Has Jamie Radtke had her fill of Tea?

Does Tea Party organizer turned Senate candidate Jamie Radtke believe she runs the risk of becoming Virginia’s version of Christine O’Donnell or Sharron Angle? Is she steering herself away from the Tea Party label?

We’re just not sure.

Last Friday, 92 House Republicans helped to defeat an amendment offered by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. Blackburn proposed the amendment to help the Republicans live up to their campaign pledge of “$100 billion in cuts.” Eric Cantor was one of the Republicans who helped defeat the measure.

The Tea Parties went wild. Erick Erickson of RedState said “This was a failure of leadership, particularly by Eric Cantor.” Erickson’s blog post was circulated around the Internet by conservative and tea party websites. They weren’t happy about the vote.

Radtke’s comments? Well, according to her Facebook page and her campaign website…nothing. Strange, since just a month ago she was touting Erickson’s endorsement of her candidacy. While we haven’t seen it, sources say that her response is “She’s not running against Cantor.”

No, but in her reason for running for Senate she says:

We would be foolish to hope one last time that career politicians can and will save us from the national crisis that they themselves even now are making worse. To change Washington we need to elect a new generation of leaders to the Senate and House who will fight to restore the virtue and accountability that has been sorely lacking in our government.

How, by any stretch, can Eric Cantor not be included in that statement?

Is she afraid of offending the Majority Leader because she knows she can’t win Virginia without his support? Or is she just not paying attention to what’s going on in Washington?

Then comes this week’s announcement that George Allen’s 2006 Netroots coordinator, Jon Henke, has signed on with Radtke.

But here’s the kicker: Radtke didn’t make the announcement.

No, the announcement was leaked and instead hit the blogsphere at Blue Virginia and Not Larry Sabato (get yer own links).

Even tonight, Radtke hasn’t officially released a statement but on her Facebook page there’s a link…to Not Larry Sabato.

Hopefully, for her sake, the first thing Henke will do is tell her “never do that again.”

It was an opportunity to shout out “Hey, I got one of George’s boys!”

And she missed it.

Not only that, while I like Henke and think he’s very good at what he does, he’s 1) libertarian and 2) from what I understand, pro-choice.

That’s not going to win her any Bob Marshall supporters. (Radtke has criticized Allen on abortion issues, even though he has a rating of 100 from National Right to Life Committee, and a zero from NARAL).

Look, the only way George Allen loses this nomination is for one of the cast of thousands also running to build a coalition against him. Hiring a pro-abortion libertarian doesn’t seem like the most logical way to get the conservatives to rally behind you.

Not Larry Sabato (the link is yours for the getting) says this is a major defection from the Allen camp. With no disrespect to Jon, I’m not really sure he’s been in the Allen camp since his last check cleared in 2006.

Perhaps more telling is that NLS says “This is a big move for Radtke who will now have every possible piece of dirt against Allen at her disposal.” That seems to imply that Radtke intends to run her campaign from the gutter.

And, since she’s cited him as her only source of this news, it seems that this time at least, NLS actually is 99.8% accurate.

UPDATE: Mr. Henke contacted Bearing Drift. He notes, among other things, that the characterization of him as “pro-choice” is an inaccurate reflection of his position.

  • Nigel COleman

    You guys have really gone off the deep end… Since she didn’t make statements about things YOU want her to talk about on her FB page, she’s suddenly gone RINO. SMH…

  • D.J. Spiker

    If there’s one person who can’t criticize anyone about going off the deep end, it’s you NC. No one takes you seriously. Rightfully so.

    I don’t see anything in there about her being a RINO however. Of course, if there’s one term that means nothing anymore, it’s ‘RINO’ Unfortunately, it’s usage has become so watered down that it’s worthless. It’s become, anyone who doesn’t vote/agree lockstep with the Tea Party is a RINO. Sorry folks, RINO has run it’s course.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Has Jamie Radtke had her fill of Tea? | Bearing Drift: Virginia Politics On Demand -- Topsy.com()

  • Igor Prohorov

    Jamie is strong on many issues, but I find it highly suspicious that she has never called out one of the biggest RINO’s in the house, who also happens to be her Representative. Please correct me if I’m wrong. Also, there is no issues page/platform on her page at all.

  • Joe Cacciotti

    I am so glad Bearingdrift also see Radtke as an opportunist and someone who refuses to criticize Eric Cantor.

    Jamie will go all out in hiring anyone who she feels may criticize her or damage her campaign. Such as recently hiring Jon Henke an…d Chuck Hanson as Radtke’s director of communications.

    I am sure many more people who have been outspoken against Jamie Radtke or those who she feels could reveal damaging information, will be hired to keep them quite.

