Don't Discourage Responsible Developers

The lead editorial in today’s Richmond Times Dispatch, titled “Charettes”, demonstrates the TD’s inability to understand that land developers have responsibilities other than making money. For those of you, like the Maven, who have never heard the word before, charettes are community meetings held to get public input concerning a specific project. The TD sees charettes as a form of market research that can increase the profits of investors. The TD also sees them as good public relations, giving neighbors of the proposed development the feeling that they have some influence in the final project.

However, the TD objects to charettes if they, in fact, allow neighbors of the project to have any say in the development. In the TD’s words, charettes are a problem if they give the impression that those affected by the project “ought to have as much of a role in making the final determination as investors. But, while developers are wise to welcome input from anyone who is interested, the final decision belongs to those who have put their good money down.”

The TD’s “the public be damned” attitude is very fitting for the late nineteenth century. It is the kind of attitude that when applied to land development creates all the nightmares that our friends in Northern Virginia are living now. After spending ten or more hours each week just getting to and from work, I am sure the Virginians up north are so happy that developers were never required to be responsible to the community.

Let me put this in terms that the TD understands—dollars. The taxpayers of Virginia will inevitably have to pay billions of dollars to fix the transportation mess that uncontrolled development has caused in Northern Virginia. Further, if we have uncontrolled development in Henrico and Chesterfield counties, the taxpayers will have to put down more money to fix those problems.

Unfortunately our less-than-great metropolitan daily is too blinded by dollar signs to recognize that developers can, and should be, responsible to the community in which they choose to build. Kudos to the developers of Three Acre Farm for their desire to be responsible developers and good neighbors.

Let’s Talk about the Democratic Party of Virginia

The Maven rarely admits that there is something he doesn’t know. Mavens are supposed to be all-knowing experts. So saying “I don’t know” or “I don’t understand” is particularly embarrassing. Besides, it’s bad for business. Who wants to use a maven that doesn’t know? Despite the risk, I have to admit that I have no idea what the Democratic Party of Virginia does.

I know it has a website. I know it has a staff. It even has a platform, adopted in 1995. But what does it do?

The first paragraph of its platform, entitled “Statement of Common Purpose”, says,

"We exist as a party to elect Democratic leaders of character, integrity, ability and vision at all levels of government in Virginia."

This is an admirable mission statement, but what does it have to do with reality? I’ve been watching, and I don’t think the Democratic Party of Virginia elects anybody!

But Maven, didn’t the Democrats elect Jim Webb to the Senate this year?

I’m not blind (yet). I know Webb won the election. But the Democratic Party of Virginia did not elect him. Webb had his own campaign organization, composed of professional political marketers and volunteers. It raised the money, it decided on strategy, it ran the TV ads (except for those from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee), it staged rallies, it canvassed voters, in short, it won the election. The only party involvement in the campaign that I saw was a “paid for by the Democratic Party of Virginia” on a Webb lawn sign.

But, what about the Democratic Representatives that were reelected to the Congress?

I’m sorry. They too were reelected by their own campaign committees, not by the Democratic Party.

But, what about last year? The Democrats elected Tim Kaine as Governor.

Wrong again! Governor Kaine was elected by his own campaign committee.

But, Maven, if the Democratic Party of Virginia doesn’t elect candidates, what does it do?

Please don’t answer a question with a question!

Let me tell you about political parties. I grew up politically a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away (Brooklyn, N.Y.). In New York, we had a Democratic Party that was organized from the bottom up. In every precinct there was a precinct captain who lived there. When he or she came to your door asking you to vote for Democratic candidates, it was one neighbor asking another neighbor for a favor. The basic organizing unit for the party was the state assembly district. Each assemblyperson was responsible for getting out the vote for all party candidates in every election. We didn’t have candidates with their own campaign committees; every candidate relied on the party to get him/her elected. Even in assembly districts in which the incumbent was not a Democrat (I prefer not to use the “R” word), the local political club ran the campaign. The party campaigned for slates. The name of every candidate from governor down to alderman or sheriff was contained on every piece of campaign literature distributed.

