Will Perriello Call for Geithner to be Fired?

As anyone following Tom Perriello knows, Perriello has not been a fan of much of Obama's economic team. He has campaigned against the Wall Street bailout from the start and opposes almost anything from the Obama administration that has the fingerprints of Goldman Sachs on it. He's an angry populist who wants more money to union thugs, not Wall Street CEOs. Fair is fair I guess. I'd worry about any Wall Street CEO that met Tom Perriello in a dark street. Collateral damage and all . . .

Now, the national media is starting to notice that Perriello wants Treasury Secretary Geithner gone. Yawn, old news! But apparently not. The absurd demand now being made is that Perriello has to "officially" come out for Geithner to be fired, as if constantly saying so in almost every town hall isn't enough. Or better yet, he has to make the call from Washington, where words apparently have more meaning than in Virginia in front of his district.

So here are my demands for Perriello in order to show that he really, really, wants to fire Geithner.

He must call for him to go on a boat.
And he must do it with a goat?
He must make his call in the rain.
And shout for Geithner's fire on a train.

Where else must Tom call for Tim to go?
Maybe in the dark?
Or on a tree?
Maybe in a cart?
We can't let Tom be!

Should he, would he, on a box?
We must make demands with a fox.
Demand he make a speech in the House.
And oppose Geithner with a mouse.
Perriello must oppose Tim here or there.
Perriello must call for Geithner's oust everywhere.

Schilling Come Lately

Poor little "Shill" Schilling is crying that in an article about Robert Hurt flip flopping on the 14th Amendment, Tommy Boy's position is only quoted through his press secretary and not directly. Somehow the Shill missed that this was the standard modus of operation for Robert Hurt throughout this entire election cycle and that he continues to hide behind his puppet master Chris LaCivita. Even more, the Shill misses that this wasn't a direct quote from Hurt in conversation, but an e-mail. An e-mail that contradicts his in-person statements on the campaign trail!

Hurt’s position on the issue, e-mailed to The Daily Progress on Wednesday, seems to contradict a statement he made about birthright citizenship the following day in Chase City.

At a forum held by the Chase City Chamber of Commerce, a questioner asked Hurt: “The 14th Amendment says that anybody that comes into this country and has a child, that child born in this country is a citizen of the United States. When you go to Walmart or wherever, you see all these immigrants with several children — and they’ve always got another one on the way — you don’t know if they’re legal or illegal. But when they’re born here, that puts the expense on us because they have those rights. Do you think we need to put a limit on the 14th Amendment to stop that?”

According to a video of the exchange posted on YouTube by the Democratic Party of Virginia this weekend, Hurt replied: “I think the first and most direct thing that we have to do is, is we’ve got to address the immigration — we’ve got to stop it at the border. And that’s the problem. We’ve just been allowing it to happen. We wouldn’t be having that discussion if we’d just do our job at the border.

“But I think that’s something we have to revisit,” Hurt continued. “Because I think we would all agree our founders did not envision what we’ve got now.”

Hurt’s campaign did not immediately return a call for comment Saturday about the apparent discrepancy between his statements on the issue.

The Shill is upset that the Daily Progress is providing more coverage of Hurt and his quotes than Perriello's position on the issue. Maybe it's because two contrasting positions are harder to cover than one? The paper covers all four candidates: Tom Perriello, Jeff Clark, Robert Hurt, and the other Robert Hurt. The Shill is a Schilling come lately trying to complain about candidates hiding behind their campaign staff, but in his rush to boost ratings he's going after Perriello instead of being an objective commentator on the race. For shame Shill!

Hurt Backs Down on Anchor Babies

Sad to say, but we have another flip flop from career politician Robert Hurt. This time it is on the important issue of anchor babies, the offspring of illegal immigrants who are guaranteed American citizenship under the current liberal interpretation of the 14th Amendment. In all issues about immigration I ask myself one simple question: WWVD? What Would Virgil Do?




So it's sad to see Robert Hurt flip flop on the issue of anchor babies and adopt a position rejected by the vast majority of Americans, and most certainly almost all conservatives.

Hurt’s position on the issue, e-mailed to The Daily Progress on Wednesday, seems to contradict a statement he made about birthright citizenship the following day in Chase City.

