As we approach the first set of caucuses in Virginia’s First Congressional District, to determine the democratic nominee, Krystal Ball continues to rack up key endorsements. Today’s press release:
FREDERICKSBURG, VA. – As the nominating process to select the Democratic candidate for Virginia’s first Congressional District kicks off, key Democratic constituency groups are making it known who they think will be best prepared to take on Rob Wittman in November’s election.
Today, Krystal Ball for Congress has announced the support of three additional organizations: AFSCME, the Farm Team, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC).
Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) said, “We are very impressed by Krystal, her positions, her willingness to fight, and the Krystal Ball campaign operation.”
“I’ve been so impressed with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee’s commitment to issues that are important to Democrats, especially their support of a strong public option,” said Ball. “Their support, along with that of AFSCME and the Farm Team, give us a sense of momentum going into this nominating process.”
AFSCME is the largest public employee and health care workers union in the United States.
The Farm Team (via their website) added the following about their endorsement of Krystal:
Not only does she represent “a fresh face” but believes passionately on changing the way business is done in Washington. She will work to get beyond partisanship and for the best interest of Virginians to keep our state the best place to run a business and raise a family.
Krystal continues to build up momentum in the race for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s First Congressional District. As we’ve said before, she is clearly the best candidate to take on Rob Wittman come November.
The following is an open letter to Krystal Ball from a William and Mary (W&M) student named Leska Pravdic. She attended a Young Democrats meeting yesterday evening, which featured a visit from Scott Robinson. Scott and Krystal are both running for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s 1st CD.
Ms. Ball,
I’m a student at William and Mary and was at the Young Democrats meeting you visited several weeks ago. At tonight’s meeting, Scott Robinson visited us. I had been looking forward to this because I was interested to hear what his views on the issues were, especially considering his website touches only briefly upon three topics: internet coverage, education, and veterans’ issues. To my dismay, I was disappointed; Mr. Robinson took it for granted that we were all invested in helping him get elected and did not elaborate on his platform. Instead, he seemed to be most interested in getting our opinions on the best strategy for winning the campaign because “at the end of the day, this [electing democrats] is what it’s all about… I’m passionate about winning.”
Though I understand the importance of running effective campaigns, I guess I fundamentally disagree with Scott Robinson’s statement. To me, passing meaningful and progressive legislation is “what it’s all about;” winning elections is not an end but rather a means to an end. This is what I admired and appreciated about your visit to us. You specifically told us your viewpoints on all the major issues (as well as including them on your website), and made it clear that you would not sacrifice your values to party politics and petty bargaining. I think we need more politicians who see things this way, who aren’t willing to just say what they think sounds best.
To make a long story short, meeting Mr. Robinson tonight inspired me to get in touch with you and see if there’s any way I can get involved and help you win the democratic nomination. I heard through Young Democrats that you are looking for student interns to help you through November. Unfortunately, I will not be in Williamsburg over the summer (I will be in D.C.) and I will be in Argentina next semester. However, if there’s any way that I can get involved on a more short term basis in the Williamsburg area, I would love to. Please let me know if you have a need for this type of help.
Thank you very much,
Leksa Pravdic
It seems that everywhere Scott goes he leaves the same impression with folks. He simply continues to avoid “elaborat[ing] on his platform.” When he is forced to discuss issues, he simply bobs and weaves around them; or worse, he proposes ideas (e.g. breeder reactors) that are poorly researched and ill advised.
As the letter writer explains, “he seemed more interested in getting our opinions on the best strategy for winning the campaign” than talking about the issues. I’m going to give Scott some free advice, “talking about issues is what wins campaigns, not avoiding them.” The letter writer rightfully concludes that
passing meaningful progressive legislation is “what it’s all about;” winning elections is not an end but rather a means to an end.
I, like the writer, am inspired by the campaign Krystal is running: one based on a winning message and effective campaign strategy. She is clearly the best candidate to take on Wittman and win come November.