But, Maven, you’re not suggesting we do things that way in Virginia, are you? It would never work.

Maybe you are right. But think of a Democratic Party that is organized from bottom to top in Virginia, from the delegate level up to the state-wide level. Think of a party that campaigns on behalf of all candidates, not letting a particular candidate lose because of poor name-recognition or lack of money. (It was outrageous that the party did not do more for Leslie Byrne last year.) Think of a party that can elect candidates not only at the state-wide level but in local elections all over the Commonwealth. Think of a party that never concedes an election but nominates and campaigns actively for candidates in every congressional district, in every state senate district, in every House of Delegates district, in every county supervisor district, in every city council district. Think of a party that operates full time to get its message to the people of Virginia. Think of a party that relies on the sweat of volunteers rather than the money of corporations and interest groups to get candidates elected.

Maven, wake up!

I must have been dreaming. What were we discussing? Oh yeah…

Does anybody know what the Democratic Party of Virginia does?

The New Teflon Kid

What do these three names have in common? Jack Abramoff, Tom Delay, Eric Cantor. They were all involved in raising millions of dollars for Republican members of Congress.

What do these three names not have in common? Jack Abramoff is going to jail. Tom Delay was forced to resign from the House of Representatives. Eric Cantor has been reelected to his fourth term in the House.

It makes you wonder what 64% of the voters in the 7th District of Virginia were thinking. Were they even thinking? Money and politics are so mixed in the electorate’s mind that they don’t seem to care any more.

It’s kind of strange. The polls indicate that the Congress is the only institution in the United States with a lower approval rating than President George. Yet, even in this “historic” election, more than 80% of the House incumbents running for reelection won. It seems that the voters believe that everyone in Congress is worthless except for their own Representative.

So the new Teflon kid has dodged the K Street lobbying scandal, at least for now. We are stuck with him for another two years. Of course there is always the consolation that Eric won’t be Assistant Majority Whip in the next Congress.

Okay, It’s Over, But Who Won?

It’s three days after the election and I am still analyzing the results. All the other pundits say it was a great victory for the Dems and a disaster for President George and the GOP. Even the President called it a “thumping,” and, because he always accepts responsibilities for what goes wrong, he fired Don Rumsfeld.

I think what these paid analysts forget is that we kicked out the Brits. We do not have a parliamentary system in our country. Our citizens don’t vote for parties, they vote for individual candidates. Many of these candidates do not identify their party affiliation in their campaign literature. In many states candidates are not even identified by party on the ballot.

The media and the press have been reporting for weeks that a significant majority of the American electorate supported transferring control of the Congress from the Republicans to the Democrats. That’s a meaningless statistic. I don’t remember seeing on the ballot any place where I could vote to change control of the Congress. All I could do was vote for one of two candidates for the Senate and for one candidate or a write-in for the House (my representative, Bobby Scott, ran unopposed). At most, I could only vote to change the occupants of two seats. I am sure that, except for those who voted “early and often,” no voter in the United States was able to affect more than two seats.

So what we had on Tuesday were 468 separate elections—435 in the House and 33 in the Senate. Although the broadcast networks and all the cable networks reported as if it was a single election, it was not.

So, who won?

I’m looking at a list in the paper of the election results as reported by the Associated Press. It lists the 426 individuals who won (9 elections had not yet been decided.) There’s another list showing the 33 winners in the Senate elections. Although I haven’t counted, I can see from the list that the vast majority of incumbent Representatives running for reelection won. Same thing in the Senate—most of the incumbents who ran for reelection won.

So, who won? Mostly incumbents.

Let’s forget the rest of the country (just for today). Who won in the Commonwealth?

A large majority of the voters ignored my advice and approved the so-called "marriage amendment.". I think the entire Commonwealth will lose because of this vote. The proponents of the amendment need to be praised, however. They marketed the vote as a referendum on marriage. Not too many people are against marriage, at least in principle, so many voted for the amendment probably without even reading it. This was a clear case of appealing to voter’s emotions rather than to their reason. It worked.