At a forum held by the Chase City Chamber of Commerce, a questioner asked Hurt: “The 14th Amendment says that anybody that comes into this country and has a child, that child born in this country is a citizen of the United States. When you go to Walmart or wherever, you see all these immigrants with several children — and they’ve always got another one on the way — you don’t know if they’re legal or illegal. But when they’re born here, that puts the expense on us because they have those rights. Do you think we need to put a limit on the 14th Amendment to stop that?”

According to a video of the exchange posted on YouTube by the Democratic Party of Virginia this weekend, Hurt replied: “I think the first and most direct thing that we have to do is, is we’ve got to address the immigration — we’ve got to stop it at the border. And that’s the problem. We’ve just been allowing it to happen. We wouldn’t be having that discussion if we’d just do our job at the border.

“But I think that’s something we have to revisit,” Hurt continued. “Because I think we would all agree our founders did not envision what we’ve got now.”

Hurt’s campaign did not immediately return a call for comment Saturday about the apparent discrepancy between his statements on the issue.

Robert Hurt's biggest opponent isn't Tom Perriello. It's Robert Hurt! One Robert Hurt is open to changing the 14th Amendment, the other isn't. One Robert Hurt wants to debate Jeff Clark, the other doesn't. One Robert Hurt likes the Fair Tax, the other doesn't. One Robert Hurt likes Paul Ryan's plan to privatize Social Security, the other doesn't. How long until we can schedule a debate between the two Robert Hurts?

Debate Debates Continues

The debate over debates continues, this time from Tom Perriello's camp.




I complained that Hurt was making a mistake to duck the debates, and now we have an ad from Perriello playing up Hurt's refusal to show up to the "job interview." I think this is a great way of phrasing it. Hurt is just another wealthy and well connected kid who expects to get a job or admission into college because of his daddy's connections. He's not willing to work for it.

Sadly, the Hurt campaign responded by accusing Perriello of "going negative." What was Hurt's first web video about, calling out Tom Perriello for not being "one of us." It seems that Hurt has gone negative too, and with good reason. You can't say anything nice about the candidates.

Perhaps Hurt should have attacked Perriello for focusing on distracting gimmicks like debates over debates instead of "going negative." While Perriello was making this ad, he was ignoring the issue of illegal immigration or the spread of Jihadists across the United States. It's time to have a real debate, one about the issues.

Hurtards Ignore Real Issues

The day after Tom Perriello defends the Mosque at Ground Zero should have been a day of conservative activists across the district picking up on the Congressman's failure to protect the Constitution and republic that he swore a oath to God (not Allah!) to protect. Instead, the Hurtards like Charlottesville's "Shill" Schilling are complaining that Tommy Boy wasn't allowing signs into his town halls. Boo hoo. Cry me a river. I guess that's what all the flash flood warnings were here in Central Virginia, Schilling throwing a temper tantrum.

Wake up conservatives. What do you think voters care more about? Bringing signs at town halls or allowing Jihadists to spread across the United States? Do you think Osama Bin Ladin will let you bring signs into the Mosques?

One Plus One Equals Three in Danville?

Last night was yet another town hall by our Congressman Tom Perriello, this time in Danville. Catherine Amos provides the coverage in the Danville Register & Bee, but I was also following Robert Benson's live-tweets during the night, such as this observation that it was a pro-Tom Perriello crowd. I was surprised that Amos's article didn't set the same tone as Benson, with references to "angry constituents," being "hit hard" on the questions, and indicating the group applauded heavily following one of the first questions from one of these "angry constituents." But then she wrote about his answers to the Mosque at Ground Zero:

“Let me start by saying, I cannot imagine wanting the government to be able to tell me and my faith community where we can build a house of worship on private property,” Perriello said. “… I have opinions on whether it’s a good idea or not, but … compared to the importance of solving the economy right now… this is a distraction of what our biggest priorities should be.”

The crowd overwhelmingly applauded his answer.

Now I've applauded Robert Hurt for finally trying to force Perriello to stand up to his Muslim overlords. We know that 70% of Americans stand with Hurt against Obama and Perriello. But I could understand Perriello getting applauded for his pro-Jihadist agenda in a pro-Tom Perriello crowd. That's what Benson indicated showed up. But Amos has so many references to "angry constituents" and hard hitting questions I can't wrap my head around what she's trying to convey about the meeting.

I believe that the combination of Benson's observation and the overwhelming applause for Jihadists indicates that this was a strongly pro-Tom Perriello crowd. We know he heavily won Danville in 2008 and is expected to run strong in the city this time as well. There may have been some Hurt supporters giving Perriello hell, but I can't believe they were a large group if being pro-Jihadist was so popular of a position. But Amos seems to be playing up the number of Perriello opponents in the crowd. Why?

