Why Ken Cuccinelli deserved to lose

[CaptLouAlbano]

Reality Sucks..

And electing a dangerous madman will not help it any.
Ken Cuccinelli is dangerous.

Hardly dangerous. And the good far outweighed the bad, and not to mention that the alternative is far worse. So instead of having an ally in the VA Gov seat, we have an enemy.

But you can be idealistic and wait around for the second coming of Ron Paul, that is your prerogative. Us realists will continue pressing on with the work we are doing.

 

[Ender]

Hardly dangerous. And the good far outweighed the bad, and not to mention that the alternative is far worse. So instead of having an ally in the VA Gov seat, we have an enemy.

But you can be idealistic and wait around for the second coming of Ron Paul, that is your prerogative. Us realists will continue pressing on with the work we are doing.

A little story a major music producer once told me:

He was put over the production of a new up and coming acapella group that had already started recording. Something was wrong with the 1st song and nobody could find it. The man began to peel off the layers of the recording and finally got down to the very first tract; it was out of tune. The first tract had ruined the whole song.

He told me that this was the "dog poop" theory and he explained it this way:

Take a nice banana split dessert dish and set a banana in it.
Cut the banana in half and lay a piece of dog poop in the middle.
Next layer your banana with your favorite ice cream, chocolate, strawberry, vanilla.
Then add your favorite toppings: hot fudge, strawberry creme, etc.
Finally add a whopping amount of whipped cream and a cherry on top.
Take a big bite and what have you got?

Dog poop.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is not realism; it's

DOG POOP.

Doing what you believe in is one thing- calling people names and expounding insulting innuendoes to those who do not believe as you do and then complaining when they retaliate in the same way is not only non-productive and a team splitter, it is also

Dog Poop.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

A little story a major music producer once told me:

He was put over the production of a new up and coming acapella group that had already started recording. Something was wrong with the 1st song and nobody could find it. The man began to peel off the layers of the recording and finally got down to the very first tract; it was out of tune. The first tract had ruined the whole song.

He told me that this was the "dog poop" theory and he explained it this way:

Take a nice banana split dessert dish and set a banana in it.
Cut the banana in half and lay a piece of dog poop in the middle.
Next layer your banana with you favorite ice cream, chocolate, strawberry, vanilla.
Then add your favorite toppings: hot fudge, strawberry creme, etc.
Finally add a whopping amount of whipped cream and a cherry on top.
Take a big bite and what have you got?

Dog poop.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is not realism; it's

DOG POOP.

Doing what you believe in is one thing- calling people names and expounding insulting innuendoes to those who do not believe as you do and then complaining when they retaliate in the same way is not only non-productive and a team splitter, it is also

Dog Poop.

But many of us, the Pauls included, did not see this as an issue of the lesser of two evils. We felt that the quote used by Ron Paul in his endorsement summed up the candidate well: "Ken Cuccinelli has been the most pro-liberty legislator and Attorney General we have ever had in Virginia. He is the only one who has consistently worked with the Liberty movement and the only one who has the guts to stand up to Washington". Paul also stated, "Ken Cuccinelli has always stood for smaller government and limited government, he has consistently and unapologetically worked with the Liberty movement in Virginia. His stand against ObamaCare shows he is willing to stand up to Washington's continued abuses on our individual liberties. I am proud to endorse to Ken for Governor of Virginia."

For that reason and others, he was not the lesser of two evils, but was far superior to his opponent and potentially a major ally.

 

[pcosmar]

But you can be idealistic and wait around for the second coming of Ron Paul, .

It is not the second coming of Ron Paul that I hope for.

But I am not going to support every Fascist that has an "R" behind his name..

And as bad as the "D"s are... we are still avoiding the World War that both McCain and Romney were promising.

Oh,, and don't forget,, it was the fucking Abortion Issue that ended up selling Obamacare.. (Romney care)

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

It is not the second coming of Ron Paul that I hope for.

But I am not going to support every Fascist that has an "R" behind his name..

So are you suggesting that Paul endorsed and campaigned for a fascist? Does this mean he then endorses and supports fascism?

 

[AuH20]

Reality Sucks..

And electing a dangerous madman will not help it any.
Ken Cuccinelli is dangerous.

You can't be serious. Given all that's going on and you have your eye on Ken Cuccinelli?

 

[pcosmar]

So are you suggesting that Paul endorsed and campaigned for a fascist? Does this mean he then endorses and supports fascism?