Why do the Democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD believe that they are the most electable? At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum on February 20, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
We’ve spent considerable time over the last week plus dissecting the candidate’s stances on everything from health care to the environment. At the end of the day, it all comes down to who is best positioned to win in November. That candidate is clearly Krystal Ball.
Scott takes an oddly simplistic view of why he believes he is the most electable:
I personally believe that with my background, I was raised here, I was a waterman as a kid, my family worked on the water and I’m a veteran.
Note to Scott, Krystal was raised here too (King George). I don’t see his point. I also have great respect for waterman, but I just can’t see the waterman pushing Scott over the top to victory. To his last point, being a veteran doesn’t mean that other veterans are going to just support you. It is all about who has the better ideas. If being a veteran were a sure recipe for success, we would have beaten Wittman (R-Va.) in 2007. In 2007 a special election was held, due to the unfortunate passing of Rep. Jo Ann Davis (R-Va.). Wittman squared off against Iraq war veteran Phil Forgit (D-Va.) and he won in a landslide, defeating him with 63 percent of the vote.
Scott’s campaign has regularly shown a total disconnect from reality and regularly takes a very simplistic view of things, which in and of itself should provide many a reason to pause. Scott actually goes on to explain that he has a very “simple” plan to cut into margins and win in November:
…the places that I’m going to cut into margins are real simple. The Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula. Rob and I are going to split 50/50. Cause I’m from there and he’s from there. I’m pretty well known in the Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula…
Scott’s entire plan, if you listen to everything he has to say, relies on people voting for him because of where he is from, what he did as a child as a waterman and the fact that veterans will vote for a veteran. This sort of strategy may win you a popularity contest, but no way is this going to win you an election. An election is won on ideas and a successful campaign strategy. Both of which is severely lacking from his campaign.
The opposite can be said about Krystal and her campaign. Over the last week plus, I’ve indicated why I think Krystal is better on just about every issue from health care to guns to job creation to the environment. She gets it. She also understands what it will take to win. Her campaign strategy focuses on 3 areas: Money, Mobilization and Message.
As I noted when I endorsed her back in January, she has raised more money than the last 3 democratic candidates were able to raise, combined, throughout their entire campaigns for this seat. She has raised over $400 thousand and is on pace to raise the $3 million it is going to take to be competitive in this district. Krystal also understands that the way we are going to win this seat is through an “unprecedented field operation.” Her volunteer growth has been nothing short of breathtaking. At the current pace in volunteer growth, her campaign will be in a position to knock on every single door within the district. It’s this sort of effort that will be needed, if we have any chance at winning in November. Her message has also shown to be an appealing one to Democrats, independents and even some Republicans. As Krystal explains:
Now, I’m a small business owner, I work in education, I’m a CPA, I worked designing accounting systems with the federal government. This is a background that has been very appealing to independent and moderated minded folks who are so frustrated with what’s been going on in Washington. And the way that I know that this is an appealing message is because over 25 percent of my contributions come from self-identified Republicans.
Krystal’s message clearly resonates with folks from different sides of the political spectrum. She also understands the lessons learned from the 2009 election:
If I learned one thing from the Creigh Deeds campaign, it’s that we have to make sure in a year when the president is not on the ticket, that first and foremost, our people are excited about coming out and voting for a candidate, that our people are excited about going out to work and knock doors.
The base never showed up for Creigh. Krystal understands that you need to reach out to a broad base of Virginians to win, which she is clearly doing, but she also understands that it is just as important to get the base excited and make sure that they show up. That is a winning strategy!
Their closing statements also painted sharply different pictures of what a potential matchup with Wittman may look like:
Scott accused Wittman of stealing every idea his campaign has put forward and selling it as his own. He suggested that Wittman had put together a flier, which suggested that Scott was “the threat.” Now I have haven’t seen this supposed flier, but this totally contradicts what Scott later says when talking about the flier:
He knows what the threat is. What I can’t understand is why he hasn’t come after me. That’s what’s puzzling to me.
Scott, I’m going to let you in on a little secret. The only threat you pose is to our chances of winning this seat.
