"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)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
Bob Marshall Takes Off The Gloves
By Greg L | 17 November 2007 | Virginia Politics, Virginia House | 85 Comments
It looks like Bob Marshall is pretty serious about challenging the Republican leadership, given what just landed in my inbox this evening. Not that I expect this is going to necessarily succeed, but it should queue up a rather worthwhile discussion about what the Republican party in Virginia actually stands for. RPV headquarters on Sunday ought to be a heck of an interesting place to be.
In the House Republican Caucus
Richmond, Virginia
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Mr. Marshall, (Bob), for himself,RESOLUTION
Expressing a sense of no confidence in the policies of the current House of Delegates Republican Leadership as pursued from 2002 to the present, and urging a change in policy.
Whereas even though the House Republican Caucus was in charge of the 2001 Delegate Redistricting, Republican Caucus strength has decreased from 67 (65 R, 2-Ind.) to 55 members (53-R, 2-Ind.) in the four and one half years of the present House leadership since the Summer of 2002; and
Whereas The Republican leadership has failed to pursue efficient government spending by:
1. Including in the 2008 budget nearly $50 million for a Fine Arts Museum in Richmond while at the same time proposing Abusive Driver Fees as a necessary component of the state road funding;
2. Refusal to demand fiscal accountability from Governor Warner by ignoring the will of the House in failing to follow up on properly passed resolutions seeking an accounting by Governor Warner and his Cabinet on implementing the recommendations of the 2002 Wilder Commission report on Efficiency and Effectiveness in Government Spending. (See HR 12 approved 61-35, March 1, 2004, requesting Gov. Warner’s Cabinet to disclose the efficiency and cost savings measures adopted pursuant to the Wilder Report and other efficiency measures; and HR 13 approved 62-33, March 1, 2004 requesting the Governor to provide the House with detailed facts relating to implementing the Wilder Report.)
3. Allowing government spending to increase at new record levels of spending without making road and transit improvements a priority, and instead providing for tax increases by appointed governmental agencies as provided in HB 3202 (2007); and
Whereas The Republican Leadership makes policy decisions in a small closed group and in a secretive manner without benefit of wide Caucus input or knowledge and in late 2006 prepared a transportation bill which Caucus members were expected to accept without discussion or critical input, i.e. HB 3202, which bill placed the responsibility for increasing taxes on appointed officials selected by statute, and included a first time ever tax on services, a tax on home sales during a declining housing market, and enacted severe Abusive Driver Fee penalties; and which violated the principles of George Mason’s Declaration of Rights and Magna Charta (1215) that citizens “cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected.” (Contrast this with the unprecedented claim supported by the Governor, the Attorney General and the Speaker of the House that, “The General Assembly’s ability and power to delegate taxation is not constrained.”); and
Whereas The Republican Leadership has failed to act in a Parliamentary manner by:
1. Accepting the Budget proposed by Governor Warner in 2003 which included both revenue spending measures and revenue raising measures in violation of the Single Object Provision of the Virginia Constitution rather than return the budget to Governor Warner and inform him that tax and spending measures may not be combined in a single bill.
2. Directing House staff to not record for the public the Privileges and Elections Committee vote on HB 2797 taken on 2-2-07, while making NO objection to all other measures reported from this same committee on the same day until strenuous objection was made insisting on the normal practice of the House, the requirements of Rule 18, and the problems this would produce for the expeditious discharge of business then pending before the House of Delegates; and
Whereas The Republican Leadership has compromised and sought to coerce the independent judgment of Caucus members and their commitment to constituents by using the authority of office to advocate, urge and insist that certain Republican members of the House Finance Committee relent in their opposition to what became the 2004 sales tax increase. Such actions are inconsistent with principled opposition to tax increases; and
Whereas The Republican Leadership has adopted the practices which it criticized Democrats for using, namely failing to appoint sponsors and publicly recognized advocates of legislation as members of House-Senate Conference Committees in at least the instances of the Constitutional Marriage Amendment in 2005 and the Transportation Trust Fund Constitutional Amendment in 2007; Now, therefore be it,
Resolved, that because of the above concerns and the distinct likelihood that the new majority Democratic Senate leadership will propose an unjustified growth in the size of government, increased government spending, and the imposition of new taxes and other policies at variance with Republican principles, that the House Republican Caucus has lost confidence in the policies of the present Republican Leadership, and request that a new policy direction be undertaken consistent with traditional Republican principles.
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.
85 Comments
Views: 1725
Loading ...
…but what Bob Marshall failed to mention was how the RPV allowed a flagrantly flawed 51st HOD District convention to go uncorrected and result in the nomination of an even more flawed Republican candidate with an abominable history of associations, both past and present.