I suggest that Ron was coerced into supporting a man he knew little about.

I would prefer to think that ,rather than thinking he had lied to me.
I am highly disappointed with his endorsement.

 

[pcosmar]

You can't be serious. Given all that's going on and you have your eye on Ken Cuccinelli?

I have my eye on many things.. and the 2nd amendment is my "Hot Button" issue.
I do not compromise on it,, and do not like double talk.

The man wants to use "mental health" to deny guns. He has turned over medical records to NCIS background checks,, (which he supports)

He is a huge supporter of the Mind Control Industry.

THAT IS DANGEROUS.

 

[AuH20]

But many of us, the Pauls included, did not see this as an issue of the lesser of two evils. We felt that the quote used by Ron Paul in his endorsement summed up the candidate well: "Ken Cuccinelli has been the most pro-liberty legislator and Attorney General we have ever had in Virginia. He is the only one who has consistently worked with the Liberty movement and the only one who has the guts to stand up to Washington". Paul also stated, "Ken Cuccinelli has always stood for smaller government and limited government, he has consistently and unapologetically worked with the Liberty movement in Virginia. His stand against ObamaCare shows he is willing to stand up to Washington's continued abuses on our individual liberties. I am proud to endorse to Ken for Governor of Virginia."

For that reason and others, he was not the lesser of two evils, but was far superior to his opponent and potentially a major ally.

That's really the crux of the issue. The pros FAR FAR outweigh the cons. There was no such thing as a lesser evil vote in this case. Cuccinelli was endorsed by the GOA, which is an extremely difficult endorsement to obtain.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

I suggest that Ron was coerced into supporting a man he knew little about.

I would prefer to think that ,rather than thinking he had lied to me.
I am highly disappointed with his endorsement.

Really? You do realize that Ron endorsed him before don't you? Again, quoting from Ron's endorsement letter: "I have endorsed you in your past elections and I am proud to do so again. I feel you are the right choice for governor."

He didn't lie to you at all, from his own words Ron supported Cuccinelli, and rather enthusiastically so. It was not only an endorsement letter, but Ron took time out of his schedule to fly to VA and campaign for Cuccinelli. Was he coerced into doing that as well? Did someone hold a gun to his head, force him onto a plane, and then give him a speech to read?

Perhaps reality is a better place for you on this. The reality is that the man that you enthusiastically supported for president in 08 and 12. The man on who's forum you have posted 31,000 times - that man feels that Cuccinelli is not a fascist, he is not the lesser of two evils - but that he is a damn good man who should have been governor.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

Cuccinelli was endorsed by the GOA, which is an extremely difficult endorsement to obtain.

Very true. Unlike the NRA, which endorses a candidate in nearly every race, GOA is highly selective.

 

[AuH20]

Really? You do realize that Ron endorsed him before don't you? Again, quoting from Ron's endorsement letter: "I have endorsed you in your past elections and I am proud to do so again. I feel you are the right choice for governor."

He didn't lie to you at all, from his own words Ron supported Cuccinelli, and rather enthusiastically so. It was not only an endorsement letter, but Ron took time out of his schedule to fly to VA and campaign for Cuccinelli. Was he coerced into doing that as well? Did someone hold a gun to his head, force him onto a plane, and then give him a speech to read?

Perhaps reality is a better place for you on this. The reality is that the man that you enthusiastically supported for president in 08 and 12. The man on who's forum you have posted 31,000 times - that man feels that Cuccinelli is not a fascist, he is not the lesser of two evils - but that he is a damn good man who should have been governor.

Anyone who the Chamber of Commerce criticizes has credibility in my eyes. Ron knows the deal. Why do you think that that post-election, he stated that Big Business and the MIC got the candidate in McAuliffe they wanted? It was all but obvious to those not living in their little bubble.

 

[pcosmar]

Really? .

Yes really. I spoke to Ron here in Michigan..He supported Gun ownership.
Supported Disbanding the ATF and supported Restoration of Rights.

He does not support (to my knowledge) Mental Health screenings for ownership.. Or he didn't..

perhaps that has changed,, because he endorsed a man who does.

 

[69360]

And you are part of why nothing will change in this country until it completely falls apart, and is forced to put it's self back together. Your kind makes me physically ill.

With your absolutist attitude you will get nothing you want politically, because 3rd party candidates don't win.

People who are willing to compromise a bit, do achieve political goals.

Would you rather have most of what you want or sit on your high horse and get none of what you want?