Krystal clearly makes the case on why Wittman is a bad fit for the district, let alone Democrats. As Krystal rightfully concludes:
…Rob Wittman is the worst type of incumbent. He is the type of person who takes money from special interests and votes exactly the way they tell him to vote, takes money from the banks and votes against basic consumer financial protections, takes money from the health insurance lobby and, forget about health care reform, he votes against health insurance for poor children. This is someone who has never created a job, he has not in his adult life worked in the private sector, he does not know anything about economics. This is someone who has not only a bad fit for us as Democrats. He is a terrible representative for this district and we have a chance this year, while he is new, while he is rated number 432 in terms of influence, while he is one of the 10 least effective members of Congress, while we are out fundraising him. This is the year to unseat him.
If all of this isn’t enough to convince you that Krystal is one heck of a candidate and is best positioned to “unseat” Wittman, look at a recent endorsement by Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Chairman, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. In his endorsement he notes that
Krystal will be a strong champion of our armed service members and a fierce advocate for our veterans and their families, both inside and out of the district. I am impressed by her call to service and with her background as a CPA and small business owner. I believe she has a valuable perspective from which to legislate on economic issues, and will be the best voice for Virginia’s first district.
I’m proud to support Krystal and urge everyone else to do the same.
Where do the democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD stand on the House health care bill that was passed and the public option? At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum on 02.20.10, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
If you were hoping to get a direct answer on the public option from Scott, don’t hold your breath. He starts out by saying that
I’m a type of person that I personally do not get so wrapped up on what the term is. What I believe is cut the deal. We’re looking for the perfect plan and as a result we have no plan.
Scott, we do have a plan. We need a partner in the Republicans that are willing to stop playing politics with health care and who are willing to work across party lines for the good of the nation. The Republicans have disintegrated into the party of “no.” What’s their plan? To start over! Health care reform is fundamental to our economic growth and now is not the time to start over. Personally, I’m more than open to suggestions on improving the current plan; however, that’s hard to do with an unwilling partner. Haven’t Democrats given up enough in the plan already? If elected, you’d have us give up more?
Scott goes on to say:
My positions on health care are very simple: if it lowers the deficit, if it is available to all Americans and if it is affordable. If it meets those three principles, I will back it. The House bill did that and the Senate bill that. As a result I would have backed either one of those bills.
The public option is a critical part in attaining the competition that is needed to meet those three principles. His answer actually provided for one of the more testy moments in the forum. As you can probably hear, a member of the audience prods him to answer the question and stop evading it. When asked again on whether he supported the public option, he simply shrugged, put his head down and refused to answer.
According to recent polling by the non-partisan Research 2000, 61% of all Virginias overwhelmingly support the public option that includes 62% of independents, 78% of Obama voters and 84% of Democrats. Blue Virginia had an excellent piece on the polling results here. If all of these groups support the public option, why can’t Scott answer the question?
The contrast in leadership between Scott and Krystal could not be any starker. Krystal had the following to say about the public option at the forum:
I’ve been a vocal supporter of the public option from the beginning. And I would have absolutely voted for the health care bill that passed the House. I think that the public option is a critical part of reform because it is one of the most serious efforts that we have in the House bill to actually cut costs and increase competition. It’s the exact sort of thing that a responsible Republican should be for. It’s not a left-wing socialist government takeover. It’s a responsible way to increase competition. And I think it is an important part of reform.
One thing is clear, we all know where Krystal stands on just about every question that she has ever been asked. On the other hand, we have not idea where Scott stands. This election is too important to gamble with our future. The sure bet is a vote for Krystal Ball!
Update:Blue Virginia has an excellent post up now that provides great additional insight on this topic. Also as Blue Virginia points out, “we’ve seen this movie before.” I have no interest in seeing a repeat in 2010.
How do the democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD plan on creating jobs in the district? At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum this past Saturday, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
Given Krystal’s experience as a successful small business owner, she offered the following analysis:
This is an area where we know that the engine of growth ultimately is not going to be the government. The government is filling a gap right now and is helping to boost the economy and get it back on track. But what’s ultimately going to lead to our economic success in this district and others is small businesses. That’s something that I know a lot about.
