorial.

Comments

[YKW]

Ben still studiously avoids the VDOT audit. Maybe you should give him credit for getting that one right as well?

[Not Larry Sabato]

YKW, still looking into that- not sure it is as clear cut.

[LMAO]

"very rocky first year"!??!

Please. Democrats WISH he's had a rocky first year. Bob has had a successful and largely uneventful firs year.

[Not Larry Sabato]

Yeah, that's why is still having to grovel over something his mostly white aides drafted up for him on the Civil War. Must be nice to live in your alternate universe.

[Gretchen Laskas]

It can't be lost on McDonnell how much the Republican Party loves Christie.

[martinlomasney]

Fred Hiatt praising the governor he help elect. big surprise.

[notsophialoren]

There should never be a Confederate History Month period!

[martinlomasney]

notsophialoren

amen, alleluia

[change]

Those boys fought and died for their country just like any other soldier. The war was not as cut and dried as your limited mind wants to believe. They deserve their honor as soldiers. Sure it was a sad time in our history, but you might want to study all the facts before you discount the memory of those men. (I suggest you study the atrocities of Grant).

And Ben, you are correct; the Gov. should take consider carefully those who give him bad counsel. He might be much better served by his own intuition, rather than blindly following those who seem to steer his ship towards the rocks.

[martinlomasney]

Change

True, the Union boys fought for their country.

The traitors fought against their country to perpetuate and extend slavery and white supremacy. A goal they continued to pursue after Appomattox through the KKK and guerilla activities like the James gang.

There is no honor in fighting to enslave a people or subjugating one ethnic group to another.

"Grant's atrocities" Wow. It's usually Sherman and Sheridan that the "Lost Causers" whine about.

Nothing that any Union General did compares to the evil of 300 years of slavery and 150 years of KKK and Jim Crow.

But keep trying to transform the perpetrators of evil into victims. Just like the Japanese forever complaining about Hiroshima and conveniently forgetting the rape of Nanking, the Bataan death march, etc., etc.

Andersonville.

The Fort Pillow Massacre.

The repeated execution of African American Union prisoners of war by Southern officers.

In any other country, the confederate leadership would have been executed and their property forfeited.

[Not Bubby]

Thank you, martinlomasney, for proving your ignorance in front of the NLS blogosphere.

Traitors fighting to perpetuate slavery? Damn, son, where did you go to school? You have a definite cause of action against your teachers for the fraud they committed against you.

Those teachers clearly didn't tell you that slaves existed in the NORTH throughout -- and AFTER -- the Civil War, despite Emancipation (which only applied in the South).

I pitied you before today, but now I pity every other poor, ignorant kid who went to school with you.

[YKW]

"YKW, still looking into that- not sure it is as clear cut."

Trying to find a way to spin this against McDonnell, eh?

It's funny how the term "not clear cut" can be used concerning the Civil War (its personalities, causes, and aftermath) as well.

[NoVA Scout]

It's good to get things right, but how hard would it have been to get this right from the start? Virginia, more than any other state, perhaps, is entitled to observe a Civil War commemoration. But to make it for one side only is nuts, particularly when today's Virginians are a thoroughly mixed group of northern and southern descent, and a very large sector of our population descends from families who came here long after the War.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

NoVA, the war still brings up a lot of feelings for a lot of people - we're not really that far removed from it. It was a major calamity, especially in Virginia, and the war is part of our culture down here.

I have always argued that leaving slavery out was not an oversight - more of a simply understanding that the issue so permeated the war and the politics that led to the war for over two decades that it simply goes without saying.

McDonnell made a political mistake, and he paid for it. Considering that all of next year is going to be one long Civil War remembrance, change the name of the month isn't that big of a deal.

Martin, you may remember that your vaunted minutemen up in Boston could also be said to have been traitors who fought against their country to perpetuate slavery and white supremacy - their victory resulted in the creation of a slave holding nation, didn't it?

And you're right - nothing any Union General did was as bad as what the Democratic party did from reconstruction until the 1960s.

[martinlomasney]

Bubblebrain

The 13th amendment abolishing slavery passed the Congress in April 1864, 6 months before the fall of Atlanta and was ratified by the states in January 1865, 3 months before Appomatox.

It's your willful ignorance that is truly pathetic.

Breitbart

Since the American Revolution was successful, they were and are Patriots.