As for the congressional elections, the Republicans won.

But Maven, don’t you know that Jim Webb beat Senator George?

Of course I know that Jim Webb, who used to be a Republican, beat Senator George, who is still a Republican. But Webb didn’t win because he ran as a Democrat. He won despite it.

I hear people saying that Virginia is now a purple state, rather than a red one. Well, I looked at the map of the election broken down by county in the paper Wednesday morning and it showed a huge sea of red, with a few blue islands. Now those islands do hold a whole lot of people, but the commonwealth still looks red to me. Besides, that map was based on the senatorial election. Let’s look at the representative elections.

Virginia has eleven members in the House of Representatives. Before the election, eight of those seats were held by Republicans and only three by Democrats. And after the election? Eight held by Republicans; three held by Democrats. Surprise! All that campaigning; all that money spent; all those nasty signs erected, and we get back the same eleven people!

But, Maven, what about last year? Didn’t the Democrats win?

No!

Tim Kane, a Democrat was elected governor. That’s true. But, the other two state-wide offices were won by Republicans. And, the Republicans retained their control over both houses in the General Assembly.

So I’m afraid that Virginia is still a red state. A candidate running as a Democrat can be elected to state-wide office, if s/he runs a brilliant campaign. But s/he will have no coat-tails. The Republicans will win most of the other elections.

But, Maven, must this be a red state forever?

I’ll talk about that soon.

Signs (part 2)

I was driving around yesterday and I saw city workers harvesting the abundant crop of political signs. I will be glad to see the signs go, but I am not at all happy that the city chose not to enforce the anti-sign ordinance weeks or months ago. I presume that when a legislative body enacts a law, it intends for the law to be enforced. The ordinance, which is codified in Chapter 19 of the City Charter entitled “Nuisances and environmental control,” was enacted, I presume, to avoid the visual pollution in the city caused by everybody putting up signs all over the place.

The law declares all signs on public property to be nuisances, and provides that both the individual who erects the sign and the person or organization on whose behalf the sign is erected are guilty of violating the provision. The ordinance provides for a fine of between $10 and $25 for each sign posted, for each day that it is posted. It also states that if the city is forced to remove the signs it can collect the cost of removing the sign from the person or organization who posted it.

From the fact that the city did not enforce the ordinance with respect to political signs erected during the recent campaign, I must assume that the city government is flush with money. Why else would it deliberately refuse to assess fines or collect the cost of removal from the various campaign committees that planted all the signs? When the next budget cycle comes around, let’s all remember the thousands of dollars that the city did not collect this election year.

I’m Back

For those of you paying attention, the Maven has been silent for more than a week. It seems that my Muse, who puts these weird thoughts into my mind, took a vacation. I certainly don’t blame her. The level of nastiness prevailing during the week before the election must have really worn her out. I must confess that I wasn’t the picture of moderation and politeness in my ravings during the election season. But, I assume that you probably wouldn’t bother reading if I was all reason and no emotion.

Now, I intend to get back to saving the Commonwealth. (Please don’t ask “from what?”)

John Kerry, Why?

I know you're a war hero. You are an outstanding leader in the Senate. I voted for you two years ago, and I'm sure we would be better off if you had won.

But Senator, you have no talent for delivering one-liners. Your badly delivered joke has allowed the Republicans several more days to avoid dealing with their abysmal record.

Come on, John, let's not self destruct!

Male Bovine Excrement!!!

I CAN’T BELIEVE THE AUDACITY OF THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE! WHAT GALL! WHAT NERVE! WHAT CHUTZPAH!

(Maven, you’re shouting. Calm Down.)
(I DON’T WANT TO CALM DOWN! THIS TIME THEY HAVE GONE TOO FAR!).
(Maven, take a deep breath. Relax)

Okay. I think I’m rational again.

