Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) stated last week that he would oppose ObamaCare.  Yet, this afternoon he voted to allow his Democrat pals to block a Republican attempt to force an up or down vote.  So did Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA).

Which Democrats are standing firm – for now?

Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD)

Rep. Glenn Nye (D-VA)

Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA)

Keep it up guys.  There may be hope for some of you yet.  Here’s a link to the Roll Call.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) met yesterday with Interior secretary Ken Salazar to push for Virginia’s inclusion in the offshore leasing program.

“During the last comment period conducted by MMS, nearly 8 in 10 Virginians expressed support for some form of offshore exploration. Offshore energy exploration has the potential to provide thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue for Virginia and is supported by the people of the Commonwealth, our Governor, and our legislature. I appreciated the opportunity to speak directly with the Secretary to encourage him to move forward so that Virginia can responsibly develop and produce domestic energy off our shores,” Cantor said.

The Weekly Standard reports that Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) will vote against the Senate ObamaCare bill pending in the House.  However, a close read of Boucher’s statement leads me to believe that he is still straddling the fence:

“I am very concerned about a number of things. First, we do not have a text of the legislation before us. That is still being discussed and negotiated. Obviously, I will withhold any judgment until I review it very carefully. I do have concerns about a number of matters I anticipate being in the draft, however,” he said.

Steven Osborne, over at Bearing Drift, asks an important question – What will Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA) and Rep. Glenn Nye (D-VA) do?  Personally, I would rather see both Perriello and Nye wait and take a definitive stand than what we are seeing from the likes of Boucher and Maryland First District Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD).

While the nation’s “economic pie” can be grown through good economic policies, the “liberty pie” is a zero-sum game – it doesn’t grow or shrink – and there are only two slices:  government power and citizens’ liberty.  If the current notions of centralized health care are enacted, government’s raw power over citizens’ lives will increase, and their liberty will be reduced by the same amount.

So writes Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli in this month’s issue of the American Spectator.  (sorry, the actual article won’t be available online until April)

Cuccinelli is fast becoming one of the leaders of the conservative movement.  While Cuccinelli has been using the power of his office to fight federal tyranny in the courts, he is also using the pen to make a reasoned argument for all that conservatives hold dear.

During the current resurgence of the conservative movement and the semi-conservative populism inherent among the tea parties, some may dismiss the need for the intellectual strength displayed by officials like Cuccinelli.  Don’t be fooled.  Without its intellectual underpinnings, the conservative movement never would have grown beyond the Bob Taft years.

As I have noted here in the past – Yes, it is important to believe the right things.  However, without a firm understanding of WHY we believe what we do, those beliefs will not survive the test of time.  This is precisely why we need elected officials like General Cuccinelli.

Yes, we all know that ObamaCare is bad policy.  We all know that it would be fiscally disastrous.  We all know that the world’s best health care system would be greatly diminished.  Yet, Cuccinelli has managed to succinctly explain why we should fight ObamaCare – even IF these things were not the case.  If we wish to forfeit our God given individual liberty for a promised blanket of economic security then America ceases to be that shining city.  Liberty forfeited is liberty lost forever.

Thanks Ken.

MPPI Senior Fellow Marta Hummel Mossburg tags RNC chair Michael Steele for the rank hypocrisy of his book – "Right Now: A 12-step Program for Defeating the Obama Agenda".  While Mossburg hits Steele on many of the right specifics, she should have expounded more on her “Ignatius Reilly” theory of the Michael Steele persona.

Steele’s problem is a simple one – he believes in nothing.  Michael Steele has shown himself willing to pander to almost any audience at the drop of a dime.  He’s conservative.  He’s cool.  He’ll use scarce RNC resources to back an unapologetic left-winger in the NY-23 race.  He’ll take credit for the victories in Virginia and New Jersey, when he had absolutely nothing to do with them (and the RNC’s contribution was an appreciated one of finance and a few bodies).

Michael Steele is the embodiment for why tea party activists, and the conservative movement in general, should look at the GOP as ONLY a means to an end and hold them off with a ten foot poll.  Sure, various state parties (such as RPV) should be looked on as allies.  Some state parties, such as MDGOP, should be viewed as irrelevant except for their easy access to the ballot.

If grass roots conservatives are serious about enacting positive change, they should start by ensuring that their state and local parties are run on conservative principles and by people who have, at least, some clue about grassroots politics and how to win races.  As an example –

I recently attended a meeting of a local GOP central committee.  When one individual (not a member) brought up the need to reach out to groups like the tea partiers and AFP, the response from several members was:

Why should we?  They need us.

NO!  As Republicans WE NEED THEM.  Honestly, if the two men who made that statement had not been elderly, I would have punched them both in the mouth.