    So those who are in need of a job and have criticized Jamie Radtke in the past, stay tuned, you may soon have a pay check from Jamie Radtke.

    It’s a smart move on Radtke’s part to hire those who can damage you the most.

  • John Jackson

    As we embark on the weekend, it could not go by without bashing Ron Paul supporters, Libertarians or the Tea Party. Guess it’s our turn this week. Rather reminds me of the “finger poking” kid on the playground that starts the fight between the bully and someone else…Hey I wouldn’t take that from them.

    I’m beginning to think that you guys are closet Democrats. It’s OK to come out, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell have been replaced.

  • Ron Paul, the libertarians, and the Tea Party are three very distinct and different groups on the ol’ Venn diagram. The first two would love to claim the third, but it just ain’t so.

  • sara

    Shaun, partially true…unfortunately you can’t use a Venn diagram for four groups, but in reality your statement should be expanded to:

    “The GOP, Ron Paul, the libertarians, and the Tea Party are four very distinct and different groups. The first three would love to claim the fourth, but it just ain’t so.”

  • Steve Vaughan

    Re: campaigning in the gutter.
    If you’re running against the “A Team,” the race is going to get down and dirty. It’s what they do. And they’re good at it. Looks like Radtke is willing to give as good as she gets and she hired someone familiar with all the op research on Allen.

  • All your “diagrams” are backwards.

    The Tea Party is Comprised of the normal spectrum of GOP (minus big govt Republicans), Ron Paulers, and Libertarians. They all have commonalities that draw them into the Tea Party.

  • Pingback: The Show Must Go On « Sara for America()

  • Gonzo

    The Virginia Tea Party Patriots assembled by Radtke served little purpose other than as a disguise for the Jeff Frederick crowd to cause headaches for RPV, and now that the lead opportunists are seeing the clock start to tick down, they’re bailing out of the way to let Mark Lloyd and co. run it into the ground and take the fall.

    Aside from the efforts to defeat Obamacare, the only meaningful purpose for the Tea Party is to provide a haven for Conservatives skeptical of the GOP/RPV, and Americans For Prosperity already fills that void. The only folks left for the Virginia Tea Party Patriots are the power hungry, mudslinging, has-beens trying to re-create themselves as “the true conservatives.”

  • Red Baron

    Wow Gonzo tell us something we don’t know.

  • @Sara —

    Mostly agreed. If the Tea Party wanted to do so, they could take over the entire Republican Party of Virginia in an instant. I’m not sure the GOP really constitutes much of a force anymore… though I’m sure the GOP would love to co-opt the movement.

  • Valentinus

    Radtke is not going to win so its not much of an issue, not because of Tea Party affiliation but because she doesn’t have sufficient wherewithal to run for Senator. Tea Partiers that ran for the House or for state offices did just fine. It’s naivete or arrogance (such as displayed by our Prex daily) to think you start at the top just because.. And even Obama knew he had to vote Present at a few stops along the way beforehand.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Has Jamie Radtke had her fill of Tea? | Bearing Drift: Virginia Politics On Demand -- Topsy.com()

  • Jay D

    Apologies for the temporary hijack of this thread, but 2 days ago a new Republican candidate entered the race – David McCormick – with not a blink from BD?

  • Valentinus

    Since I’ve learned not to leave anything implicit here, I meant my comments about the Tea Party on a national level; not VA specifically. The Tea Party did less well in VA than many other states, another reason why Radtke is going to lose.

  • Gonzo’s observation that Radtke bailed out to let Mark Lloyd take the fall for the anticipated degradation of the Virginia Tea Parties is quite poignant. But I believe a few related observations may provide further insight into the nature of the maneuver and its other underlying causes.

    Radtke and McSweeney never had a vision for the Virginia Tea Parties outside that for advancing their political agendas: Jamie’s, to launch her political career into a high orbit, and Pat’s, to settle scores and regain influence over RPV. A principal part of the act was to organize a big, impressive Tea Party Convention, using the event to attract to them media attention, grassroots support, and money to launch Jamie’s campaign for high office. Neither Pat nor Jamie care about the common man, and neither could see how to benefit their agendas by helping the Tea Parties secure a few victories for the people.

    Jamie’s bail-out came when she (and McSweeney) believed she had secured the Tea Party support for her senatorial run. And as I just said, she had no interest in advancing the Tea Party cause anyway — nor could she even if she wanted to. Jamie is a rather pedestrian thinker, visionless and uncreative, even if she is a manipulator extraordinaire, Jamie can read and recite from memory Pat McSweeney’s talking points, and can do it very well, but even thinking falls notoriously short of a viable vision, even when he tries. (I do have much respect for him as an attorney though.)

