Sunday, January 01, 2006

Big Week

This week looks crowded with events..and I will try to blog at/about as many of them as I can. I will be attending the VCAP gala in Richmond Tuesday night with guest speaker Zell Miller, and an awesome upcoming Country singer named Luke Stricklin Saturday is the Americans for Prosperity event in Richmond with Delegate Chris Saxman, Delegate Paul Harris, and Speaker Bill Howell. After the event I am also going to try to head down to Lynchburg to help out Mike Harrington for the day. The campaign could use any and all if you can help-head on down! Tim Kaine also has a transportation town hall in Falls Church on Tuesday night at 6:30 at George Mason high school for those interested. In my home district of the 33rd I will also be doing some work- Mick Staton and Randy Minchew continue to battle it out for the Republican nomination to challenge Democrat Herring. I had a good conversation with Supervisor Staton the other day...he's a great guy, and seems to be less "forceful" with his views than his father in law. He was good at answering my questions on issues, and was had great ideas on transportation. That said-I stand firm in my endorsement, and support of Randy Minchew and believe he will win much easier against Herring. Mr.Minchew posesses strong conservative values, and has been a longtime community activist. He will be a great Senator in Richmond. We can not afford another Democrat in the Senate, a win in the 33rd will make it easier for Democrats to bump off Jeannemarie Devolites-Davis, and Ken Cuccinelli..both great Senators in the Virginia legislature. If it's Staton of Minchew..we need to win the seat.


At 1/02/2006 12:16:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Why don't you spend some time exploring the world and yourself, instead of diving headfirst into politics at such a young age??

At 1/02/2006 12:37:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Umm, Randy gave money to Janet Howell, Dick Sassaw, and the Democratic Senatorial Caucus. All AFTER he joined the Loudoun Republican Committee.

Randy is a lot of things, but none of them are conservative!

(Oh wait, TC posted this. I forgot that all of those are "conservative" campaigns in his eye!)

At 1/02/2006 12:46:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


You're repeatedly listing Randy Minchew as a conservative on your blog, and yet you fail to go into detail on what makes him one. You just says he has "strong conservative values". Given that you yourself are a bit confused on what TRUE conservative values are, I would *love* to see a listing of the reasons why Randy is a conservative -- in the world of Too Conservative that is.

At 1/02/2006 12:52:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't ask him that.

To TC, you can support all but one tax hike, and still be a 'fiscal conservative'.

I won't even get into the "conservatives" he supports and their voting records on abortion, gay rights, etc.!

At 1/02/2006 01:31:00 AM, Blogger Willis said...

Why, because he doesn't hate women and gays, he can't be a Republican??

At 1/02/2006 02:22:00 AM, Blogger too conservative said...

Willis-I still have time for the world..and myself..don't worry about me.

anon-Randy's wife gave the money, they shared a joint checking would do good to ask him before you spread rumors.

2nd anon-considering I am pro-life, an nra member, and have common sense ideas on tax issues..I think Mr.Minchew fits along with me there.

He's got the same moral values as I...and in my opinion does not have a liberal tax record.

I am not sure what "conservatives" I support that are squishy on abortion and would be news to me.

In my book I believe theres logical conservatism..and illogical conservatism.

In Northern don't need guns on school property or on bars or in some conservatives believe.

And Willis-Maybe you see the problem in our party...

I..who am one of the most conservative people I know..get blasted from people who consider themselves conservative..but instead wish to trample on peoples privacy in their home..and expand the governments scope over the people...

This is not conservatism.

At 1/02/2006 08:33:00 AM, Anonymous NOVA Scout said...

TC: In modern Virginia there is a small, but vocal group whose definition of conservatism is not based on core philosphy, but is based on personal preferences.This is the Nasty Wing of "conservatism" (loosely defined - for many of these people, "conservatism" is a far more noble label than they truly merit). It is a cluster of people who would rather vent than win. They have managed to separate political opinion from the mechanics of gaining and sustaining political power to a degree that their population has become an ever-tightening circle of fractious internal debate. One can't entirely ignore them, because they vote in GOP primaries, make a lot of noise, and often throw around "facts" that are entirely made-up (always the danger that an innocent voter will pick it up and rely on it). One of their great pleasures is to accuse meat-eaters looking for something more than thin gruel of conservative-sounding catch-phrases of being "moderates" or "liberals." Fortunately for the continued viability of political conservatism, there are not enough votes in the electorate for these guys to have a long-term impact on governance in the Commonwealth. Their high water mark has come and gone as the electorate becomes better informed focuses more on Virginia issues. Watch what happens in 2007 (at least in the Northern Counties) as their local heroes scramble back from the land of rhetoric to the land of getting potholes fixed in order to hang on to seats in the Senate and HD.

