Remembering David Nolan

It's eerie and it's sad.

On Friday, sometime between 11:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m., David Nolan added me as a friend on Facebook.

By Saturday evening, David Nolan had passed away.

The founder of the Libertarian Party and the creator of the paradigm-shifting Nolan Chart was killed in a car crash in Arizona, apparently caused by Nolan's suffering a stroke while behind the wheel.  He was 66 years old.  Tomorrow would have been his 67th birthday.

Although I only met Nolan a few times during my years as a Libertarian Party activist in the early and mid-1990s, his influence on me (and others) was strong.  Dave Weigel explains that Nolan played a moderating and conciliatory role at sometimes raucous LP gatherings, including the contentious 2008 presidential nominating convention:

I met Nolan in 2008, while covering the Libertarian Party convention for Reason -- in Denver, again -- and liked him instantly. He was a center of calm in the middle of an rough and media-grabbing battle for the heart of the party. He calmed the occasional (okay, frequent) sense that the nomination of one candidate or another would destroy the LP by praising all of the candidates and telling the losers to suck it up. He did not seem like a man who was retiring from politics, so I wasn't surprised to see him make one last hopeless run for office as a Libertarian, campaigning against John McCain in this year's U.S. Senate race.

I won't repeat the oft-told tale of how the Libertarian Party was started in David Nolan's living room in Denver in 1971, a reaction to the Nixon administration's decision to impose wage and price controls on the American economy.

I wasn't there, but it's amazing that a then-27-year-old political activist could almost singlehandedly establish a political party that would later have tens of thousands of members (and ex-members), lead to the election of hundreds of public officials across the country, and spread the message of libertarianism during political campaigns, when voters tend to be paying closer attention to issues.

During the 1996 LP convention in Washington, there was a commemoration of the founding of the party, which that year was celebrating its 25th anniversary.  In one of the meeting halls of the Washington Convention Center, a recreation of Nolan's Denver living room served as a stage for early LP members to reminisce about the founding.  Nolan participated, as did 1972 vice-presidential candidate Tonie Nathan (the first woman ever to receive a vote in the Electoral College), and Pennsylvania LP activist Don Ernsberger, who recalled that he used a mailing list of about 50 people to recruit members to the new party, and at the time he thought the list included every libertarian in the United States.

An underestimate, to be sure.

Unfortunately, nobody had thought to record the recollections of the early LP leaders, either on video or on audio.  An opportunity for a lasting oral history of the founding was lost, except in the memories of the hundreds of LP members who were there that day.

Even if Nolan had not been one of the founders of the Libertarian Party, his legacy would be secure simply in his creation of what is now universally known as the "Nolan Chart."  He helped us break out of the constraints of a paradigm that insisted upon a two-dimensional, right/left political spectrum and demonstrated that the way people really think about politics is three-dimensional -- not just right/left, but also up/down.

I have used the Nolan Chart, and the accompanying World's Smallest Political Quiz (developed by the late Marshall Fritz), when I lecture to college classes about libertarianism.  It's a good way to break the ice and also to explain how libertarians do not fit into a two-sizes-fit-all liberal/conservative mold.

I have also used the Nolan Chart and the WSPQ in an Operation Politically Homeless display at county fairs (with the LP), at Republican gatherings (with the Republican Liberty Caucus), and at gay pride festivals (with Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty).  The chart and the quiz are both effective conversation-starters and also good recruiting tools.  It's always amusing to see some Republican finding out he's not conservative, or some Democrat finding out she's not liberal.  On more than one occasion, I've observed (metaphorical) steam coming out of someone's ears when he discovers he's a statist or -- far more often -- a satisfied smile upon learning that he's a libertarian.

Countless members of the Libertarian Party and other libertarian -- small-L -- groups have joined the movement upon taking the quiz and seeing their dot on the Nolan Chart.

In a note sent late last night (or quite early this morning) to members of the Libertarian Party of Virginia, longtime LPVA activist Marc Montoni wrote:

There is not a person who has been involved in our organization who wasn't touched by the life of David Nolan. He helped build our political home and devoted decades of his life to its guidance and service. Nolan's work has influenced the lives of millions of people through the thousands of small and large successes that the Libertarian Party has had in its four decades of existence. If Libertarians hit the streets to protest a tax increase, it was Nolan's creation that brought them together. If a Libertarian is among the nearly 1,000 people who have won election to public office, it was Nolan's creation that helped staff the campaign team.

Other tributes to David Nolan have been posted on the Libertarian Party's blog.

Nolan's final act of political activism took place on Facebook shortly before he died. He expressed a wish that, to celebrate his birthday on November 23, friends and acquaintances should make financial donations to the Advocates for Self-Government.

As one of his friends noted on that Facebook page, what a fitting tribute it would be if that request for contributions turned into a moneybomb for the Advocates.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

 

Has Virgil Goode Fully Abandoned the GOP?

