"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
RISHELL COMES OUT
By Greg L | 3 July 2006 | 50th HOD District | 12 Comments
Jeanette Rishell’s campaign website and previous public statements made it appear that she intended to hide her radical political views behind a smokescreen of platitudes as she tried to position herself as a “moderate” successor to Harry Parrish. It seems that I have misjudged her intent, and a recent article in the Times Community Newspapers shows there actually is an interest in putting her radical politics out there front-and-center for the electorate to consider. I applaud Jeanette and her campaign for this, as a solid debate on the issues will benefit our democracy. It takes a bit of courage to put your views on display to the public. It really takes a lot of courage to put some of these views on display. Good for her.
Jeanette clarifies a few important policy positions in the article, and I hope to hear in more detail what these are. She says she supports “living wage” mandates, where government bureaucrats arbitrarily determine the value of labor, rather than the marketplace. I’ve seen this enacted in some other localities where this has balooned the cost of government and hurt the local economy. This is one of those nice feel-good ideas where we get a chance to provide for all according to their need, and extract from the taxpayers the full extent of their ability in true marxist fashion. But it is compassionate, and emotionally satisfying to those who believe in free lunches.
Another courageous statement is her promotion of “social and economic justice”. Although this sounds compassionate and caring, the implications of using the justice system to ensure outcomes that the State feels are important is the precise reason for the economic collapse of the Soviet Union, the horrors of Saddam Hussein’s torture chambers, and the political repression of the Cuban people. Instead of adjudicating the law, “social and economic justice” schemes employ the legal system as a bludgeon against liberty in order to force income redistribution, approved political behavior, and favor specific classes of persons of whom the State is enamored.
The practice of “social and economic justice” in it’s various forms is responsible for the murder of millions of innocent people throught the world at the hands of their own governments. Promoting that failed and utterly insane recipe for misery, death and servitude is indeed very courageous. It just won’t get much traction as a campaign platform among the voters of the 50th District.
Liberals cannot speak for long without mentioning the need for increasing taxes, and this article doesn’t dissapoint.
“While funding formulas should be changed,” Rishell said, “first we need to establish a dedicated funding source for transportation improvements and maintenance.”
“In order to fund transportation costs, Rishell said all options should be on the table. While she said she wants to keep taxes low, her campaign manager, Matt Harrison, said a .25 percent income tax increase on the ‘wealthiest’ taxpayers, and the addition of title fees on vehicle purchases, are all viable options. He called the increases in title fees ‘very minor revenue enhancements.’”
Want to guess who the liberals think are the ‘wealthiest taxpayers’? And how much do you think “very minor revenue enhancements” will end up costing you, the “wealthiest taxpayer” if that’s all that’s needed to fund all the transportation spending that would be required? No mention is made of the billion and a half dollars of tax revenue the state has in it’s coffers but cannot legally spend from the last “minor revenue enhancement” rammed down the throat of taxpayers who had clearly rejected this notion in previous referenda.
The insatiable appetite for ever increasing portions of your wealth isn’t exclusive to transportation funding however, as there are other critical issues that require more “investment” of your money. The article gives you a hint at the broad extent of this additional spending with this:
“Rishell also said she is ‘in favor of supporting any three-part programs’ for gang deterrence, which include ‘prevention, intervention and enforcement.’ She supports a universal after-school program, a similar concept to Gov. Kaine’s proposed $300 million universal pre-school ‘Start Strong’ program, to deter school children from joining gangs.”
“Part of the prevention method, she said, is just to ‘keep kids busy.’ Rishell supports spending taxpayer money to have tattoos removed from former gang members to keep them from rejoining gangs. ‘There’s no guarantee’ former gang members will not rejoin gangs, she said. ‘Parents need to take responsibility.’”
“Enforcing gang prevention ‘is a tough thing to do,’ she said, adding that while she is ‘not familiar with the areas of greatest gang activity’ in the 50th District, she suspects ‘there are probably gangs everywhere and we just don’t know it.’”
Let me get this straight — she admits she doesn’t really understand the problem, but has a solution that involves spending additional taxpayer dollars so “parents can take responsibility”? Perhaps talking to someone who actually has experience with gangs like Jackson Miller who was marked for death by MS-13 due to his effectiveness in dismantling gangs in Northern Virginia might help. He likely would counsel effective law enforcement rather than something akin to “midnight basketball” style government “investments” of your money.
Perhaps one of my favorite quotes in the article is from Gary Friedman, ostensibly a “moderate” Democratic candidate for BOCS Chairman:
“Gary Friedman, a potential candidate for chairman of the Prince William Board of Supervisors, said that after talking with several local Republicans, he believes the GOP will attempt to make Rishell ‘look like the most radical … extreme individual to the left of Communism on the face of the planet.’”
“Friedman said supporters of Rishell could counter this by ‘extracting quotes’ from Miller supporters who post on Republican blogs and ‘publish them,’ as Friedman said their quotes make Republicans appear more extreme.”