What Marshall and some of the other anti-tax conservatives
fail to realize is no one cares about HB3202 except for a handful of no new taxers. The fiscal conservative crowd could not even agree if this was a good idea. VCAP and Norquist remained silent during the GA session about this bill and the Club for Growth in Va came out against it. With this spit there was hardly an anti tax consensus against it until the Democrats started bringing up abuser fees. Marshall and the Club have failed to realize that unelected transportation authorities are not a “hill to die on” First no one understands it in the first place and second, most of these folks like Frederick, Marshall, and the Club have permanently damaged their relationships with other Republican caucus members by essentially campaigning against them this past year. This will not help them when they need to get a bill through committee this year and the next few sessions. Other good conservatives will ask, why do I want to help these guys when they constantly stabbed us in the back in 07. While it is admirable what Marshall is doing, this is absolutely going to kill his district because he as essentially become an independent.
So Marshall alienates himself from the rest of the party even more….yet the 13th HD continues to re-elect him for close to 20 years. I guess those citizens in the 13th don’t want to be represented over mainstream issues.
Newer residents should do a little research about the issues that Del. Marshall originally ran on. It speaks volumes.
Since there already is a MFA in Richmond, I’ll assume that is to expand their exhibits? Thank goodness. It’s terrific little musuem and if you haven’t visited, you should.
They have one of the large private collections of Fabrege.
Everyone could use a bit of art in their life - helps keep the brain in shape.
Dolph said “Newer residents should do a little research about the issues that Del. Marshall originally ran on. It speaks volumes.”
Dolph, yes it does speak volumes. It says your anti-life agenda cannot cope with the fact that for 20 years your kind has been trying to get rid of him, and for 20 year voters have shown they want a Delegate that has the same values as themselves, not yours. Your distain shown on this blog for Bob is palpable, and is coloring all your comments of him.
G Man,
Please explain to me what an ‘anti-life agenda’ is. That is a rather absurd expression. While you are at it, I would also be interested in hearing what ‘my kind’ is. Should I cover my eyes to shield them from all the ranting and raving?
G Man - Recall Bob Marshall and his wife “took over” a BOS meeting last year to keep the struggling Manassas Adult Day Care program alive as his father in law was a participant -if you were there it was a disgrace. This is the same Bob Marshall who has stated women should stay home and care for their families -unless it’s him. He is nothing but a hypocrite. I would have to assume this is built into him permenantly.
I am decidedly pro-life but wouldn’t vote for him for a million bucks. I look beyond their ’statements’ and attempt to get to character. His was easy to find.
Marshall has no problem with taxes - as long as it is going to pay for his pet projects.
Proof - the adult day care program. HE benefitted, so it was a good idea and worthy tax. A “REAL” republican would question why the government and taxpayers are responsible for caring for Marshall’s family members.
Dolph:
As an unfortunate resident of Marshall’s district let me say that the man is not unbeatable, but not with the candidates the Dems have been throwing at him. I’ve met Bruce Roemelt and he’s a nice guy. But, he’s as far to the left as Marshall is to the right. The district is still a right-leaning district. It will take centrist Democrat who focuses on economy and transportation issues (and has acceptable answers on social issues to limit exposure on that front). Colman did fine in the precincts that overlap Marshall’s which shows the district will vote for a D.
But I say more power to Marshall. I hope he is successful in recasting the direction of the House leadership. That will only make the choice all the more clear in two years–elect members of a party that understands the need for compromise and constructive cooperation or pick members of a party that clearly favor division. Just remember this resolution when you’re trying to figure out how Virginia became a blue state.
Turn PW Blue,
I don’t understand why, in almost 20 years, the 13th district hasn’t found a viable democratic candidate to run. Political neophytes always seem to run against the well-oiled Marshall machine. It is like they are being throw to the wolves. I don’t live in the 13th so I stopped watching the carnage after a decent and good man was basically ruined, back in the 90’s, for having the gall to run against the formidable Mr. Marshall.
I like Roemmelt but the Dems need to run someone more centrist at this point. (Dolph, the Democrats haven’t bothered to field viable candidates for the BOCS in some districts either. I don’t know what the problem is there.) Many of us are willing to pay taxes to support art museums and to make a dent in our traffic problems. I want roads that aren’t falling apart, schools that don’t have to rely on trailers, cultural attractions, ample parks, etc. and I’m willing to pay for them.
The fact that Marshall couldn’t get the chairmanship of the immigration study committee says it all…even his own party thinks he’s a crackpot Johnny One-Note. This guy is a bedroom voyeur extraordinaire and a meddling crackpot when it comes to end-of-life issues.
I do like Marshall but I think he is way over the top on some issues (and does not no when to quit) but after his antics with the house leadership over the past several months, he will be luck to even be on a committee, much less chair it. Rule of thumb: Don’t go after leadership and especially the Speaker unless you are sure you can beat them. Marshall should have plenty of seniority to chair an important committee but his constant badmouthing of other caucus members does have consequences. I do think some in the Republican party(even conservatives) would like to see him either retire or lose because his antics do hurt other conservatives across the state in less Republican areas.
anonymoustoo said on 18 Nov 2007 at 11:13 am:
This guy is a bedroom voyeur extraordinaire and a meddling crackpot when it comes to end-of-life issues.