With little fanfare, former U.S. Representative Virgil Goode has joined the national executive committee of the Constitution Party, essentially severing his ties with the Republican Party.

This is not the first time Goode has switched political parties. Having served in the Virginia State Senate as a Democrat for almost 25 years, he was elected under that party's banner to the U.S. Congress in 1996, becoming an independent in 2000 (after having been one of the few Democrats to vote for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in 1998), and finally switching to the GOP in 2002.

Goode ran as a Republican until he was defeated by one-term Democratic Congressman Tom Perriello in 2008, after a recount showed a razor-thin (727) vote majority. (Perriello was subsequently defeated by state Senator Robert Hurt of Chatham this past November 2.)

According to Richard Winger at Ballot Access News,

On November 18, former Virginia congressman Virgil Goode accepted an appointment to the Constitution Party’s national Executive Committee....

Goode has been somewhat involved with the Constitution Party ever since he left congress. He has spoken at several Constitution Party national meetings during the past two years.

Winger draws an analogy to Goode's joining of the CP's national committee to Bob Barr joining the national committee of the Libertarian Party. Barr, a former Member of Congress from Georgia, said at the time that he had no intentions of running again for public office, but in 2008 he sought the LP's presidential nomination and received it.

Whether Goode has ambitions to be a presidential candidate -- one could not say that a nominee of the Constitution Party has ambitions to be President -- is not known. Commenters on Ballot Access News suggest a CP presidential ticket that would include Goode and former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who this month placed second in the race for Governor of that state, ahead of the Republican party's nominee.

Tancredo and Goode share a visceral xenophobia that would make them compatible as national ticketmates, regardless of which one was the presidential nominee and which was the vice-presidential nominee.

It should be noted that Virgil Goode's wife, Lucy Goode, is a vice chairman of the Fifth Congressional District Republican Committee.

The Constitution Party's press release welcoming Goode to its leadership ranks can be read here.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Charlottesville Illuminates Its 2010 Christmas Tree

Times have changed.

In Jerry Herman's song from Mame, "We Need a Little Christmas," young Patrick expresses astonishment that his Auntie Mame wants to begin celebrating Christmas so early, because it's just "one week past Thanksgiving Day!"

That was in the 1920s.  Now it's the 2010s and Christmas celebrations begin one week before Thanksgiving Day.

At least that's true in Charlottesville, where tonight civic officials, media figures, and local residents came together for the "Grand Illumination" of the downtown mall, and the sparking of 18,000 lights on the Christmas tree at Central Place.

Here are video highlights of the ceremony, featuring Bo Sykes of the Newsplex and Libby Allison of NBC29 as emcees, General Registrar Sheri Iachetta leading the singing ("Deck the Halls," "Jingle Bells," and "We Wish You a Merry Christmas!), and Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris, Vice Mayor Holly Edwards, and City Councilors Satyendra Huja and Kristin Szakos, as well as Albemarle County Supervisor Duane Snow, marking the festivities.

For those in a nostalgic mood, check out this post from 2008, with video of that year's Christmas tree illumination in Charlottesville.

Also, check out the Christmas items I have designed at my CafePress shop, called (naturally) "Gifts from RickSincere.com."

Update, Saturday, November 20:  I just uploaded another video from the Grand Illumination to YouTube.  This one has musical selections from the Jeffersonland Chorus, a barbershop harmony group.  They sang, among other familiar tunes, "Jingle Bells," "God Rest You Merry, Gentlemen," "O Holy Night," and "Silent Night."
 

RLC Rejects TSA's Assault on Passenger Privacy Rights

From the national office of the Republican Liberty Caucus -- what I like to call "the Republican wing of the Republican Party" -- comes this press release about the TSA:

For Immediate Release: November 17, 2010

Republican Liberty Caucus Rejects Transportation Security Administration's Assault on Passenger Privacy Rights

AUSTIN, TX -- The Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC) denounces the recent changes in the airport passenger screening practices of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

RLC Chairman Dave Nalle said the intrusive nature of new TSA procedures draws attention to the fundamental flaws in the government's strategy of attempting to address the threat of terrorism through increasingly draconian domestic security measures.

"In the name of public safety, government agencies have been given more and more power at great cost to our civil liberties and in violation of the Bill of Rights," Nalle said. "The emergence of an unaccountable state security apparatus in America is a reminder of Ben Franklin's maxim that 'they who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety'."

"The new TSA procedures of giving randomly selected passengers a choice between a full body, backscatter x-ray scan and an intrusive, hands-on body search are unacceptable," Nalle contends. "These searches are a clear violation of our 4th Amendment rights, because they are not reasonable and are carried out with no probable cause. The increase in security at airports with more technology and more violation of the privacy rights of passengers cannot be justified on the basis of any increase in the threat of terrorism, because there has been no such increase," Nalle explained.

