Saturday, August 13, 2005

A Good Ole Party!

Tonight Mitch and I had the pleasure of joining many of our fellow Northern Virginia GOP-ers. It was a get together hosted by PWC BOCS Chairman/Former-LG Canidate Sean Connaughton to thank all of us who volunteered on his campaign in the primary. I will say it shows alot of class for a politician that lost his campaign to have a 'Thank You' event for his volunteers. We saw all the normal players in the CCCN-wing of the PWC party. Marty Nohe and his lovely wife look as if they will be expecting shortly (Congrats!). I suggested Jay or Mitch as names for the new Nohe in order to honor the TC blog... I don't think that will happen. Anyways, Danziger, Vaneges, Beyer, Gentile, Smith, and friends were all present. I also found it interesting that so many people from outside of PWC came. A few Fairfax people as well as Stafford, Arlington, and Alexandria people came out to show their support to include the elder statesman of NoVa politics, Kenny Klinge. I even had the opprtunity to meet a couple that drove all the way from Richmond to show their support and admiration for Sean. I also ran into some of Connaughton staff that we all got to know so well over the past several months. Rob Whitney, the Campaign Manager, is working with a new group called Americans for Prosperity and seems to be doing well. Ryan Kelly, the Fairfax Director, just completed his Officer Training with the Virgina National Guard and is still plugging away with Congressman Davis. And, Chris Woodfin, the Hampton Roads Director, is now working for the Tidewater Builders Association. (Updates on everyone else would be appreciated.) I will say it was a good event overall. There was some minor talk of what is next for Connaughton, but most of the day centered around good food, good drinks, and good friends. It was a classy decision by the Connaughton folks to put this on, a tip-of-the-hat to all of them.


At 8/13/2005 11:13:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was Jim Young invited?

At 8/14/2005 09:00:00 AM, Blogger James Young said...

Funny, Anon 11:13. Obviously not.

As for "Kenny Klinge" as an elder stateman, his sleazy mudslinging against Steve Chapman on behalf of Harry Parrish demonstrated once again that those who insist upon getting in the mud also get dirty.

Say what you will about the Bolling/Connaughton race, but it wasn't the type of dirty campaign (on either side) that Klinge ran for Harry Parrish.

At 8/14/2005 09:47:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why do you guys let Young pollute everything that gets posted on this blog? I think he should be voted off the island.

At 8/14/2005 10:20:00 AM, Blogger MR JMS said...

This is an open forum for all to say what they will.

Feel free to sit back and laugh at the comments of many though.

At 8/14/2005 10:32:00 AM, Anonymous nasuna said...


When speaking of Day Laborers, James Young recently said, "we should ALWAYS stand up for enforcement of the law" (emphasis added). He is absolutely, positively 100% correct on this account. The day laborer problem is a serious one throughout the commonwealth and specifically here in Prince William County. Every member of the PWC Board, save one, has been consistent in the position that NO public funding should be used to create or operate any "center" that would certainly support and facilitate illegal activity. I am sure that James will join me in praising the Prince William County Board for (unlike Arlington County, soon the town of Herndon and presumably, soon Fairfax County) choosing the path that stands up for law and order, based on his obvious love of the rule of law. Unfortunately, the Immigration Service has not found sufficient cause to enforce the law in this case, or even to investigate of credible charges could be filed.

Oh, but wait... this same James Young now condemns Kenny Klinge for "sleazy mudslinging", apparently for doing nothing more than notifying the proper authorities that there was significant reason to believe that a felony had been committed in Manassas Park. The facts supporting Mr. Klinge's concern were at least significantly credible that the Commonwealth Attorney's office filed felony charges against the suspected criminal and is persuing the case. If a jury of his peers finds that Steve Chapman is innocent, then his name will be cleared and the publicity there surrounding, coupled with his sincere and demostrated love of conservativce principles like traditional family values, will surely usher him to a seat in the General Assembly in 2007. If, on the other hand, Steve Chapman's peers find that he did, in fact, commit the very criminal act that Mr. Klinge suspected, or if Steve Chapman pleads guilty to the charges against him, then justice will be served in the eyes of the law.

So, apparently, James Young believes that when a Spanish speaking person from Latin America illegaly moves to a new home to get a new job, that "we should always stand up for enforcement of the law." (Up to this point, James and I agree.) But when a non-Spanish speaking person from Dale City illegally LIES about moving to a new home to get a new job, a citizen who takes the time to "stand up for enforcement of the law" is guilty of "sleazy mudslinging."


At 8/14/2005 09:03:00 PM, Blogger James Young said...

I would be remiss if I didn't say "Thanks," mr jms. Isn't it interesting how those too craven to attach their names to their rantings wish to silence those of us who do.

As for nasuna, I agree with paragraph one. The PWC BOCS deserves kudos for its response to this issue, and he or she is correct in noting the failure of the INS (and its successor) on this issue. I was interning for Congressman George Gekas when Simpson-Mazzoli came up for a vote in the House in '84, and vividly remember being in the House gallery when final passage was voted there for the first time.