I couldn’t agree with you more on this statement. I hope you see I don’t always disagree with you.
Lafayette, I know we think alike on this issue too.
Marshall is way right, but given the choice between way right or way left this part of VA is going to pick right. Liberal Dems
cannot win in Prince William and Loudon yet thats all the Democratic Party can find to run.
It’s been said but worth saying again, the Dems need to find a main stream canidate who will focus on issues besides abortion.
All the Dems want to sell is a Anti-Life Agenda and Gun Control. The Republicans just want to talk about Pro-life, Anti-Tax and how everybody needs a gun. The Mainstream wants to hear about Schools, Jobs, and Roads.
Remember the Repulican Senate Re-districted Marshall’s home out of the 29th District so he would not run against Colgan or for Colgan’s seat. Basically putting Marshall in a Democratic Senate District because they (the Republicans) didn’t want him in the Senate.
Democrats seemed to do pretty well in Loudon County last week. Demographics probably explain that phenomena.
I am still waiting to hear what this ‘anti-life agenda’ is.
Dolph, Let’s see…anti-life agenda is probably the opposite of pro-life agenda. It probably means the efforts put forth by those who are selective about who lives and who dies. E.g., abortion (killing babies in the womb), euthanasia (killing the vulnerable, sick, elderly or disabled, aka, nonproductive or a drain on our economy). To put it in a positive light, rather than negative, you could call it pro-death, I suppose. Oh, to be a culture that values all life as a gift. To instill compassion in people who see, hear and feel the imperfect or the needy, and to recognize the inherent value in even one’s own suffering.
Legal2,
I agree with you. I wish all people could see how precious life is, especially their own.
“Oh, to be a culture that values all life as a gift. To instill compassion in people who see, hear and feel the imperfect or the needy, and to recognize the inherent value in even one’s own suffering.”
I hope this beneficence extends to your Hispanic neighbors and their US citizen children.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if all complex issues could be solved with a simple label?
I figured it was code, and I was correct. Actually, the issues mentioned are religious and ethical questions and should probably best be left to churches and theologians rather than legislators.
Great cop-out, Dolph.
Anony..too. You bet it does “extend to Hispanic neighbors” and they should be obeying the law, the one written on their hearts by God and the one made by those with authority (which also comes from God).
Sorry Dolph, Roe v Wade made it no longer just a religious and ethical issue, but a legal one too.
Legal2,
Seriously, what else is there to say? Churches should dictate morals and ethics to their own parishioners. That is their job. The state should stay out of it other than basic framework. I do not give the state the moral authority to make deeply personal decisions for me. Perhaps it is just my libertarian streak.
Legal2, your religious arguments carry weight with those who believe just as you do. Others may not agree. I wish those who were against the choice to have an abortion would simply not have one and would work to educate the population on the effective means of avoiding pregnancy, and leave the rest of us alone.
When my father was dying of congestive heart failure, he was in such agony that he tried to spell out to my sisters that he wanted the tubes to which he was connected pulled. He had already told them that he wanted the tubes pulled so that he could die. He thought they were so stupid as to not understand him so he spelled out his wishes. I’m glad hospice arrived that night and not that idiot Bob Marshall.
G Man,
How so? No one is saying you have to have an abortion. If it is morally repugnant to you, then by all means….don’t go there.
There is also that slight matter of rule of law……
Yeah, your government using tax dollars to kill babies in the womb - so much for keeping the government out of it. If you are serious about that, then let’s stop the huge amounts of $$ going to Planned Barrenhood. Funny how “your kind” wants the government to stay involved in that aspect of our lives.
anonymoustoo,
I totally agree with you including your final conclusion.
I have a similar story with my mother. I honestly believe, that as a society, we treat animals far better than those we love.
Actually, Dolph, when suffering in people is not viewed as having any worth, people are reduced to animals being “put down.” It’s one thing to die a natural death, without extraordinary means to prolong suffering without any hope of improvement, and quite another to euthanize/murder/suicide assist people who don’t understand the meaning of suffering. I highly recommend, “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl, a holocaust survivor.
Legal2,
I can feel the love and compassion just oozing out all over. Got over that real fast, didn’t you? ‘My kind’ can get just as snippy as ‘your kind.’
I wonder how much MY government would save per week if we cut out that nasty little anti-life war?
The point is, we do not have a line item veto on things we don’t necessarily approve of. For the record, planned parenthood is not government funded. I hardly consider that government intrusion in my business.
We cannot instill our religious beliefs on to others who may not believe the same thing.