The Republican Liberty Caucus believes that Americans have seen enough abuses of the Constitution and calls on the federal government to curb abuses by the TSA and other agencies. We recommend putting control of passenger security in the hands of the airlines, which have a vested interest in making sure that flights are safe. We also support Representative Ron Paul's "American Traveler Dignity Act" (H.R. 6416), which would make TSA employees accountable for their actions.

Nalle observed, "With the increasing level of government intrusion into our lives in the name of security, America reminds me too much of what I saw in the Soviet Union, where I lived as a teenager. How long will it be before police will be stopping us in the street at random to ask for our identity papers?"

The Republican Liberty Caucus, founded in 1991, exists to promote individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the Republican Party. Learn more and become a member at http://www.rlc.org/join-the-rlc/.

###

Related Links:

· RLC Legislators Working to Dismantle TSA Rules

· Actions You Can Take to Assert Your Rights

· Join the Resistance Movement on Facebook

· Follow the RLC on Facebook and at our Blog

Virginia Film Festival Starts Today

My favorite weekend in Charlottesville's calendar starts later today, when the 23rd annual Virginia Film Festival takes the stage at venues across the area -- including the Paramount, Regal, and Vinegar Hill cinemas downtown and the Culbreth and Newcomb Hall theatres on the Grounds of the University of Virginia.

The biggest "get" at this year's festival has to be director, screenwriter, and film historian Peter Bogdanovich, who will be presenting at least two of his best-known movies, The Last Picture Show and Paper Moon, during the course of the weekend.  (Two other Bogdanovich films, What's Up Doc? and Cat's Meow, will also be screened.)

About a month ago, Virginia Film Festival director Jody Kielbasa announced most of this year's program at a news conference at the X Lounge in Charlottesville.  Let's go to the video!

Part I:

Part II:

My coverage of the 2009 Virginia Film Festival can be seen here, here, and here, with a later post about Matthew Broderick here.

Posts from the 2008 Virginia Film Festival include this one on director/screenwriter Guillermo Arriaga, and additional videos here and here.

Video from the 2007 Virginia Film Festival can be found here and here, with photos from that year's festival here.

Reports on the 2006 Virginia Film Festival include this one, this one (with popular silent video of William Moseley), this one (with Robert Duvall), and this one.

A report on the 2005 Virginia Film Festival is here, and this episode, featuring my confrontation with Vanessa Redgrave, was mentioned by former festival director Richard Herskowitz in his farewell remarks three years later.

Watch this space for future reports on the 2010 Virginia Film Festival.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

 

1, 2, 3: Vote No, No, No

Most voters who go to the polls today in Virginia will be surprised to find, in addition to candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and a smattering of local office, three ballot measures asking for their permission to amend the Constitution of Virginia.

Two of the measures deal with creating conditions for exempting certain classes of individuals from local real estate property taxes, and the other permits the General Assembly to increase by as much as 50 percent the amount of tax revenue set aside in the so-called "rainy day" fund.

When it comes to amending the basic law of any jurisdiction, it is up to the proponents of the change to provide a compelling reason to do so.

In the case of these three amendments, it has been difficult to find any proponents at all, much less enthusiastic proponents who have laid out a persuasive argument in favor of change.

On the other hand, there have been those who have analyzed the three proposals and found them severely wanting.  One of those is Charlottesville radio show host and former city councilor Rob Schilling, who has recommended to his listeners on WINA-AM and the readers of his blog that they vote "no" on each of the measures on the November 2 ballot.

I agree with him.

With regard to the two property-tax measures, it is not a good precedent to set to allow any discretely defined group to be exempted from the common responsibility to pay taxes.  While I strongly support across-the-board tax cuts and accompanying cuts in government expenditures, carving out exemptions for politically well-connected or popular minority groups (in this case, disabled old people and disabled veterans) casts a very bad example.  First, it encourages other groups -- narrowly- or broadly-defined -- to seek similar exemptions for themselves.  Second, it means that all other taxpayers will have to pay a higher amount when their tax bills are assessed and collected.

With regard to expanding the "rainy day" fund, I would have less of a problem with it if "rainy day" were more specifically and narrowly defined.  If it were designed, for instance, to be used in the case of natural disasters like hurricanes, blizzards, or earthquakes that create large areas of destruction or, in another instance, in the case of a terrorist attack or conditions of armed rebellion, my objections would be muted.

The problem with the "rainy day" fund, as it is currently used, is that it gives legislators an excuse to dip into savings whenever there is a revenue shortfall, rather than finding ways to cut spending.

If there is a surplus in revenue, it should be returned to the taxpayers as a refund or tax cut, not added to a supply of "mad money" for members of the General Assembly to play with.