Not only are they polluting the air waves with their political lies, now, they are smelling up my mail box. It’s a huge over-sized post card and it says “Tax-and-spend liberals have a message for you.” TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS? Then they show pictures of John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Howard Dean. Next it says, “If the Democrats win, they will roll-back the Republican tax cuts—and that means higher tax bill for everyone.” It concludes with “Don’t let the tax-and-spend liberals win.

TAX AND SPEND LIBERALS?

Male Cow Poop!

Can we look at the facts? In the four fiscal years from 1998 through 2001, the United States Government, with a Democratic President, a Democratic Senate and a Republican House of Representatives, reduced the national debt held by the public by $394.6 billion.[*] In the five fiscal years from 2002 through 2006, the United States Government, with a Republican President, a Republican Senate and a Republican House of Representatives, increased the national debt held by the public by $1,503.9 billion.

Let’s look at this again. While the “tax and spend” liberals controlled the White House and half of the Congress, the Federal Government spent $394.6 billion less than it collected in revenue. While the “fiscally responsible” Republicans controlled the White House and the Congress, the Federal Government spent $1.5 trillion more than it collected in revenue. That is an average annual deficit exceeding $300 billion.

The Republicans keep lying and lying about spending. It is the Republican Congress and the Republican President that have continued to spend money at a deficit rate year after year after year. The “fiscally responsible” Republicans with their reckless spending have made future tax increases inevitable. It will be our children and grandchildren who will have to pay for the Republican spending binge.

Citizens of Virginia, the cradle of American democracy: Would Thomas Jefferson stand for these lies? Would Patrick Henry tolerate such rubbish? Would George Washington accept such trash? When in the course of human events it becomes necessary to get rid of our Republican oppressors, I know not what course others may take; but as for me, throw the anuses out!

[*] The debt held by the public represents the total national debt less that portion that the Government owes to the Social Security Trust Fund, the Civil Service Retirement Trust Fund and other government funds. The information I use comes from the Bureau of Public Debt website. publicdebt.treas.gov/

Lies, Fear and Smear

The Democrats want to lose in Iraq. The Democrats want to raise taxes. The Democrats want to destroy marriage. The Democrats are in favor of pornography. If the Democrats win control of the Congress, al Qaeda will attack us here at home. If the Democrats win control of Congress, the economy will collapse. The Democrats owe no allegiance to the people of America. Every Democratic candidate is under the control of those left-wing Liberals Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer and John Kerry. A Democratic victory will mean the end of American civilization. I’ve got a list of 250 communists in the Democratic Party. Oops, forget the last one; I forgot what year it is.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” So said Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister of Nazi Germany. Murray Chotner used the big lie technique to bring us Richard Nixon. Karl Rowe used it to bring us George W. Bush. And now President George and his Republican buddies are using the big lie technique in a desperate attempt to hold on to power for the next two years.

Whether it’s the political ad trumpeting the lie or the stump speech stirring up fear, the one thing the Republicans don’t want the voters to look at is their record over the past six years. The campaign strategy is simple: make the Democrats look so evil that the voters will reelect us even if we have done a terrible job. We have to make the people afraid to vote for a Democrat.

This lie-fear-smear strategy appeals to the most basic of human emotions. It is based on a desire to get people to vote from their gut rather than from their mind. It is based on an elitist mentality that says that the American people aren’t smart enough to deal with issues. It’s based on a suspicion that if the electorate actually voted on the issues, they might vote against our side. Therefore, lie to them, terrify them, cover your opponent with slime. But at all costs, don’t let the voters think.

Citizens of Virginia! Isn’t it about time that we told the purveyors of lie, fear and smear that we don’t fall for this outrageous campaign tactic? Go to the polls next week and show them that we Virginians can vote with our minds, not with our instincts. Show them that we are not too stupid to understand issues. Show them that despite their smokescreens we can see that “the Emperor is naked.” Six years of Republican mismanagement is enough. Vote Democratic.