Legal2,
I am not going to debate right to die or abortion. I obviously have very different feelings about such issues than you do. Both come from our own personal belief systems. I don’t want to impose mine on you and I don’t want you to impose yours on me. I consider both issues to be deeply personal.
Dolph, When did Planned Parenthood stop receiving government funding?? In 2004, they received $50 Million from Title X and $50 Million from Medicaid. Look at the last quote here: MANY more people are killed in the name of choice than in the “anti-life war”. There is a boatload of information out there for the uninformed such as Dolph:
“[Note: In Planned Parenthood’s 2002-2003 Annual Report, PP reported committing 227,375 child-murders-by-abortion in 2002. PP reported total income of $766.6 million, of which $288.2 million was from Clinic Operation; $254.4 million was from taxpayer dollars; and $228.1 million was from donations. PP’s reported profit was $36.6 million (Source: E-mail from Edward Szymkowiak, December 18, 2003). Therefore, although Title X and Medicaid provide approx. 40% (est.) of the total taxpayer dollars that is given to Planned Parenthood, there are also other government funding sources beside only Title X and Medicaid, that add taxpayer money to Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s coffers.]” http://www.covenantnews.com/lefemine041031.htm
Planned Parenthood describes itself as “the nation’s leading sexual and reproductive health care advocate and provider.” In 2005, Planned Parenthood provided 264,943 surgical and medical abortions, the most of any abortion provider in the U.S.[1]
And from Wikipedia: “Planned Parenthood receives almost a third of its money in government grants and contracts ($305.3 million in FY 2006). It received $345.1 million in clinic income that year, $212.2 million in private contributions and bequests, $33 million in other income and $7.2 million for the Alan Guttmacher Institute for a total of $902.8 million.”
Dolph, you have proven yourself to be ignorant in the geniune sense. You have lost any credibility with me when you can’t even be honest about the very easily proven funding of the largest death organization in our country.
Dolph “Sanger (founder of PP) also supported eugenics,[3] a controversial view held by a significant number of intellectuals at the time.[4]” - a false compassion (lie) to “help” (kill) people of certain undesirables (unborn, infirm, or certain races). You’ve come a long way, baby!
Moral relativists do not uplift or improve the human condition.
Legal2,
How about citing a neutral source? Just the verbage used is a big tip off that I won’t be getting unbiased information. You are aware that PP does more than provide abortions? Perhaps all that contraception is lumped in with the abortion rate?
And who gives a rat’s rear end what Margaret Sanger believed? Why on earth does it matter?
John Forbes Nash was raving crazy a great deal of his life. Do we throw out his contributions to mathematics?
You don’t consider Planned Parenthood’s own stats on Wikipedia to be neutral? Then check out the hundreds of other sites that clearly show the huge funding PP receives. Abortion is very profitable.
Margaret Sanger’s “contributions” have brought some people to the belief that life is negotiable, expendable and ultimately disposable.
You are the one who said, “For the record, planned parenthood is not government funded.” All your other comments are efforts to distract attention away from your outright lie, whether from malice or ignorance. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that your lie is through ignorance.
Nice try, though ineffective.
So, Legal2, do you support using contraceptives to avoid pregnancy? (Somehow I doubt it.)
I don’t mind if PP does get some of my tax dollars. GWB’s war gets my tax dollars as well despite its waste of lives and money. Just suck it up…we all pay for things we dislike or don’t use. I believe I’m correct in saying that the taxpayers are paying for the police who direct traffic from our area churches. I’m an non-believer…why should I pay. (I pay because it’s for the benefit of smooth traffic control and the general good.)
Re abortion and the right to die, it’s a personal decision and your opinion is no more valid than mine. MYOB.
Do you accept that PP provides services other than abortion?
To me, government funded means it is totally funded by the government. All sorts of organizations and corporations get grants and have contracts with the government. I do not consider them to be government funded. It is a matter of semantics.
You obviously are very emotional over this issue. I am clearly not to person for you to vent about it with. We do not agree. You want the government to make these decisions for you and I do not.
The point is, if you want the government to stay out of these issues, then be consistent and stop the funding of groups, pro-life OR pro-death. Let the non-government entities fund PP. A government is supposed to use its resources to protect its borders, which these days is fighting terrorism on foreign soil, rather than here. But I would like to see even that de-politicized.
Dolph, you are hopeless. You don’t even follow your own arguments and when backed into a corner, you circumvent and try distraction to deflect. You are not enough of a challenge and have lost your credibility. Your reality is yours and mine is mine. So…Clintonesque. Typical lib.
So, Legal2, do you support using contraceptives to avoid pregnancy? You avoided answering this. I’m speaking about the general “you’ and not you specifically.
Whether a person does or doesn’t is his/her own decision. Planned Parenthood should not be given government funding for an individual’s personal “choice.”
And you include contraception in that ban on funding for PP?
How about abstinence lectures? Should they be publically funded?