The Southern Democrats who were responsible for those outrages were welcomed with open arms by the 20th Century Republican Party. You're bursting with pride over that aren't you, Strom Thurman. You, Trent Lott and Jesse Helms. Racebaiting is an exclusively Rethuglican Tea Party trick these days, and you couldn't be more proud of that aren't you, Lee Atwater's ghost and Haley Barbour. Voter suppression of minority voters is a favorite Koch brothers enterprise.

More pathetic lies from Breitbart.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

Martin, yep - patriots who had no problem joining with a slave holding south. Neither side had clean hands in the slavery issue, so stop with the nonsense.

As for the welcoming with open arms, not quite. Most of the southern Democrats who were responsible for those outrages were dead by the time the Republican party let them join in the 70s - you're ignoring the fact that Jim Crow and the KKK (at its zenith) began during reconstruction, not the 1960s.

Sure, you can throw Strom Thurmond in my face - but the list of Democrats who made Strom Thurmond (way to lecture someone on having their facts straight when you can't even spell his name right) look like Martin Luther King is as long as my arm. I have no problem recognizing that my party sacrificed honor for pragmatism when it accepted the southern racists and I'm not proud of it. What I find truly sad is that you seem to think that filibustering a civil rights bill is a more heinous crime than the hundreds of lynchings and other crimes the Democratic party turned a blind eye from for over half a century. Were we wrong to let them in? Sure. But what we did pales in comparison to what the party you belong to condoned and actively encouraged for almost a hundred years.

Feel free to point out where I've lied. Ben doesn't want me "outing" you, so I won't, but I will say you're far more of a pompous ass on the internet than you are in person.

[change]

Brian,
I don’t know the man, but I believe “pompous ass” fits pretty well.
He might not be so bad if he could get a few facts correct.

I think it’s an overdose of daily KOS.

[martinlomasney]

Brietbart

Of course they were welcomed with open arms. Reread any description of the '68 campaign and Nixon's southern strategy: openly courting the segregationists and racists.

Strom was part of Jim Crow in '48. Read any of his campaign speeches from that year.

Jesse Helms, read a transcript from any of his radio shows.

Atwater admitted to appealling to racists in every campaign he ran.

When did the rethugs ever repudiate their blatantly racist ploys during their decades long service to your party stretching into this century?

And the Tea Party? are you going to defend any of their antics?

The chronic lie of your postings on race is that without the 10-15% of the rethugs who are white supremecists, your party would be electorally irrelevant.

Instead of acknowledging that despicable conduct and McDonnell's ugly pandering to that segment of your party, you'd rather distract yourself, and attempt to deflect that criticism, with the historic misdeeds of Southern Democrats from 50 to 150 years ago.

Northern Democrats did condemn the lynchings and other violations of African American's civil rights contemporaneously, while republicans were silent. It was Northern Democrats who introduced the anti-lynching laws throughout the first half of the 20th Century which would have passed if the rethugs had voted for them.

I'll have to work on being more of a pompous ass in person, I must be slipping. Coming from you, that's high praise indeed.

Change

you wouldn't know a straight fact if you fell over it.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

Martin, I know the history. You're the one running from it. Northern Republicans were just as vocal as Northern Democrats about the abuses in the South. And you also casually ignore that the vast majority of black activists in the years prior to the 1970s were Republicans, from Frederick Douglass to Martin Luther King, Jr. Until the 70s, the vast majority of black elected officials were Republicans.

I've acknowledged the southern strategy and the pandering that has been done by the party over the years. I've condemned it. I don't like it. But I'm not going to roll over and let you ignore the 100 years of terrorism and murder sponsored by the Democratic party. Sure, northern Democrats condemned it. But that didn't stop them from joining with the South to control the Senate for decades.

And while the anti-lynching laws didn't pass, the laws that made the biggest difference - the civil rights laws and voting rights laws - would not have passed without Republican support.

It's this kind of BS that drives me crazy. The Democrat party has been using and abusing the black community for decades, but we're the evil ones because some racists vote Republican. That's just flat wrong.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

That should read "Democratic" party. I'm not trying to pull a Rush Limbaugh there.

We should get lunch soon so you can lecture me in person.

[martinlomasney]

Contrary to the misinformation of your prior post, breibart, the founders had tremendous problems with the continuation of slavery.

The first draft of the Declaration contained a condemnation of slavery. Madison refused to include the words "slaves" or "slavery"in the Constitution.

Jay led the abolition of slavery in New York as did many of the other founders.

The plantation class of the south insisted on slavery's protection as their price for joining the Revolution and the Constitution.