Actually, the jury is out as to whether Judy Feder or Jeanette Rishell are the most extreme lefty candidates this year, but I sure do appreciate his recognition that Black Velvet Bruce Lee is making an important contribution to the political discourse in the 50th District. When the Dems single you out as their greatest concern for a candidates political future, you know you’re probably doing something right.
I feel honored.
By the way, Jeanette has her first fundraiser with the Virginia Partisans Gay and Lesbian Democratic Club. I’m sure it’ll get good coverage in the local papers, and we’ll have some more opportunities to demonstrate just how far to the left this candidate is as she panders to the GLBT community in an effort to finance her campaign. I can’t wait.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
12 Comments
Views: 936
Loading ...
This either shows courage, foolishness, or a poor understanding of the citizens of this area, and possible all three. It is nice to see a candidate publicly say what they believe in - but she also has to get elected. The fact that Rishell is so vocal about opinions that are so unpopular indicates that she is not a very good politician. Maybe this is to her credit, although I suspect that she is less brave than simply out of touch. But regardless, Miller will squish her like a bug this November. But at lease she will ride into defeat with her principles intact.
The only way for a liberal to win in this area is if they lie about being a liberal. Miller is fortunate that he is not going to face such a dilemma. Conservatives can win here on their principles. This is why, at the end of the day, the Republican Party is much healthier than the Democratic Party, both locally and nationally. When we say what we believe, we have a good shot at winning. When Democrats do, they usually lose. You may disagree with the Iraq war, but Pres. Bush was very clear about how he was going to fight it. John Kerry – not so much.
Well, it should be a very interesting few months. She wants to combat crime, but does not want to crack down on illegal immigration, which has fueled the gang growth in our area.
She wants to continue to provide those that pay the least in taxes with even more public assitance from those that pay the most in taxes.
As Russell Harrison said, she is either smart or does not have a clue.
Don’t hurt your arm Greg.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
OK, these personal wars have to stop. If you have a beef with Mr. Young, he has his own blog where you can pursue this. I appreciate the sentiments directed at me, but I feel compelled to delete this post in order to help put a stop to this continuing foolishness.
I am really saddened by the fact that moderate voters have no one to vote for this election cycle in the 50th district. You guys highlight how conservative your candidate is and how left Rishell is. Who are we, those who aren’t especially religious, who just want to pay a reasonable tax rate, while leaving government programs intact for those who can’t help themselves, who want a good education for their children, supposed to vote for? Individuals who’s views are informed by best practice, experience and not so strong on religious beliefs. I am not a Methodist or a Unitarian. Where is our candidate, because it’s isn’t Miller and it is surely not Rishell! Or are we unworthy of a voice because we are not Godly or Godless enough?
Moderate,
Well, you have two choices, one is for keeping taxes low, and one wants to raise them through the roof. In my eyes, there does not seem to be a difficult choice to make.
Social programs have been proven to be a crutch for the most part, an endless cycle for families.
Yes, but not for all families.. until medical insurance covers every family member with disabilities, things like respite through government waivers programs are needed by many. Government programs aren’t all welfare programs for freeloaders. Some are used by working, educated families with exceptional needs. It’s not a crutch for everyone.
a frustrated moderate,
Jackson Miller is a conservative, yes…but I am a conservative as well. If you look at Harry Parrish’s voting record, you will see that HE was a conservative. What you are not taking into account is that there is a vast difference between those who have hijacked the conservative label, namely a relatively small group of extremists, and those who have fought the conservative fight for decades.
I believe that Jackson Miller is a strong conservative in our mold, who believes in tempering those strong beliefs with reason, compassion, and an instinct for governance…as well as a genuine love for his community. There really is nothing wrong with being a conservative, per se. Don’t fall for the extremist line.
Frustrated,
Look at both candidates closely, and I’m sure you’ll be able to make a decision you’ll be pretty happy with. And if you have still have some concerns, make sure you keep talking with your legislators on all levels, and make sure they know what you’re facing. I know Jackson works with his constituents to help get their problems addressed, and at the county, state and national levels your concerns should be addressed properly. Congressman Davis and Wolf are pretty good at constituent service.
Just make sure your representaives know what you’re facing.
Harry Parrish was a solid conservative for the largest part of his political career. To try and say he wasent is just plain untruthfull.
He had a couple of big votes that put him in the scopes of some of the far right of his party, (especially the tax vote 2 years ago).
The fact of the matter is that Jackson Miller is far closer in political philosophy than Rishell will ever be to Harry.
What I recpect about Rishell and Miller is that they dont really play the political two step. They both are straight forward and honest about where they stand. That being said, Miller is the far better candidate FOR THIS DISTRICT. He also has better experience with Govt. service, both
as an elected official and as an employee of the county police dept.
I am voting for Miller, but I have the utmost respect for Rishell, she is not trying to hide who she really is.
Moderate,
Life is a tough thing, and not everyone has the “luck” or good fortunes not to be touched or affected by major medical needs.
But, I do not know if the Government is the answer.
I suppose I live by the motto that Government does not solve every problem. I find it funny that people are shocked our Government was unable to do more in New Orleans. Well, Du! But, that is the type of attitude that develops when folks believe the Government should be involved in almost every aspect of our lives.