Yes really. I spoke to Ron here in Michigan..He supported Gun ownership.
Supported Disbanding the ATF and supported Restoration of Rights.

He does not support (to my knowledge) Mental Health screenings for ownership.. Or he didn't..

perhaps that has changed,, because he endorsed a man who does.

It hasn't changed. He's just not an absolutist. He endorsed somebody who is mostly good. That's how things get done.

 

[SilentBull]

So should we assume you voted for Romney then? Romney had a chance to win... Gary Johnson had none... Ron Paul had none.

Romney winning wouldn't have helped Rand Paul. Ken winning would have. You can't see the difference?

 

[cjm]

I have my eye on many things.. and the 2nd amendment is my "Hot Button" issue.
I do not compromise on it,, and do not like double talk.

You mentioned that you did not approve of Cuccinelli in part because he is opposed to constitutional carry. But you live in Michigan which is not a constitutional carry state. That's a form of compromise. You may be working towards constitutional carry there, and I applaud that. But in the meantime, you tolerate the Michigan gun laws as they are. There are undoubtedly benefits to living in Michigan that allow you to compromise on this issue. The fact that you still live there tells me that the benefits outweigh the harm in your world view.

Cuccinelli's benefits outweighed the harm in my view. It was a compromise, but a principled compromise that would have advanced liberty in Virginia. Jumping from "he has turned over medical records to NCIS background checks" to "he is a huge supporter of the Mind Control Industry" is dishonest though. Feel free to criticize him but please don't go down McAuliffe Road.

 

[pcosmar]

You mentioned that you did not approve of Cuccinelli in part because he is opposed to constitutional carry. .

No,, actually,, I said I favored Sarvis because of his position on Constitutional Carry and on Restoration of Rights.

That was in one of the first of Oh So Many threads on this subject.

And it was a quick look at 2 people I had never even heard of prior to the thread. I took a quick look at both of their stated positions.

Jumping from "he has turned over medical records to NCIS background checks" to "he is a huge supporter of the Mind Control Industry" is dishonest though. Feel free to criticize him but please don't go down McAuliffe Road.

No it is not,,because after the initial reaction and comment I went looking a bit deeper.
Cuccinelli has a history of support for and advocacy of the Mind Control Industry.. and has openly made statements that he wishes to prevent anyone with "Mental issues" (whatever that means) from owning guns.

That makes "Mental Health" the criteria,,, rather than the Constitution.

It is back door Gun Control.

 

[Keith and stuff]

In theory, yes. If you lose an election, it's because you failed to convince the voters, so yes, in theory, you deserved to lose. Nevertheless, I believe Ken would make a better governor than the guy that won.

 

[Cap]

A little story a major music producer once told me:

He was put over the production of a new up and coming acapella group that had already started recording. Something was wrong with the 1st song and nobody could find it. The man began to peel off the layers of the recording and finally got down to the very first tract; it was out of tune. The first tract had ruined the whole song.

He told me that this was the "dog poop" theory and he explained it this way:

Take a nice banana split dessert dish and set a banana in it.
Cut the banana in half and lay a piece of dog poop in the middle.
Next layer your banana with your favorite ice cream, chocolate, strawberry, vanilla.
Then add your favorite toppings: hot fudge, strawberry creme, etc.
Finally add a whopping amount of whipped cream and a cherry on top.
Take a big bite and what have you got?

Dog poop.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is not realism; it's

DOG POOP.

Doing what you believe in is one thing- calling people names and expounding insulting innuendoes to those who do not believe as you do and then complaining when they retaliate in the same way is not only non-productive and a team splitter, it is also

Dog Poop.

Instead of the purger's cabal, DOG POOP Cabal has a better ring to it. I like it.

 

[Feeding the Abscess]

Whatever the exit polls showed, they weren't available before the election happened.

The reason the Dems were funding Sarvis was definitely because they intended to get people who would otherwise have voted for Cuccinelli to vote for him. This is an old trick of theirs. It's not some new crazy theory that people just came up with for this race.

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/11/02/news/local/doc4cce3b8551b74712212971.txt
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20101028/NEWS02/310280073/

I don't like the vote stealing argument either. Nobody's entitled to anyone's vote. But call a spade a spade.

If I remember, Knott denounced it, rather than reveling in it like Sarvis's supporters, and mocking the Republicans for pointing out the obvious.

Before the election:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2...hurting_dem_in_virginia_gop_still_losing.html