Shak Hill: Tea Party Candidate?Politics

shak_hillIn a fundraising letter released by Shak Hill, candidate for the Republican US Senate nomination, he indicates that he welcomes the mantle of running as a Tea Party candidate.

Hill, a retired Air Force colonel former Air Force pilot and flight commander from Northern Virginia, used the occasion of RPV rolling out the Web site “MarkWarnerRecord.com” to make his claim in order to differentiate himself from Washington “insider”, “elitist”, and purported tax-hike advocate, former Bush White House Counsel and RPV Chairman Ed Gillespie.

Hill states:

“In 2012, after a rigorous primary contest in the Presidential nominating race, our party decided to settle on a seriously flawed candidate. That candidate- Mitt Romney, with his own record of government run healthcare and a checkered past of flip flopping on core principles offer a very similar comparison to the contest we now face.

“By doing so we ignored the huge successes of the Tea Party and Conservatives in the 2010 mid- term elections. We took our winning strategy off the table!”

In his letter, Hill lambastes Gillespie’s track record on taxes, bailouts, and advancing a notion that citizens be compelled into buying health insurance through adjusting the federal tax code.

In a nut-shell, Hill questions Gillespie’s principles and wonders how the GOP can take on Warner if Gillespie is the nominee.

“We cannot run against Warner on principle when our own principles are being questioned,” he writes.

The Republican convention will be held in June. Most local committees are now accepting registration for Virginia voters to become delegates with very short deadlines – some as soon as the end of the month. You can find out more on how to register to become a delegate to the convention at RPV.org.

Update: Hill’s military rank was originally posted inaccurately . It has been corrected.

  • MD Russ

    “Hill, a retired Air Force colonel from Northern Virginia,..”

    If I am not mistaken, Hill retired from the Air Force as a Lieutenant Colonel and not as a Colonel. For those who have not served in the military, there is a huge difference between the two ranks and claiming to be a “retired Colonel” when he retired as a Lieutenant Colonel is resume inflation at its very worst. It is one of the major objections that I have with Fox News when they refer to Ollie North as “Colonel North.”

    And it is enough alone for me not to vote for Shak Hill.

    • DJRippert

      I think people get confused. As I understand it (which may not be right) it’s OK to “round up” when you speak to somebody or about somebody using their name. So, if you were Lt Colonel Russ I could say, “I saw Colonel Russ at a party last night.” or “Hello, Colonel Russ”. However, if you ever introduced yourself you’d always say Lt Colonel. Also, if somebody asked me what you did for a living I’d say, “He’s a Lt Colonel in the US Army”. It’s unclear to me that Shak Hill refers to himself as a Colonel. Couldn’t it just be a case of others “rounding up” when the refer to him?

      I don’t know much about this Shak Hill guy. However, I read that he has six kids and 46 foster children! It seems to me that those who tell women to “choose life” and then work hard with adoptions or foster care earn a measure of respect.

      • MD Russ

        Rounding up is not permitted. That would allow retired Colonels to claim the status of retired Brigadier General. The problem with Lieutenant Colonels is that they can be referred to or addressed as “Colonel” in verbal communications. That is why there is a common question in the military, “is he a telephone colonel or a real colonel?”

        Irregardless, not making clear in published materials that you are a retired lieutenant colonel and not a colonel is deceptive. We have enough deceptive politicians in Congress already.

        • http://bearingdrift.com/ J.R. Hoeft

          MD – I’m a retired Lieutenant Commander. I always say so, but there are others who call me “commander.” Lieutenant means “in lieu of” or the “second” or “in place of.” My point is lieutenant is often dropped in conversation – but not in written form. I didn’t see anything in his release that referenced his rank. I was going off of memory.

          • MD Russ

            JR,

            I might have over-reacted to Hill, but I searched for his bio and could not find any reference to his retired rank except for “colonel,” which he apparently didn’t spend enough time on active duty to achieve. This has been a hot button for me ever since Ollie North, who belongs in prison, remade himself as “Colonel Oliver North” on Fox News after he retired in disgrace by beating a tour at Club Fed on a legal technicality.

            BTW, in my corner of the military, the term “decorated combat pilot” means that he flew in combat and didn’t crash his aircraft. BFD. Hill seems to me to be inflating his military service for political self-aggrandizement. If so, I hate that. Neither you nor I did what we did to polish our star.

            Just to be clear, my original comment was meant to disparage Shak Hill and not you.