Book burning

It’s not only our junior senator who is attacking Jim Webb’s writing. Now the book-burners are out in full force. Before you even think of voting for Allen next week, think of how it will be: the only book at the public library will be a dictionary—abridged, of course. And then the thought police will come knocking on the door to see what is on your book shelf.

Get the Red Out!

I grew up in the 1950s, so to me the color red is particularly troubling. In my schools they taught me that there were the good guys—us—and the bad guys—the REDS. So, when the media divided the country, I was (and still am) very upset that they put me in a Red State.

Even after the end of the Cold War, the Red States to me are Viet Nam, China, North Korea, and . . . Virginia? Being called a Red State is a blot on the partially flawless image of the Old Dominion.

It’s time we did something about this! We need to make Virginia “True Blue”. It’s time to get the Red out.

Vote Democratic!

George is getting to be an embarrassment

Our beloved junior senator has said time and again that he wants this election campaign to turn on issues rather than on attacks on character. Of course, he only meant this rule to apply to Jim Webb. It is clear that Senator George doesn’t think he can win on his record, so like any good loyal Bushite he’s gotta fling manure. But this latest attack on Webb based on the fiction he has written is absolutely surrealistic.

George, the books Jim Webb wrote are FICTION. In case you don’t know what that means, HE MADE THEM UP. And, George, when somebody makes things up, they don’t represent his or her character. They’re just a story.

Senator George, you’re supposed to represent the people of Virginia. Do you want the rest of the country to think that we are so dumb that we would vote against a guy because he wrote some fiction that you don’t like? I actually received e-mail from a friend in another state putting Virginians down because we elected someone who could say what you said. When you say things like that, George, you’re not only embarrassing yourself, you’re embarrassing each and every citizen of the Old Dominion.

So, Senator George, let’s cut out this mud-flinging and get back to the issues. Start talking about your record. How have you done on the war against al Qaeda? What about your forever support of our “nation-building” in Iraq? Explain how an increase of 48% in the national debt since you’re been in office represents fiscal responsibility? Tell us what you’ve done to save Social Security? Tell us how your head-in-the-sand attitude toward climate change has helped protect the earth. Explain to the tens of thousands of Virginians who suffer from pain and premature death from a wide range of diseases how they are helped by your vote against stem-cell research. Don’t forget to talk about your drugs for seniors program, which has increased profits for pharmaceutical and insurance companies but has left elders with huge donut holes in their coverage. You might also want to talk about why both North Korea and Iran have significantly increased their nuclear weapons programs since you have been in office. Finally, you can tell us why you have no solution to the immigrant problem other that branding millions of people as criminals and building a “Berlin Wall” on our southern border.

Reelect George Braxton

As long as I'm picking on King Doug, I might as well post a letter I am sending to the Richmond Free Press:

I was disappointed, although not surprised, by your reporting of Mayor Wilder’s not quite endorsement of Jerry Miller, who is running against School Board incumbent George Braxton in the city’s fourth district. Mr. Wilder was elected by a wide margin and took office expecting that he would run the City of Richmond as he saw fit. He didn’t anticipate that there were members of the City Council and the School Board who would actually have opinions of their own. Mr. Wilder has been in constant conflict with the Council and with the Board, and at times he has not prevailed. Mr. Wilder is so upset that he didn’t always get his way during the first two years of his term that he is trying to purge both the Council and the School Board of those individuals who did not support him completely. George Braxton is apparently one of those independent-minded members of the School Board with whom the Mayor would prefer not to deal starting in January.

I don’t know much about his opponent, but George Braxton, himself a product of the Richmond Public Schools, is a decent, smart, hard-working man who is dedicated to providing a first-class education for all of Richmond’s children. In his two years on the School Board he has faithfully represented the interests of his fourth district constituents. George Braxton is working to make the public schools of the City of Richmond the best in the Commonwealth of Virginia, if not in the nation. He is determined to stop the flow of young Richmond couples to the suburbs in search of what they think will be better schools. During his first term on the Board, Mr. Braxton has worked well with the Superintendent and with other members of the Board. His colleagues respect him so much that they chose him as Vice Chairman after only a year on the Board.

