Since I was going off of memory, thank you for putting the link to where you, Jim Young, clearly stated “Your “childish tactics” are attacking Faisal about his weight when the candidate you support is every bit as calorically-challenged as Faisal (and me, for that matter), if not more so.” And thank you, Anon, for correcting me on my grammar - you are 100% correct.

Again, YOU, Mr. Young, are the liar because if that quote above does not declare that you are saying that Julie is overweight, I don’t know what does. Julie’s weight has no business even being brought up anymore than yours or your wifes.

What I believe is the case with you, Jim, is this. By your own admission you have won 100% of your cases because you get the priviledge of getting to chose which case you will represent. Well, by doing this, you do not know how to lose gracefully.

That being said, Jim, you are like the spoiled child that does not get his way. EVERY TIME you lose politically, which is about 100%, you have a conniption (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conniption). Time, and time, and time again, you have been virtually spanked by ALL who have debated you. Yes, you get the occasional points in there, but the big picture is, you are wrong and just do not know the proper way to handle yourself.

Did they not teach manners at that all male (civilian) college you went to, Jim??? YOU may have nothing to prove (you have done THAT time and again and probably don’t even realize it), but your boy Faisal sure does!!!

I’ve nothing to prove to cowards.

Well, maybe not. Because then, of course, the “have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too” crowd of AWCheney and her “Amen!” chorus will accuse me of bragging, or whatever.

Kinda of like JM. Yes, JM, it is “all about [me]” when someone makes a charge and I respond to it. I suppose that I could have just ignored it. But then you would have accused me of agreeing with it.

Apparently, it’s all about YOU, JM. Whatever you say/surmise/speculate/creatively assert is right, and everyone else who disagrees with you is wrong.

If Greg were really honest, he’s rename this sited “JM’s Insane Asylum.”

Is this all about you James Young? No one cares.

“Your “childish tactics” are attacking Faisal about his weight when the candidate you support is every bit as calorically-challenged as Faisal (and me, for that matter), if not more so.”

I’m not sure what Mr. Young is disputing here. John shouldn’t have put the paraphrase in quotation marks to be sure. But his summary was accurate.

Mr. Young says that Faisal, James Young, and Julie Lucas are fat. And that Julie is the fattest.

I’m not sure how that makes Mr. Young look “right”.

Julie might be chubby, and so are you, Mr. Young — but neither one of you has a duty to your country to be less weighty. Mr. Gill does.

From Mr. Young:

“I made no assertions about Julie’s weight, save to note that, like many of us, she could stand to lose a few pounds.”

Well, that’s about as Clintonian as it gets.

Does anyone wonder like I do if JY actually reads these things to himself before he hits the send button? This is because he disagrees with someone over Primaries as opposed to Conventions.

“there are quite a few Republican officeholders, past and present, who have valued my aid and input, and it is a measure of how ill-informed about local matters that you are that you could make such a mistake”

Name ‘em and describe what you did for them.

You assert that I said that Julie is ““calorically challenged” and “even more so than himself.”” I obviously do not refer to myself in the third person, so there’s the first tip-off.

However, what I actually said was “Your “childish tactics” are attacking Faisal about his weight when the candidate you support is every bit as calorically-challenged as Faisal (and me, for that matter), if not more so.”

http://www.bvbl.net/index.php/2007/05/22/jeff-dion-gay-dating-ad-discovered/#comment-11653

I made no assertions about Julie’s weight, save to note that, like many of us, she could stand to lose a few pounds.

But the more important point is that you people chose the terms of this debate. It is certainly laughable that you complain when someone points out to you how your tactics could be turned back on you.

When the candidates go to vote in November, they are, in a sense, competing in a Primary, not a convention made up of both Party faithfulls. The problem with a Convention is that, real or not, the perception can be placed that it was biased for or against a certain candidate.

The Faisal campaign time and again had accused the Lucas campaign of wanting a Primary ONLY so she could get Democrats to vote. Well, after doing a tally it was found that the Faisal Gill campaign is riddled with Democratic supporters (be it potential delegates or campaign contributors). Heck, even his inner-circle have voted in Democratic primaries (not that there is anything wrong with that )

Your work for the Party is to be commended, as is your enthusiasm. Keep up the good work and fighting the good fight…seems that our Party is very fortunate to have you in our ranks.