          • DJRippert

            I don’t know Shak Hill from a hole in the ground. I went to his web site and read what is written. It describes his time in the Air Force but never mentions his rank. However, the web site does make a healthy effort to paint a picture of a poor boy made good. The description of his military record includes being a decorated combat pilot and flying top secret missions.

            If he refers to himself as Colonel rather than Lt Colonel I don’t see it.

            Anybody who supports Shak Hill should pass along this free tip from me – a candidate’s web site should have a tab titled “Issues” where the candidate actually says what he or she will do if elected. Mr. Hill’s web site is long on descriptions of Mr. Hill and his family but missing any discussion of issues.

          • Steven Thomas

            DJ- there is an issues tab. http://www.shakhill.com/issues/

          • DJRippert

            Excellent. I was looking for the issues tab at the top of the web site but it was on the bottom. I read through the issues. They are more like statements of philosophy but it’s a start. Hill says government spends too much. OK – how much should be cut and from what?

            I also think the Republicans could make a lot of hay with a populist view of the tax code – both individual and corporate. Industry and company specific tax breaks are the quid in the quid pro quo of gifts and campaign donations.

          • Turbocohen

            Keep digging Steven.. In the mean time, it time to make more popcorn..

  • Turbocohen

    Sadly Shak has a sense of being entitled to the TP mantle, if there is one. Nice guy but this is not a tea party guy by default no matter how many times he repeats that mad clicks the glass slippers.

    • Marta D. Saltus

      Great point, Turbo. I have never seen Shak at one single tea party event in Nova, or DC for that matter.

    • Steven Thomas

      Shak has a far better case to be a TEA party candidate than Ed has to being a “conservative”. For crying out loud, he started American Crossroads with Karl Rove! They are actively targeting TEA Party candidates!

      • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

        American Crossroads was not started to target Tea Party candidates and Ed Gillespie has not been affiliated with them since 2012. The organization actively target unelectable candidate was a different Karl Rove organization, the Conservative Victory Project. Ed has nothing to do with that, to my knowledge.

        Get your facts straight, Steve.

        • Steven Thomas

          Actually Brian, I believe I said “he started Crossroads with Karl Rove” and that crossroads is now targeting TP candidates. Both of which are true. And if the question is who is more friendly to the TP, well, the company you keep matters.
          And Marta, Shak has been going to TP meetings for years….. don’t know where you are coming from there.

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            Steve, you’re acting like Michael Moore, stringing together two completely different facts and letting people connect dots that aren’t there. Don’t do that.

            The question isn’t who is friendlier to the Tea Party. You essentially accused Gillespie of not being a conservative and then launched into a non sequitur about Crossroads. That doesn’t make any sense.

            Where Marta is coming from is simple – she’s a highly active Republican activist in Northern Virginia who goes to everything. If she hasn’t seen Shak, he’s not been there. Not a slam on Shak, that’s just a fact.

          • Steven Thomas

            I’m glad you don’t question which candidate is friendlier to the TEA Party.
            The American people are smarter than you give them credit for, Brian. They know a bill of goods when they see it.

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            I don’t have enough information to say who is better, so I didn’t contradict you on that.

            I give the American people a lot of credit for being smart, but when they are being told factually inaccurate information, you can’t fault them for getting things wrong. So stop leading people to draw incorrect inferences through your statements.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            And Steve, if I may make a recommendation: if you are speaking on behalf of a campaign, I would be a little more respectful to potential supporters, as everyone in this thread is. Maybe you didn’t learn that in campaign 101, but alienating voters is not a good strategy to gain their support.

          • Steven Thomas

            Marta, I have said nothing disrespectful, and I apologize if you somehow took offense. I will say however, that calling me out on this (simply because we happen to be on different sides of this given issue) while giving Brian and his stated contempt for conservatives a pass, does not help the credibility of your concern.

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            Steve, I don’t have “contempt” for conservatives. I have contempt for some conservatives, just like I have contempt for some liberals and some moderates. Don’t mischaracterize my personal dislike for specific individuals and their tactics as being somehow indicative of my views on ideology. I don’t waste time arguing ideology.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            Politicians looking for votes should be very much aware of what potential constituents care about, whether it’s a “credible concern” or not. Your candidate is on the ballot, not me. Secondly, I am a private citizen free to support, and side with, whomever I wish. I would advise you again that taking pot shots at people will not get your candidate any more support than he had before; on the contrary. Having said that, you are the veteran campaigner with over 10 years of experience and raising millions of dollars, right, so what do I know? You clearly think you are on the right path. Just keep doing what you are, and we shall see what happens on convention day.