At 1/02/2006 10:32:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


I have no doubt that you are likely as 'conservative' as TC, but that doesn't really say much.

Of course the squishes out there hate terms like 'moderate' and 'liberal'. These terms qualify the voting habits, or preferences, of those who hold moderate stances on taxes (like TC) as well as on most other issues.

You can argue that TC is just being 'pragmatic' or in your opinion more 'realistic' about the need to sometimes raise taxes, as a politician sees fit. However this is not a philosophy that is shared by anyone who is conservative. You can't be conservative, just because you like the title. You have to actually practice what you preach.

It's like a person who considers himself to be a Christian, and yet rarely goes to church, feels that there are multiple ways to get into heaven, and thinks that Jesus was just a "good man". Such a person can say he's a Christian as long as he wants, but that doesn't make it true and he certainly isn't fooling God!

In the same way, TC can claim that he and Randy are conservative, but when all of the known conservatives in NoVa endorse his opponent, and Randy has money from his checking account going to some of the most liberal Democrats in this state (while making up random stories about how his wife is REALLY the one giving cash to Dems...) it paints a pretty good picture of who Randy is, and what he actually believes in.

At 1/02/2006 11:41:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You rail against "illogical conservatives" and GOP party challengers yet you are attending VCAP's fundraiser????

Do you really pander to everyone?

And let me guess ... when you head down to Harrington's district, you'll make sure EVERYONE knows that you're there, including Harrington himself ... then knock on a few doors and then leave. Sure the help is great, but would you be going if only,say the volunteer coordinator, saw you?

At 1/02/2006 11:59:00 AM, Blogger Mitch Cumstein said...

What everyone seems to miss here is that terms like "conservative" and "liberal" are relative. Compared to the average American, I am fairly "conservative," but a "moderate" when compared to folks like TC and Nova Scout. Put me in a room with many of the GOP primary voters and I'm a "liberal." Whatever. The focus should be on who we can get elected that represents the majority of the positions we share, instead of attacking good public servants for a few compromise decisions they've made in the best interests of keeping us moving forward.

At 1/02/2006 12:10:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...


Don't bring deep theology into this..because you're beginning to sound dumb.

You can be Christian and not attend church at all..

and i do not support tax increases, but it's simple math.

and even though I don't feel the need to explain why I wish to travel to Lynchburg to help out a was because I was asked to come volunteer by the campaign.

Nameless to love them

What will you be doing as im 3 hours away helping a campaign?

At 1/02/2006 12:27:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 11:41 -

I'm pretty sure I just saw TC bash VCAP just a week or so ago. I wonder why he's attending this event? Didn't he just say that “the organization was a complete and utter failure” for supporting conservative challengers?

It makes you wonder if there is anyone out there that TC won't suck up to, when he's not bashing them for being ironically too conservative!

At 1/02/2006 12:35:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

3rd anon-

Your handwriting looks remarkably like the earlier anons..but whatever.

Zell Miller is amazing...I am going to hear him well as Luke Stricklin who I have seen in concert at the Nissan Pavillion.

I am branching out anon-is that alloweD?

I'll be back later..I am going out to lunch now with awcheney

At 1/02/2006 12:37:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Perhaps you should review the entire comment before you bash it. The quote had multiple qualifiers not just the one you chose to reiterate.

["It's like a person who considers himself to be a Christian, and yet rarely goes to church, feels that there are multiple ways to get into heaven, and thinks that Jesus was just a "good man". Such a person can say he's a Christian as long as he wants, but that doesn't make it true and he certainly isn't fooling God!"]

Is there something about this ENTIRE quote that you disagree with, or do you just have a basic dislike of people who talk about Jesus and use the basic stances of Christianity as an example?

At 1/02/2006 12:41:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...


I simply feel you are lost..and now you feel the need to infer that I don't like religious people.

