Will a party loyalty litmus test bite Rigell/Goode?
By JR Hoeft | Tuesday, May 18th, 2010 | Politics
C-Ville News and Arts writes:
Goode’s frustration toward the GOP was evident recently when he appeared as a keynote speaker at the Constitution Party’s Spring National Committee meeting in Minneapolis. On its official Web site, the Constitution Party says its main goal is to “restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.” The party also supports a moratorium on legal immigration.
Some have speculated that Goode’s speech in Minnesota was the first step in a Fifth District run as an independent or third-party candidate, a claim he has denied.
However, the Second District candidate that he travelled to Gordonsville to support, Kenny Golden, recently dropped his GOP affiliation and has joined the independent ranks. Goode commended Golden for making the switch.
If one followed the party plan of the Republican Party of Virginia, enacted this past November, Goode has indeed disqualified himself as a member of the Republican Party.
The Party Plan unequivocally states that a Republican, as of June 2006, is defined as follows:
All legal and qualified voters under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, regardless of race, religion, national origin or sex, who are in accord with the principles of the Republican Party, and who, if requested, express in open meeting either orally or in writing as may be required their intent to support all of its nominees for public office in the ensuing election may participate as members of the Republican Party of Virginia in its mass meetings, party canvasses, conventions, or primaries encompassing their respective election districts.
Personally, I don’t think speaking before the Constitution Party as a keynote violates the intent of this rule, but is hosting a fundraiser for an independent candidate, such as Kenny Golden, one which pokes holes in Goode’s GOP bona fides? Does it even matter? Especially since Goode could only run for office as an independent, so why should he care about his Republican credentials?
On the other hand, 2nd District Candidate Scott Rigell is giving Democrats something to ponder – just how strong is Rigell’s affinity for the president?
According to a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee press release today, Rigell has gone from being an impish troublemaker in the Democratic primary for president to a full-throated admirer of President Obama’s rhetoric.
Donates to Obama but Doesn’t Support Obama. “In March 2008, during the Democratic presidential primary, he gave $1,000 to then-candidate Barack Obama. ‘I had never at any point wanted Barack Obama to be president. It was to stop Hillary Clinton,’ Rigell said.” [Virginian Pilot, 3/01/10]
President Obama Moved Me to Donate. According to conservative magazine Human Events, “On a local blog, Rigell responded by saying that, “Yes, I was moved by his rhetoric and by the prospect of seeing a minority rise to the highest office in our land.” [Human Events, 5/12/10]
Rigell, who was recently endorsed by Governor Bob McDonnell and Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, not to mention such other conservative luminaries as Jay Sekulow, Morton Blackwell, and Mike Farris, has seemed to be on the fast track to victory.
But will these criticisms of his party loyalty, despite his nearly 100% donation rate to the GOP, be enough to trip him up?
If fundraising for a friend – and longtime Republican – such as Kenny Golden, is enough for folks to want to kick Virgil Goode out of the party, is a $1000 check towards the president’s campaign and “being moved” by the president’s rhetoric enough to question Rigell’s conservative credos?
In other words, which is more important – a lifetime of work for a party or a few moments of disloyalty?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
Comments
34 Responses to "Will a party loyalty litmus test bite Rigell/Goode?"
If Rigell thought he was actually doing Republicans a favor by donating to Obama during the primaries, then he’s too stupid to be in office. As I said then, anyone who thinks we needed to STOP Hillary from getting the nomination is plum ignorant.
If he donated to Obama because, well, he wanted to support him – off with his head then!
Maybe we can read between the lines and figure out who you are endorsing now? Maybe not in this case, but in the things most important sometimes “a few moments of disloyalty” can make all the difference. All and everything can be forgiven, it’s up to the individuals if they want to forgive.
Ask any wife about their feelings on “a few moments of disloyalty”, and then look at the fallout from Sanford, John Edwards and now Mark Souder, and today, Arlen Specter. If you are a politician, your contract with the people is like a marriage contract with a spouse. The relationship is based on trust and loyalty which is sealed by an oath.
Good gracious. Too much drama over a stupid $1000 check. Look at the totality of the man’s record and accomplishments and make your judgment. Everyone has done something they regret. Everyone. Don’t be so sanctimonious and judgmental. Does anyone actually believe that Scott Rigell would go to DC and fight for Obama’s legislative agenda? Does anyone believe that Rigell would give aide and comfort to Pelosi? If you (not specifically you JR, but “you” in the broad sense) truly believe that then you’re too immature to be considered a responsible adult and you’re just throwing insults and bombs for the sake of being an irritant and a gadfly. This whole episode and the fact that its brought up repeatedly reminds me of the Washington Post and George Allen’s macaca moment. Enough already. Everyone that knows about this Obama check has already determined whether it is important to them. No new logic questions or comparisons with Virgil Goode are going to change anyone’s mind.