          • Steven Thomas

            Marta, I have taken pot shots at no one. To the contrary, I have taken them from Brian and others here. I take them in good humor because that is a part of political discourse. But I challenge you to show me what you consider a “pot shot” because I just don’t think there are any. There certainly weren’t meant to be any.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            Brian is also a private citizen, you are representing a campaign. You certainly have questioned the conservatism of some, which I find very interesting. Didn’t you work for JMD’s Lt. Gov campaign, until she lost on the first ballot, and then you moved on to EW’s? If you are so attuned to the Tea Party and conservatism, you would know that JMD was considered anything but conservative on several issues. It’s funny you now question others conservatism or lack therof, given the circumstances. I am not sure why that’s relevant; they are not running for office.

          • Steven Thomas

            Marta, the only person whose conservatism I question is Ed, based on his record (tax hikes, bailouts, individual mandate). If you disagree with me, feel free to say why, that’s what healthy political debate is about. But there was nothing disrespectful or personal in it, unlike being called “Michael Moore” by Brian above. As for JM, she is 100% pro-life (as I am) and did the honorable thing by backing EW as the Republican nominee even when she didn’t agree with him on everything. That demands respect. You know who didn’t do that last year? Ed Gillespie.

          • Ryan Thomas

            That is great JM is 100 percent pro-life. So is Ed. So my question is how can you criticize Gillespie for not being conservative when the candidate you worked for (JM), and from whom your company received the most fees from, is far less conservative on many issues than Ed (gun rights, taxes, etc). Ed never had Bloomberg rallying on his behalf. You knew all this when you chose to support her. So let’s cut this self righteous BS and criticism of Romney, Allen, Gillespie, Comstock, etc when you are all over the place.

            Maybe rather than be Shak and Bob Marshall’s rottweiler, you should focus on promoting the policy IDEAS of the candidate (SINGULAR) you work for.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            My thoughts exactly.

          • Steven Thomas

            I don’t know who you are referring to but I haven’t said a peep about Barbara or George Allen. But neither of them are on the topic of dicussion here, just a red herring. Here’s what we have: one candidate who is a down the line conservative, won’t raise taxes, living testimonial to life, no bailouts, distinguished military career (which matters in a state where 1 in 6 voters is military), never supported Obamacare or the individual mandate. The other candidate, backed an unconstitutional tax hike, TARP bailouts, the individual mandate, was the lobbyist for Enron.
            Reasonable people can surely disagree on what it means to be conservative, and I certainly don’t own that label. But given the preponderance of the two records, it is REALLY hard to substantiate the claim that Ed is a conservative, or that Shak is not one. In point of fact, I have yet to hear one reason why Ed should be my senator, apart from “he can raise money”. That is NOT a qualification. Mark Warner can raise more money than Ed can, and he has a better chance of winning, so should we back Mark Warner? Of course not.

          • Ryan Thomas

            BS again. I have seen you trashing Barbara in the comment sections of Bull Elephant and here. I also heard you trash Romney and Allen in the same sentance at an FCRC meeting, so you are caught again.

            Second, I don’t think you even know what the word preponderance means. What record does Shak have other than being on some city council in Florida and bailing before his term expired. Also, ask some folks who worked with him on the 10th district committee and they paint a less than flattering picture of Shak. I see NO evidence of a record of accomplishment by Shak other than a bunch of rehashed 1980s campaign buzz slogans and platitudes. That does not constitute a record.

            Between your work for JMD and lying about not bashing Comstock and Allen, you are losing credibility the more and more you post and open your mouth.

          • Steven Thomas

            Well, I suppose you (like Brian) can attack me personally if you like. I’m not sure it will get you far. I would challenge you to show one instance- even one- of me bashing Comstock and Allen. And saying that George Allen lost because of the macaca thing isn’t bashing, it’s a statement of fact.
            Also- paging Marta Saltus to condemn this fellow on his disrespectful and personal attacks… crickets?

          • Ryan Thomas

            Maybe you should read back through the comment sections of various blogs to refresh your memory. I didn’t personally attack you other than point out you are all over the place politically and it is ironic for you to attack Gillespie for doing the same.