Slavery used to be legal in this country and it was the churches who led the abolitionist movement. Back then they were consider radicals and religious nut cases who were trying to impose their religious views on other and meddling in the rights of citizens to own other people.
Just because something is legal doesn’t make it just.
Legal2, Dolph and anonymoustoo:
Man, did I parachute into a firefight.
But at least my screen door is closed…
No, I am not a challenge because there is no debate. I don’t know why you don’t understand that.
Your responses are typical of people who have simplistic answers for very complex problems. You will never see anyone else’s point of view. You will never be able to see the world outside your own microcosm.
anonymoustoo,
Funny you should ask about those abstinence programs. Millions of dollars spent on those and the guy in charge of funding some of these programs ends up on the DC madam’s list. How typical of those with moral superiority.
Rob Smalls,
A screen anything is probably dangerous! I would quickly suit up…in flame-retardant haz-mat.
One way to affect the House Republican Leadership’s selection and subsequent behavior is to send a strong message that a change is needed in both the Senate caucus leaderships - e.g., to be MORE pro-gun.
Click http://tinyurl.com/yv8494 to send a message to you newly elected or re-elected Senator that you want the Senate caucus leaderships to be more pro-gun.
Do it now and tell your friends.
Legal2,
You are right. Anyone who can go to the library can find out what the Federal Government gives Planned Parenthood. Of course there are those who want to spout off comments before finding out the facts. I hope you had a good Sunday. Keep up the good fight. 2Timothy 4:22.
Legal2 and likeminded - Planned Parenthood!!!! What does that stand for? PLANNED is the big word. Imagine if all babies were planned! In an ideal world that would be the case. That’s the ideal PP strives for. Instead they are being raked over the coals by those who only see one side of their work. The International Planned Parenthood has done an outstanding job in many countries, where women didn’t even know that there were ways to avoid pregnancy. - I have a feeling Legal2 is male and, consequently, not able to become pregnant.
Legal2 and Patty,
I know where you both stand on abortion and right to die issues. Please, do disrepect to either of you..but I must ask this question. I know you both love unborn babies, and don’t want them killed. How do you feel about the death penalty?
I agree with Dolph and anonymoutoo on this whole heartedly.
I think you all might be missing the point just. I want abortion to remain legal, and by wanting it to remain legal doesn’t mean that abortion would be MY personal choice. I have lots more to say on these issues.
All you “pro-lifers”,
You don’t want YOUR tax dollar going to fund such things as PP. Would you prefer YOUR tax dollar be paying for unwanted children in the “system”? These babies are born to unfit mothers, young mothers, mothers on drugs, and mothers not really able to take care of these babies the are born into a life of doom and gloom and my opinion.
corr
NO disrespect to you both…
Lafayette, because Dolph always brings up the abortion issue when Bob Marshall is mentioned, and claims that she wants the government out of this issue, is why I consistently bring up the funding to the self-proclaimed, largest provider of abortions in this country. If she doesn’t think that the $100-300+ Millions that our taxes are significant enough to qualify as funding this org., which according to their own reports are a portion of the nearly $1 Billion they receive annually, then she should have no problem with it being de-funded. We haven’t even discussed whether it should be legal or not. That is a separate issue not discussed.
FYI, the death penalty, I believe should be rare, but used when necessary - to protect society. I am not a seamless-garment person who paints life issues with the strange broad brush many religious leaders do. (Heck, they are illegal alien aiders & abetters.) And I don’t consider unborn babies threats to society.
Question: Must the Federal government fund everything that is legal???
Correction, Legal2, I did not bring up the abortion issue today. Actually I don’t believe I brought it up the last time I discussed Marshall. Last time I discussed the housebill defining life as beginning at fertilization and why that was a bad bill.
Defining life as beginning at fertilization basically would outlaw most modern forms of contraception should federal laws change. I am very opposed to any bill that reads this way and would not support any candidate who voted for it.
My comment is the third from the top. You will see that I suggested that new residents research Del. Marshall. and pointed out that he was alienating himself further from the mainstream party. I never mentioned abortion.
So lets see, in the words of Billy Joel…We didn’t start the fire….
Legal2,
I think you know I’m not an EVIL person, and Dolph isn’t either.
To answer your question….NO, NO, NO, NO!!! I don’t like the government funding a lot of things, but that’s the way the old ball bounces. I have many friends that don’t have children, and yet they’ve paid for schools for years. I think that’s just the nature of the beast. The government is going to fund things that not all of us approve of.
Patty,
Where are you?
“Defining life as beginning at fertilization basically would outlaw most modern forms of contraception should federal laws change. I am very opposed to any bill that reads this way and would not support any candidate who voted for it.” What modern forms are you speaking of, Dolph? What contraception is or would be outlawed? Do you mean the fall-back of abortion when contraceptives fail? Do you mean the abortifacient, RU-486? Why are you so afraid of defining life? Sounds a little like you’re freakin’ out.