And besides, who gives a rat’s ass what some d-bag hack at the DCCC thinks.
Now if someone had a house in DC, not THAT would be an important issue, right?
Um…I’m with you in spirit, I think, Ron, but comparing the Obama check to WaPo/George Allen maccaca (and by that stretch, McDonnell’s thesis) is apples to oranges. The Obama check is a legitimate campaign issue, as are all of his donations, 99.5% of them good.
I do disagree entirely with the comparison to Goode. Virgil’s just making sure everyone knows he’s unaffiliated with the Republican Party at this point, something that Rigell is certainly not doing.
Thank you D.J.. It is an issue and the excuses I’ve heard so far don’t satisfy me. Ron, I have friends who are excellent anger management therapists. I’ll be glad to give you their numbers.
No one answers the questions I posed – will Rigell support Obama? NO. Will Rigell support Pelosi? No. And Kathy, if the answers you’ve heard so far don’t satisfy you, then vote for someone else or ask yourself why they don’t satisfy you. Again, look at the totality of his record. Re, anger management, you must be joking…this doesn’t make me angry or even upset. It’s too petty an issue to get worked up about despite the bloggers repeatedly bringing it up. And DJ – its exactly like macaca or the thesis – the question was raised by those who wanted an explanation and one was given. Usually that’s enough. This is just redundancy because there is an ax to grind – an agenda to pursue. Just like the media after macaca.
Except that an issue doesn’t necessarily just go away after an explanation. The reason the thesis and maccaca fiascos became running jokes was literally every article written about Allen and McDonnell mentioned those things. That hasn’t been the case with Rigell (not including comments)
I protest vehemently when people say Rigell isn’t conservative or a RINO or whatever; that couldn’t be further from the truth. For people in VB who’ve been around long enough, the very idea is a joke, since Rigell’s best ‘flaw’ was he was always too far right. Say what you want about the donations, but it’s a complete jump in logic to say he wrote this one check so he’s not a conservative or he’s a RINO. There’s a very good reason why Scott Taylor’s alleged ‘Seal not a RINO’ motto hasn’t caught on in the district: it’s not true. We are fortunate to have a great slate of candidates to chose from on their merits. Attacking them rather then contrasting their stances is unacceptable, and believe me, local political careers for most of the candidates are ended after June 8th for the next decade, at least within the Party
That being said, it doesn’t mean it’s going to go away because he explained it once. It’s always going to be there.
Contrasting their stances?
yeah, maybe Bearing Drift can sponsor a debate that they can all attend…
oops.
Ron, despite your words, “ax to grind – an agenda to pursue”, I really do have honest questions and would like honest answers. Checks to Obama, Mark Warner and Lucas is not a one time check. If for instance he was running as a moderate Republican and Rigell’s answer was:
“I knew for years I would eventually run for office at the right time in my life. I wanted to raise my children, get my business successful and find someone to run it for me I could trust before I pursued politics. While I gave to support my Republican friends and did everything I could to see them successful, I knew I also had to make Democratic friends to have their vote too when it came time for me to run. I am a person who wants to show early on I am a friend to all and can reach across the aisles to Republican and Democrats alike to work together.”
If that was his answer, I would respect and support that answer.
D.J., who else is a conservative you know or have known that ran or is running as a conservative Republican and gave money to liberal Democrats, (more than one) to help them in their campaign? If you or anyone can prove this is standard operating procedure I’ll eat my questions and words and I’ll never speak of it again. I Promise.
D.J.
Several times I have challenged you to give examples of conservative stands on issues that he (Scott Regall) has openly expressed prior to his announcement. You have provided none. Hence, I will now pen an article on my blog Wally’s World giving express examples where Rigell has openly shown a liberal to moderate posture not only through PAC contributions but verbally and in writing. Understand that I respect everyone has the right to a position, but one can not profess to be a conservative with a non-supportive ideology. D.J., you can’t un-ring a bell.
Wally, you haven’t challenged me to do anything, you’ve shouted out some open things to the comment, but not once have said DJ you should do this.
I don’t speak for Rigell or his stances. Sorry. And at the end of the day it’s not my job to convince anyone to vote for anyone. Hell, everyone on here predominantly has made up their minds as it is. Speaking of thesis though, it’s probably worth pulling Rigell’s from Regent.
I’m sure the VBTA will love your article. In fact it might even prevent them from endorsing any Republican. Guess we can look forward to the VBTA endorsing Glenn Nye this year.
The interesting thing about the DCCC piece that JR references above is that they turned Rigell’s words against him since the quotes are contradictions absent of any core values or message. Empathy with a customer buying a car may get you a sale, but empathy with all points of view as a wannabe politician will get you in trouble. The DCCC gave Rigell a little friendly tap on the shoulder with this article and when the time comes, the 2nd is going to be a brutal turf battle which empathy, understanding and a slick sales pitch won’t win.