          • Steven Thomas

            Well, I could list off my conservative resume if you like, including raising $1.5 million for EW Jackson and being called a “government-hating nutzie” by my local liberal paper when I was a unit chair, but that’s not really the point. I’m not on the ballot.
            Instead, we have a constitutional conservative who has served his country honorably, worked himself from poverty to being a sucessful business owner, and fostered 46 children, versus someone who has scarcely lived a moment of his life outside DC political circles and who has promoted tax hikes, bailouts, and the individual mandate… and who lobbied for Enron. That is the choice, and there is nothing you can say that will not make it the choice.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            Steven, I have heard Shak use the line you used at FCRC the night before, at the Colonial RWC: “this election should be about Warner, not Romney, Allen and Rove” … That was a turnoff right there. Talk about why your candidate might be the best one for the job. I have yet to hear anything coming out of his campaign along those lines. I do believe now you must go back to campaign 101. The Leadership Institute offers some very good classes, make sure to check them out.

          • Steven Thomas

            Elections don’t get held in a polyannish vacuum, Marta. They are a choice, and if one of the choices has fatal flaws, that needs be debated in open forum. Shak has no flaws, zero. Nothing the Dems can attack. That is a major difference and an asset.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            “Shak has no flaws, zero” wow! I thought Shak belonged to the human species, as the rest of us do. Are you now saying Shak is not a human being? I’m speechless, and that doesn’t happen often.

          • Ryan Thomas

            Btw this whole “you can attack me personally” pity party rhetoric of yours is comical. Politics is a full contact sport. Bring a cup. I have been attacked personally MANY, MANY, MANY times in politics; it is part of the game. I am pretty sure you complaining about people questioning your credibility will really garner you plenty of sympathy.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            I was not aware I had any obligation to defend you… I think you are very confused Steve, and really digging a very deep hole here. Again, I strongly recommend you attend LI’s campaign school. I can put in a good word for you with Morton Blackwell. His wife Helen is lovely. I have been a guest at their home many times.

          • Marta D. Saltus

            Steve: my statement was that I have personally not seen Shak at any of the events I have attended regularly for 6 years now. As Brian accurately states below, I have been participating in more Tea Party events and groups all over NoVA and DC for me to even mention here, but I will mention a few: Northern Virginia Tea Party, Arlington Tea Party, Alexandria Tea Party, even PWC and crossed paths with Loudon members at joint events, at a couple of times in VA Beach. I have never seen Shak at any. Many rallies have been held by all area TP groups, within VA, MD, and even DC. I have never seen Shak at those. He may very well have been at others, but the point here is you are making him appear like a Tea Party candidite that has been actively engaged as I and others have, and that is simply not the case in the circles I belong to. Don’t make generalizations; that doesn’t look good for the candidate and his campaign.

      • Turbocohen

        Yeah Steven, Ed raised 8 mil for Rand Paul.. and parted ways with Rove who went all nasty on tea party.. Ed is in the business of electing REPUBLICANS and uniting our party, unlike Rove who is a progressive rino dividing us.. The two are very different and there are plenty of reasons for conservative tea party members to support Ed.

        • Steven Thomas

          No one is all bad, even Warner has some good votes. But the scrutiny- justly- will be focused on his disastrous votes. Just like the scrutiny on Ed’s record will be on support for tax hikes, individual mandate, and bailouts- all of which happened in the last 6 years. Then you have lobbying for Enron and a bunch of other poor decisions Warner will key in on. None of these fit any TEA Party conservative I know, which is why Ed’s personal approval ratings are upside down and he is running behind a generic Republican when polled against Warner.

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            Here we go again. How exactly does someone who has never held elected office get a “record?”

            And this is another example of you playing fast and loose with facts – any generic Republican is going to do better than any specific Republicans. We don’t elect generic, no name people. So even bringing that up is ridiculous.

            Steve, you’re not helping your client when you make arguments like this that are so easily shot down. Explain why we should be voting for Shak, not why you think Ed sucks. Just because you think Ed isn’t the best guy for the job doesn’t mean Shak is.

          • Steven Thomas

            Translation: Ed should never be held to account for the things he has said or done in the public arena, ie, his “record”.

            When matched against this “record” (cue Dr. Evil hand quotes here), I will take Shak’s record of distinguished military service, being a living testimonial to life by fostering 46 kids and adopting four more, starting his own business and living the REAL (ie, NOT DC-centric) American Dream. The polling proves this out.