  • Hi Gonzo! Muppets for George Allen! Yayyyy!!!!!

  • Now that I know my nemesis Red Baron is against Radtke, I’ m nervous. The frozen pizzas aren’t bad in a pinch.

  • For the record, I am the one posting as Kermit and Snoopy.

    Just saying you should have the courage of your convictions to use your real name.

  • Marsha Blackburn Voted FOR:
    Omnibus Appropriations, Special Education, Global AIDS Initiative, Job Training, Unemployment Benefits, Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations, Agriculture Appropriations, FY2004 Foreign Operations Appropriations, U.S.-Singapore Trade, U.S.-Chile Trade, Supplemental Spending for Iraq & Afghanistan, Flood Insurance Reauthorization , Prescription Drug Benefit, Child Nutrition Programs, Surface Transportation, Job Training and Worker Services, Agriculture Appropriations, Foreign Aid, Debt Limit Increase, Fiscal 2005 Omnibus Appropriations, Vocational/Technical Training, Supplemental Appropriations, UN “Reforms.” Patriot Act Reauthorization, CAFTA, Katrina Hurricane-relief Appropriations, Head Start Funding, Line-item Rescission, Oman Trade Agreement, Military Tribunals, Electronic Surveillance, Head Start Funding, COPS Funding, Funding the REAL ID Act (National ID), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, Thought Crimes “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, Peru Free Trade Agreement, Economic Stimulus, Farm Bill (Veto Override), Warrantless Searches, Employee Verification Program, Body Imaging Screening, Patriot Act extention.

    Marsha Blackburn Voted AGAINST:
    Ban on UN Contributions, eliminate Millennium Challenge Account, WTO Withdrawal, UN Dues Decrease, Defunding the NAIS, Iran Military Operations defunding Iraq Troop Withdrawal, congress authorization of Iran Military Operations, Withdrawing U.S. Soldiers from Afghanistan.

    Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
    See her “blatantly unconstitutional” votes at :

  • Mark Kevin Lloyd

    There are comments on this thread from people I don’t believe I know. Maybe I do since they hide behind the anonymity of their cyber moniker and don’t have the courage to speak directly to all they would demean.

    This movement, and the VTPP, is not a created vision of any one person, or group of people. The formation of the VTPP was not Jamie’s idea. It was the brainchild of others, and she was asked to get involved. She did, and she did accomplish what others around the country have tried to do and failed. Jamie deserves credit for this. I’ve seen firsthand what she has done, and what she has been through. I’ve witnessed her dedication to the cause, I’ve seen her successes and failures.

    The fact that so many people want to destroy her, the VTPP, and the movement overall indicates that they feel some sort of threat. My mom used to say that a person is known by the friends they keep, but I think in politics it is just the opposite. In politics it appears you are known by who your enemies are, and your critics.

    The VTPP might fail, the movement might fail, or maybe they morph into something else altogether different than what they appear to be now. Time will determine that. If it does fail, then may God save us all from what is coming our way.

    It is easy to criticize, and much harder do actually step up and make something happen. I have no doubt that many of you who are critical of the VTPP, the Tea Party movement, and Jamie Radtke do see yourselves as making contributions to the greater good. But, I would challenge you to explain how the constant derision of people trying to come together and change things for the better accomplishes anything.

    You question Jamie’s motivations, and defend others who have proven their motives to be the same, if not less than hers. You predict the failure of the VTPP and the Tea Party movement nationally, but that prediction has been out there from the very beginning, and so far has been inaccurate. There is no evidence of failure, or even diminishing momentum. There is evidence that the naiveté is going away, and things are turning more focused and serious. The movement is moving away from the big rallies, and putting more of that energy into real political action. Tea Party caucus’ in house and senate, Tea Party candidates winning around the country, flipping 19 state legislatures in less than 2 years, is evidence that something is happening, and it is NOT the GOP that made this happen. Although, they want to take credit for it.

    My critical friends, this is a work in progress. There is much more work to do. You can either jump in and help do it, or critique it from you hiding places. I would welcome your help, your good ideas, and your energy. (Your money would be nice too, since none of us are being compensated for the hours we spend doing this.) But, carping from some cyber-hiding-hole is not leadership, or even a productive contribution.

  • Jay D –
    Guess you, DJ Spiker, and I were all thinking about McCormick at around the same time…both DJ and I posted late-afternoon yesterday.

    My apologies for not posting on him earlier, but this is still a hobby for all of us. We try to stay on top of the political news, but sometimes don’t get to things immediately.

