Virginia continues to surprise Democrats and the elite media. This week a special election was held to fill the state Senate seat in Fairfax County vacated by conservative Republican Ken Cuccinelli, who was elected as the state attorney general. The Democrat won but by only a few hundred votes. Lee Hockstader of the Washington Post — not known to make excuses for the GOP — explained that the Democrat was a “well respected, two-term member of the House of Delegates who is universally acknowledged as one of the state’s leading experts on juvenile justice, incarceration and rehabilitation,” while the Republican “served a single term on the Fairfax School Board before being unceremoniously turned out of office.” The result should give Democrats pause:
This is a no-brainer. [Democrat Dave] Marsden should’ve cleaned up. Instead, he won by scarcely 1 percent of the 23,600 votes cast. His margin of victory came from a 2-1 edge among the state’s 1,200 absentee voters, a constituency GOP officials somehow overlooked. All 40 seats in the state Senate will be up for grabs next November. Be afraid, Virginia Democrats, be very afraid.
But before we get to another round of state races, we have this year’s congressional contests. Gerry Connolly, a first-term congressman in the 11th district and former Fairfax County supervisor who replaced longtime and very popular Tom Davis, should be “very afraid” as well. Two Republicans — Fairfax county supervisor Pat Herrity and businessman Keith Fimian (who lost to Connolly in 2008 by a 54 to 43 percent margin, considerably ahead of John McCain, who lost to Obama by a 60 to 39 percent margin in the county) — are vying to challenge him.
Since coming to the Hill, Connolly has eschewed the model of his predecessor, a moderate, pro-business Republican who remained popular in his district even when Republican fortunes flagged. Instead, Connolly has voted down the line with Nancy Pelosi and Obama on the left-wing agenda. His votes on cap-and-trade and especially ObamaCare (which will hit his constituents with a bevy of new taxes) will certainly be under attack. Connolly has reason to be nervous: Bob McDonnell shocked Virginia politicos, who had come to see Fairfax as drifting further and further into the Blue, by carrying the county 51 to 49 percent, running against the very Obama agenda items Connolly has supported.
In a year in which Massachusetts is competitive, northern Virginia certainly will be — especially if Republicans can make the case that incumbent Democrats have lost faith with their more moderate voters.
Obama’s 3 function Language –
I find Obama’s language is designed to accomplish 3 goals. One is to appeal to mainstream America, with tough language to terrorists and patriotic themes at home. Within that same language is the 2nd function, his wink to the academic left, his radical associates, and his liberal base. The 3rd is Obama’s political fishing pole. He dangles this language that couches radical ideas within seemingly mainstream talk in front of Republicans and dares the them to bite. If they take the bait, Obama cries foul. The best example is President Bush’s statements in Israel. There is abundant proof that the President’s criticism did apply to Obama. However, Obama uses his language to change its meaning, emphasize the toughness, and claim that he was unfairly attacked.
Another good example, is when Obama referred to the Israel-Palestinian conflict as a “constant sore” He received a lot of criticism from Rep. Boehner and Rep. Cantor. Again, Obama’s campaign and his media supporters cried foul. They claim he is a stalwart supporter of Israel. With all of the terrorism, fundamentalism, and tyranny in the Middle East, why does Obama refer to Israel-Palestine conflict as the “constant sore”? Its the wink to the left, while goading the Republicans to dare challenge him, so he can corner and label them as “old” politics. If you catch Obama using this strategy, be assured that he is only “evolving”, not inconsistent. He meant the religious fanatical Mullah, not the religious fanatical President.That is really funny, actually. Evolving and preparing!
However, it is an amazing strategy, one that I hope the American people wake up to, before the fall.
We don’t have to worry that Obama’s public position on foreign policy issues is chiseled in stone. He will change that as election year expediency demands. We do have to worry that his actual understanding and intentions will not have changed.
If only Obama held up Kennedy’s Cuba policy as a shining example! Bay of Pigs didn’t quite succeed in provoking nuclear war the first time around, after all. I’m not sure why Joe thinks his colleague should emulate Reagan’s approach with Iran, though – surely he’d be aghast if Obama sold Ahmadinejad a pile of weapons?
does lieberman want obama to win? why else would he. the most hated senator in america, attack him?
I wonder just how many times anybody at the Denver convention will utter ? ..
Obviously, Jack Kennedy is so far under the bus that even Oswald can’t find him with a scope.
Jason-I think you are giving Obama too much strategy credit. This inexperienced, empty-suit candidate is shallow in knowledge on the economy, our financial system, foreign policy/history) etc. In fact, he’s shallow in integrity as well- staying with the Rev. for 20 years & he still has not disowned Ayers. His community organizer title means what? He’s more knowledgeable than Clinton & McCain in foreign policy means what? Most liberal senator in the Senate means a lot. On & on & on only means to me he is an empty-suit, especially one on one & when being challenged by his own words. Easy debates for McCain. Obama will give speeches when debating McCain. No answers just words. Count on it. However, most shallow about Obama are his words, just words, that American people should lower our standards to be liked by other countries. His message should be to the dictators of the third world countries & to all countries to follow America as an example to improve standards, not to lower ours. I think Rev. Wright said something about America’s greed as well.
What Leiberman neglected to mention is that the Democrat party defines itself by opposition to all things Bush and Republican. Mindless contrarianism is its core policy.