Maybe you should get to know me alittle I go to Mclean Bible Church, and will be attending Baylor (a conservative baptist school) if you didnt year to major in Religion.

I don't disslike people who talk about jesus anon...

I recently secured Pat Robertson as the head speaker at the Teenage Republican convention..Rev. Robertson is one of my heros.

Sometimes I dont even know why I argue back, these comments are just stupid.

Now I am really going to I wont be back to pick at all the untruths until around 2:30

At 1/02/2006 03:26:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you notice how you make blanket statements without backing it up with any substance.

You say "I simply feel you are lost" and then have nothing to show how we are "lost" in your opinion?

Then, and I love this, you go on to say how you really are a Christian because of the school you're going to, and how the people you like are Christian too!

Maybe you could follow that up with the statement that a lot of your friends are black, so there's no way you could be a racist!

At 1/02/2006 03:55:00 PM, Blogger too conservative said...

You're an idiot.

I got a scholarship to Baylor based on my church experiences, and my promise to go on missions for them.

Is this something you've done anonymous?

What does this have to do with the post?

At 1/02/2006 05:27:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

I don't know but anon sounds like Willis' alter ego... Like the Green Lantern or something...

Read the other posts, anon. TC is a good, solid, Christian young man. It's unfortunate more young people don't have the backbone he does.

Baiting will get you nowhere here!

At 1/02/2006 09:02:00 PM, Blogger Willis said...

I'm not that anon. He is a different person.

At 1/02/2006 10:52:00 PM, Blogger Lucy Jones said...

Just yanking your chain, Willis...

At 1/04/2006 08:57:00 AM, Blogger AWCheney said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 1/04/2006 09:04:00 AM, Blogger AWCheney said...

It would seem that Anon. 10:32 AM made your point Nova Scout. He uses terms like "squish," liberal, and moderate with, I suspect, very little historical perspective considering their context. He's probably just repeating what he has been told, with absolutely no experience in true philosophical battles within the political arena. He is representative of the sheep who are being led by those of the "end justifies the means" persuasion (remember that conversation in 1978 Bob M.?...I'll never forget it). This is not a philosophical battle we are is a power struggle between "mainstream" conservatives and the "new right" conservatives, plain and simple, with the only winners being the Democrats.

Young TC represents, to me, a future generation of our Party which I had been afraid no longer existed: Those who hold honor and integrity and, yes, compassion above mere issues which are constantly changing (what constitutes a conservative among the small but vocal element to which Nova refers is not the same as that which constituted a conservative 10, 20, or 30 years ago). The issues which define the various incarnations of the designation “conservative” are fluid…honor and integrity are not. I heard (and saw the results of) this said best by a gentleman by the name of Richard Obenshain in the early spring of 1978. He was speaking to an obviously hostile room of Democrats (Farm Bureau group, Dems for the most part in those days) and Dick never side-stepped a question or qualified his stand on an issue...but he told them the truth and that it was all they would ever hear from him. He said (and I’ll never forget this either), “you may not agree with me on many or even most of the issues…but you will ALWAYS know exactly where I stand.” The room became electrified…they didn’t care about the issues anymore…they had just been introduced to an honest man. Dick very narrowly escaped being carried out of that meeting on the shoulders of these men. There was, at one point, shouts of “Obenshain for President.” It was glorious and, sadly, something I doubt I will ever see again in my lifetime. Who knows, though...perhaps there is hope.

At 1/04/2006 03:06:00 PM, Blogger Involved said...


The problem with your statement is that it is built upon a Straw Man fallacy. You decide that anyone who disagrees with your definition of conservatism must be:

a) part of a small group of radicals
b) incapable of being able to think for themselves since they disagree with you (while agreeing with others who also disagree with you)
c) unaware of the historical context of the term conservative because it seems to conflict with your own notions of what the word means.

It would be equivalent for me to say that all moderate republicans are dumb because they disagree with me, and don't have the same knowledge of history as I have developed. Anyone who says otherwise is clearly following the mantra of others, who have told them what to do and think.

I would be very interested in reading about what you consider to be a 'mainstream conservative'. From your posting it would seem that you simply need to be honorable (which I guess is a term you leave up to interpretation as to what you consider honorable) and possess integrity. By such a definition even Howard Dean could be a 'mainstream conservative' as I'm sure he is viewed as an honorable person by some and is very honest when he says that he thinks all republicans are racist and evil.