My opinion was dismissed because I was told I had not held positions within the party. I only bring up the fact the I have managed campaigns (most of them wins — a few unseating incumbent Dems) because that is the perspective I come from in all this and why I have an interest. I never intended these posts to get personal and turn it into a discussion of resumes. I could care less about that stuff, except to say I can’t for the life of me figure out why someone would claim he was a key figure in building the PWC GOP without having been anywhere NEAR a winning campaign.

I thought the point was to get some folks elected….not just run people to lose. Our conservatives in Richmond need more help and I don’t know where this school of thought comes from that conservatives are somehow at a disadvantage in a primary and must be nominated in a small, tightly controlled convention. Of course you can point to some David vs. Galiath scenerios where poorly funded candidates try to unseat entrenched incumbents (I’m talking about open seats).

The point is, it’s the trouble that is caused in some poorly run conventions that scare away our good, future candidates and the donors who will fund them. It also deflates the enthusiasm of the volunteers.

Well, AW, at least he did not refer to you as “calorically challenged” and “even more so than himself” as he, Jim Young, did to Julie.

He has YET to attack Julie Lucas on the issues. His statement of “she supports tax increases” is blatently false. He attributes this to her “support” of Buck Waters back almost a decade ago. Yet, he is so quick to deride anyone against Faisal by saying that we are condeming Faisal of “guilt by association.”

Just wondering, has ANYONE from the 51st District donated money to the Faisal Gill campaign? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller??? Waldo??? Anyone???

And no, you need not “have held a position in the party for the last 16 years to have an opinion.” It might be helpful, though, in lending some authority and depth to opinions about internal party workings in PWC to have actually witnessed some of the goings-on, of which you were perhaps unaware “while working on General Assembly and statewide campaigns out of Richmond through the 90s,” or perhaps, while relying upon the jaundiced views that you might have gained at family gatherings. Nevertheless, some of us have been able to lend aid to local party matters while working on other things, like working to defund the far-Left’s illicit forced-union-dues-for-politics nationwide, in places like California, Alaska, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. To be sure, managing campaigns is important. However, it is not the be all and end all of ability to speak with authority in matters political, though — protestations to the contrary notwithstanding — you appear to believe so, or want others to believe so, since you’ve mentioned it twice now.

But back to the main point on conventions vs. primaries: it’s an academic issue at this point with regard to this race. The legitimate authority which gets to decide such questions has decided on a convention. Discussion at this point over how it could have been done better or how there was a better alternative are a thinly-veiled effort to delegitimize the eventual GOP nominee, whomever that may be. It’s too bad that some are now emulating the Dems’ strategy after the 2000 debacle in Florida.

If your interest is in holding primaries in the future, then perhaps the best way to ensure that end would be to get involved in local party matters or at least, get more involved than you have been recently. It is doubtful that blogosphere discussions on the issue at this time and over how it was a bad decision in this case are not conducive to that purported goal.

James is to busy trying to manage his huge ego. That he has been a PWCGOP gadfly for years is true. That James Young has actually had the impact that he loves to shout about is a product of his ego…much overblown.

RE Lars’s comment: the use of of primaries to build parties is a sign of confidence and aggressive expansion. The use of conventions, especially those where the credentialling process becomes the focal point, is a defensive strategy designed to protect a relatively small bunch that holds power within the local party units. The “cross-over” problem is a bogey-man thing. I’ve never seen any convincing evidence that it is a statistically significant phenomenom.

I’m not religious about this: primaries have their problems too. Low turnout and expense are chronic in Virginia. But I think you fairly described how primaries can work hand-in-hand with party building at a time when bringing new faces to party politics is a November-important event. Conversely, failure to bring new faces and new enthusiasm to the Party is also a November-important event (in a bad way over a lot of Novembers).

I’ll just have to post as anon from now on since my last name apparently offends James Young and I needed to have held a position in the party for the last 16 years to have an opinion (would have been tough to do while working on General Assembly and statewide campaigns out of Richmond through the 90s).

I’ve been around Prince William County long enough (since 1962) and County GOP meetings (at least one or two every year from 1976 through 2003) to know that I’ve never heard of a James Young ever managing a single winning GOP campaign anywhere, but I just don’t think any of that is relevant for the purposes of exchanging ideas/comments (one of the purposes of political blogs).

I don’t care to participate in the personal digs here. I sincerely want to weigh in on how we can fix these problems in GOP nomination contests. Hey..I hope he’s right and the GOP somehow holds the 51st seat. Right now I see too many danger signs for success and an unwillingness on the part of some to fix problems that are very fixable.