Krystal has an impressive background. Her professional experience ranges from software design and implementation for the US Federal Courts to evaluating Indian start-ups in education. She currently owns an educational software company.
As a small business owner, she knows what it takes to create jobs. As Krystal explains,
as a CPA I know the sort of tax reform that will help small businesses, as a business owner myself I know the sort of incentives that can help small business owners, I know that access to credit is absolutely critical.
She not only knows that small businesses will play a critical role in our economic recovery, but also has a deep understanding of critical job-related issues effecting folks throughout the first district:
In the southern end of the district, the quadrennial defense review just came out and they are recommending that we move a carrier [that resides in] Norfolk down to Mayport, Florida. That would mean 11,000 job losses in Virginia. Some of those would be in the first and some of those would be in other districts. But that’s something that I’m tremendously concerned about that we are going to have to pay attention to and make sure that our representatives are arguing forcefully for keeping that carrier in Norfolk.
What’s Scott’s plan for creating jobs in the district and throughout Virginia? Broadband. He had the following to say:
I’ve been to D.C.; I’ve met with different leaders. They all say the same thing; Scott the First Congressional District is probably the best piece of real estate in the country for job development. You’ve got a great location. You’ve got Norfolk and Newport News down south, you’ve got Richmond, you’ve got DC up north. It forms a perfect triangle. You’ve got infrastructure, you’ve got rail, you’ve got airport, you’ve got a port, you’ve got four-lane highways going east, west, an educated workforce. You have an educated workforce. I’ll put my colleges up against any colleges in the country: Mary Washington, William and Mary, Christopher Newport, the community college, Rappahannock Community College. But the one thing that we don’t have and we are not going to create any jobs in the First Congressional District is until we bring technology to the district. I have been pressing that the entire 5-months. We have to bring broadband throughout the entire district.
While I agree that we’ve got some of the finest colleges within the country and that continuing to expand broadband throughout the district is a great idea, I feel that this is a very simplistic view of what conditions are necessary to create jobs. I’m certainly in favor of expanding broadband throughout the district as part of a comprehensive strategy to create jobs, but that can’t be the entire plan.
On a side note, fomer Gov. Kaine and Sen. Warner have done an outstanding job of expanding broadband access throughout Virginia. Former Gov. Kaine actually established the Office of Telework Promotion and Broadband Assistance, which works towards establishing affordable, accessible broadband services to underserved areas of the Commonwealth.
Krystal knows what it will take to jumpstart job creation in the district, having created jobs herself. She wants to invest in green technology and provide incentives for companies and entrepreneurs to locate their business within the district, especially in Economic Empowerment Zones.
She will also propose necessary tax reforms to help spur job creation and make sure that these same businesses are able to get critical access to credit. Many small businesses have struggled mightily in securing adequate credit to make payroll in these difficult times, so access to credit is critical.
She also wants to invest in smart grid technology, which would allow alternative energy sources to become viable and potentially lead to individual’s ability to become energy entrepreneurs through selling their excess energy through the grid. This is the out-of-the-box thinking that we need to create 21st century jobs!
Where do the democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD stand on gun control? At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum this past Saturday, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
Scott and Krystal are supporters of the 2nd Amendment. In case their was any doubt in your mind on where Scott stands on guns, he wants you to know that he guesses he is “a big supporter of guns.”
Both candidates were asked on where they stood on guns in bars. Scott is “uneasy” about guns in bars and does not ultimately support it. Krystal left no doubt in anyone’s mind on where she stands on guns in bars:
Guns in bars is just a bad idea. Anybody knows that beer and guns are probably not a good mix.
In typical Scott fashion, on the issue of gun legislation in general, he refused to stake out any real, concrete positions. Instead, he kept repeating that
it’s not really a federal issue; it’s really a state issue.
What a cop out! Can he provide any straight answers or opinions on issues? With current federal and state gun legislation on the books and several bills pending in the 111th Congress, what is Scott’s position and what, if any, legislation would he support at the federal level? Simply saying that it is a state issue helps him avoid taking any positions. This has become an all too familiar theme in his campaign.