    You can always reach us to remind us to post things through our contact page. http://bdbackup.wpengine.com/contact/

  • Jay D

    J.R. Absolutely no apology necessary – just an impatient ‘inquiring mind’ here! 🙂 BD bloggers (and subsequent comments) generally reveal much more than press releases and WaPo stories, which is very cool and work that is much appreciated!

  • Joe Nowlin

    Who needs NLS or Blue Virginia when we have Bearing Drift or as I call it the “Conservative Cannibals”. Some of the vitriol spewed in this comment string against good conservatives must have Virginia liberals smiling. Keep it up and the Democrats will keep the Senate seat.

  • It is good to see Ward’s update acknowledging that Mr. Henke is NOT pro-choice. I guess that means Bob Marshall fans can rest easy, huh Ward? That has been a frequent mischaracterization of both Libertarians and Ron Paul Republicans.

    Traditionally you could probably say Libertarians have been pro-choice, but that has changed. Sure there are a good many in that category still. Being Pro-life is not inconsistent with libertarian thought. It all comes down to when you think a fetus becomes a person. At that point the Natural Rights kick in. Additionally, many disaffected Republicans have joined the Libertarian party or are just small “l” libertarian Republicans. You might be surprised how many TLP members are Pro-life and were happy to hear about Planned Parenthood being defunded in the House of Representatives.

  • tx2vadem

    Britt, not enough to get “…a pro-abortion libertarian…” stricken from the record. Best to ostracize first, apologize later I guess. =)

    To this poster though, I love “pro-abortion” it perfectly warps the position of opposition by ascribing a position that no one actually holds.

  • Gonzo


    “In politics it appears you are known by who your enemies are, and your critics … I would challenge you to explain how the constant derision of people trying to come together and change things for the better accomplishes anything”

    Are you talking about criticism of the Tea Party Patriots, or are you talking about “Tea Party” attacks on Robert Hurt and Scott Rigell (both who voted for the Blackburn Amendment to cut spending an additional $21 billion), longtime conservative unit chairs (replaced by chairman to paranoid to send out meeting announcements), Bob McDonnell (derided as a conservative whack job by the left throughout the governor’s election), constitutional officers (kicked out of local unit committees), and virtually any candidate leery of parading around carrying the mantle of a “tea party candidate.”

    If you’re so convicted that conservative infighting is not productive, then stop doing it. Solid conservatives having to fend off Don Quixote crusades (waged by Jamie Radtke and co.) on candidates who actually have a chance of winning something are not productive. Throwing mud then chastizing those washing it off their face doesn’t make you a conservative, it makes you a hypocrite.

  • Mark, you are known by the Tea Party hating muppets that attack you. You are known by the nameless individuals attacking you that think a candidate Virginians have already fired has a chance. If George Allen was a worthy candidate, he wouldn’t have people scrambling to join the race against him. If George Allen was a better choice than Radtke then Radtke wouldn’t have picked up $100k in December, Erick Erickson wouldn’t have endorsed her, and key people like Henke would be fleeing Allen to team up with his opponent Jamie Radtke! If Senator Allen’s brand of conservative can’t make it in Virginia, where can it? He was fired. Better to have a change of guard rather than a return of a proven disappointment.

  • Mark Lloyd’s defense of VTP and Radtke, affectedly constructive, is full of mischaracterizations. I have repeatedly presented here the truth of how Radtke and her cronies had come to control the majority of the Virginia Tea Parties, ad see no reason for repeating this one more time at this stage. However, I would like to explore the new spurious claim by Mark that the “Federation” was not Jamie’s idea and that she merely set it up at the request of others. Would Mark be so kind as to tell us who the “others” were? If he complains that Jamie and VTPP have been attacked here by nameless individuals — I certainly am not one, he should provide the names of those he claims to exculpate Jamie’s motives.

    So, Mark, will you let us know who these “others” were? Names?

    Jacob Roginsky

  • The VTPP leadership is known by the puppets that defend them, most with brown noses, and to the one, obviously, without much of a critical mind of their own. The act does sometimes call for a puppet to pretend to be a muppet.

    Jacob Roginsky

  • The Virginia Tea Parties must not allow Radtke and her brown-nose cronies define the RP Senate primary as that between Radtke and Allen. There is a good chance that Bob Marshall, a true conservative and, in sharp contrast to Radtke, a person of principle will enter the fray. He, not she, represents the values and aspirations of the Tea Parties, going out on a limb for principle, a bright mind thinking for himself and standing up to the establishment, a superbly experienced lawmaker with a tremendous record of public service, a man capable of exciting the conservative grassroots without cheating and manipulating them.