MLK was never a republican and he certainly lost any respect he might have had for the party of Lincoln after Kennedy called him in jail and Nixon didn't during the '60 campaign. There were few African-American elected officials anywhere until the 60s civil rights and voting rights acts which bills were opposed by most republicans.

Goldwater opposed the civil rights acts as did most Rs. Derksen got a handful of northern Rs to break Strom's filibuster. That's it.

Its the blatant rethug appeal to racists over the last 40+ years that should (and probably does) shame you.

No time for lunch.

[local gop]

it's really ridiculous that people try to pretend that the party labels in the 40's/50's/60's in the South are the same that they are now. folks in the South were only Democrats because Lincoln was a Republican. The Republicans then are the Democrats now, and the Democrats now were the Republicans then.

The point isn't to re-write history and try to explain away the civil war or gloss over the atrocities committed by both sides. unfortunately its the GOP recently that has been more welcoming to those who try to pretend that slavery had nothing to do with the war, or that it was all the north's fault and the south was innocent in the whole thing. its ridiculous and down right embarrassing some times.

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

Martin, the founders, other than Benjamin Franklin, believed that slavery would eventually phase itself out. Franklin new better. I think it's funny that you give Madison credit for having a problem with using the word 'slavery' in the constitution, but didn't seem to have a problem treating black Americans as three-fifths a person.

Of course the southern plantation class demanded protections for slavery. No one is arguing they didn't. What I'm trying to get you to admit is that they struck a faustian bargain - and it almost tore the country apart. Like I said, no one comes to this argument with clean hands.

It's funny that there's so much debate over whether MLK as a Republican. His father was, endorsed Nixon, and at least one family member has stated publicly that he was a Republican. I'll take their word for it over yours. And sure, while Kennedy may have helped get him out of jail, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Voting Rights Act and he and his brother Robert had King under FBI surveillance because they thought he was a communist.

In the period after the civil war, there were almost two dozen black congressmen and senators, all of whom were Republicans.

Dirksen helped write those laws - he took the lead on the VRA - and rallied majorities of Republicans to pass both the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. 80% of the Republicans in both the House and Senate voted for the Civil Rights Act and for the Voting Rights Act - for the VRA, in the Senate, it was almost unanimous on the Republican side. Only Thurmond voted no. The bottom line is that neither of those laws would have passed without Republican support. To say that "most Republicans opposed the civil rights acts" is a flat out falsehood. Look up the vote totals.

I have no problem owning that some in the party have blatantly appealed to racists over the last 40 years. That does not excuse the Democratic party's history. Two wrongs don't make a right. And I would rather be a member of a party that only pandered to racists, rather than one who killed for them.

I can understand why you can't find the time for lunch - it's far harder to call someone a liar to his face when you know he isn't. Not everyone has the stomach to back up their online persona. I understand. It's not the first time I've run into this in politics. First time with someone I've actually met, though.

[Not Larry Sabato]

I've met you in person, and called you a racist, so it's not the first time you have encountered it with someone you have met! :-)

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

You weren't serious!

[martinlomasney]

Breibart

Hoover surveiled MLK on his own and against RFK's wishes.

I was wrong about the Northern Rs. The majority did vote for the bills.

No one is excusing the southern Ds, especially HFB.
The bastards belong in hell.

McDonnell's recent pandering to the "Lost Causers," white supremicists and racists can and should be condemned and brought to an end as beneath the party of Lincoln but since the Rs are now a regional party dependent on the approval of pigs like Limbaugh and the votes of his racist followers, it cannot happen. Making excuses for it and trying to distract from it is dishonorable.

Never called you a racist, just dishonest.

[Spock]

Martin- I know you are joking, but, seriously, Brian is nothing like Breitbart.

Brian is actually pretty reasonable, even when he is mostly wrong, he at least has a point to make with more than an ounce of intelligence.

Breibart is a bi-polar narcissistic attention hor who has no clue what he is talking about.

[Sam]

As a Democrat, I will completely admit that the Democratic party of the past has some things to be proud of, and some things to be deeply ashamed of.

Can't we all just agree that both parties have plenty of both?

[Valley Indie]

Yikes, what an exchange. I have to say that it's people like martinlomasney who have created the current political climate. And are also the reason the Democrats will lose many seats. Ridiculous exaggerations, baseless personal attacks, and overreaching.