I believe that the default vote for any referendum or other type of ballot measure is "no."  So my recommendation for today's election:  Vote no on each and every proposed constitutional amendment. 

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

 

Guest Blogger Tim Hulsey Reviews 'Sanctified' and 'Locomotion'

Sanctified satisfies at Lincoln Theatre; Locomotion derails at Kennedy Center

Tim Hulsey

Special to The Metro Herald

“Democracy,” said H.L. Mencken, “is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.”

If that's true, then the new musical Sanctified, now playing through November 14 at the historic Lincoln Theatre, is theatrical democracy in action.  A potent brew of shout-and-holler gospel music, country comedy, Sunday-school piety, and aw-shucks know-nothingism, Sanctified knows exactly what its audience wants, and gives it to them good and hard.

The plot, what there is of it, involves the East Piney Grove Baptist Church, a dwindling African-American congregation in deep but otherwise unspecified financial trouble.  The young pastor (John McClure, Jr.) has pinned his church's last hope on a 30th anniversary Gospel Revival, and brought in his opera-diva cousin (Mary Millben) to assist with the proceedings.  A lay minister, Deacon (Frederick Strother), respectable to the marrow but lacking spiritual fervor, schemes to remove the pastor from his post.

Meanwhile, two mysterious “delivery men” (William T. Newman, Jr., and Joshua Nelson) work behind the scenes to ensure the revival's success – and it hardly counts a “spoiler” to reveal that these delivery men are actually angels in disguise.  Of course, the pastor's plans for this revival will go awry in a most amusing and heartwarming – if predictable -- manner.

Still, scene-stealing turns from Almonica Caldwell as a gossipy church lady and Ellis Foster as a doddering, unintelligible elderly chorister keep the proceedings lively, even through Sanctified's overlong, overstuffed second act. 

Moreover, playwright Javon Johnson provides a generous helping of strong comic business – most of it amusing, and all instantly recognizable -- for the squabbling, backbiting members of the East Piney Grove Gospel Choir.  But Bernadine Mitchell, as elderly Sister Sarah, walks away with the heart of the show, delivering her character's Christian homilies with world-weariness and absolute sincerity.

Then there is the score, a blend of traditional gospel tunes and original material by Rollo Dilworth and Raymond Reeder.  For a patchwork score like this, the music of Sanctified holds together fairly well, and the original title tune, “Sanctified,” is an instant Sunday-morning classic, guaranteed to linger in the mind for days.  Mary Millben, a Leontyne Price-soundalike (with showy coloratura to match), gets top honors for solo vocals, though gospel-music veteran John McClure, Jr., a top-five finalist on BET's Sunday Best, takes a strong second place: Their first-act duet “Come Out the Wilderness” is far and away the vocal highlight of the show.  Only the treacly second-act love ballad “A Miracle in Your Eyes” and the rap number “Tougher Than My God” feel out of place here; the style and subject matter of these pieces are not in keeping with the rest of the show.  (As an added bonus, for several nights of the run, the promoters of Sanctified have asked a “guest artist” to perform the next-to-last number of the evening.)

Technical aspects of the show are uneven.  The historic Lincoln Theatre, which hosted legendary performances by Duke Ellington and Ella Fitzgerald, may be the perfect venue for a show like Sanctified, but with Sanctified, problems with the sound mix along with the unpredictable acoustics of the venue occasionally make some of the voices (especially Millben's) shrill, tinny and unpleasant.  The crew seems to be working these problems out, slowly and gradually.  But visually, at least, the show is always striking, thanks to a stylishly evocative set by Tony Cisek and moody lighting from William H. Grant, III.

Playwright Javon Johnson seems to have conceived Sanctified as a Tyler Perry-esque response to the ever-popular Smoke on the Mountain series of country-gospel musicals.  The show strikes more than its share of false notes, particularly in its callous attitude toward the “hincty” college-educated opera singer, and in the impossibly trite angel subplot.  But like the East Piney Grove Gospel Choir itself, it overcomes its many problems through sheer good will.  This isn't highbrow theater by any standard, but at its best, Sanctified illuminates the triumphs and tribulations of a close-knit community of faith.  Sanctified is a mess, but it's a rousing, entertaining mess, guaranteed to leave the audience both sanctified and satisfied.

I wish I could say half as much for the world premiere of Jacqueline Woodson's Locomotion, which just finished a brief run at the Kennedy Center.  Woodson adapted this 70-minute children's drama from her Newbery Honor Award-winning book, chronicling a turbulent year in the life of an inner-city African-American orphan who finds a much-needed outlet for self-expression in his daily poetry journal.