On a quick side note, the Supreme Court is set to take up, on Tuesday, a constitutional question that depending on the ruling may have far reaching implications on current urban gun laws throughout the country. I’ll actually go into a little more details about this under a separate post.
So while Scott waffles and weaves, Krystal leaves little doubt in folks mind on where she stands. She explains that
we need to focus on how do violent criminals get their weapons. By and large they do not get them from retail outlets, they are getting them on the black market, they are getting them from friends who bought them on the black market. And what we really need to focus on to cut down on violent crime, which is absolutely a plague of this nation, is anti-trafficking legislation.
Krystal points to recent anti-trafficking legislation introduced by Sen. Gillibrand (D-NY) as being “on the right track.” Krystal explains that
anti-trafficking legislation at the federal level is the way to really have an impact in cutting down on violent crime.
Krystal also understands a thing or two about prioritizing needs. She actually pointed to a recent bill introduced by state Sen. Creigh Deeds that would allow lifetime hunting licenses for children younger than 2. She explains that
with all the problems that we’re facing in the state, is this really what we want to be spending our time debating. Infant hunting licenses. So, my daughter Ella for her second birthday in two weeks I can get her a hunting license.
I think Colbert does a great job of explaining all of this:
This election will come down to one of ideas and prioritization of needs. Krystal clearly has the best ideas and understands how to prioritize needs. With regards to electability, I believe that Scott is the 2010 version of Creigh Deeds. Let’s not make the same mistake twice.
Where do the democrats running for the nomination in the 1st CD stand on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?” At the Stafford 1st CD Candidate Forum this past Saturday, Scott Robinson and Krystal Ball had the following to say:
Simply put, Krystal supports Adm. Mike Mullen’s, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opinion that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” should be repealed. Adm. Mike Mullen provided some pretty powerful testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee recently. He said that
allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do.
He went on to say that
no matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens or me personally, it comes down to integrity, theirs as individuals and ours as an institution.
With regards to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Scott will support whatever the results of a study currently being conducted on this very question. If there is one thing I have learned is that people, rightly or wrongly, support leaders that are principled and wiling to take stands on difficult issues. Scott seems neither principled nor willing to take a stand on this issue (let alone any).
Heck, even former Vice President Dick Cheney has weighed in on the subject. In an interview on “This Week,” he was quoted as saying that
When the chiefs come forward and say, ‘We think we can do it,’ then it strikes me that it’s – it’s time to reconsider the policy.
Sen. Joe Lieberman plans on introducing a bill next week to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Yes, Joe Lieberman.
In a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, 75% of all Americans said that they support openly gay people serving in the military. This same poll also indicates that this is widely supported by folks of all parties. 82% of Democrats, 77% of independents and 64% of Republicans support repealing it.
As John C. Maxwell once said, “a leader is one who knows the way, goes the way, and shows the way.” Krystal is just that leader.
UPDATE: Lowell has additional insight on this subject at Blue Virginia.
Over the next week or so, I will be comparing the positions of Krystal Ball and Scott Robinson on a myriad of important issues. Krystal and Scott are both seeking the democratic nomination in the First Congressional District this year and they both appeared at a candidate forum hosted by the Stafford Democratic Committee this past Saturday.
The first issue that we will delve into is the environment. Both candidates were asked to talk about their environmental priorities and whether they support Cap and Trade.
Both candidates agreed that the preservation and protection of the Chesapeake Bay should be a top environmental priority; however, as opposed to Scott, Krystal displayed a much more thorough understanding of the issue at hand. At times it seems that Scott was just memorizing things and simply trying to recite them from memory. Not once did he mention anything about the effect climate change is actually having on the bay.
Krystal strongly believes that the
current regulatory regime for controlling nonpoint source pollution is just broken. We’ve got to fix it, we’ve got to get the EPA more involved in controlling nonpoint source pollution.