No, I don’t think you are an evil person.
BTW, I’ve paid for public schools for years, too, and never put my children in them, thank goodness. That doesn’t mean that I begrudge anyone for the taxes I’ve paid for other kids’ education. My point is still … if you want the government to stay out of this issue, how can you justify all the millions that the gov’t is paying these people who are definitely coming from this agenda? They are not neutral. They are making big bucks.
IUDs and low-dose birth control pills, for example. It is strange legal2 that you don’t appear to know the arguments of your own anti-abortion side.
Most forms of birth control pills and IUDs prevent implantation (conception) and the morning after pill would also be outlawed.
If theologians, scientists, and biologists cannot agree as to when life begins, why should a bunch of legislators make that determination, especially when alterior motives are present when doing so?
When life begins was answered years ago - where have you been? But I guess it continues to be evasive to people who want to kill life, but not admit that’s what it is. You really enjoy talking in circles, Dolph, but I must leave you with your delusions now. g’night…
Actually, I think there is a consensus that life begins when an egg is fertilized. At that point, it substantially changes from something with the potential to develop into a human being, to something that will develop into a human being. Any point beyond fertilization as a demarcation point is necessarily arbitrary and less significant as a biological transition as the ultimate transition of fertilization that preceded it.
As medical science advances, the “viability” demarcation point currently used (first trimester) to make this determination is being pushed. If the only limitation for the preservation of life is our technical ability to save life, we’ve got a very troubling moving target here.
Should we be able to develop an artificial womb, (something I would not feel comfortable with at all), it would effectively bring “viability” right to the moment of fertilization. What shall we do then? How can we deal with the moral and ethical dilemna that would unavoidably pose?
Bob Marshall is saying to the Caucus what most of them are probably thinking, but are too afraid to say it. This is the best thing that could happen to the House GOP Caucus and, you just watch, in the end Bob Marshall will be the hero.
This is why he has won over his fellow Delegates one at a time of the years. He is the conscience of the House Republicans. He knows the rules better than the rest of the membership, knows the State Constitution backwards and forwards, and he knows how to follow is principles better than anyone in Richmond.
Dolph is evasive? I have two words: pot, kettle.
Legal2, you just heard what contraceptives would be illegal because they prevent implantation *after* fertilization. You appeared not to think there were any contraceptives threatened.
Actually Roe v. Wade stands on the shoulders of another landmark SC decision directly related to contraception: Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). That was where the SC ruled a Connecticut law prohibiting the use of ALL contraceptives was unconstitutional. That is where a constitutional right to privacy was established.
Oh nonsense…theologians and scientists are still debating life. People simply do not agree. That is the reason extremists should not be in office trying to enact laws that do away with contraception.
Bob Marshall is an authentic buffoon, but I at least thought he could string a sentence together.
“Allowing government spending to increase at new record levels of spending without making road and transit improvements a priority, and instead providing for tax increases by appointed governmental agencies as provided in HB 3202″
Does Delegate Marshall think this is acceptable writing? Marshall ought to be writing at the level of Thomas Jefferson, not Jefferson D’Arcy!
If Mr. Marshall could express his thought clearly and vigorously on paper the statement would read:
“Government spending increased to record levels. Roads and transit improvements were not made a priority, and appointed - not elected - government agencies were given authority to levy taxes.”
The illiteracy doesn’t end there. What self-respecting delegate would allow this sentence to be published under his name?
“Whereas The Republican Leadership makes policy decisions in a small closed group and in a secretive manner without benefit of wide Caucus input or knowledge and in late 2006 prepared a transportation bill which Caucus members were expected to accept without discussion or critical input, i.e. HB 3202, which bill placed the responsibility for increasing taxes on appointed officials selected by statute, and included a first time ever tax on services, a tax on home sales during a declining housing market, and enacted severe Abusive Driver Fee penalties; and which violated the principles of George Mason’s Declaration of Rights and Magna Charta (1215) that citizens “cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected.”
That is all one sentence. If an English 101 student wrote this, she would fail.
A better statement would read:
“Whereas the Republican leadership makes policy decisions in secret, and without the benefit of Caucus wide input. For example, in late 2006 a transportation bill - which allowed appointed officials to increase taxes - was put to a vote without Caucus discussion. For the first ever, a tax on services, home sales, as well as severe Abusive Driver penalties were inflicted upon Virginians. The Bill violated the principles of George Mason’s Declaration of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and the Virginia Constitution.”
It is humiliating that my delegate ought to be a member of a remedial English class, not the Virginia General Assembly.
Is anyone else concerned that Delegate Marshall - who recently realized he is a stalwart opponent of illegal immigration - has the same command of English as a first generation immigrant?
legal2,
Nuetral? I don’t think nuetral is something there’s much of this is a pretty passionate and personal matter. I’m a true Independent. I’m very liberal on somethings, and very conservative on others. I usually just have to pick my battles and causes to fight. Right to life/die issues are not one I care to touch. I’ve seen so many in my family die slow agonizing deaths with Alzhiemers and cancer. I hate to see suffering of the ill and elderly.