 The book Locomotion has become middle-school required reading for all the right reasons, but few of its rough edges and hardly any of the narrative drive have made the transition from page to stage.  As eleven-year-old Lonnie Collins Motion (the “Lo-Co-Motion” of the title), Nickolas Vaughan sounds and acts more like a happy children's television host than the brooding, introverted character of the book.  Fatima Quander, playing all the women's roles in the show, is convincing in none of them.  Of the three-person cast, G. Alverez Reid makes the strongest impression, mostly in the role of Lonnie's classmate Enrique.

 As adapter and playwright, Woodson peppers her script with easy bromides, flat speeches, one-dimensional characters and crass tearjerker moments, in a manner that, ironically enough, betrays the tough-minded spirit of her original book.  Jennifer L. Nelson's broad direction condescends to her intended audience of children, most of whom seemed bored and restless at the performance I attended.  Production values are excellent, as one would expect from the Kennedy Center, but on the whole, this Locomotion goes nowhere fast.

Sanctified:  Book by Javon Johnson, original music by Rollo Dilworth and Raymond Reeder.  Directed by Derrick Sanders.  Lincoln Theatre (near U St./Cardozo Metro Station) through November 14.  Two hours and fifty minutes, including 15-minute intermission.  Tickets $37-$47 plus service and facility charges.  For tickets, call (202) 397-SEAT or visit www.ticketmaster.com.  For more information, call (202) 328-6000, or visit www.letsgetsanctified.com or www.thelincolntheatre.org.

Locomotion:  Adapted by Jacqueline Woodson from her Newbery Honor Award-winning book.  Directed by Jennifer l. Nelson.  Kennedy Center Family Theater, October 23-31.  70 minutes, no intermission.  For tickets to Kennedy Center performances, visit www.kennedy-center.org or call Instant Charge at (202) 467-4600.

Teachers' Union Cites Me in Anti-Robert Hurt TV Ad

When, wearing my "Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner" hat as a political writer for Examiner.com, I interviewed state Senator Robert Hurt (R-Chatham) a few days after he won the GOP nomination for Congress in Virginia's Fifth District, what was most striking about the candidate's replies to questions was their blandness.

When asked, for instance, to name three federal programs that he would favor eliminating or privatizing, Hurt could think of only one, the Department of Education, whose purpose, he said, was "not clear."

Such a response was both non-controversial and disappointing. Non-controversial, because eliminating the federal Department of Education has been a goal of the Republican Party since at least 1980. Disappointing, because his answers showed Hurt to lack bold thinking about how best to limit -- or shrink -- the size and scope of the federal government.

So it came as quite a surprise when, months later, the National Education Association began to air a TV ad favoring Hurt's opponent, incumbent Congressman Tom Perriello, and attacking Hurt for those very positions he took in his interview on Examiner.com.

In fact, the NEA cited the "Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner, 6/13/10" in its campaign commercial, which has been broadcast frequently on local Charlottesville television stations (NBC29, Newsplex) for about two weeks. In the meantime, it has had just 357 hits on YouTube since it was posted there on October 19.  (By comparison, a rough-hewn, meant-for-TV ad posted by independent candidate Jeff Clark has had 360 hits since September 28.  For contrast, check out Hurt's first on-the-air ad, which has had 1,435 hits on YouTube since August 24.)

Here's the NEA's ad, which runs 31 seconds in length (and seems interminable in its frequency on local television):

The NEA's television commercial does not cite my earlier interview with Hurt, in which he asserted that Tom Perriello "dances with Nancy," referring to the current Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).  Nor does it cite my interview with Perriello himself, in which he made strange claims to having a "libertarian undercurrent" in his political thinking, or the refutation (one might say "refudiation") of Perriello by actual, local libertarians.

Whether the NEA's ad discourages voters from casting a ballot for Hurt because they disagree with his position on the Department of Education, or whether it encourages other viewers to vote for him because they agree with that position, remains to be seen in the results of the election on November 2.

The fact that the nationwide teachers' union finds Examiner.com -- still a newcomer to the media stage -- a reliable and credible source speaks volumes about the positive potential of this publishing platform.

(This blog post is adapted slightly from an earlier article on Examiner.com.)

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Video from Albemarle GOP Rally for Robert Hurt

Halloween is more than just "trick or treat."  In most years, it's just a few days before an election and therefore is a last-minute opportunity for campaigning.

So it was in Charlottesville on Sunday, October 31, a bright, sunny, unseasonably warm day perfect for going door-to-door to beg for candy and votes.

Two of the candidates seeking election to Congress in Virginia's Fifth District also used the time to rally supporters.  Incumbent Congressman Tom Perriello (D-Ivy) visited the Grounds of the University of Virginia, where he was surrounded by children trick-or-treating on Mr. Jefferson's lawn -- and their voting-age parents.