            Game, set, match.

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            Steve, you know full well that when you are working for someone else – say, as Chairman of a political party, or an advisor to the President – you aren’t saying what you personal believe, you are representing or supporting your boss’s view on things. So claiming that Ed has a record because he’s made public statements in his career when he’s been working on behalf of other candidates, or the Republican Party of Virginia elected leadership, or the President of the United States is not fair. Blame George Bush if you have a problem with something Ed said supporting a Bush Administration priority.

            Nobody is arguing that Shak isn’t a good guy. But you’re going to need more than that to convince me he’ll be a good U.S. Senator.

          • Steven Thomas

            Brian, with respect, I don’t think any fair-minded person would agree with you. What you say and do, you alone are accountable for. Period. Apparently Shaun Kenney and John Scott agree with me on this point, because both of them (rather than address the points in hand) have tried to use my own employment to somehow discredit my arguments. You are continually given gruff about your own employment (in these circles, but not by me). Who you choose to work for- say, Enron, or the Corporate Alliance for Healthcare Reform- also reflects on you. That is why lobbyists seldom make for good candidates.
            Actually, on that point, what exactly is the great reason Ed Gillespie needs to be in the U.S. Senate? So far, the only reason I have ever heard given is that he can raise money (which says nothing about what kind of Senator he would be). So, given the remarkable deficiencies in his record, why not nominate someone like Shak whose record and beliefs better fit the party, then have Ed fundraise for him?

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            Steve, you don’t judge a lawyer by his clients, you shouldn’t judge a lobbyist by his clients either. Same with political consultants. Is anybody who worked for Enron tainted by what their leadership did? I don’t think so. Lobbyists make great candidates, in my opinion, and we’ve seen some lobbyists go on to be good elected officials, like Haley Barbour. Everyone is entitled to their day in court or their first amendment rights. Nobody should be penalized for helping someone exercise their rights.

            When people use your employment to discredit your arguments, they aren’t attacking you for your arguments. They’re saying you are being paid to make those arguments, so folks need to keep that in mind when judging your credibility. It’s the difference between a commercial with a testimonial from an actual person vs. one with a testimonial from a real person read by an actor.

            In the end though, we shouldn’t be blaming people for the sins of others. Guilt by association is bad. Don’t do it.

            Fair minded people, like me, aren’t going to judge you or anybody else by who they are employed by. I am never going to begrudge somebody a paycheck. Not everybody is lucky enough to be able to work for someone whose political views and policy positions exactly mirror their own.

  • Teddy Salad

    Glad he sent this letter. Now I know who not to vote for.

  • JReynolds79

    Want to know how I know Shak Hill’s days are numbered? He’s laying claim to titles without doing the work. Nice job Shak!

    • Steven Thomas

      What titles?

  • DJRippert

    Let’s see … a guy grows up in the NorthEast and comes to Washington, DC to go to college at the Catholic University of America. He stays and becomes a party functionary, Washington insider and ultimately the chairman of his political party. He then seeks a major elected office in Virginia despite never having held elected office.

    Were Ed Gillespie and Terry McAuliffe twins separated at birth?

    You guys crack me up. Where are the cries of “carpetbagger”, “insider” and “crony”?

    I am open minded about this election. Gillespie or Shak Hill might have enough good ideas to make them attractive to independent voters. I look forward to hearing what they have to say about the issues. Until then, I’ll leave the candidate bashing to you supposed Republicans. Let’s be honest – you guys do a better job of ripping apart your own candidates than any Democratic web site.

    • Doug Brown

      So you will be supporting Ed like you supported Terry?

      • DJRippert

        I might. Being a lifelong Virginian I don’t put any credence in calling anybody a “carpetbagger”. I also don’t put any stock in calling candidates for US Senate “Washington insiders”. The day the winner of the election takes the oath of office he or she becomes a “Washington insider”. They are running for the right to become a Washington insider even if they weren’t one already.

        First things first, I wonder why people on this blog seem so anti-Hill and pro-Gillespie. Maybe Shak Hill referred to himself as a Colonel instead of Lt Colonel. Maybe Shak Hill overstates his Tea Party credentials. That’s it? I’d love to hear some more serious reasons to support Gillespie over Hill.