Yet, this is the underlying attitude from too many in the GOP.  Sure, they want tea partiers and AFP members to knock on doors, make phone calls, write letters, and stuff envelopes.  Then, they want those people to go home.  It’s 1975 – 1980 in the GOP all over again.

Sure Michael Steel will pander; so will many other “GOP leaders”.  However, if we are serious about electing good, solid, fiscally responsible candidates who respect the Constitution then we need to take control of local and state parties where conservatives are not respected (but not demand some ideological purity test).  We then need to demand of state party chairs and their national committeemen and women that we need REAL conservative leadership at the RNC.  That means dumping Steele.  If some RNC members were moved by racial concerns, they should be reminded that Ken Blackwell (a true conservative candidate for RNC chair) was black the last time I checked.  While Blackwell was my number 2 choice in the race that saw Steele elected, he surely wasn’t a distant two and was (and would be) someone that conservatives would be proud to call as their national chairman.

Michael Steele is worse than Ed Gillespie (an RNC chair under George W. Bush).  At least Gillespie is an accomplished political operative.  He just isn’t a conservative.  However, Gillespie reflects a view of the Republican party which is sadly shared by Michael Steele:

According to the Union-Leader, Gillespie "said in no uncertain terms that the days of Reaganesque Republican railings against the expansion of federal government are over. . . . No, today the Republican Party stands for giving the American people whatever the latest polls say they want. . . . The party’s unofficial but clear message to conservatives is: Where else are you going to go? To the Democrats? To the Libertarians? They don’t think so."

No Ed.  No Mike.  Conservatives will simply work for conservative candidates and tell the rest of the GOP to pound salt in other races.  The ball is in the GOP’s court.  With leadership like Steele’s I think that grassroots conservative activists are in for a very sad surprise if they believe that the GOP is really on the side of Reagan conservative coalition.

Bob Holsworth at Virginia Tomorrow argues that Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli is redefining the office’s role, much like Jim Gilmore did during his term as AG.  Holsworth defines the new “Cuccinelli doctrine”:

It is the job of the Virginia Attorney General to identify and counter instances where the federal government may be unconstitutionally or illegally extending authority over the states.

Interesting.  While I question whether or not this redefinition will have the political legs of Gilmore’s move of making the AG “Virginia’s Top Cop”, Cuccinelli’s recent actions on behalf of the Commonwealth regarding states’ rights and federal mandates is more substantively important.  In a short period of time Cuccinelli is proving himself to be a conservative’s conservative.

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has issued an opinion that Virginia Sen. Robert Hurt (R-Pittsylvania) can raise money for his congressional race during this year’s General Assembly session.  Virginia law prohibits members of the legislature from raising money while the legislature is in session.  Cuccinelli’s opinion states that this prohibition does not apply to federal races.  Hurt is seeking the GOP nomination to challenge Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA).  According to Cuccinelli:

However, it is my further opinion that such prohibition does not restrict fundraising activity related to a campaign for federal office. Finally, it is my opinion that federal law pre-empts Virginia’s fundraising prohibition when a General Assembly member solicits or accepts contributions solely for a federal office.

This opinion is in line with the practice in other states – states with far more stringent campaign finance laws than those of the Commonwealth.  However, some of Hurt’s opponents for the GOP nod are not convinced:

"Although it may be legal, it certainly isn’t ethical," said Laurence Verga, a private real estate investor from Ivy and one of Hurt’s rivals in the June 8 primary. "The American people are tired of career politicians like Senator Hurt who put their personal aspirations above their ethical obligations."

Verga said the intent of the 1997 law that forbids Virginia lawmakers from accepting contributions was to "prevent lobbyists from buying votes."

While Delmarva Dealings has not been a supporter of Hurt’s campaign, Cuccinelli’s opinion was the right call.

When Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell was elected governor last November, and Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling was re-elected, McDonnell stated that Bolling would be in charge of McDonnell’s plan to bring more jobs to the Commonwealth.  In order to finance the plan, McDonnell’s administration has put forward a $50 million plan to finance more economic development in Virginia.  Bolling will now also be in charge of shepherding McDonnell’s plan through the legislature.

On Wednesday Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell delivered the GOP response to Barack Obama’s 2010 State of the Union address.  You can view the speech here:

McDonnell’s message will prove important because he expressed the ideas upon which this great nation were founded and those ideas which have made our nation the greatest on earth.  While Obama wishes to continue throwing hard earned tax dollars (and even more money borrowed from the likes of Communist China) at problems, McDonnell’s message was one of self-reliance, self-sacrifice, liberty, and innovation:

Good government policy should spur economic growth, and strengthen the private sector’s ability to create new jobs.  We must enact policies that promote entrepreneurship and innovation, so America can better compete with the world.  What government should not do is pile on more taxation, regulation, and litigation that kill jobs and hurt the middle class.  It was Thomas Jefferson who called for “A wise and frugal Government which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry ….and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned…” He was right.