His Republican opponent, state Senator Robert Hurt of Chatham, spoke at a gathering of GOP activists at Albemarle Square on Route 29 north of the city.  Hurt was introduced by Governor Bob McDonnell after speeches by RPV Chairman Pat Mullins, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling, and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA7), who, as several speakers pointed out, is poised to become Majority Leader of the House of Representatives when the current holder of that title, Ohio Congressman John Boehner, becomes Speaker next January.

I was able to capture the entire event on video, in five parts.

In the first part, Albemarle County Republican chair Rachel Schoenewald makes some introductions, followed by Pat Mullins and Ken Cuccinelli (who points out the presence of "Death himself" in the audience, admonishing "Death" not to vote on Tuesday).

In part two, Bill Bolling speaks and introduces Eric Cantor.

In part three, former Delegate and current Congressman Eric Cantor delivers remarks, and then introduces Bob McDonnell.

In part four, Cantor introduces "His Excellency, the Governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnell," who speaks and introduces Robert Hurt. McDonnell begins with a reference to the UVA defeat of the University of Miami in Saturday's football game, which stirs up the crowd.

In the fifth and last segment, Robert Hurt makes the case for his election on Tuesday and the defeat of Tom Perriello. The candidate naturally mentioned his endorsement by the local newspaper, The Daily Progress, which had been published early Sunday morning.  After Hurt finishes, Pat Mullins wraps it up with encouraging words for the crowd and an invitation to them to volunteer to work on the campaign for the next two days.

Photos of the rally can be seen on Facebook, here.

Interviews I have conducted with Robert Hurt are here and here; an interview with Tom Perriello, in which he cites a "libertarian undercurrent" for his vote in favor of Obamacare, is here. (Those interviews, and interviews I have done with other congressional candidates in the 2010 election, can be found on Examiner.com.)

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Tom Perriello and Barack Obama

It's not news -- at least not anymore -- that President Barack Obama attracted a crowd of more than 7,000 people when he came to Charlottesville on Friday to speak at a rally on behalf of incumbent Congressman Tom Perriello (D-Ivy).

The event was carried live on local television stations, from the landing of Air Force One at CHO through following the motorcade down a deserted Route 29 through the speech itself to the lift off of the President's airplane barely two hours later.

The question remains, however, as to why the President came to Charlottesville in the first place.  The appearance was, it seems, the only one at which Mr. Obama offered his campaign support to an individual Member of the House of Representatives.  (In other campaign appearances around the country, the President spoke on behalf of candidates -- some incumbents, some not -- for the U.S. Senate and for governor, but not for House Members.)

Here's my interpretation of the events of these past days, which must have been pretty heady for local Democrats.  People who live in Washington, D.C., can be cynical about presidential motorcade sitings, but such things are rare in Central Virginia.  (In the past 100 years or so, there have been scattered visits by Franklin Roosevelt, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton [as president-elect], and George W. Bush.  Charlottesville is long past the days when three presidents called it home.)

So why did Obama come?  And why did Perriello accept his visit, considering that the Fifth Congressional District is far more conservative than Perriello himself is, or claims to be?

It might not be risky for Perriello to be seen (figuratively) bumping fists with Obama at Charlottesville's downtown pavilion, in a city where Democrats show a routine 4-to-1 advantage in election returns.  But down toward Farmville and Bedford and Danville, associating with the highly unpopular president days before the election is quite risky.  It might make Charlottesville and Albemarle voters more enthusiastic about their candidate -- who they were going to cast a ballot for, anyway -- but it might also incite fence-sitting or complacent conservative voters farther south.

So, my take on all this:  Regardless of whether Perriello wins or loses next Tuesday, the new Democratic establishment is setting him up to be a favored candidate for statewide office in 2013.

Face it, after the Republican sweep of 2009, the Democrats don't have much of a bench of eager potential candidates for governor, lieutenant governor, or attorney general.  Terry McAuliffe may be up for a repeat run for the Democratic nomination for the top spot, but few others seem to want to go through the (political and personal) pain that plagued Creigh Deeds last year.

Democratic powerbrokers see Tom Perriello as a rising star within their party, an opinion shared by many in the party's grass roots.  He voted for Obamacare, cap-and-trade, and the failed stimulus package but kept his distance on the administration's budget, banking "reform," and other controversial issues. He has a great resume:  two degrees from Yale, experience as a humanitarian in combat zones overseas, and at least two years as a Member of Congress.  He's proven himself to be a hard worker and indefatigable campaigner. (It helps that he's unmarried and childless.)

My prediction is that, win or lose on November 2, Tom Perriello will be a candidate for Virginia Attorney General in 2013.  I also predict that the Democratic Party will give him a clear path to the nomination.  (Sorry, Senator McEachin!  You had your chance.)

I can't wait to talk to Ken Cuccinelli to ask him what he thinks of his re-election opponent.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

 

Book Review Blog Carnival Number 55 Is Now Live

As I foretold a few weeks ago, I am hosting the 55th edition of the Book Review Blog Carnival on my other blog, Book Reviews by Rick Sincere.