        As for Mark Warner – he’s done some good things and some bad things. We’re not dealing with a Jim Moran or Gerry Connolly here. He voted no on a proposed Senate amendment to prohibit the sale of assault weapons. He voted no to a proposed Senate amendment to limit the size of magazines in firearms. Of course, he was a willing participant in the disinformation around Obamacare.

        • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

          I think it’s simply a question of who folks know. I know Shak and I know Ed, but I’m also in Shak’s area, so I’ve met him plenty of times. Not everybody else has. But everyone in Virginia who has been active for more than a year knows Ed.

          • DJRippert

            I know of Ed Gillespie but I don’t know Ed Gillespie. However, I know plenty of people who say they personally know Ed. Literally all of them speak very highly of Mr. Gillespie. I never heard of Shak Hill outside of what’s occasionally written on Republican blogs. I understand that he’s been a foster parent to 46 foster children over the years. Sounds like he’s a pretty good guy too.

            I hope they get around to addressing the issues. I’ve been to both their campaign web sites. Nothing but fluff. They’re both hard working guys who love their families. Yadda, yadda, yadda. I am also a hard working guy who loves his family – maybe you should vote for me.

            Beating Warner will be quite a challenge. Warner is held in pretty high regard by most Virginians. He’s hardly considered an embarrassment to the state. If Gillespie or Hill is to have a chance they need to understand the issues that Virginians consider most important, define their policy regarding those issues and stay on message with respect to those issues. a good start would be to write what they think on their freakin’ web sites!

          • Steven Thomas

            Not true. I have been active in VA politics in varied parts of the Commonwealth for mroe than a decade and I have never met him. Might have something to do with not taking much interest in the nitty gritty of state party politics (and wasn’t chair for long).

          • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

            I guess only us high powered DC lobbyists have met him, right?

            Come on.

    • JReynolds79

      There aren’t any cries because they would be completely unfounded-the fact of the matter is Gillespie has spent his entire life working for the Republican Party…don’t try to re-write someones biography, it’s unbecoming.

      • DJRippert

        And Terry McAuliffe didn’t spend his whole life working for the Democratic Party? At 22 he was the national finance director of Jimmy Carter’s 1980 reelection campaign. He then went to law school and by age 43 he was Chairman of the Democratic Convention of 2000. Then Chairman of the DNC. He was one of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign managers.

        As far as Ed Gillespie working his whole life for the Republican Party – he founded Ed Gillespie Strategies – “a strategic consulting firm that provides high-level advice to companies and CEOs, coalitions, and trade associations.”. Sounds like a political insider using his connections to make some money in private industry to me. Before that he worked for Quinn Gillespie and Associates (QGA), one of Washington, DC’s premier government relations firms. Ed Gillespie is also a paid speaker who is represented by the Leading Authorities Speakers Bureau

        You might find it instructive to actually read Ed Gillespie’s biography before accusing me of rewriting it. Your claim that Ed Gillespie spent his entire life working for the Republican Party is absurd. He spent plenty of time making money in Washington the old fashioned way – dispensing advice for a fee.

        • Doug Brown
          • DJRippert

            OK. Ed Gillespie founded a lobbying firm with Jack Quinn – a Democratic Party operative. Personally, I am glad that Gillespie founded a private enterprise and can work along side Democrats. I might be happier if he’d founded a software company rather than a lobbying firm but even lobbying is private enterprise.

        • JReynolds79

          That’s right, I forgot-being bipartisan is sacrilege these days. Reagan was blindly partisan, right? Oh wait…

          • DJRippert

            You’re getting a bit lost here. I don’t have a problem with people being “Washington insiders”. I didn’t criticize Terry McAuliffe for being a “Washington insider” and I won’t criticize Ed Gillespie for being a “Washington insider”. The people I criticize are those who rail at McAuliffe for being an insider but then overlook the issue when one of their insider candidates comes forward. Ditto for the even more absurd term “carpetbagger”.

            As for “crony” – they’re all “cronies”. They come to Washington quacking about how much they hate Washington and promise to serve a term or two and then head home. But they rarely do that. Instead, the come to Washington, serve a few terms and then stay in Washington and profit from their connections. I see Newt Gingrich eating in a McLean, VA restaurant all the time. I guess he never made it back to Georgia. Rick Santorum was living in Great Falls, VA years after he was out of politics. I guess Pennsylvania wasn’t really his cup of tea after all. Democrats too. John Breaux often spoke warmly of his home state of Louisiana while serving in Washington as a US Senator. Once he left office he headed back to Louisiana. He made it all the way to Maryland where he now resides.