Greg L.,
Everyone is still tip-toeing around the real implications of what defining life beginning at fertilization would do to most modern forms of contraception.
I do not debate abortion. It is a deeply personal issue that I believe each person has to decide for themselves, within the current confines of the law. My political beliefs are not necessarily my personal beliefs. However, when it comes to legislators passing laws that outlaw contraception (were Roe to be overturned), then I have a huge problem.
As for everyone agreeing to when life begins, that will never happen, any more than people will all agree on the age of the earth, creationism vs evolution, etc.
Greg L,
Your point about abortion is identical to Christopher Hitchens view.
“But his greatest heresy from liberalism is one we hear least about. Hitchens opposes abortion on materialistic grounds: human life has to begin at some point, and there is no non-arbitrary way to determine that is begins at a point after conception but before birth.”
http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.759/article_detail.asp
http://www.hitchensweb.com/
Legal2 at 9:44 - So you never put your children in public school, THANK GOODNESS. You sound like quite a snob.
Many anti-abortion folks seem to care a lot more about the fetus than the end “product”. I say, put you money where your mouth is and adopt unplanned, maybe handicapped, children who “chose” parents not able or fit to care for them.
Krusty said on 18 Nov 2007 at 10:28 pm:
Many anti-abortion folks seem to care a lot more about the fetus than the end “product”. I say, put you money where your mouth is and adopt unplanned, maybe handicapped, children who “chose” parents not able or fit to care for them.
I will agree for a fourth time Krusty. Thank you for you well said comments above. I agree completely.
Dolph,
From my perspective there’s nothing that equates contraception — preventing fertilization — with abortion. From a material standpoint (thanks, Matt, for pointing out that reference, I didn’t know about Hitchens) there’s a huge difference. From a faith perspective, despite the statements by the leadership of one segment of the Christian faith which I don’t ascribe to, I still haven’t found anything that would make me feel morally compelled to condemn the practice.
To me these are very separate issues. I would imagine that for most in Virginia, it’s a separate issue for them as well. I don’t believe that ending abortion necessarily has anything to do with limiting contraception, although there are some that feel differently, and while I respect that perspective, it’s not where I’m at.
Greg,
That’s the rub. There is a biological difference between the terms fertilization and conception. Most modern contraception prevents implantation, not fertilization. Thus, the bill in question would outlaw most modern contraception like some birth control pills, morning after pill, and the IUD.
While you and I might not agree on abortion, I see this bill as an issue that goes way beyond that debate.
I believe everyone would like to see less abortion. Outlawing contraception is not the way reduce unwanted pregnancy.
http://www.calright2life.org/difference.htm
Krusty,
Unfortunately, the number of babies up for adoption in this country does not come close to the demand. I know this personally. My own doctor told me that I would have better success of adopting a baby overseas because there are too few babies available in this country due to abortion. That was her words and she didn’t proclaim herself as a “pro-life” doctor. Those are the facts.
Also, when talking about abortion the discussion always turns to chasing other rabbits. If you want to discuss each on its own fine but when talking about abortion, the fact is that an unborn child is killed.
Most common forms of contraception are ones that do not prevent implantation. Also, IUD’s are rarely used any more. They have been deemed dangerous by many physicians. One IUD maker was sued.
End of life issues are another topic. I’ve had to deal with this scenario with my family, including my own son. There is a big difference between using hospice which I totally agree with than a Doctor Kervorkian. There is a big difference with helping people transit from this life and those who arbitrarily decide when to end a life. For example, should people who are depressed be killed? How about those who are paralyzed who can’t take care of themselves? What about people who have Down syndrome? I think many may be surprised that hospice has wide support from Christians. In Sweden the practice of terminating life is the Dr. K. version. I’ve read articles of how older people are terrified of going to the hospital to get treated for minor ailments because they are afraid a doctor might decide it was time for them to die. It’s been a while since I’ve read those articles but you can probably Google and find them.
This whole thing started because a certain person wanted to know what “anti-life” is. That is a fact. Evidently, this person likes to jump in to fan the flames so to speak. If you don’t want a discussion about this, don’t fan the flames. Otherwise, you will get a discussion. My initial comment was to affirm that Planned Parenthood does indeed get money from the Federal Government i.e. our tax dollars. I was then asked for my opinion and I gave it. I speak from my Christian beliefs. I have to. To do otherwise would betray my Christian beliefs.
Oh Patty, its ok to say my name. Actually, read back. You will see that I didn’t bring this topic up. It was hurled at me along with some silliness about ‘my kind’ and the anti-life agenda. Let’ be truthful now.