  • Theresa Robinson

    Jamie has had her fill of tea. Not only has she had a fill of it, but her cup “runneth” over with it. She definitely represents the Tea Party. The question is which persuasion of the Tea Party does she represent? Is it the Tea Party inspired by true liberty and Constitutional government or is the Tea Party inspired by the same Republican establishment ideas cloaked in patriotic clothing? Once everyone establishes that there are two different philosophies floating around within the Tea Party, they can clearly see Jamie’s dilemma.

    Jamie Radtke, what ever you think of her is a leader in her own right. This is obvious by the many people who follow her. To be a leader, someone has to follow. I have no qualms with that fact. She’s politically charismatic, charming, clever and calculating. What should concern voters about Radtke is where does her loyalty lie? At the end of the day, what voices does she listen to? Underneath the political rhetoric of “cut government spending” and “let’s return back to the Constitution”, what is she really saying? Empty political phrases and patriotic rhetoric means absolutely nothing if it isn’t followed by specifics. She has provided some specifics, but not on key issues. Even Christine O’Donnell’s website stated where she stood on key issues during her Senatorial race.

    I submit to you that the race between Jamie Radtke and George Allen will not work in Radtke’s favor because she has Tea Party baggage. I believe that Jamie, like most Tea Partiers in Virginia, still whole heartedly sympathizes with the GOP, which explains why when she is asked about foreign policy, she doesn’t respond. I believe it is out of fear of exposing her commonality with the GOP. Recently, I heard that she gave an interview where she expressed support for maintaining some troops in Afghanistan. If that is true, she’s an interventionist by definition and that would be the philosophy of the GOP. Many in the Tea Party are also willing to give up their personal liberties and protections under the Constitution in exchange for protection from mainstream media’s drummed up terror threats. The Tea Party, like the GOP, is also more concerned with ending Democratic power than they are doing what is right. After attending the Tea Party Convention, it was clear as day that the GOP wheels much influence over the Tea Parties in Virginia. Everyone? No. However, the the term “majority” wouldn’t be too much. Yes, they all talk about cutting budgets, ending government handouts to citizens but they take a 180 degree turn on cutting budgets when discussing foreign aid or the cost of building empires over seas. They can’t have it both ways—cut big government spending and maintain big government spending in Afghanistan. Just read the blogs and comments made by many Tea Partiers on foreign policy and it is identical to the GOP and it contradicts the concept of cutting government.

    So the GOP is in the Tea Party and most of the Tea Party sympathizes with the GOP. Most of the Tea Partiers, including Radtke, haven’t changed their old views. They have simply modified them to maintain GOP power. They have added a Gadsden flag and other jazzy patriotic imagery to a neo-conservative and very establishment Republican philosophy of politics. They can’t speak out against a Cantor, and would invite a George Allen to a Tea Party Convention. It’s like a child who is taken away from their parents to live with a new family. No matter how good the new family is to the child, the child still longs to be with their family. That is why Radtke, in my opinion, won’t elaborate on foreign policy, a legitimate topic for a Senatorial race. She likely cannot break away from establishment thinking on this issue. It doesn’t make her a bad person but someone who is still struggling with certain issues. Even if voters don’t agree with a candidate’s stance on an issue, they still need to know the candidate stands for something. It isn’t clear in Radtke’s case.

    It’s unfortunate but George Allen may win the nomination on the basis that he is a reformed GOP candidate who received a lashing from many Republican voters. Jamie on the other hand has to hide and walk on egg shells with political correctness so as not to offend anyone by letting on that she really thinks like the GOP that she has condemned for the past months. She is trying to appeal to GOP sympathizers, diehard GOP voters, and the true liberty minded conservatives who were in the trenches fighting establishment Republicans long before it was popular. She, like many in the Tea Party, may still be grappling with changing over from the GOP’s big government philosophy to Constitutional government and liberty. She may not be able to part ways with the kinds of policies that don’t pass the liberty or Constitutional government snuff test. The establishment has stated that this is “extreme” and she can’t think outside that false label.

    I don’t see an easy way out for her in this campaign. She has to come across as genuine, without any personal motivations. She has to state emphatically where she stands on key issues and document this information on her website so that she doesn’t appear as dodging the issues. She can’t be worried about what other people think. She has to be like Bob Marshall and let the chips fall where they may and stand on principle. So, far none of that is coming through in her campaign and it’s unfortunate with all of her leadership qualities. Principle counts.

  • Jacob, I tell even you doubt the weak crap you’re spewing.

    Of course Mark is being attacked by nameless individuals. How about Gonzo and Red Baron just for starters.

    You wanna talk about “brown noses”? Look in the mirror bud.

  • Theresa Robinson said “They can’t speak out against a Cantor, and would invite a George Allen to a Tea Party Convention.” You Ms Robinson are brandishing BS. Jamie calls out Cantor as the rino he keeps proving himself to be over and over..