          • JReynolds79

            So you’re pre-emptively painting a picture without any color? Makes sense now…

          • DJRippert

            I am painting a picture without any color? Pre-emptively, no less? I have to be honest – I don’t know what you are talking about.

          • JReynolds79

            Ok, my point is simply that you’re confusing correlation with causation. You can’t misconstrue someone’s success in an industry as anything other than an ability to assess the landscape and succeed-something Ed has proven time and time again. He wins, and with no statewide offices, we need a winner.

  • Jack K

    I am supporting Shak for two reasons. The first being that he is a true conservative and has the best chance at being the Tea Party candidate in this race. No matter who you support, we are all Republicans and we need to stand behind the candidate who has the best chance of winning. The past two presidential elections have shown us that nominating either Washington insiders or “wishy-washy” candidates doesn’t work and it is time we stop pretending that it will work. The 2010 elections showed us that the people really do want new conservative/Tea Party candidates and 2014 could turn out the same or even better than 2010 for the Republicans. The second reason I support him is due to the fact that he has dedicated his life to serving the public and helping others.Whether he was defending our nation as an Air Force pilot or as a foster parent to over 40 kids or as a regular blood donor for over 20 years, he is someone who genuinely wants to help people and has a life’s record of doing so.

    • http://www.brianschoeneman.org/ Brian W. Schoeneman

      Now that’s a good explanation of why someone is supporting Shak. Even if I disagree with the wishy-washy characterization.

      • Colin

        Shak Hill for U.S. Senate: He donates blood.

        • Teddy Salad

          Hill for Senate: Supporting the Girl Scouts one box of thin mints at a time.

      • Warmac9999

        You are correct. The problem isn’t wishy-washy, it is with republicans who believe that ever bigger government is great just so long as republicans control the reins. We are clearly coming to a juncture where something has to give between the big government politicians and the small government citizens. Ben Franklin once said something to the effect that those who trade essential liberty for security will eventually have neither liberty nor security. I prefer liberty but history shows that there are lots of people who will sell their souls and their children for a few pieces of silver or gold.

    • MD Russ

      Nice. I have also dedicated my life to defending our nation, along with 1,917,242 other retired veterans. And I have performed Top Secret missions while being a decorated war veteran. (e.g. I got those “meritorious” I-showed-up medals.) I was a frequent blood donor for 40 years until Mad Cow Disease made me ineligible and I have rescued puppies and kittens from animal shelters.

      BFD. How does that qualify me for the United States Senate?

      • Eric McGrane

        In same fashion as Al Franken, only better?

        It would help if you laid out your specific qualification criteria.

        • Warmac9999

          Frankenstein didn’t win, he stole.

      • Doug Brown
        • MD Russ

          I didn’t vote for him, either, primarily because he was an empty suit with no qualifications. Thanks for helping me illustrate my point about Hill.

          • Doug Brown

            You have a selective service sense of humor.

      • Warmac9999

        Mad cow disease explains everything. There, I stepped into your world and you should be happy, happy, happy.

        • MD Russ

          Very funny, Warmac. At the risk of doubling your knowledge of the world, I will have to tell you that anyone who has lived for an extended period of time in a country with Mad Cow Disease is permanently ineligible to be a blood donor. That is because they may have a latent infection of variant Creutzfeld Jacob Disease (vCJD). But I am happy, happy, happy that you can make fun of a retired military veteran who might develop a fatal brain disease and die a painful death.

          It must really suck to be you, asshole.

          • Warmac9999

            And, of course, you have to resort to name calling. Oh, I can assure you, there are many diseases that are fatal and painful – and those diseases are far more prevalent than Mad Cow.

            You might want to examine the European five year survival rate for cancer deaths among men – currently about 47%. The USA five year survival rate for cancer deaths among men – currently about 66%. So as you rail about a disease which affects very few, I would prefer to talk about something that everyone is likely to encounter if they have not already done so.

            Obamacare, rather than lifting the above statistics even higher, will almost certainly lower them. This is the great socialist medicine that is so beloved by the democrats.

            As to making fun about your service, you ridiculed Shak Hill. Apparently, you can dish it out but not take it. I can certainly honor your service and did so myself for decades. I cannot, however, honor your ridicule.

          • MD Russ

            You want name calling? If you can’t understand the enormous personal insult that you gave me, then go fuck yourself. I suggest that it will be the best sex you have ever had.