The carnival is a collection of submissions by various bloggers in categories like fiction, non-fiction, history, mysteries, children's and young adult (YA) books, "lists," and author interviews.

Check out the carnival today and consider submitting your own book reviews to future editions.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 

See my articles on Examiner.com!

Perriello's Perplexing 'Populist' Self-Identification

On more than one occasion, U.S. Representative Tom Perriello (D-VA5) has spoken of himself as a "populist."  He seems to think that is a good thing.

For example, in an article by Ray Reed for WSLS-TV in Roanoke, we find this:

Perriello said the Hurt campaign seeks to “falsely portray me as a liberal when I am a populist.”

Perriello told columnist E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post:

"First and foremost, I'm a populist."

In an article in The New Yorker, George Packer explains the origins of the term "populist" in American political discourse and applies it to Perriello:

Perriello is less a Progressive than a Populist. The Populists were agrarians, and when Perriello told an audience at a grant-giving ceremony in Martinsville, Virginia, that farm jobs could be the jobs of the future, he was sounding a very old chord in American discourse. In his language and sympathies, his frequent use of the word “elite,” his vilification of Wall Street bankers, Perriello is carrying the banner of the laid-off seamstress, the struggling truck-stop owner, the hard-pressed tobacco farmer. These were the constituents of the original Populists. They looked with anger upward rather than with sympathy downward. They didn’t come from the professional middle class, though some of their champions did, and they didn’t put their faith in the training and education of experts. If anything, expertise was suspect as a cover for the interests of the powerful. Hofstadter described the “dominant themes in Populist ideology” as “the idea of a golden age…the dualistic version of social struggles; the conspiracy theory of history; and the doctrine of the primacy of money.”

I was incredulous when I first heard Perriello use the word "populist" to describe himself. Did he not understand the history of the term? Did he not know who else in American politics is, or was, a "populist"?

For example, Huey "Kingfish" Long, the corrupt head of Louisiana's political machine, was proudly "populist." Social Security Online -- a U.S. government web site! -- describes Long as

A nominal Democrat, Huey Long was a radical populist, of a sort we are unfamiliar with in our day. As Governor, he sponsored many reforms that endeared him to the rural poor...

The Kingfish wanted the government to confiscate the wealth of the nation's rich and privileged. He called his program Share Our Wealth. It called upon the federal government to guarantee every family in the nation an annual income of $5,000, so they could have the necessities of life, including a home, a job, a radio and an automobile. He also proposed limiting private fortunes to $50 million, legacies to $5 million, and annual incomes to $1 million. Everyone over age 60 would receive an old-age pension. His slogan was "Every Man A King."

Alabama Governor George Wallace, the segregationist who ran for President in 1968 and 1972, was so much identified with populism that the subtitle of a made-for-TV biopic about him was "the rise & fall of an American populist." And journalist Stephan Lesher's book about him is titled George Wallace: American Populist.

The Encyclopedia of Alabama begins its entry on Wallace like this:

He was elected governor for an unprecedented four terms in 1962, 1970, 1974, and 1982, and was de facto governor during the administration of his first wife, Lurleen Burns Wallace, from 1967 to 1968. Wallace also launched four unsuccessful bids for the presidency on platforms that opposed the expansion of federal power and appealed to white populist sentiments. During each election cycle, he modified his racial views to suit the times. Despite his support for road construction, education, and industrial development, Wallace is widely known for his resistance to civil rights, limited economic vision, failure to reform the tax code, and total focus on campaigning, at the expense of running the state.

Then there's David Duke, the former Ku Klux Klan leader, racist, and anti-semite who ran for president on the Populist Party's ticket in 1988.

Perriello certainly has a lot in common with Pat Buchanan, the pundit and failed presidential candidate described by Alexander Cockburn as a "populist outsider" in the same category as Jesse Jackson and Jerry Brown. Jonathan Alter called Buchanan a "Beltway populist" in a 1996 Newsweek cover story. Like Buchanan, Perriello opposes free trade with potential purchasers of American products overseas.

Whether these sordid associations are what Perriello seeks when he calls himself a "populist" is somewhat beside the point, because populism is, at its core, opposed to individual liberty and personal responsibility.

When I used to man libertarian booths at county fairs and gay pride celebrations, we used the World's Smallest Political Quiz and the Nolan Chart to explain how people really think about politics. The Nolan Chart turns the inadequate, one-dimensional left/right political spectrum into a two-dimensional grid that is better for identifying how people think.

Basically, the chart (using the quiz) measures how people view economic and personal liberty. People who score high on the economic liberty scale tend to be conservatives; people who score high on the personal liberty scale tend to be liberals.

People who score high on both scales tend to be libertarians.

People who score low on both scales, however, tend to be authoritarians or populists.