  • Theresa Robinson, that is one very thoughtful post.

  • Pingback: Principle Counts. | Roanoke Tea Party()

  • Theresa Robinson

    Principal Counts. (Correction)

  • Theresa Robinson

    Mr. Cohen, no BS. She is very discreet about her comments about Cantor, to the point that she didn’t support Floyd Bayne in a run against Cantor. Sure, she probably speaks out on Cantor’s policies in private to a few select individuals, but not publically. Yet, his policies are an issue that should be discussed publically by Republicans. She also missed a great opportunity to support Tea Party backed candidate Floyd Bayne. Inviting George Allen to the Tea Party Convention, in my opinion, just appeared too cozy for me, almost as if she was pandering to the GOP. I don’t know why but now she runs for Senate against him and recruits an Allen staffer?? All of this is why I made the point that she is still sympathetic to the GOP establishment. Maybe you are as well. I’m not saying that is a bad thing, but simply a reality that people can’t always part ways on old philosophies. If those philosophies were good, none of us would be talking right now and Allen would be just fine as a candidate. However, the old GOP thinking is just obsolete. Serious voters are looking for different ideas, not the same old dried up stale ideas that failed us and brought us the turmoil we see today.

    Bottom line, there isn’t anything new here. I can’t tell the difference between Radtke and Allen and since she whispers about key issues, what am I to think? I’ve asked her where she stood on foreign policy and she shared with me is that she was still putting together a platform. Well, why run when a platform isn’t in order? How does a candidate ask for money when they don’t have a platform in place? I don’t understand. Can someone help me with that? You don’t call that BS but you say my comments are BS! Isn’t that what the Tea Party is all about, challenging voters to question political candidates and hold the fire to their feet?

    This is why I’m not convinced that “many” Tea Partiers are genuine about liberty and Constitutional government but only eager to keep a Democrat out of power and maintain Republican power. I on the other hand, and many like me, support a genuine conservative who supports liberty and Constitutional government, not the same Republican rhetoric with a patriotic flavor.

    It’s not too late for Jamie; I provided some tips in my comments above. She can start with talking about foreign policy in depth. Thank you.

  • Britt,

    You do not need to look in the mirror to see that your nose is brown, just see where it is. However, if you do face the mirror, check out your tongue as well.

    Had Mark not spoken to the issues I raised about Jamie, e.g. on how the “Federation” was set up, and had he not responded after my posting, perhaps the blanket complaint that those who attack Jamie in this forum hide their names would be valid. But, as things stand, it smacks of an underhanded attempt to kill the message by attacking the messengers.

    Jacob Roginsky

  • What is notorious about every defender of Jamie I have encountered in these forums — not to say that all her defenders are like that — is they refuse to address the most important specifics of my complaints about Jamie, and some offer in response nothing but ad hominems. I have a number of complaints that Jamie’s defenders have refused to address, and let me once again recite just three of those:

    1. The creation of a “Federation” of “the” Virginia Tea Parties by a few individuals, who write the rules to effect their virtual control of the collective activities of the Virginia movement, resting the control of the flow and competition of ideas, as well as the associations with one individual, Jamie Radtke, is a FRAUD and nothing but a FRAUD on the cause. This is how the “Federation” ended up in bed with Speaker Howell and a bunch of other establishment Republicans, speaking their language, while throwing Bob Marshall, a true hero of the cause under the bus.

    2. Turning the Federation into Jamie’s fan club, presumed to support, among other, her senatorial ambitions, without as much as surveying the rank-and-file members of the constituent organizations as to their preferences, is wrong. It is all the more disturbing given the fact that this was not a demonstrated spontaneous response of the movement, but was imposed on the “Federation” from the top, by a few cronies of Jamie, most notoriously Karen Hurd, who had proclaimed on Facebook that the “Federation” would endorse Jamie for Senate and who effected the solicitation of the rank-and-file members of the constituent Tea Parties to vote for Jamie in an online BD poll, in which Bob Marshall and Ken Cuccinelli were also possible choices, among others. A Tea Party “Federation” that is so manipulated in support of its leader, with the leader’s full knowledge and acquiyescence is a mockery of the cause that is supposed to stand for, among other, ethics, rule of law, and fairness.

    3. The control of the “Federation” by Jamie and her cronies, particularly of the flow and competition of ideas, has predictably resulted in the situation we are in, whose important aspects were excellently described above by Theresa Robinson, VTPPF being intertwined with RPV, and having neither the courage of convictions nor a vision to pursue the Tea Parties’ ultimate natural mission, returning America on the path of liberty, individual rights, and prosperity. What we hear from Jamie Radtke is the same old Republican talking points. The dying Bill of Rights, which is foundationally the most important problem in America, is not even a VTPPF topic.