          • Warmac9999

            Did you or did you not ridicule Shak Hill? As to an enormous personal insult, my intention was to point out your ridicule through the use of the ridiculous. Apparently, I succeeded beyond my wildest imagination. Your reaction is the both unreasonable and unreasoning.

            I have seen this on the Huffington Post to the point where insults such as yours have little meaning to me. I see it as your inability to accept any responsibility for your own words. It should be no surprise to you that I, or for that matter, anyone can take exception to what you say and in any way they or I chose to say it.

            Based on past discussions, you and I will never agree on much of anything. I try, however, not to curse at you. As far as ridicule to make a point – sorry, but I will chose whatever approach I find useful and not be restricted to what you think is the right way to say something.

    • MD Russ

      “By doing so we ignored the huge successes of the Tea Party and Conservatives in the 2010 mid- term elections. We took our winning strategy off the table!”

      Really? Did “our winning strategy” in 2010 include Christine O’Donnell’s failure to win a very open seat in Delaware? Or Sharon Angle’s failure to unseat Harry Reid in Nevada, underperforming a generic Republican by over 11 points in the polls? Or Joe Miller’s failure to keep a safe Republican seat in Alaska?

      A few more Tea Party winning strategies like these and Republicans can forget about ever regaining a majority in the Senate.

  • Bob A

    I hate to say the words, but we must face the reality that Virginia is now a “Blue State”. We of the Virginia GOP need to change our thinking concerning what makes a winning candidate. Now a successful GOP candidate must win over significant numbers Independent and Democratic Virginia voters.

    While I have no doubt that Ed Gillespie is good and honest man, I don’t believe he’ll be a winning candidate. It seems to me that Ed is from the same mold as our two prior Virginia GOP U.S. Senate candidates. What I mean by that is Ed is a long time Virginia GOP operative as were George Allen and Jim Gilmore. Their brand of Republican is not winning now in Virginia.

    It is time for the Virginia GOP to get behind a different kind of Republican. A Republican who does not carry baggage that can be attacked by Mark Warner. A candidate who does not need to waste a lot of effort fending off Democrats. A candidate who can keep the pressure on Mark Warner and his failures as a Senator and a Governor.

    I endorse Shak Hill to be the Virginia Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate.

    • Marta D. Saltus

      So in the same breath that you say a winning candidate must be able to win over indies and democrats, you say Ed Gillespie cannot, but Shak can? I’d love to have Steve comment on that logic! It would also be nice to know your real name, “Bob A” Normally endorsements are accompanied by the full, and real name, of the person making the endorsement.

  • Jonny

    I believe that Mr.Hill is the best Choice for Virginia. This is because he believes in America. He fought for our country and will continue to do show on the Congressional Floor Battles. He will bring back our economy by cutting taxes and bringing more people jobs. Learnmore here : https://docs.google.com/file/d/0By9CVYuIKQdfU2JzWU5kT09DNUp6VGNzdC01eXdpZm42MHIw/edit

  • ghostofteddalton

    People wonder why the Republican Party is in decline. This site gives you an idea. Half of this thread seems to be devoted to the difference b/w a Colonel and a Lieutenant Colonel. The other half seems to be whether a man attended some meetings or not.

    And this is the most commented on thread of the day.

    What has happened to the “bold colors” of Reagan. It seems that almost every Republican site nowadays has threads that simply denigrate into the most obscure arguments one could dream of….

    • Ryan Thomas

      The party is in decline because people like Shak Hill drop platitudes and rehashed old phrases and think that is enough to win. They also think that drumming up the base with red meat is sufficient to win in a purple, almost blue, state. Principles are a nice foundation but I want to see a house of ideas and policies built on it. People don’t buy holes in the ground with concrete walls; they want something of value to buy. 1980s catch phrases and no money won’t win in today’s environment.

      • Warmac9999

        The Party is in decline because it has lost its identity to the Democrats. Virtually every presidential candidate since Reagan was a big government candidate. GHW Bush won because of Reagan – and then turned big government with his tax pledge rejection. GW Bush barely won and then built ever bigger government. Dole, McCain and Romney all ran on the idea that Republicans do better things with the levers of ever larger government.

        We need to get back to the basic principles of the party – small is beautiful. And we will certainly not win every election as we develop our message. But the American people will support candidates who know how to keep America going with smaller, less intrusive government.