[steve vaughan]

McDonnell's first year can't really be characterized as either great or "rocky."
Yeah, his folks had some early problems getting out of campaign mode and into governing mode, leading to the Civil War fiasco, among other problems.
However, the governor did a good job negotiating tricky budget waters given that, ideologically, certain solutions were off limits for him.
He re-opened the rest stops, which was a crowd pleaser, though fairly unimportant in the bigger scheme of things.
He got to tout a "surplus" although that's stretching the meaning of the word.
However, he's about to take a loss on privatization of the ABC stores, the biggest initiative he came out of the campaign with.
So, certainly less of a first year than Allen or Gilmore, who both rammed through major initiatives, although Gilmore's was a disaster in the long run.
Less "rocky" than Warner's first year.
About even with Kaine.

[steve vaughan]

He does have the problem, which none of the preceeding four governors had, of being totally overshadowed by the a.g.

[Martin Lomasney]

Sam & Spock

Breitbart's problem is repeatedly trying to draw equivalencies that either don't exist or are not relevant between present day outrageous conduct by the white supremecist Tea Party wing of the rethug party and anything or anyone else.

There isn't anything equivalent. The very attempt at excusing these continued outrages by saying "someone or something else was/is just as bad" is to deny the evil of white supremecist, racists, mysogynists and homophobes on the right.

There is no moral equivalency. Pandering to that evil as "FCPS fail" did last April has no excuse.

That's the inherent lie of most of Breitbart's postings here.

Valley Indie - pointlessly vague and useless post.

[Bubby Hussein, Hillbilly Sheikh]

When is McDonnell going to apologize for that deal AG McDonnell negotiated between Virginia and Northrop Grumman IT? An unending giveaway of taxpayer money!

[Michael]

Martin:

What percent of the GOP would you classify as racist?

What percent of the Tea Party movement would you classify as racist?

How did you calculate those two numbers?

[Brian W. Schoeneman]

There's no inherent lie because I'm not arguing with you when it comes to present day "outrages." Where they exist and are legitimate, I'm as condemnatory of them as you are - as anyone is.

All of this stuff has to be placed in context. There are historical equivalents and ignoring that things have changed over the last hundred and fifty years is to ignore the extraordinary progress we've made. It's easy to bash one party or the other over perceived racial issues in a vacuum but I don't believe it's far to ignore how far we've come.

While most people will agree that pandering to racists is bad, when you look at where we've come from and the past abuses that political parties have committed, that pandering is like complaining about a mosquito bite on one arm when you've got multiple gunshot wounds on the other.

[change]

Brian,
It is obvious that martin cares little about any “factual” debate. His autopilot is stuck on “KOS” talking points and facts will not change his direction.
I am not sure what would be definition of a person would be that refuses to understand even the basics of history, but he seems to find an extreme, self important, gratification in his obstinate refusal to acknowledge even the most obvious of truths.

You have tried to reason with him in an intelligent manner and have conceded the evils of both sides. I fear you have reached the point where you are attempting to “teach a pig to sing”.

[martinlomasney]

breitbart

More excuses, obfuscations and distractions. Context is irrelevant when pandering to evil is concerned.

Micheal - read the thread; covered it already.

change - more squealing from you? nothing to advance the exchange, typical.

[Spock]

Bri- we don't need to make a state one month long holiday to remember what an embarrassment the civil war was.

If you want one day to honor those men, women, children who were kidnapped, dehumanized, tortured, whipped and murdered by oppressive scum for the sake of free labor, okay then let's do it.

But, if you think it progresses the community to celebrate the criminal acts of the oppressors, you have a twisted view of progress.

[steve vaughan]

Spock, I agree.
If everybody wants a Civil War related holiday, how about the day Virginia rejoined the Union, that's something to celebrate.
Otherwise, how about Virginia Heritage Day, celebrating the part of our history that is proud---statute of religious freedom, Constitution, mother of presidents, etc.?

[Michael]

@Martin,

I don't see where it's covered. You did write, "10-15% of the rethugs [sic] who are white supremecists". So you submit that 10-15% of the GOP is racist.

So what of the Tea Party?

And how did you come up with those numbers? Are you just guessing?

[Spock]

Steve- the whole thing smacks of a "white privilege/identity month"

Heck, let's have a peanut soup holiday! That's a long virginian tradition most of us can get behind.

There is a claim that George Washington ate peanut soup everyday.

And, FYI he aslo grew hemp!

Maybe we can have a honorary "Hemp Month" celebration ...for the sake of George Washington..yeah...for that guy...*grin*

[viagra online]

This is my point. This does not mean that someone's being concerned about deer is to be judged one way or another - just want to introduce some more science to the discussion. PS I have no stake in the Croton issue myself.