I urge Free Press readers in the fourth district to reward George Braxton’s hard work with another term on the School Board. Don’t let Mr. Wilder’s desire for a compliant Council and School Board ruin the career of this exceptional public servant.

Sign, Sign, Everywhere a Sign

I know it’s not spring ‘cause the days are getting shorter. It’s also getting pretty cold at night, which feels more like fall than spring. But, everywhere I look I see these colorful rectangular growths jutting out of the ground. Most are blue, some are white, and even some are red. And they have things written on them—people’s names. In this part of Richmond, the blue ones either say George Allen for Senate, Jim Webb for Senate, or Jim Nachman for Congress. The white ones either say George Braxton for School Board or Jerry Miller for School Board. The only red ones say Eric Cantor for Congress. It’s election time in Richmond

For a while, all the signs were the same size, maybe 18 inches by 30 inches (I’m just guessing). Now I’m beginning to see all these mega-signs. They are at least four times the size of the other ones. The first mega-signs I saw bore the names of Republicans George Allen and Eric Cantor. Why would you think Republicans need all these super-size signs? Can it be that they are lacking in vision? Or maybe they feel a bit inadequate. Maybe they have a need to brag that “mine is bigger than yours.” Or just maybe they have too much money to spend between now and Election Day. Oh, now one of our school board candidates, Jerry Miller, is also using these mega-signs. School Board elections are supposed to be nonpartisan, but the super- size signs lead me to the conclusion that Miller must be a Republican too.

And what’s with Eric Cantor? The National Journal says he is the second most conservative of the entire Virginia congressional delegation (including senators). And his signs are RED! When I was a wee lad, nobody would think of using red. Red meant commie. Hey, at the height of the Cold War, the Cincinnati baseball club changed its name from Reds to Redlegs so nobody would doubt their patriotism. Isn’t it weird that we refer to conservative strongholds as Red States? Back in the day, the Red States were China, the USSR and the countries of Eastern Europe.

I’m getting a bit tired of all these signs. They are everywhere—on people’s lawns, along the sides of roads, between sidewalks and the curb, on median strips. After a while they are just plain ugly. I guess if citizens wants to put up a sign on their own property they have a right to do so. But, what about public property? A part of that public property belongs to you and me. Should we be forced to have political signs on our part of the commons? I gotta check on this.

I’m going on line to my beloved internet and checking in the Charter of the City of Richmond. Hey, look here. Chapter 19 of the City Code deals with nuisances and Article II of that chapter deals with posting of signs. Section 19-22 is entitled “Posting of signs or advertising prohibited.” I must be getting close. Hey, it says that it is unlawful for anyone to post any sign, including a political sign, on public property. It also declares that any violation of the prohibition is a nuisance and that anybody is free to remove these nuisances from public property.

I don’t understand. If it is unlawful to post signs on public property, why are all these signs out there. Wait while I call a friend who might know. . . . Would you believe it, he says that Douglas Wilder, our beloved mayor, has instructed city employees not to enforce this ordinance before Election Day. I wonder—does the City Charter authorize the mayor to instruct city employees NOT to do their jobs? Aren’t we the citizens of Richmond entitled to a mayor who enforces the law rather than ignores it?

(Wasn’t it just yesterday that I said I had nothing much to say about His Mayorship?)

For Roger

My friend Roger who lives in Christiansburg, which is several hundred feet above Roanoke, asked me to write about three things: 1- the Redskins; 2- the live balls being used at the World Series; and 3; His Mayorship Doug Wilder.

1- Roger seems to forget that I am the James River, not the Potomac River, maven. I could write tons of stuff about “Your Richmond Braves,” but what can I say about the Skins? They suck? That would be unkind. So I will put it this way, there is nothing wrong with this team that cannot be fixed by turning back the clock and bringing in the Hogs, Joey Theisman and Riggo.

2- At my age, what do I know about live balls? (Hey it’s okay to tell age jokes about yourself.) I mean, really, if it’s okay for pitchers to use dark stuff, why not use live balls? The fans want to see lots of scoring; let them have homeruns.