A commenter on an article called "Notes Toward a New Political Taxonomy" on The American Scene explained it similarly:

The Nolan chart is the simplest/most precise way to show this. It is a two dimensional chart, that thus has four corners.

The two dimensions are: Economic, Social.

Economic means the role of government in economic policy in taxes, spending on social programs, education, health care, etc. regulation.

Social means role of government in drugs, homosexuality, abortion, the draft, etc.

Those who favor social freedom but not economic are left/liberal

Those who favor economic freedom but not social are right/conservative

Those who favor all freedom, libertarian

Those who favor none, populist/authoritarian

Based on this taxonomy, a "populist" is someone who wants the government to intervene in people's economic decisions and also wants it to intervene in their social and personal decisions.

Put another way, if a "libertarian" is someone who wants to keep government "out of the bedroom and out of the boardroom," a "populist" is someone who wants to make sure government stays in the boardroom and stays in the bedroom.

Giving Tom Perriello the benefit of the doubt, perhaps he thinks "populist" is a synonym for "popular" or means simply that he wants to do things "for the people."

Even so, does he really want to be associated with the likes of Huey Long, George Wallace, David Duke, and Pat Buchanan? If not, why does he use the same word to describe himself when that word is applied so commonly to these figures from the dark side of American politics?

Either Perriello is ignorant of the nomenclature and ignorant of history or he's conscientiously linking himself to an anti-freedom political philosophy.

That's both odd and disturbing for a politician who thinks he has libertarian leanings.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 
See my articles on Examiner.com!

Are Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber Necessary?

It turns out that writing about Justin Bieber's alleged assault of a 12-year-old boy who (allegedly) called him a "faggot," Lindsay Lohan's choices of nail polish and her evolving mug shots, Paris Hilton's cocaine arrest, or Perez Hilton's oscillating mean spirits is no longer necessary to attract money-earning Web traffic -- if it was ever necessary at all.

Celebrity stories may raise the numbers of visitors, but those visitors are less likely to buy anything, or even look at advertising on a web site or blog.  It's as if a passerby noticed Shia LaBeouf at a sidewalk cafe in Dupont Circle but didn't bother to stroll into the place and order an espresso and a muffin.

The New York Times reports that an analysis by Perfect Market, a media consulting company, finds that hard news stories attract the most profitable traffic to newspaper web sites (and, I would hazard to extrapolate, to news-and-opinion blogs, as well).

According to the Times:

Using data from newspapers including The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, The San Francisco Chronicle and The Orlando Sentinel, Perfect Market found that the most profitable articles were the ones readers were most engaged with. Topics like unemployment, the egg recall and mortgage rates topped the list.

The reason, Perfect Market analysts explained, was that advertising is more effective when it is paired with news content that is relevant to the product, especially when the subject of the news is something in which readers have a personal interest.

Reporting on the same story, with the alliterative headline "Lindsay Lohan Less Lucrative for News Sites Than Hard News," Advertising Age added:

Newspaper websites get more ad revenue from articles about serious stuff like the Gulf oil spill than from traffic bait like stories on celebrity scandals, according to an analysis by Perfect Market, a company that aims to help publishers become more visible and profitable on the web.

Advertising Age's Nat Ives explained why celebrity-driven stories lack the profit potential of nuts-and-bolts, bread-and-butter topics.

A lot of the difference had to do with automated text ads that are keyed to the content on a page, ads that can be overshadowed by the big display units that newspapers' sales teams typically sell directly. Articles about immigration, for example, are magnets for text ads promoting immigration lawyers.

"The rates paid by advertisers on Google AdSense for immigration-related terms are higher than the celebrity-related stuff like Lindsay Lohan," said Robertson Barrett, chief strategy officer at Perfect Market. Mortgage lenders want to put text ads in front of people reading about mortgages, he said, but there aren't as many advertisers trying to sell celebrity memorabilia.

Jeremy W. Peters in the New York Times offered some actual numbers that demonstrate the profitability of stories about the economy and other "kitchen table" issues.

Perfect Market measured revenue per page view and found that articles about Social Security were the most valuable, generating an average of $129 for 1,000 page views. Articles about mortgage rates made $93 for every 1,000 page views. On other topics, values for every 1,000 page views were $28 for items about unemployment, $33 for articles on jobs, $20 for articles on the egg recall and $26 for pieces on immigration reform.

To be perfectly candid, I still haven't made a dime from Google AdSense in the nearly six years I've been blogging. But at least I know now that I don't have to make gratuitous references to Lady Gaga in order to increase my traffic volume and click-through rates.  (I'll still Tweet about Glee, even though there's no profit in it.)

To my readers, however: please feel free to click on the ads below. Google and I will both be grateful (me more than the Big G).

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter! 
See my articles on Examiner.com!