Cuccinelli-Oleszek: Money Madness and Desperate Behavior

This AM has all sorts of low key silliness flying in my backyard.  Election Day is around the corner, and the Cooch and the Hoot are going at it full tilt.

Both have claimed the other has gotten a huge recent infusion of cash-and by recent I mean since the final pre-election day campaign report.  Both claimed the other side had gotten a big contribution, and asked contributors for more money.

 Now BVBL is wonders whether she got such monies under the table or from an undisclosed donor-and in comments NLS says there is a $134K contribution from the State Dems to her that shows up in the State Board of Elections (SBE) database but not at the Virginia Public Access Project (VPAP). Greg questions whether that is enough to make the network buy she made.

My question comes from another angle, because the whole money thing has gone bizarre and beserk. To date these two have piled up two million dollars (pinkies to both corners of mouth!) for a state senate seat…I have no doubt there is more that is coming in or has come in and not been accounted for. When the election is over and the dust settles and the smoke clears, these two will have spent more than some contested congressional elections. We can hash out afterwards who got what from whom…because the ducats are coming in too fast right now to get an accurate assessment.

I do chuckle at one thing…over at RK, Hoot is quoted as saying, “I do not have a few organizations I can turn to every time I need help. I have relied on the help of thousands of individuals in the district, Northern Virginia, and the Commonwealth.” The funny thing is that while she is saying that she not only gets huge checks from the state Democrats, but by recent analysis Cooch has not only received a large percentage of his money from small $$ donors than has Hoot, but he has more than double the small $$ donations than the Hoot.

No, the Hoot’s real only problem is that no one thought she would need large sums this late in the game-one would think a district that voted 54% for James Webb a year ago would be more fertile for this year’s Democratic state senate candidate.Now the Dems have to get her money as best they can.

What continues to strike me is what seems to be the growing desperation of Team Hoot and how it is manifested.  As noted here, her Cooch attacks on stem cell research are seemingly off base, and at least out of kilter. Jim Hyland notes that the only stem cell bill since Cooch has been in office was SB 1194 in 2005. This bill was offered Senator Russ Potts to offer funding for stem-cell research not involving human embryos.

I know you may need to compose yourself after realizing Cooch (a) voted for a bill supporting stem cell research that was (b) proposed by Russ Potts.

You might think, “Well, it must have been something else, then! Hoot wouldn’t lie!” Perhaps-but therein is the problem. Hoot’s television advertisement on network television gives no background, no context, not citation, no footnote, nothing to support her claims…and the same is true on the marsden endorsement mailing profiled by NLS. So we either have bad writing or production by the campaign, or we have intentional omission of data to cloud the issue by the campaign team. Either way we have to roll with the record, which to the moment seems her stem-cell claims are-at best-inaccurate.

Then there is the cock-fighting bill, leading to today’s most unusual post heading and retort.

Really, you can’t make this up…the smart-ass in me has about a bazillion comments to make, but no…that would be waaaaay too easy. 😉

But is this all Hoot can talk about? At this late date, is an attack on a vote that has little impact on the day-to-day lives of her potential constituents all she has?

Maybe so…she can’t talk about transportation, because that by her declaration would revolved around hypothetical questions about how she would have on past legislation and saying precisely what she would do. Hoot won’t talk about immigration matters, because she considers it a red herring-while it is in reality one of the biggest issues in Northern Virginia. Understand, this is not a matter of her failing to take a position on how to address immigration issues-this is a matter of her choosing to not address the subject.

Instead, she attacks on the subject of cock-fighting. While I do not dismiss the importance of this matter, I suggest that in terms of importance to this senate district there are more fertile areas of discussion.

But then, who am I to say? Shoot, from what I can tell the Hoot apparently doesn’t even want my vote.

Now I have a friend who says assertions like this are just wrong-because apparently the cost creating and mailing campaign materials makes it impractical to send things to folks like me…you know, default Republicans.

But let’s assume she is right…aren’t there other means of asking the question? Her television ads don’t ask for my support, they just urge me not to vote for Cooch. And while I have had Cooch door-to-door folks ring my doorbell twice in this campaign, tain’t no one from the Hoot’s team has paid me a visit.

Making spurious claims about your campaign financing, undermining your own charges by not providing substantiation-which allows immediate and effective counter attack, choosing to fight on lesser issues while ignoring major ones through silly circumlocutions, and ignoring voters.

What a long, strange trip it’s been…

UPDATE on the MONEY:  as of the 12 Noon 11.2.2007 VPAP report, the money raised in the Va 37 is:

Hoot: $1,068.389.00

Cooch: $1,132,197.00

It’s the tv, mon, it’s the tv that’s doing this!


2 thoughts on “Cuccinelli-Oleszek: Money Madness and Desperate Behavior

  1. Bwana – I agree with your observations, logic and ideas expressed. I’ve spoken to both candidates – and their campaign staff – and attended their live Springfield Government Center debate…so I feel I’ve done my research and direct observation to qualify me to have an informed opinion.

    For the first time in 20 years of living in Fairfax County, I took notice of a local political campaign – and donated to a political campaign – to Cooch – why? Because when I checked out Janet’s mailings (i.e. I wanted to see if Ken was as “kooky” as she was saying, and instead found him to be a competent, thoughtful, articulate politician with well thought out views and positions, with a record (like it or not) that shows he has taken action and has made progress.

    For all of Cooch’s positions, Janet only had opinions and nothing in the way of factual courses of action she would use to approach or fix the problems.

    As an example, I asked her, to her face, about her “common sense” gun control position – and why someone like me, who as both a former federal officer and current reserve army officer with two combat tours to Afghanistan, should be restricted from carrying a weapon anywhere I want or feel the need- based on the fact that I know how to use it, and have equal experience (and understanding of the application of deadly force) as any law enforcement officer…her answer was “well everyone is not as qualified as you to carry a weapon…” really? What does that have to do with the fact that she wants me to be restricted from carrying a weapon in some locations then? She could not/would not answer…please do not get me wrong – I do not like fire arms – I do not collect them – but I have a couple because 1) I was trained to use them and have used them when necessary and 2) criminals will not give up their illegal use of them – to me the 2nd amendment is clear – to her, she has ideas without practical reasons to support them. Where is the common sense to remove firearms from law abiding citizens in some locations? To me it is a clear advertisment for criminals to bring their guns because they know they will have free reign…plus Cooch has been working to close the loop holes that have allowed individuals like the VA killer to fall through the cracks and obtain a firearm…which to me is true “common sense” gun control.

    I asked her to her face on the “common sense gun control” issue – and this is where she lost me when she could not provide a rational, logical answer to my question…this has been the case consistently with her campaign pretty much on all issues as far as I can tell.

    Is this the kind of leadership we want or need representing us in Richmond?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s