Democrats rev up the attack politics
By Brian Kirwin | Thursday, July 30th, 2009 | UncategorizedI guess they had to cross the water to find a newspaper to print their latest attempts to run away from issues. Heck, when Creigh Deeds is getting beat by Bob McDonnell 55-40 and Bill Bolling and Ken Cuccinelli are up by similar margins, you have to expect mud to fly.
So today the Virginian-Pilot and the Democrats attack Del. Phil Hamilton for working in Education.
Yep, the so-called party of “for the children” with automatic support from the Virginia Education Association is upset that Phil Hamilton does work for higher education.
Hamilton’s Democrat opponent doesn’t get mentioned until the 28th paragraph (HA HA!), but they did find a college “senior fellow” Judy Nadler to say Hamilton’s work for Old Dominion University “raises several red flags.”
What they didn’t print was that Nadler was also a recent Mayor of Santa Clara, California, and a “prominent Dem” – you’d think the “ethics expert” quoted wouldn’t be a Democratic leader.
Not surprising though, since Santa Clara doesn’t have a single Republican representing it in Congress, the State House, the State Senate or the County Board. Yep, 100% Democrat.
But that’s the unbiased expert?
John Miller, the State Senator from Newport News, lists his job as “Associate Director of The Virginia Electronic Commerce Technology Center at CNU”
Sound the alarms! Ethics breach! Call California to help us in Virginia with our ethics!
Oops. John Miller is a Democrat. No front page story about his University job. No Democrat elected official, uhm, I mean “senior fellow” to attack him.
Just more fluff from the candidate in paragraph 28.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
12 Responses to "Democrats rev up the attack politics"
Of course this story was in the Pilot – never mind that Hamilton is a representative on the Peninsula. But when you can’t get the local paper to write a hit piece I suppose the neighboring paper will have to do. The Virginia Pilot is our local version of the NY Times, completely in the pocket of the liberals.
Brian… brian… brian. Weak sauce amigo.
“So today the Virginian-Pilot and the Democrats attack Del. Phil Hamilton for working in Education.”
Ummmm…. No. At the very least, hows about mentioning what the article was really about. Instead its the same old prattle about “libwul media” thats the reflexive mantra, which is echoed dutifully and robotically by Jessica here.
Hamilton is voting on budgets that include money for the center and the center then turns around and hires Hamilton as a contractor. Its quite simple. If thats inaccurate, say so and offer a details that disprove the story. On the other hand, feel free to defend the practice of someone being on the payroll for an outfit that politicans hold budgetary sway over. That BD puts your story on its front page says a lot about BD.
And Sen. John Miller?
Foobar,I hope the weather is nice up there on your high horse.
If they are going to run a front page article, they should at least have found some accountability for wrong-doing. At this point it looks like a Democratic cheer for Hamilton’s opponent, and less like responsible journalism.
Unless an investigation provides evidence otherwise, I’m with Brian on this one.
Phil Hamilton is the vice chairman of Appropriations, a budget conferee, and personally submitted the $500,000 earmark that created the training center.
John Miller worked at CNU prior to his election and isn’t even on Senate Finance.
You can take issue with the slant of the coverage, I suppose, but comparing Hamilton to Miller is idiotic.
Same issue we have in the 8th District where an Assistant Professor at Radford University is running against Morgan Griffith. Let’s see if what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
http://roanokevalleyrepublicans.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-this-what-carter-turner-means-by.html
From Brian’s reply “And Sen. John Miller”, i take that as an apology for his bizarre and woefully inaccurate “they attacked him cuz he works in education” statement.
James, what exactly is accountability of wrong doing? Is that like finding someone guilty of a wrong doing before writing an article about said story? Perhaps you both can re-read my earlier post and comment on the simple point i made.
As for Brian’s Miller v. Hamilton comparison, i’m not familiar with these esteemed gubminters at all. So i dont have a horse in the race. I was just unsurprised by the complete and intentional misread of the story on Brian’s part which afforded him the opportunity to make the bizarre claim that he made.
But if compare we must, i would say that a distinction could easily be made. Frankly, i was of the expectation that the estute bloggers on Drift would provide that FOR us, not the other way around.
As the article states, Hamilton was put on the payroll immediately after the funding was provided. That could be ascertained by the line “the day the money began flowing, the center put him on its payroll”. Secondly, Hamilton is a major force in the budget process.
“As Vice-Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Phil is an important player in the budget process. In addition to serving as Chairman of the Health and Human Resources Subcommittee, Phil serves on the Public Education and Public Safety Subcommittees. And, Delegate Hamilton is one of the very select few legislators who serve on the Budget Conference Committee, whose members are entrusted with negotiating and crafting the final version of Virginia’s Budget.”
Now, if Miller’s CNU gig had similar timing issues and that he wielded comparable budgetary powers like the Representative in the article, then that to me would represent similarities. But i could not ascertain that Miller is on a budget committee. Nor could i determine when he started at CNU. Perhaps he too started the CNU job the day after he voted on a bill (that he was critical in creating and hammering out) that provided funds to CNU. I doubt it. Please report.
Having said that, i come back to Brian’s reply. One could deduce from his “Well what about this other guy” reply that Hamilton’s budget, subsequent vote, and next day consultant job may smell a bit. Or it could be that the cozy relationship doesnt bother Brian at all, but he never gets around to saying that it doesnt bother him. But if that were the case, I would expect a “so what?” instead of his “what about this other guy?” tact But to be fair, perhaps both warrant a “so what” as far as Brian is concerned.
The omnipresent “dang lib media” angle here is interesting. I dont see where Brian challenges what was written about Hamilton and the next-day consultant gig. He skips it entirely. Instead he pines for inclusion of the other party’s guy in the article, as though they are comparable. Hows about simply weighing in on the cozy next-day gig?
The one thing very wrong with the Pilot story is that, through use of the California expert on ethics, the impression is left that this is a “conflict of interest.”
Under Virginia conflict of interest law, it is certainly NOT a conflict of interest.
One could argue that is due to the utter inadequacy of Virginia conflict of interest law.
What about lawyers who make laws that benefit lawyers?
Like Dave Albo? Guess we’ll have to leave that one up to his constituents, won’t we?
Brian-
Like the Hamilton situation. Lawyers writing the law to benefit lawyers is NOT a conflict of interest issue. That’s because the laws don’t just affect the lawyer/legislators but every legislator. Similarly, legislators who are teachers vote on teacher pay raises and work rules. Because they affect every teacher, those are NOT conflicts of interest under Virginia law. That’s not the fault of the legislators, it’s the fault of the voters who have clearly indicated that they don’t care about these kinds of issues. If they did, the state would have a conflict of interest statute with teeth. Legislators and their staffs will frankly tell you that they don’t care about changing the state’s ethics laws, because “that doesn’t move any votes.” And they are right. I expect the Hamilton issue won’t move many either.
[...] By DCH Published July 31st, 2009 Steve Shannon is going negative early. With lousy poll numbers and a demontrated lack of substance, he must be trying to find something to pin on Cuccinelli. And [...]
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.