At first I was wondering if Amos was just trying to provide balance and give Perriello a hard time. That's great, if she could do it without being so obvious about it. Then I re-read the article and realized that her emphasis on Perriello's opponents attacking him on health care but applauding the Mosque at Ground Zero makes them sound out of touch with Robert Hurt's defense of America's Judeo-Christian values. Is she trying to pull a fast one on the people of Danville and convince them that everyone, even conservatives, are in support of the Obama-Perriello stance against the government defending our freedoms?

Perriello Surging, Hurt Finally Switches to the Issues!

A new poll from a conservative organization shows Perriello surging against Robert Hurt. He's closed the gap from 23 points to only 6 points. This poll, from American Action Forum, has Hurt narrowly ahead of Perriello 49 to 43. This is very different from the SurveyUSA poll from a few weeks earlier showing Hurt ahead by 58 to 35. Interestingly, the new poll doesn't indicate the level of support for Clark or if they even polled the independent conservative running in the race as well.

Taking into consideration that this is a Republican poll, I suspect that it leans slightly in Hurt's favor. Certainly failing to include Clark is a boon to Hurt's numbers. It's very possible that the candidate are actually tied. Hurt's numbers have collapsed in a very short period of time. Why?

Maybe it's because his campaign has spent more time whining about the time of Perriello's town halls than hosting his own public forums. And I mean public forums, not closed door meetings without any media coverage.

Maybe it's because his campaign has spent more time ducking debates and refusing to debate Jeffrey Clark than addressing the issues.

I've been calling Hurt and his supporters out for their inability to focus on the major issues facing Virginia. I've been told I'm just slinging out crap. Unfortunately, the Hurtards continue to provide more than enough cow shit for Tommy Boy to step in. Recently I've seen claims that the terrorist attack on Perriello's brother was not actually an attack and somehow was done by a rodent. This is disgusting and not true. It has to end. Robert Hurt should be called on to make very clear that he believes that Tom Perriello's brother, like himself, was the target of violent intimidation.

Now that Hurt's numbers are collapsing, he's finally turning to the real issues. He's called on Perriello to oppose the Muslim conquest of New York City and condemn the plans to build a Mosque at Ground Zero. The Democrat President Barack Hussein Obama has defended these plans. I'm glad that Hurt is finally realizing that he shouldn't just sit back and play political games on meaningless issues like town hall timing and debates about debates. He needs to man up and make some noise, just like Virgil did.




Where is Virgil when we need him now?

Robert Hurt should go beyond his demand that Perriello stand up against the Muslim threat in NYC. He should demand that Perriello return all campaign contributions from Muslims. We know that Perriello talks a good talk about being "independent" because he doesn't take money from lobbyists and corporations, while being bought and paid for by unions. But what about Muslims? How much Saudi oil money is being funneled to Hamas, and how much is being funneled to Perriello? Is there a difference?

How Out of Touch Are Hurtards?

The longer this campaign goes on, the more difficult it is for me to stick to my belief that Robert Hurt is the best way to eliminate Tom Perriello from office. I agree with Jeff Clark on the major issues and I believe that as a veteran and small business owner he has the real world experience our representatives need, unlike the wealthy Robert Hurt who is entirely out of touch with the problems facing working Virginians. But Clark was stabbed in the back by Jim "Judas" McKelvey (I wonder what his 14 pieces of silver will be) and Hurt continues to lock Clark out of major debates. Hurt may win but he's acting like a "sore winner" who is totally insecure in his upcoming victory. Voting for him will leave a bad taste in my mouth I'm not looking forward to.

Hurt's supporters, the Hurtards, are making it even more difficult. Their constant stream of letters to the editor seem like they are all coming from the same playbook of Chris LaCivita, finding minor things to complain about like the timing of town halls. What about the major issues? I guess LaCivita doesn't want to address the major issues. His messaging certainly shows how out of touch he is from reality in Southside. Check out this letter.

Say what you will about Virgil Goode, but he served us very well as a Democrat, an independent and a Republican. I will admit that he wasn’t flashy and did not make a lot of noise, but he stuck to and voted the conservative values of the people of the Fifth District.

Virgil wasn't flashy? Didn't make a lot of noise? Hello?