Awcheney, I appreciate your love of nostalgia, but please try to stick to the issues at hand. What exactly does a person need to stand for in order to be a conservative in your eyes? What would be the difference between a "mainstream conservative" versus a moderate? Is there a difference, or are we just playing with terminology?

It also looks as if you feel you have a knowledge of what us "new conservatives" think.

Would organizations that have been around since the early 1970's like the Heritage Foundation be considered to have this 'new' ideology? Was Barry Goldwater a 'new conservative'? Would Morton Blackwell, Mark Earley, Chuck Colson, and Lee Atwater all be 'new conservatives' as well. (If so I think they'd be happy to hear about their newness, as all of them are either relatively advanced in years, or else passed on.)

Your ideology seems to assert that you must be either young or else stupid in order to use terms such as Conservative, Moderate, and Liberal; while these are terms that are readily used in the media and just about every nationwide political periodical distributed by groups throughout the political spectrum.

Is there some reason why your choice in terminology is somewhat superior to that of everyone else? Or is this simply a new tactic of the moderate wing of the Republican party, so that you can call yourselves conservative without defining what that actually means?

At 1/04/2006 08:25:00 PM, Blogger AWCheney said...


"a) part of a small group of radicals"
I don't recall mentioning a "small group of radicals" anywhere in my post.

"b) incapable of being able to think for themselves since they disagree with you (while agreeing with others who also disagree with you)"
My point was that people are bandying about terms such as "squish" and "RINO," just because they hear others use them, with no regard for the fact that they have real, and hurtful, meaning to conservatives, many of whom are the victims of this thoughtlessness.

“c) unaware of the historical context of the term conservative because it seems to conflict with your own notions of what the word means.”
Actually, the point I was trying to make is that the term “conservative” does indeed have different meanings to different people, based largely upon their own historical experience with the political spectrum…hence the fluidity of the subject. Too many people are suggesting that conservatives are only those people who agree with a relatively small group who deem only certain few issues to be the indicators…everyone else is a “squish” or worse. Issues are very complex. By relegating them (all of them) to a simplistic “for or against,” black and white standard we remove them from the realm of reason to that of pure emotion…which not only does not play well with the electorate, it doesn’t play well with history.

In terms of defining my own conservatism, my views have changed little since the days when I coordinated, most notably, the PWC Obenshain and Reagan campaigns (among numerous other conservative political activities) and sat on the State Steering Committee for each of those campaigns. I have always viewed myself a Constitutionalist who believes strongly in State’s rights, individual rights with limited government interference in the lives of the citizens (limited only to the protection of the rights of all individuals equally), and fiscal responsibility along the lines of balancing the public checkbook (spending cuts and tax cuts ARE NOT mutually exclusive). Each of those issues can be broken down into a multitude of sub-issues within their context…there’s nothing simple about it. Anyone who has ever given any thought to an issue cannot possibly suggest that everything is black and white and that a mere handful of issues constitute what makes a conservative…or not.

Insofar as honor and integrity in politics, that is something which I have always, and will always, feel very strongly about. I would much rather deal with a moderate or liberal or Democrat or anyone who has strong beliefs, expresses them openly but still keeps an open mind to others than someone who believes that the “end justifies the means” and how they define that end is the only relevance. Someone whose word and deed can be trusted unequivocally, regardless of their politics, is a person to be admired.

I may not have expressed myself adequately in my previous post or even in this one (husband and I just quit smoking, cold turkey...concentration focused elsewhere). I hope, however, that I managed to somewhat clarify what I was attempting to convey.

At 1/08/2006 10:15:00 AM, Anonymous NoVA Scout said...

Anke: Good luck with the smoking thing.

At 1/08/2006 03:11:00 PM, Blogger AWCheney said...

Thanks Nova...we need it. It's been 37 years for me and longer for my husband (he started younger than me)!

At 1/13/2006 12:10:00 AM, Anonymous John Epps said...

I had a chance to read Randy Minchew's Virginia Society of Human Life candidates' survey and he is as solid on life issues as they come. He reminds me a lot (in his looks, demeanor, and style) of new Chief Justice John Roberts who, while staunchly pro-life, is more effective my not waving his views in the faces of others. Minchew has the stuff to go higher if he wants.


Post a Comment

<< Home