The Dems never really pulled out all the dirt on Faisal. If the election were perceived to be closer, terrorism would have been the big issue.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=280367130714172

Now, I suppose some wisea$$ will accuse me of “bragging.” Tell me: how does that make you different from the Liberals who attack no matter what one does, especially when one dares to defend himself?

When did you EVER provably “perform yeoman’s service for the Conservative cause,” “Batson”? And when did you ever do anything but run YOUR mouth, CON Artist … er, “CONVA”?

Oh, that’s right. You both hide your identities so your meager credentials can’t be compared to mine, and/or because you fear association with your comments. But to answer your question about the last 6-8 years, Con Artist … er, “CONVA,” to give just one example, I was in Ohio in 2004 (you know, Ground Zero of the prospective controversy) as part of the GOP-Bush/Cheney legal team. Was even called back as one of the more highly-qualified litigators on Wednesday morning before Kerrey conceded. I was working a poll for four hours just a few weeks ago, in a district where a “Republican” Supervisor of whom you probably approve not only didn’t lift a finger for a GOP candidate, but actively endorsed a Democrat. What poll were you in?

And I have “no idea that [I] and [my] bunch have done anything wrong.” Well, I know what you SAY “[I] and [my] bunch” — a characterization that I would dispute, BTW — have “done … wrong,” but unfortunately (for you) what you say “[I] and [my] bunch have done” is not “wrong.” You’re just complaining because the internal GOP outcome doesn’t suit you. And because it doesn’t suit you, you petulantly and childishly have attacked the Party’s nominees. Now, I suppose that Conservatives could have done the same thing to JMDD, or to Glen Hill (not Conservative enough for some), or even to Harry Parrish, when his campaign slimed a Conservative challenger in 2005 to maintain his hold on power, but Conservative’s didn’t. To the contrary, Conservatives got behind the Party’s nominees.

It is a comment on your character — and that of those of your ilk, like “NoVA Scout” — that you do not extend the same courtesy. Or, if courtesy is not a concern, the same hard-headed pragmatism, in recognition of the utility of doing so. Probably yet another reason why you conceal your identity. It would be disastrous if Conservatives responded in kind to you and your candidates, wouldn’t it?

The key is noting the criticisms rendered here are now also against Bob FitzSimmonds. Have y’all forgotten that he was UNCHALLENGED for the GOP nomination?!?!? Criticisms against him are gratuitous, and reveal the ideological nature of complaints that you unsuccessfully misrepresent as complaints about the integrity of the process. You can’t beat somebody with nobody, and those of you who now criticize him offered no alternatives. And I would remind you that I supported Dave Mabie for the GOP nomination in 2003.

So “NoVA Scout’s” statement that “I doubt Colgan would have even run if a serious Republican had declared. But Colgan is a substantive and honorable man who would not cede his seat willingly to a caricature of everything that is wrong about certain pockets of commandeered Republicanism in the Commonwealth” is, in fact uninformed. No less an authority than Tom Davis called me shortly after the failed sales tax referendum in 2002 to inform me that Colgan had been prevailed upon by Mark Warner and Lee Stoffregen to run again, and I’m sure that the same thing happened this year.

Colgan “is a substantive and honorable man….”?!?! Hardly. Colgan is, and has proven himself to be, a partisan hack. Moreover, the next four years will give whoever runs against Colgan a wonderful opportunity. He has been pegged as someone who can deliver for Northern Virginia. Not that he ever did so (any more than Harry Parrish did in a similar position in the House) when the Dems were in the majority. All they ever delivered was higher taxes.

People like “NoVA Scout” believe that the notion that we are paying enough of our income to government is “commandeered Republicanism.” Fortunately, his type of “competence,” “responsibility,” and/or “respectability” have been rejected by the majority of Republicans. It’s only considered “incompetent” for the type of Republican for whom “slower Socialism” is an adequate theory of governance. I had the privilege of hearing Phyllis Schlafley speak today. I believe the relevant title of her book is “A Choice, Not An Echo.”

BTW, those are certainly bold words in light of the unfortunate shellacking that JMDD took in Fairfax. Talk about divorced from reality as to what constitutes a winning GOP strategy.

What do you people think got us to majority status in Virginia? Or, for that matter, in the House and Senate in 1994?