3- Surprisingly, I have very little to say about King Doug these days. In times past I could have burned up cyberspace with the heat of my invective. But, hey, Doug actually endorsed a Democrat yesterday. Of course if he hadn’t been so vindictive last year and had endorsed Creigh Deeds, we might not now have an attorney general who embarrasses himself by saying that the second and third sentences of the marriage amendment will raise no legal issues.

How was that, Roger?

Saving Marriage?

They tell me that we need this amendment to save marriage. (I know I’m being a bit vague, but you know who “they” is). They say that if I vote against this amendment I must be opposed to marriage. They hint that if this amendment is defeated civilization as we know it is doomed.

What kind of crap is this?[*]

What I want to know is what are we saving marriage from? What exactly is it that is threatening marriage? What is so dire an emergency that we need to amend the Commonwealth’s constitution to save us?

Although Virginia law already prohibits same gender marriages, they tell us that we need this amendment to make really sure that two men or two women, who love each other, can never claim they are married. Because if they do . . .

Is there something I’m missing? Is my marriage suddenly and severely threatened if a homosexual couple moves in next door? Will my wife suddenly demand that I move out because the two men or two woman living next door claim they are married? How many healthy marriages in the Commonwealth do they think will suddenly end if homosexual couples are permitted a relationship that resembles marriage?

But wait, maybe they are right. I can see it happening. A young innocent, defenseless married couple is sitting at their kitchen table eating dinner. Outside, two roaming homosexuals who claim to be married peek in the window. They sneak around to the back of the house. They silently open an unlocked window and creep into the house. They tiptoe toward the kitchen. Suddenly, they LEAP out and SIEZE the poor unknowing couple and shout out, “YOUR MARRIAGE IS OVER!” And another Virginia marriage bites the dust![†]

Nearly half of the marriages in this country already end in divorce or with two people coexisting although they can’t stand each other. Will the “marriage amendment” save those marriages?

We allow wife-beaters to marry. We allow child sexual-abusers to marry. For some reason, it’s only gays and lesbians that threaten the institution of marriage. Clearly we need to amend our Bill of Rights to stop the menace.

Look, I am pro-marriage. I am pro-people. I am pro-love. I will vote no on that inane amendment.

[*] Not that it is any of their business but I have been married, to the same woman, for nearly 40 years. Clearly I am not opposed to marriage.

[†] This is a cleaned-up version of a shtick by comedian Lewis Black.

Taxes

I really love the new ad from the Republican National Committee. It accuses all Democrats of wanting to raise taxes to pay for their outrageous spending. It says that, if the Democrats are elected, spending and taxes will go through the roof.

Huh! The Democrats are big spenders?

This one suddenly eclipses Senator John McCain’s outrageous statement that Bill Clinton is responsible for the North Korean nuclear test as my nominee for the October Chutzpah Award. (For those of you unfamiliar with the term, chutzpah is a Yiddish word meaning nerve or gall. An example of chutzpah is the teenager who kills both his parents and then asks for leniency from the judge because he is an orphan.)

Let’s look at the facts. Since January 2001, when Republican George Bush took office as president with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives and a split Senate, which became controlled by the Republican two years later, the United States Government has spent $2.8 trillion dollars more than it has received in revenue. That means that the “fiscally responsible” Republicans have increased the national debt, which you and I and our children and our grandchildren and probably our great-grandchildren will have to pay off, by about 48%. How can they blame this on the Democrats when they have controlled the White House and the Congress while this new debt was piling up? Let’s all recognize that it is the Republicans who are the big spenders in Washington.

The Republicans claim they are fiscally responsible. They claim they have lowered taxes. Come on RNC. Are the actions of Mr. Bush and his Republican congressional cohorts really resulting in lower taxes? Hell no! They have merely moved the tax burden from themselves to a future generation. Eventually some one has to pay off that debt. Their spend now-pay later philosophy is the farthest thing from fiscal responsibility I can think of.