Today, the federal government is simply trying to do too much.

While most Democrats and far too many Republicans seek enhanced personal and corporate power through the overreaching hand of government, McDonnell’s message was one reminiscent of Ronald Reagan:

The circumstances of our time demand that we reconsider and restore the proper, limited role of government at every level.  Without reform, the excessive growth of government threatens our very liberty and prosperity.

School choice and educational opportunity based on merit and need rather than bureaucratic fiat are cornerstones of a conservative education policy.  McDonnell used a portion of his national address to promote those ideas.  McDonnell also asserted a belief held by the vast majority of Americans, but not those in the Obama administration or a majority of Democrats in Congress – constitutional rights belong to American citizens, NOT foreign terrorists:

Americans were shocked on Christmas Day to learn of the attempted bombing of a flight to Detroit.  This foreign terror suspect was given the same legal rights as a U.S. citizen, and immediately stopped providing critical intelligence.  As Senator-elect Scott Brown says, we should be spending taxpayer dollars to defeat terrorists, not to protect them.

Americans believe in equality of opportunity.  We know that there can never be an equality of outcomes – unless we aim for the lowest common denominator.  We also know that hard working and innovative Americans, free to excel and unhindered by unnecessary government interference are what made this nation great :

Here at home government must help foster a society in which all our people can use their God-given talents in liberty to pursue the American Dream. Republicans know that government cannot guarantee individual outcomes, but we strongly believe that it must guarantee equality of opportunity for all.

That opportunity exists best in a democracy which promotes free enterprise, economic growth, strong families, and individual achievement.  Many Americans are concerned about this Administration’s efforts to exert greater control over car companies, banks, energy and health care.

Over-regulating employers won’t create more employment; overtaxing investors won’t foster more investment.  Top-down one-size fits all decision making should not replace the personal choices of free people in a free market, nor undermine the proper role of state and local governments in our system of federalism. As our Founders clearly stated, and we Governors understand, government closest to the people governs best.

McDonnell’s conclusion summed up the ideas upon which our nation was founded and became the greatest nation on earth:

Some people are afraid that America is no longer the great land of promise that she has always been. They should not be.  America will always blaze the trail of opportunity and prosperity.  America must always be a land where liberty and property are valued and respected, and innocent human life is protected.

Government should have this clear goal: Where opportunity is absent, we must create it. Where opportunity is limited, we must expand it. Where opportunity is unequal, we must make it open to everyone.

Our Founders pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to create this nation. Now, we should pledge as Democrats, Republicans and Independents–Americans all—to work together to leave this nation a better place than we found it.

Unfortunately, these ideas are foreign to the American left and far too many who claim the cloak of conservatism.  We need more leaders like McDonnell; men and women who understand AND believe in these core concepts.  What we do not need are those who merely mouth words in an attempt to gain votes and power.  McDonnell’s address should remind us of what we believe, AND of the danger posed by those who claim to represent us, but really represent themselves.

For a copy of the full text of McDonnell’s address, CLICK HERE.

Bearing Drift has an interesting internal debate going.  Agricola makes an excellent pitch for resurrecting the political corpse of former VA-5 Rep. Virgil Goode.  Brian Kirwin, who I’m usually in agreement with, makes an obtuse argument against it (based on term limits?).

Let’s face it, Virginia Sen. Robert Hurt (R-19) hardly possesses the most conservative voting record.  As Agricola notes:

His votes for HB 3202 in 2007, the massive 2004 Chichester tax hike, and his support for benefits for same-sex partners are decidedly to the left of the incumbent. Read that again… even Perriello, a former executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, doesn’t go so far either in his positions on fiscal policy or social liberalism.  Attempts to paint himself as something he’s not will simply fail.  Conservatives don’t trust Hurt, liberty-minded voters don’t like Hurt, Tea Party activists see Hurt as the establishment, and VA-05 activists are vehemently opposed to Hurt.  Simply raising the GOP banner and saying “vote Bad over Worse” simply doesn’t fly anymore.

I disagree that Hurt CAN’T beat Rep. Tom Perriello (D-5).  However, there is no question that Hurt is the “establishment candidate”.  House Minority Whip Eric Cantor’s support is excellent evidence.  Cantor, once a genuine conservative, has sold his philosophy for the opportunity to sit at the head of the table.  Hurt appears to be struck from the same mold.  The bottom line is that we need FEWER members of Congress like Cantor, not more.

I’m not an idealist.  I’ll leave that to the Paulistinians.  We can’t implement a conservative agenda unless we win races.  However, we can’t implement that agenda by electing candidates like Hurt either.  While never a huge Goode fan, he can be expected to be more consistently conservative than Hurt.

Perhaps it is time for Goode to emerge from the wilderness.