What universe are you from "Bill Henderson of Danville," assuming that you actually wrote that letter on your own and didn't have it dictated to you by Sean "P. Diddy" Harrison or Chris LaCivitia. Virgil Goode made noise. He took on the powerful liberal machine. And what's why they backed Perriello in 2008. I'm sick and tired of the Hurtards attacking Perriello as a mindless puppet of Pelosi and the Democrats. He's not a pawn, he's at least a rook or a knight on their chessboard. Hurt's campaign needs to stop focusing on Nancy Pelosi and start focusing on the very real danger created by Tommy Boy himself.

Slow News Day in Southside?

By ducking debates and whining about the schedule of Perriello's town hall schedule, Robert Hurt has raised serious questions about the credibility of his campaign against Tom Perriello. Right now the only thing going for Hurt is that he is, technically, a Republican. That his campaign's complaints about Perriello's Chatham town hall actually made it into the paper shows just how much of a slow news day it must be. In a more honorable society, Catherine Amos would be considering seppuku for the shame she has brought onto all reporters everywhere.

The complaints stem from that fact that in the mythical world of Chatham everyone is working or getting the kids ready for school at 7:30 Monday morning. In Chatham, a land where I think hobbits also exist, there are no senior citizens with nothing to do who might have complained last year that the town halls were too late in the evening for them. In mythical Chatham, everyone has the exact same schedule and no one works odd hours so that a 7:30 morning town hall is more convenient than a 6:00 evening town hall. And in Chatham, the residents are so afraid of driving to the big city Danville, they can't go to the Perriello town hall the next day in the evening!

Whine, whine, whine. Perriello is yet again holding more town halls than anyone else and yet again Hurt is complaining that it isn't enough. Where are Hurt's town halls? Where are his public appearances? I guess Hurt has better things to do than actually campaign for the job he wants. I guess he's just like the rest of Chatham. He's too lazy to campaign, and they are too lazy to drive to Danville.

Robert Hurt is a Coward

Based on the polling out right now lifelong politician and Southside scion Robert Hurt looks likely to be the next Congressman from the Fifth District of Virginia. Which is entirely fair in the United States of America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. We don't need no stinkin' democracy! Hurt's family has worked very very hard to accumulate wealth, prestige, and influence in order to buy off Southside's establishment to get their boy Robert into Congress. And we know that Robert will always be in debt to both his family and the Beltway political machine that hand selected him to run. So it's a win-win-win situation. A win for Hurt's family. A win for establishment Republicans. And a win for Robert Hurt. What's not to like?

But Robert Hurt might want to ask Tommy Boy to leave some things around the office for when he takes over. You know, anything that would be helpful. A map of the district (since he doesn't go up to Charlottesville much), some fancy pens (pretty!), a spine and the massive pair of balls that Perriello has been hauling around the district in his pick up truck. Because Hurt doesn't have anything to show that he's a man. Are his kids adopted? I don't he has the ability to impregnate an ovulating Mexican trying to conceive an anchor baby with whatever he's working with right now. Maybe too many drugs in college have dulled his male instincts?

Today, Hurt became the first politician ever to back out of the Senior Statesman debate since it started in 1996. Did our dear friend L. F. Payne ever back out? No! Did Virgil ever decided that putting himself up against the jokers the Democrats ran against him was beneath him? No!

Robert Hurt has held every position possible on debates. First he said he would debate Clark. Then he said he would with certain qualifications. Then he said he would never debate Clark. He's backed out of almost every debate imaginable. No since Green Eggs and Ham has someone refused multiple offers in so many ways.

Why is Hurt hiding? He is ahead in the polls. He should have the confidence to go into the debates. Is it that Clark is beneath him? Why is Clark any less of a viable candidate than Ron Ferrin, who Hurt was willing to debate? Is it that including Clark in the debates would elevate him? Who cares? Goode was willing to debate Meredith Richards, who was so far to the left appearing on stage with Goode was the most reasonable thing she had ever done. That certainly elevated her campaign!!

Hurt should include Clark in the debates. Perriello has reached the point that he's willing to debate Hurt one on one if that's the only way Hurt will debate. But expect to see Tommy Boy showing up at every debate he is invited to for the campaign. Why is Hurt allowing Perriello to pick up this free media attention and make Hurt look bad? I can only blame his puppet masters in the Beltway establishment who think that Hurt isn't ready to debate Perriello. Hurt deserves better than this advice. So do the voters of the Fifth District of Virginia. Hurt should stand up to his puppet masters now, or else we'll be electing a coward to Congress.