Perhaps you truly believe that your limp-wristed brand of “go-along-to -get along” is a winning strategy. That’s not only absurd on its face; it evidences a willful blindness to historical fact.

How about Nada Nadim Prouty, the 37-year-old Lebanese native who is related to a suspected Hizbullah money launderer…”

Looks like she and Faisal were both kinda like “exonerated,” huh??

Ya kinda beginning to get the picture??

Am I supposed to be psychic? You made a statement about Gill’s access to intelligence.

I asked you where your information came from, and you insulted me but didn’t tell me where. Now you tell me, as if I knew all along.

“”"which you endorsed when it suited you, and now attack when it doesn’t;”"”

I haven’t attacked Sperry’s book. I haven’t even disagreed with it. I love his book, entitled Infiltration. To find out more about it visit sperryfiles.com.

As I have said previously, I doubt Colgan would have even run if a serious Republican had declared. But Colgan is a substantive and honorable man who would not cede his seat willingly to a caricature of everything that is wrong about certain pockets of commandeered Republicanism in the Commonwealth (the comparison with Harry Parrish is apt). It was the local committee’s job to find a credible candidate and to bring him forward. They didn’t even try, as far as I can discern. No excuses, please. It’s absolute malfeasance.

Frank Wolf’s history has nothing to do with this.

His name is Frank Wolf.”

We must all forgive Jimmy his lack of adequate research. He was FAR too young (no pun intended), and not in the area, to realize that the 10th Congressional District was dominated by Arlington County in those days, along with some very liberal areas in Fairfax County. Arlington County was no less liberal then (relative to the rest of the state, at least) than it is now. Comparing Frank Wolf’s efforts at a time when Republicans were hardly the dominant political party to those of FitzSimmonds is really a ridiculous comparison. We didn’t start doing too well here in Prince William County either until around the time that Frank got elected, and that was largely thanks to Harry Parrish.

It really DOES help to have been there…so please forgive Jimmy his ignorance.

I stopped in there today, just to take a look at what he was pushing. Well of his 17 posts on the front page, there was one comment each on three of them. That’s the kind of interest your and his brand of conservatism brings. Sigh….

Afraid you have missed the point totally. I am very careful when voting that the person I am casting a vote for does not have a hidden, or not so hidden agenda other than what is stated. Surely you can understand that. I prefer religious neutrality in government.

Furthermore, I don’t bake.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results. Young and his ilk are no better than Rishell, Rommellt and Feder.

Whens the last time James Young did this?

That is the remedy to all the problems outlined here. James Young is just desperate for names now so they can start their blacklist that will once again block participation through one of their stack credentils committees.

The wave is coming boy.

At one point in my life, a whole bunch of Buddhists were doing their best to kill me and my buddies (and were quite successful). Why not add that religion to your list?

Better yet, go bake some cookies.

There was a time when Pat Buchanan performed yeoman’s service for the Conservative cause. And while I don’t agree that he is anti-Semitic, as National Review suggested a few years back, he is clearly a nativist, and a protectionist, two views outside of the mainstream of BOTH the GOP and the Democrat Party.

The only commenters who can be taken seriously are Greg — who is at least man enough to have gotten sued for his alleged smears — and Hirons. Well, OK, there’s PRJM, who’s a Democrat who describes keeping one’s word as a “weird cult” (BTW, PRJM, on the “access to intelligence,” I was quoting Sperry’s book, which you endorsed when it suited you, and now attack when it doesn’t; could you make up your OWN mind before trying to persuade others).

Scott, aside from the fact that she was reelected against two laughably-weak candidates, what makes Julie qualified to be a Delegate, or to run against a by-2009 incumbent who will take her apart in debates? Especially over Mike May?

And “NoVA Scout’s” attack on running a candidate who’s lost on multiple occasions is just weird. I can think of at least one other guy who was a three-time loser, yet was nominated for a fourth time.

His name is Frank Wolf.

“””As for “question[ing] Gill’s electability,” that’s not something Republicans do after a nominee has been decided.”””

Ohhhhhhh, Republicans knowing that Gill was not electable occurred well BEFORE the 400 block voters (and a few politicos who need their support) decided to make him the nominee.

…and by the way jimmy, there were far more racists at the convention who supported Gill than there were who opposed him. Despite your persistent and worn-out name-calling, racism is not a trait limited solely to caucasian Americans.