Belittlement with unused nicknames is hardly “wit.” And as for “sage advice,” my recollection is that your “sage advice” to Harry Parrish was to use the criminal justice system to attack a political opponent. Oh. I get it. You meant “sleazy advice.”

““Ohh,” says the OWW, “I have exercised influence, but it is double-secret, and God knows, I couldn’t … er, dare not actually prove it with accomplishment.””

As any child would, if you don’t have a reasonable argument make something up. I have nothing to prove…but you prove yourself the egomaniacal fool consistently.

“I know the difference between credentials and influence. As to the former, you doubtless possess some, which is probably why you frequently regale us with — what was the phrase you used? — your “growing rather old and tiresome…and laughable,” as well as dessicated “credentials;” as to the latter, influence is generally a function of respect.”

I never spoke of influence, only principle…obviously influence is far more important to you than principle. In terms of respect, I really don’t care if I have any from either you, or from within your increasingly shrinking circle…and I further doubt that you have any. They’re just too afraid of your rampages to tell you. Again, regarding credentials, I have nothing to prove…unlike you.

“You have none, and must (like your buddy “Batson”) constantly attack those who actually do.”

I have no desire to attack the handicapped or otherwise challenged…I simply respond.

“And BTW, I trumpted nothing in this thread.”

It’s “trumpeted” Jimmy and, although not in this thread, you do…over and over and over…

“You are doubtless correct that “there are many more experienced political activists out there who … are far more experienced and knowledgeable about politics than you or your buddies, who quietly involve themselves as a matter of principle.” Sadly, you presume too much with your sanctimonious claim that you are among them, or that your enemies can only be pursuing “self-serving interest or ego quest.””

To repeat for late-comers, what I actually said was, “…you would do well to consider that there are many more experienced political activists out there who, like me, are far more experienced and knowledgeable about politics than you or your buddies, who quietly involve themselves as a matter of principle rather than any self-serving interest or ego quest.” The meaning here is self-explanatory, particularly to those who know you. I realize that you are not the type of person who could understand a concept such as that.

“As for your claim to “quiet,” one can but hope.”

I could never do that Jimmy…I wouldn’t want to deprive you of my sage advice and witty presence.

I know that you prefer unilateral disarmament in the face of your attacks. Guess it “hit[s] a nerve” when others won’t indulge you.

Your time is coming also. As is mine, if it hasn’t already. Be respectful.

I suppose that only you would believe that your claimed “assistance quietly, behind the scenes” and that “there are a lot of candidates/elected officials, past and present, during the period you mention out there who can attest to that” is anything but a monument to your absence. “Ohh,” says the OWW, “I have exercised influence, but it is double-secret, and God knows, I couldn’t … er, dare not actually prove it with accomplishment.”

I know the difference between credentials and influence. As to the former, you doubtless possess some, which is probably why you frequently regale us with — what was the phrase you used? — your “growing rather old and tiresome…and laughable,” as well as dessicated “credentials;” as to the latter, influence is generally a function of respect. You have none, and must (like your buddy “Batson”) constantly attack those who actually do.

And BTW, I trumpted nothing in this thread.

You are doubtless correct that “there are many more experienced political activists out there who … are far more experienced and knowledgeable about politics than you or your buddies, who quietly involve themselves as a matter of principle.” Sadly, you presume too much with your sanctimonious claim that you are among them, or that your enemies can only be pursuing “self-serving interest or ego quest.”

As for your claim to “quiet,” one can but hope.

If you are referencing me here, Jimmy…I was never “gone” or totally absent. One of the biggest differences between you and me is that I am secure in myself and don’t have an ego which requires constant massage. I prefer to provide my assistance quietly, behind the scenes (and there are a lot of candidates/elected officials, past and present, during the period you mention out there who can attest to that…but I do not need them to do so). So, while you trumpet your YR and handful of convention credentials (which is really growing rather old and tiresome…and laughable), you would do well to consider that there are many more experienced political activists out there who, like me, are far more experienced and knowledgeable about politics than you or your buddies, who quietly involve themselves as a matter of principle rather than any self-serving interest or ego quest.