Despite this the RNC has the chutzpah to blame everything on the Democrats. I suppose the big bad Democrats armed with assault rifles, thanks to the National Rifle Association, forced the Republicans to approve all those bloated appropriations acts. And what about Mr. Bush? Did he veto even one of those huge appropriations and insist that the Congress be fiscally responsible? Did he suggest that because we are in a major war perhaps we need to delay the tax cuts for his wealthy friends?

Returning the Republicans to power for two more years of uncontrolled deficit spending makes no sense. It is time to throw the rascals out

A traitor?

As Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and Mr. Rumsfeld have made clear recently, we are engaged in a war of biblical proportions between the forces of good (us) and the forces of evil (them). We need to stand united and must back the policy of this government. If we don't, if we dare to criticize the Administration's policies, we are endangering the future of all humankind. We must salute Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney and Mr. Rumsfeld and get on with their war. We must not give aid and comfort to the enemy by questioning anything this Administration does. I guess since I have serious questions of why we ever got into this war and how we're fighting it, I must be a traitor. I wonder if that is worse than being a Liberal.

Clearly, Mr. Bush and his friends in the Administration must believe in the philosophy of Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister of Nazi Germany:
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

President Adams, the elder, and his Federalist cohorts passed the Sedition Act to crush dissent against his government. I guess we should feel lucky that Bush and company have not yet made dissent criminal. So far, it is merely unAmerican.

Hello and Goodbye to George and George

My favorite incumbent U.S. president was in Richmond yesterday, tying up traffic, adding a pumpkin-worth of currency to the local economy, and raising many dollars more for the campaign war chest of my favorite junior senator. Not that Senator George really needs the money. He already has millions that he will bestow on our local media in exchange for the privilege of polluting our televisions with his ads. Senator George could do a lot more for the Virginia citizens he says he loves by just walking around the neighborhoods of Richmond and distributing money to everybody he sees.

In his speech, President George made it clear that, despite what everybody in the country seems to think, this election is not about him. That should be music to the ears of many Republican candidates around the country. Unfortunately, it won’t help Senator George very much.

Although George and George have made it clear that they are opposed to human cloning, their record during the nearly six years they have been in Washington makes me wonder. On almost every issue these two guys are as alike as any two of the thousands of acorns piling up in my backyard. Even their smirks are indistinguishable. And they are such rascally critters that I’m sure Dr. Seuss would refer to them as Thing One and Thing Two.

Thankfully, George and George have left Richmond. And, if my fellow Virginians do the right thing on Election Day, we will send Senator George back to California where he can find a less boring career. As for President George, at noon on January 20, 2009, we can be rid of him too.

Adieu sweet clones!

The Marriage Amendment--WWJD

I am very surprised by the Washington Post poll which shows that 53% of Virginia voters support the so-called marriage amendment. My initial thought was, “didn’t they poll any Christians?” Thinking Christians cannot possibly support this amendment.

1- When Jesus was asked what the great commandment in the law was, he replied “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.” Matt. 22:37-40.

Does the “marriage amendment” demonstrate love of God? By outlawing some of God’s children, the amendment shows scorn, not love, of God. Can one love the Creator and yet hate His creation? The amendment violates what Jesus called “the great and first commandment.” It also violates the second commandment. One does not show love for one’s neighbors by taking away their rights.

2- Jesus taught, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?” He described as hypocrites those who criticized the perceived sins of others while ignoring their own behavior. Matt. 7:1-5. The “marriage amendment” is based on a judgment that the lifestyle of some people is not acceptable in Virginia. It violates Jesus’ admonition to not judge.

3- When faced with the punishment of a sinner, Jesus said, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." John 8:7 Are the supporters of the “marriage amendment” so pure that they can throw stones at those they consider sinners? Is not voting for this amendment casting the first stone?

The bumper sticker asks “WWJD?”—what would Jesus do? Based on his teachings, it is clear that Jesus would vote “no” on the proposed amendment.