Jo-Ann Chase’s Pit Stop in Bizarro World
By Greg L | 26 June 2011 | Jo-Ann Chase, Loudoun County, Virginia House, Prince William County | 9 Comments
An incident I heard about today reinforces a pattern of behavior I’ve noticed over the past years and voters in the 87th House District would do well to take note. When someone seems to repeatedly experience unusual difficulty in differentiating between fact and fiction, they really aren’t someone you’d consider qualified to exercise any degree of legislative power, no matter what party they belong to. In this case the issue rears itself within the Republican party, and specifically in the candidacy of Jo-Ann Chase.
One of the endorsements highly-coveted by candidates is that of the Virginia Citizen’s Defense League PAC. Every election this outfit sends out a candidate survey and endorses candidates strictly on the basis of how they answer the survey. It’s the gold standard of honest endorsement practices, one entirely free of the usual political horse-trading that fatally infect NRA endorsements, and thousands of gun owners take VCDL-PAC endorsements very seriously. Last Friday Jo-Ann Chase sent out her “news from the campaign trail” email, and says in it that she got the VCDL-PAC nod. Wow. That’s a pretty significant development.
…the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) endorsed Ms. Chase. The VCDL is a grassroots organization, dedicated to advancing the right to keep and bear arms, as enumerated not only in the U.S. Constitution but also as it relates to Article I, Section XIII of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
There’s a problem here, though. VCDL-PAC hasn’t even sent out their candidate survey yet. There’s no way VCDL-PAC would endorse without a survey, so here again we have Chase veering off into “Bizarro World” where fact is fiction and fiction is “fact.” I wouldn’t call this lying, as I really don’t ever believe during one of these episodes Chase is intentionally trying to deceive anyone. If the usual pattern holds true, she just thinks that something patently ridiculous is actually the truth.
That should lead to some rather interesting explanations from her campaign as she tries to explain this email from Philip Van Cleave, President of VCDL:
From: Philip Van Cleave
Date: June 26, 2011 10:04:37 AM EDT
To: joachase@aol.com
Cc: VCDL PAC, VCDL Board
Subject: Urgent - re: VCDL endorsementJo-Ann,
It’s been brought to my attention that you sent out an email on Friday (”News from the campaign trail,” June 24,2011) which says you are endorsed by VCDL.I need you to send another email as soon as possible to the same people that Friday’s email went to retracting that statement.
Please note:
1. VCDL does not endorse ANY candidate and can’t do so legally. We DO survey candidates and share the results with gun owners immediately before an election or primary, but the survey hasn’t gone out yet
2. The VCDL-PAC **does** endorse candidates, but they have not yet endorsed anyone in your race and won’t until VCDL’s survey has been sent out to all candidates in the race and the survey returned
While the endorsement in your email sounds like a “snafu” (perhaps you have VCDL mixed up with another gun group), the public record does need to be corrected IMMEDIATELY.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Philip Van Cleave
This is going to be an interesting primary to watch.
Tweet This
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. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.
9 Comments
Leave a Reply
Views: 1270
Loading ...
drooling pistols at 10 paces…..last one standing…is winer.
I watch with anticipation EVERY communication that “Jo-Ann Chase for Delegate” puts out. Each one has its own unique violation of law that becomes more and more curious.
Her first few emails and flyers lacked the required election disclosures (violation of state law); she allowed information to be passed out at her kick-off party that did not have the appropriate disclosures regarding the opponent (violation of state law); then she hosted a RAFFLE at a campaign sponsored event (violation of state law); then she booked and advertised a political event with a private 501(c) foundation (violation of federal law); now she is advertising major endorsements that haven’t really happened (outright dishonest?).
Willful violations of the code sections violated above are criminal.
So either she is a criminal or just really incompetent… choose one, but regardelss of what you decide, I along with many others, believe that the woman is NOT qualified to hold public office.
VCDL has put out this in their email alert tonight:
Funny. It sure sounded to me they were certain about who they were talking about. What do you call this, “sloppy?”
Still haven’t seen JAC send out anything to the people that got her email yet, however. I’ve never seen a campaign issue a retraction via the aggrieved party before, so I guess the hijinks aren’t over yet.
So Jo-Ann sends out another blast today saying that the Virginia Gun Owner’s Coalition endorsed her. I expected as much would happen.
The VGOC is a small business run by Mike McHugh that is probably more of a cash-generating hobby for him rather than an activist organization. The only thing it does is send out desperately-worded fundraising mail and endorse candidates. McHugh himself is somewhat notorious, and it makes perfect sense that he would come to JAC’s rescue after this huge blunder. No doubt the entire process used to determine who would get this endorsement was a hasty phone conversation between Chase and McHugh.
Hilarious.
McHugh is a scum bag.
I met him in Richmond back on 2005 and we began talking about the second ammendment. I complemented him on his activism to protect our rights. I then mentioned to him how I was a strident supporter of RTKBA and that I was a member of the NRA.
He then lit into me like I had just punched him mom in the face for being a member of the NRA. I now know that some in the RTKBA community think of the NRA as a sell out organization, and that is fine. However when talking to McHugh he just snapped. It was a nice ageeable (we are on the same side) type of conversation until I mentioned the NRA. McHugh went from pleasent to furious. I thought he would punch me in the face if I had kept talking or defended my NRA membership.
After his tirade I didnt say a word and quietly walked away.
Since then I have learned that he has created a pro-life and a pro-gun organization simply to try and get contributions to line his own pockets.
Scum bag indeed.
At least she’s against illegal immigration.
So? Ramadan is against illegal immigration as well.
I’ve been on both sides of Chase in the past. I did not support her in the 10th District Convention where she was running for the SCC…
But in other matters, she’s been at least somewhat useful.
But at our October meeting of the LCRC, when everyone else in the room was fixated on getting our ducks in a row for the election that was just a week away, she became irritated when she was not recognized by the Chairman because we were still rolling out marching orders for Election Day.
She attempted to grab the microphone, in what was evidently a “look at me” moment….inserting her own imagined importance over that of the troop deployment to win the Governor’s, LG and Attorney General races. I’ve never forgotten that, as well as her insistance that she be comp’d at Women’s Republican lunches because she is a member of the SCC.
Some people represent, and others want to get elected for the free lunch.
Anon - my only problem with the NRA is that depraved degenerate criminals like Larry Craig are on the BOD.
Thats pretty hard to explain away.
My bucks go to Larry Pratt.
Main thankies for the article.Much thanks again. Much obliged.