    I agree with much of of what Theresa said above, and salute her thoughtfulness and sense of fairness. However, I disagre with the invition to Jamie to come out and speak with conviction to the issues important to the Tea Party cause. It is too late for that. Jamie is not a teenager with convictions and character in flux, and if she does come out and sound as a person of force and convictions, it will almost certainly be insincere.

  • Lol, good to see that you can see you own nose, Jacob. You’re a funny one to be talking about ad hominem. You are the one that brought up “brown noses”. You do quite bit of name calling. Look, if you can’t read the posts above from nameless pseudonyms that can’t even stand with their own name, that is your handicap.

    You don’t care about Bob Marshall. You just care about the idea that a Marshall run will split anti-Allen votes. Naturally so, because some of the same people that are pro-Tea Party find a lot to admire about Marshall. Tea Partiers in general have a fondness for guys like Cuccinelli and Marshall.

    Nice of you to admit that Theresa made some good points, but again, you’re just looking to sew division in George Allen’s opposition. Look at what she writes, Jacob. You won’t steer her anywhere with platitudes.

  • Britt,

    In addition to a brown nose, you have a short memory and poor comprehension.

    It was you who first launched an ad hominem at me, when you posted under my initial message in this thread with “Hi Gonzo! Muppets for George Allen! Yayyyy!!!!!” That you called not only “Gonzo,” but me a “muppet” in that response is clear not only from where you posted the remark, but from the post you just made accusing me of being a supporter of George Allen, working to undermine both Radtke and Marshall for Allen’s sake.

    There is no question, in her posts Theresa stated and/or implied that Jamie Radtke fails to demonstrate the courage of principled and independent convictions, and invites her to do that. I agreed with the first and disagreed with the latter. If you don’t understand that, get a friend to help you read and comprehend Theresa’s and my messages.

    If you continue to insist on my being a secret supporter of George Allen, I will blow your cover as a secret supporter of Moammar Gaddafi.

  • Jacob, since BD does not allow Russian letters, here it is phonetically: bros? mudak

    For the not family safe translation: http://translate.google.com/#auto|ru|knock%20it%20off%20asshole

  • D.J. Spiker

    It’s too late, clearly, but it’s looking more and more that Jamie should have run for a State Senate seat or something more state-centric before attempting this jump to the US Senate race. It would have given her credibility within the GOP, something currently lacking, prepared her for running for office, something her and her team have clearly lacked thus far, and would have reduced the volume of these comments from both sides of the Tea Party. It’s simply too high profile a position to run for at this time.

    Too little, too late. But it’s looking more and more that State Senate rather than US Senate would have been far more beneficial.

  • Jacob, people use fake names for a few reasons. Among them is to snipe at opponents while hiding in the shadows. Another is to talk to other fake names they themselves posted in order to inflate the appearance of their opinion. Some use fake names because they’re new to blogging and maybe nervous about jumping in. Some just think having a “handle” is cool. I don’t really have a problem with the last two, but if you’re going to say things about individuals, you really need to be honest and on record with your real name.
    You are the one to attach “muppet” to yourself, not me. I was making fun of the fake names. I do still contend that you are an Allen guy. I don’t know enough about you to call you a muppet or puppet. That is on you. For all I know, you could be a paid operative.

    You did in fact agree with legitimate arguements that Theresa made. Jamie Radtke has been very discrete about a lot of things. She has to be. Anything that she puts out has to be reconciled with the fact that the Allen camp will try to use it to divide her coalitons of support. Kinda like what I claim you are attempting.

    Further, Jamie Radtke is running as a Republican and not just a Tea Partier. That means she needs to work with other Republicans and represent them as well as Virginians in general. That is why you have a few of her positions coming out contrary to Cantor etc but she has not criticized him personally.

    I disagree most with Theresa on not seeing the difference between Radtke and Allen. Radtke has made some positions clear. Granted they were safer distinctions to make. They are ones that point to her being a better choice already.

    While I understand why Radtke might be playing close to the vest right now, Theresa’s complaint about it is legitimate and understandable. This is a problem Radtke has. She needs to appeal to mainstream Republicans and hope her position as a real fiscal conservative will offset differences she might have foreign policy wise with Ron Paul style non-interventionism. I really can’t see a Ron Pauler voting for Allen, but they could go with an alternate candidate or just stay home on that race. I think it is in Radtke’s in

  • Amy K

    I see a whole lot of ego problems in these comments…Aren’t we all wanting to see more conservatives in office? What is with all the negative silliness here?