However, I take issue with nasuna' second paragraph, and note how he or she presumes too much about my comment, while implying that I am a racist. Perhaps if he or she had read what I had previously said on the subject (http://skepticalobservor.blogspot. com/2005/05/does-harry-have-no-shame. html#comments) he or she would know that I did not condemn Klinge "for doing nothing more than notifying the proper authorities that there was significant reason to believe that a felony had been committed in Manassas Park"; I condemned and condemn him for the sleazy tactic of seeking out such information for purely political gain on behalf of Harry Parrish, by attempting to cover up his role in it, and by providing deniability to Harry by suggesting that he (Harry) had no knowledge of it.

Another principle of "enforcement of the law" for which "we should ALWAYS stand up" is the constitutional presumption of innocence, one which nasuna would apparently deny to Steve, in his or her inaccurate assertion that I excuse "a non-Spanish speaking person from Dale City illegally LIES about moving to a new home to get a new job."

Equally inaccurate is the assertion that Klinge "t[ook] the time to 'stand up for enforcement of the law.'" No, Klinge took Harry's time -- because he was/is Harry's paid consultant -- to attack Harry's opponent for Harry's advantage. Is nasuna seriously suggesting that Alexandria resident Klinge would have "notif[ied] the proper authorities that there was significant reason to believe that a felony had been committed in Manassas Park," that he would have been "a citizen who takes the time to 'stand up for enforcement of the law,'" if he hadn't been Harry's paid consultant? If so, that's precious.

Klinge is, indeed, "guilty of 'sleazy mudslinging.'" For good or ill, that's not an offense that can be adjudicated by a jury of his peers.

And BTW, nasuna's editing could use some work (mine too, probably). The word is "hypocrite," though his or her usage is inappropriate.

At 8/14/2005 11:19:00 PM, Blogger MR JMS said...


If Steve is found guilty in a few weeks would you then say that Mr Klinge's actions were appropriate?

Also, by you rationale would hiring a Private Investigator to look into someone be wrong?

At 8/15/2005 05:17:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't this the same Jim Young who hired a court reporter to transcribe Sean Connaughton's traffic court appearance?

At 8/15/2005 08:15:00 AM, Blogger Mitch Cumstein said...

What I find interesting about the Chapman situation is that, in many cases, emotion has tainted opinions. Those who supported Chapman for Delegate are typically his most vocal apologists, while those who were against him are quick to point out his shortcomings.

To be sure, I was against him. My feelings were based on my own personal experiences and from anecdotal evidence received from people that I trust. When putting that information together with his positions on the issues and other important factors (age, experience), the only conclusion I could come to was that Chapman was simply not ready to represent us in Richmond. Maybe someday he will be ready, but not in 2005. Of course, the issue of his moving into the 50th district and whether he lied about any of it didn't affect my opinion in the slightest. He wouldn't have gotten my support anyway. I suspect that the same holds true for the vast majority of his supporters and detractors as well.

The point is, Chapman made the decision to move into a district to run against an entrenched incumbent. Gutsy move. To not expect that there would be scrutiny of this move is either naive or just plain dumb. Had he put more effort into doing it the right way, getting all of I's dotted and T's crossed, this wouldn't have been much of an issue. Yet his handling of this, right down to the "Pimp My Ride" interview, was pathetic.

It comes as no surprise the Steve's supporters were willing to overlook this during the campaign. It is a very pragmatic position, one that we all take from time to time whether we're willing to admit it or not. Let's face it, there are many Republicans out there who take issue with many of the decisions Parrish has made over the years. If you don't like Parrish and want him out of office, it's easy to overlook Chapman's transgressions. I can't, not so much out of loyalty to Harry as it is my own personal feelings about Chapman's abilities and worthiness of the office.

In any case, none of it really matters at this point. Let's just move on. Chapman's fifteen minutes are thankfully over.

At 8/16/2005 10:21:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, isn't that Chapman still ILLEGALLY running a business out of a house in Dale City that he no longer lives in? You can't have a business in a residential home, and fail to live in the home. Perhaps another violation in the wings.....

At 8/16/2005 12:50:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It sounds like a nice party - how can I get invited to the next one?

At 8/16/2005 07:29:00 PM, Blogger Walt Ball said...

Glad to hear the party went well. I think it shows a lot of class too, for a losing candidate to not forget the folks who helped him so much. Well played Mr. Connaughton. Hope we see you around in the rest of the state in the coming months and years!

At 8/19/2005 11:36:00 AM, Blogger James Young said...

mr jms --- Sorry for the delayed response; no wireless access for a few days.

To answer your question, no, I wouldn't, since his motivations won't be any less craven in hindsight. I would condemn Steve's actions (didn't anybody think to mention Debra Wilson to him?), but a guilty verdict/plea doesn't render Klinge's motivations any less sleazy. That is why Klinge's actions are worthy of comment now, and Steve's aren't, as the latter's are still subject to adjudication.

Anon 5:17 -- I heard this nonsense years ago, and I've heard that the source is the Connaughton camp, as part of Sean's paranoia/smear campaign against me. 'Fact is, I've never hired a court reporter in Prince William County for any purpose, and I certainly didn't do so for Sean's traffic court appearance. BTW, why didn't the commentator mention that it was for aggressive driving?

First, I'm too ch... er, frugal, even if I had a good reason to do so. Second, my understanding was that the newspapers were covering it. Third, why would I do so? I supported Connaughton for Chairman, as the GOP nominee, in 2003. In fact, I've never commented on it at all.


Post a Comment

<< Home