I had forgotten that one. I remember the one about Darth Vader, and Jabba the Hut though!

And how would “Dil Doe” know, anyway? His face has never darkened the door of a GOP event, so far as we know (and if I correctly surmise his identity, then he has certainly never done so). He is fairly free with his criticisms, but so far as we know, he has never been elected to any leadership position in any position, nor exercised any leadership in any context. From the evidence here, we could reasonably presume that “Batson” can’t even lead his stream into the bowl, on those rare occasions when he has not soiled himself at the prospect of confronting his betters. “Batson” seems best suited to the position he finds himself when walking his dog: in the rear, anxiously awaiting his opportunity to collect the deposits left behind.

“Sheep,” “Dil Doe”? All of the evidence demonstrates that you have been little more than a sheep all of your life. And remember the old joke at H-SC: “Where the men are men, the women are women, and the sheep are nervous.”

Maybe. What is even more pathetic is that slip-and-fall attorney, who has a blog that no one reads, is notorious for personally attacking anyone with whom he disagrees on multiple sites (even his own, but few see it), goes crying to the teacher like a school-girl, because mean old Batson pulled his pig-tails. Hardly the resolve I would expect from one who wields the power of the Dark Side.

Just to keep with the subject of the thread, I don’t see how Taco’s defenders can continue to hold that he has exercised leadership in the party. The PWCGOP is fractured, and factionalized. Many long-time members have left in disgust. Taco play’s favorites when it comes to candidates. Taco has allowed himself to be perceived as unethical, by taking money from a candidate in a contested nomination. Taco acted unprofessionally at a Congressional Candidates debate, and embarrased the party, and it made all of the papers. Taco willfully neglected the 50th HOD race last November. (I guess you only get help if you pay him for it). He neglected the US Senate race, and George Allen was defeated in PWC as a result.

Taco is a party chairman. He is chaged with facillitating the nomination process, and with helping to get nominated candidates within his area of responsibility elected. Not only has he willfully neglected his duties as Chairman, he has financially benefitted from the process. He has brought discredit to himself, and the party on several occasions.

James and Charles call Taco a leader. What does this say about their judgement? Who wouldn’t these two sheep follow?

Us peons, whether working for the government or not, have the same rights as everyone else.

It’s really pathetic that this cowardly, low-level government peon is given a forum to indulge his long-festering college resentments here. Most people grow up.

On the other hand, didn’t Larry Sabato get a lot of press for doing the same thing during last year’s senatorial race?

Yep. It’s true. I’m one of them. Because, IF that had happened, there would be at least a prima facie case of a quid pro quo: Kopko would have — contrary to his history — chosen a nominating process after payment from a candidate.

No such prima facie case is made here. Kopko chose the same nominating process that he has advocated consistently. That’s why this whole imbroglio is more about form than substance, and more about Kopko unwisely giving his political enemies fodder for their creative fictions than about real wrong-doing.

But God forbid facts should interfere with “NoVA Scout’s” nihilistic attacks upon genuine, committed Republicans.

What is surprising is that he put away his toy trains long enough to help Darth Vader defend Gill and Kopko’s questionsable behavior. Since Charles is defending it, he must condone it. I am not saying he needs to express the same outrage as other commentors. He could condemn the actions with his silence. Nope, not Frodo. He needs to comment in defense.

At the very least, we can see that there are no hard feelings between Darth and Frodo, seeing as Frodo replaced Darth, when Darth was canned as an OpEd writer at the Potomac News.

Charles’ verbosity aside, Tom “Taco” Kopko and Fish-Gill are still shadey.

Why would someone attack the very person who received the $$ and knew what it was for and then reported that fact. She didn’t spin anything. And, I, for one, had no idea WHO she was supporting.