And the cock crows three times.
VBTA has nothing to do with my comments, they are mine.
a) The fact that DCCC is taking the time to attack Rigell shows they know what a tough candidate he will be in the general. Have they ever released anything else on any other GOP candidate?
b) 99.5% of Rigell’s donations have gone to Democrats? If I had a GOP Congressman who voted 99.5% of the time the RIGHT way, I’d be estatic.
As I’ve said before; Bill Bolling, Morton Blackwell, Kay Cole James, Jay Sekulow all just LOVE to endorse liberals!
Wally, just read the new story about Rigell on your blog. Do you have a link to the VP letter Rigell sent defending the $25,000 trips to Japan by a VB city council member?
Thanks for the heads up.
Bryan R, Thou shall not BS thyself. The DCCC faithful might as well endorse Rigell for the primary.. oops.
Bryan I wouldn’t necessarily agree with your first point, but the fact that the DCCC is putting out anti-Rigell press releases already does not bode well for Loyola, Taylor, Sandlin, Maulbeck or Mizusawa.
DJ, Rigell has the money, the endorsements, the polling, the signage, is blitzing the media, and has the “Contender” stamp of approval. So, Rigell’s head is out of the gopher hole and he is naturally the DCCC target of choice. Apparently they have written off the rest of the candidates as noise.
The fire may already be on Rigell but at least he’s in the kitchen. The rest seem to be out on the patio as far as the DCCC is concerned. I’ve never seen a primary with so many great candidates and most not even have a chance. Was it because three started too late, most were unknown, most don’t have the resources, one of them gave considerable money over the years to other politicians? Could any of the rest of them made such a impression they would blow Rigell out of the water? Maybe, but they didn’t. The rest will split the vote with most going to Rigell. It is what it is.
Hmmmmm, Republican Party establishment lets down stalwart Kenny Golden, after he went to bat for all of these local Republicans, and when he seeks their support, they turn away, after his years of party loyalty? Virgil dares to think independently, and tries to hold the Republican Party establishment accountable for their years of abandoning the Republican Creed? And you want to excoriate both under the State Party Plan?!! JR, are you now part of the establishment? I would like not to think so, as you have shown yourself to be a true conservative. Yet, two conservatives reject their Party because the Party has rejected conservative principles (and them as well) and you call them out on it? The problem is NOT with Golden and Goode, THE PROBLEM IS WITH THE PARTY.
Kathy M – Anything can happen in the next couple of weeks. What we see on the surface is cash, rhetoric, and advertising; what’s going on underneath is much more complicated and likely to be influenced by many variables. Tuesday’s election results are all over the board; the outcomes of primaries and general elections are anything but certain. In the Critz/Burns contest the NRCC dumped over $950,000 (along with $445,000 from outside groups) to beat Critz. Burns is a businessman, ran as the outsider, and followed the NRCC’s ‘winning’ strategy of making the election a referendum about Nancy Pelosoi and Obama … in a seat that was trending Republican. (Sound familiar?) According to all news reports, the NRCC and the DNCC are pouring over this race and reassessing strategies for June.
BTW – there’s an informative, issues based Q &A w/ Bert Mizusawa in Jay Ford’s candidate series today.
http://www.altdaily.com/features/news/politics/qa-with-bert-mizusawa-republican-hopeful-for-congress.html
“Church ain’t over til the fat lady sings”
Campaigns and elections are driven by the CANDIDATE. His message, his story, his ties to the community, his experience, his ability to connect to audiences, etc. etc. etc.
They are not driven by endorsements.
Endorsements are often the by-product of a candidate’s ability to connect with the voters of their community.
Endorsements are often because other elected officials respect or realize a particular candidate is running an effective campaign and want to be part of a “winner.”
Endorsements are often because of prior relationships or friendships that extend back decades (see Bob McDonnell endorsing Rigell).
But Endorsements don’t win campaigns. They don’t. If they did, Charlie Crist would be the Republican nominee in Florida, instead of Marco Rubio.
That is the point I’ve tried to make to Kenny Golden and everyone other person complaining that party “bosses” decided the primary.
They don’t. This isn’t 1940s Virginia during the Byrd Machine.
20,000 VOTERS decide who the nominee are, and to think that Endorsements alone can carry a candidate is foolish beyond belief. They don’t, they often fail (as in the case of Pennsylvania with Specter).
The fact that Endorsements mean so little in a nominating contest should be obvious to someone like Golden who was a local Party Chairman. The fact that he failed to receive any endorsements should have meant little to him; if he was basing his campaign on endorsements from certain elected officials than it would have been a failed strategy even if every Delegate, Senator and elected official had climbed on board.