If anyone says I have an ‘anti-life agenda,’ they had best explain what that means because it is an incredibly stupid expression to most of the world and is not self explanatory, especially since I have no agenda. It appears it is just another example of thinly veiled name-calling.
That was a lot of bluster with little payoff at the end. After all of that he simply asks for a change in direction? Why not go for the throat of somebody?
legal2 said on 18 Nov 2007 at 3:48 pm:
Great cop-out, Dolph.
Anony..too. You bet it does “extend to Hispanic neighbors” and they should be obeying the law, the one written on their hearts by God and the one made by those with authority (which also comes from God).
So does the Supreme Court of the United States of America also obtain its authority from God?
I am Pro-Life, I want “In God We Trust” on money and “Under God” in the pledge, but I have my limts. Osama BinLaden believes God is on his side too. Don’t use my God to make your point.
I don’t like it be Roe vs. Wade is the law of the land, not one which I believe God made.
18 Nov 2007 5:47,
anonymoustoo,
Dont make statements where you dont know the answer. The police that you see directing traffic after church services are being paid directly by the church as an off duty job for the officer. Tax payers are not paying them at that time.
anon said on 18 Nov 2007 at 10:22 am:
Marshall has no problem with taxes - as long as it is going to pay for his pet projects.
Proof - the adult day care program. HE benefitted, so it was a good idea and worthy tax. A “REAL” republican would question why the government and taxpayers are responsible for caring for Marshall’s family members.
anon must think like the Stewart, Stirrups and other “REAL” Republicans in PWC where they pass zoning amendments that protect Horses, Farm Tractors and Jackasses more then they do Humans. If you are a Jackass you are allowed to build shelter within the set back lines on your property. If you are disabled and a human tough too bad. All a human is allowed to have is a three foot ramp. After all get rid of the old and those that need help for we are a county of Rich Republicans who only care about them selves. Make sure that those who serve this county and get injured find some where else to live for we are too good for them in “Stewart ,I am better then anyone else’s county.” Maybe you would like the “final solution” to take care of the elderly and sick and those who are not rich. After all the Stewart’s and all those new immigrants to PWC have taken away the property rights of so many of those who lived here for decades and would like to be able to sell their property to take care of their needs but only home owners are allowed to make all that tax free money aren’t they anon… Maybe you will be lucky and die early in life so you do not have to go thru what the elderly do and struggle with in the final years of their lives.
anon it is not just republicans either who think like you and Stewart it happens in deomcratic governments as well. In 1992 Baltimore county told me that my mother was too old to be hurt and disabled on the job!!!! They like me a whole lot less the Stewart does. I have learned over the years that when you deal with a jack ass you kick long and hard and you can get to their brains from their ass… they now teach her case in Law School and what it cost them in money has help make it possible for assisted living for her and that is a good thing.
PWC policeman, I’m glad to find that I was given erroneous info about traffic direction at the local churches.
I’d like to hear your feelings about having to enforce our new resolution but I doubt that this blog is a place that you’d like to share!
Regardless of the issues, I must agree with Matt - 10:03…
Not necessarily “fancy,” but the ability to communicate intelligibly in English is a skill that every elected official should possess.
Patty - 19 Nov 9:22 am - I must protest about your statement re Sweden being a Dr. K country. You must have Sweden confused with Holland. The Swedes are NOT afraid of going to the hospital (on the contrary, due to social medicine they patiently [pun intended] wait months, sometimes years, for non-acute doctors appointments and elective surgery.) There’s NO nationwide euthanasia. Period!
Bob Marshall has no chance at a leadership posistion. The guys strongest trait is he sticks to his core posistions, but it is also his biggest fault. He does not know comprimise and has sees no value in listening to other points of view. He is now one of the senior legislators, and if Richmond Sunlight is correct he introduced to most bills last year and only had a 13% sucess rate. The only one of the PW delgations lower was Frederick at 10%. McQuigg, Puller and Colgan were the highest. Seems like the link is, those three can work across the aisle. Not following Marshall too closely, I would like someone to tell me on major piece of legislation he has passed since he has been in the House. “In God We Trust” on school walls and no birth control at state supported college campuses dont count. He gets nothing done and the other Republicans know that. He would be a stumbling block. He couldn’t even get chairmanship of his own immigration committee. Not a bad man, but a lously legislator. Rommelt had a better chance of winning against him than Marshall does at a leadership posistion.
[…] iconoclastic streak that few, if any, in the General Assembly can match. Notice the firebomb of a resolution Marshall took to the House Republican […]
Del. Bob Marshall (who used to be MY delegate in Woodbridge when I lived there) is an extremely principled man who belieevs what he says and says whet he believes. He has not changed a bit. How many politicos would take on their Speaker? Few if any. Virginians should get behind him if he decides to run and we’ll have a ball seeing a Marshall/Warner tilt. No one has been able to attack his character.
Sandy Sanders