  • Bradley A Trimble

    I have to agree with the comments about RATke and her intentions…… She mislead several members of the TEA Party. Her only intention was to her her name out in the public arena.
    Jacob Roginsky and Theresa Robinson have voiced several of the concerns I have.
    I guess we will have to sit and wait for our answers.

  • Temporary

    One easy way to know if you are talking to the Tea Party or to the GOP is to ask one simple question – “would you favor voting with Democrats to cut defense spending in order to balance the federal budget ?”

    If the answer is “no” and they look sort of frightened that you asked, they are GOP.

    If the answer is “yes”, you’ve got yourself a Tea Party budget balancer.

    I wonder how the candidates for Webb’s seat would answer that question ?

    I think it is telling when a Tea Party website has a lot of links about Obama did this, or the Democrats did that, or anything about GOP/Democrat social issues such as same sex marriage, pro-life/-choice, etc .. because I don’t think your average Tea Party person gives a rat’s a## about stuff like that, and if they did they would probably be arguing against the GOP’s position as often as not.

  • John Jackson

    Temporary, With a defense budget of about $700 billion, you could eliminate the whole defense budget and still have nearly a $1 trillion deficit. That means that you’d eliminate Veterans programs, personnel and retiree pay.

    President Obama released a budget that had deficits (equal to the defense budget) for the remainder of the decade. So, your theory holds no water. So, what else would you cut with a $1 trillion deficit after you have eliminated the defense department?

    As for the three questions to ask a Tea Partier, here they are: 1) Do you support limited government, 2) a free market and 3) being fiscally responsible.

    The take on your social issues…if government wasn’t trying to regulate every aspect of your life, then they would not need to take a stand on these. It’s a shame that so many people have so much faith in government.

  • Temporary

    John, you’ve taken what I wrote much further than I intended it.

    I did not indicate that the defense budget was the only thing that we need to cut to balance the budget, that is obviously not the case. I only meant to write what I actually did write, which is that you can use the question of voting with Democrats to cut defense spending to distinguish between GOP and Tea Party, because the GOP would never agree to it, whereas a Tea Party person very likely would because of your points (1) limited government and (3) fiscal responsibility.

    I did not say anything about cutting the entire defense budget, those are your words, not mine. Obviously entitlements are where we need to do the most cutting, but any GOP’er would agree with that.

  • Britt,

    You said nothing in defense of Radtke that the common politicians do not say to themselves and others in defense of their refusal to act courageously and with conviction. And if Jamie already acts like a common politician, what reason do you have to believe she will be different if she gets elected?

  • John Jackson

    Temporary, Sorry, I must’ve misread your post. Someone even recommending a Tea Partier voting with a Democrat is a question I could not ponder right now.

  • Jacob, gotta ask.. Did Sara James put you up to this attack? I smell a rat.

  • sara

    James Turbo,

    That is priceless. Yes, I control everything, including giving words to a Constitutional Scholar, whom I’ve never met.

    I’m good!

  • Sara,

    I ignore royal fools, and recommend you do the same. They are more fun and less trouble that way. Let turbo do his flips and run his foul mouth; he helps us make our case as to the Radtke’s base of support.

  • Atchooly Jacob I feel compelled to thank you for waking up the people who have been sending me email talking points defending Mrs. Radtke’s role in turning around the Richmond Tea Party and stemming the high turnover of board members.. among many other email tidbits I previously knew nothing about. My questions is why none of this was public knowlege? If I am to believe what is sent to me Jamie deserves credit for being a very effective organizer and more than doubling the membership to over 10k members while at the same time fending off legal crises that predated her involvement..

    It is interesting Jacob that I get old copies of threatening email tidbits between tea party volunteers and past leadership after you fling poo on this blog, is this coming from you? a cohort? Or is it someone else not posting here? There are dots to connect but not sure what they lead to..

    I would like to know Who is (name deleted)@rtp.com?

  • sara

    James Turbo,

    Legal “crisis”? Well it was absolutely horrible, a situation presenting itself at the same time I discovered I had skin cancer and my mother was dying. It was terrifying, it really was. The situation is similar to one that many other political novices have encountered. Incidentally, I could tell you the name of one very well known GOP leader who had a similar legal issue. Every other patriot group in the state was doing the same exact thing, unknowingly, by the way. When alerted, appropriate forms were filed.

    Anybody who says differently has their own motives and agenda. Which, in politics, people do.

    On your stated “mission” as you told me on Facebook, you are going to learn lots of interesting things. I really don’t think you want to air this out here, it won’t help “your” candidate at all.

    Oh – is this part of conservatives eating their own, that you so often criticize, when others do it? Are you finding that it tastes good?

  • Dang, James Diesel is a full-fledged two-stoke Inspector Gadget!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.