Bryan R – Believing that endorsements “matter so little” requires a willing suspension of disbelief. If unimportant, campaigns would not work hard to obtain them and, once obtained, would not prominently resell to the public via press releases, TV ads, and web sites. Same is true for which causes a candidate supports with personal checks. It’s another data point from which voters can draw conclusions and judge candidate’s veracity and character.
http://bearingdrift.com/2010/05/18/june-e-zine-special-nomination-edition/
Scott Rigell’s Commitments # 3 & #4 look pretty shallow next to his $10,000 support of a non-constitutional bill that attempted to obfuscate and shift accountability for 9 Billion dollars in regional taxes/debt from the General Assembly to the HRTA & NVTA:
#3. I WILL BRING ACCOUNTABILITY TO WASHINGTON, D.C.
#4. AMERICA’S FOUNDING DOCUMENTS WILL GUIDE MY DECISIONS.
Rigell is so far out in front he could get caught naked with Feda Morton and he would still win by 10 points.
@ Drooling – If true (and I’m not convinced) …ain’t that a shame. If D2 elects Rigell, we deserve to lose to Nye. $20,000 to support a clearly unconstitutional $9 Billion tax law??? “Send a proven leader to congress”???? What has he proven? He can write checks, abandon his church (because a church in Rhode Island ordained a gay minister), and sell cars? Service in the marine reserves??? Scott served in the days we called them ‘weekend warriors’; it was a time of almost ZERO chance of ever being called up and reserve duty was not much more than a camping trip, in uniform. I can only imagine what the REAL warriors that served in combat zones (Mizusawa, Maulbeck, Loyola, Taylor and Golden) must think. As the Texans say: Rigell is ‘all hat and no cattle’. I surely hope D2 elects anyone-but-Rigel; so many other honorable and real leaders to choose from.
If you’re right, Nye will pop champaign corks on June 8th.
Jay D, It was $10,000 not $20,000. Today I looked at:
http://www.vpap.org/committees/profile/money_in_donors/864?end_year=2002&filing_period=all&filter_schedule=all&industry=all&limit=50&locality=all&lookup_type=year&order=amount&page=1&start_year=2002&zip_code=all
I wonder who gave the sales pitch for the YES campaign originally? They were really good to snow job so many great people and businesses. Some I do business with and will never change, like my bank.
It’s good to have questions based on facts, not fiction.
On a positive note.. Watched Scott Play drums today with Guava Jam at the ocean front during the grand opening for the park honoring a man battling ALS. He was surprisingly good.. sincere thanks for the entertainment and supporting a great cause.
Back to the cruel issue, it is ironic that by virtue of the outcome of our primary that primarily republicans will deciding whether Nye wins in a couple of weeks. How so many can willingly put blinders on when it is so natural to see is a mystery.
Kathy, you are correct. A typo on my part not caught. It was $10K, not $20K. Thank you for catching my error. I would also love to know who pitched this and am glad others are paying attention. You can track the patrons and the votes on the bill links I posted earlier, on the BD e-magazine post. I am blown away so many elected officials didn’t understand (or care) that one region cannot tax another and the awesome power to tax rests solely with our elected officials, who are accountable to the people. One would think that would be covered under Delegate/Senator training 101.
And I am blown away that anyone who was part of this fiasco (and a major funding source) would even be considered as an appropriate candidate for congress.
How can any one type the words “Virgil Goode” and “party loyalty” in the same sentence with suffering a paralyzing fit of laugher……BWWWAAAAHAHAHAHA….see? Goode would declare himself a Whig, a Know Nothing or a Bull Moose this afternoon if he though there was any advantage in it for himself.
You must have a facebook account to see this:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1431341270994&subj=1192156398&ref=nf#!/video/video.php?v=1431341270994&subj=1192156398
Kathy Mateer says:
May 19, 2010 at 6:42 pm
“”If for instance he was running as a moderate Republican and Rigell’s answer was:
“I knew for years I would eventually run for office at the right time in my life. I wanted to raise my children, get my business successful and find someone to run it for me I could trust before I pursued politics. While I gave to support my Republican friends and did everything I could to see them successful, I knew I also had to make Democratic friends to have their vote too when it came time for me to run. I am a person who wants to show early on I am a friend to all and can reach across the aisles to Republican and Democrats alike to work together.”
If that was his answer, I would respect and support that answer.”"
Bob must have been listening. He gave that answer for Scott.
I wish the process of primaries worked the way I thought they should, the people making the choice before all the heavy hitting endorsements but it didn’t happen.
Rigell will win because of all the endorsements. “If he’s good enough for Bob and all the other Republican politicians , he’s good enough for me” mentality.
I guess no matter who wins, (Rigell, wink wink), we will stand behind and be strong and help who wins beat Nye. It’s called party unity.
CAn I ask What is This thing all About?
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.