She also understands that in order to get the bay under control that we need to directly address, and in Wittman’s case acknowledge, the effects that climate change is having on the bay. Krystal goes on to say that
we can do everything right with the bay in terms of controlling pollution and it would all be for not, if we do not get climate change under control. It contributes to the algae blooms that create the dead zones that cause all the problems.
Krystal goes on to explain that
We are home to the second most vulnerable coastline to climate change. Second, only to New Orleans. So, this is an area that will quite frankly be under water, if we don’t get this under control. And Rob Wittman has voted time and time again against renewable energy. He voted against Cap and Trade. We’ve got to get serious about controlling climate change or else the bay is in big trouble.
Krystal also spent quite a bit of time advocating for renewable energy. She noted the huge potential of wind power off the coast of Norfolk. It has some of the highest sustained winds in the country and the shallow depth makes it very cost effective. She also noted the potential for solar power throughout the district.
The candidates differed substantially on Cap and Trade. Scott does not support it and Krystal does. Scott didn’t offer any reasons on why he opposed it.
Krystal on her support for Cap and Trade:
it is exactly the sort of market-based energy reform that, again, a responsible Republican should support. It uses market mechanisms to set the price, so it is as little government intervention as possible. And it is a policy that has been proven to work. Helped us to reduce acid rain under the Clean Air Act, so we know that it works.
Another issue that arose was nuclear power. Scott is a big supporter of nuclear power plants and Krystal is not ideologically opposed to it. Krystal thinks that wind and solar power are better ways to go. Her big issues with nuclear power plants are how to deal with the waste that they generate and the incredible construction costs to build one. Krystal noted that
construction costs on nuclear plants have gone up from an estimated $3 billion per plant 5 years ago to now an estimated $9 billion dollars.
She brought everyone’s attention to the fact that the President has decided to commit taxpayer dollars to backing loans for nuclear power plants, which she strongly opposes. She explains that the reason why the government had to get involved
was because no one in the market thought that this was a good deal. 50% of nuclear power plants do not make good on their loans.
It simply does not make fiscal sense and unnecessarily puts taxpayer dollars at risk.
Perhaps the biggest bombshell (perhaps quite literally) was Scott’s explanation on what he would do with the nuclear waste generated. He seemed to imply that nuclear waste would not be an issue with breeder reactors, something he strongly supports. When I first heard that I was speechless and it further reinforced the fact that he doesn’t do his homework.
The one advantage of a breeder reactor is a limitless supply of fuel; however, the disadvantages seriously outweigh any benefit. The waste produced by the breeder reactor must still be reprocessed, so that the 239Pu byproduct can be filtered out and reused by the reactor as fuel. 239Pu is also incredibly dangerous. It is so dangerous that the nuclear industry puts limits on how much of it an individual can handle over a lifetime. The fuel that this reactor uses and produces can also be used in a nuclear bomb. The security concerns are enormous and puts this country at a huge security risk, as these reactors would be present a huge target for terrorist organizations. If all of that isn’t enough to scare you, the costs for these reactors are very high.
I’m shocked that Scott would strongly endorse using breeder reactors, especially based on his background in the military. His biography indicates that he managed policy development regarding weapons of mass destruction as his final assignment at the Pentagon. You would think that with all of his “experience” that he wouldn’t be proposing something that has the potential to endanger the security of this nation.
It is clear to me that Krystal has a way better grasp on environmental issues and, most importantly, does her homework before making policy decisions. This is just the sort of person that this district needs.
UPDATE: For an excellent further analysis of these issues, see Blue Virginia.
Over the last several months, I have heard many rumors and accusations that Scott Robinson was actively campaigning for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s 1st Congressional District while on active duty. Until this past Saturday, that is all that they were. At a candidate forum in Stafford, VA this past Saturday, Scott directly addressed these rumors. Scott is currently running against Krystal Ball for the democratic nomination in Virginia’s 1st Congressional District.
Before we get into what was said, let’s understand the rules that anyone on active duty military must abide by.
A regular member, or a retired regular or Reserve Component member on active duty under a call or order to active duty for more than 270 days, may not be a nominee or candidate for the offices described in subparagraph 4.2.1., except when the Secretary concerned grants permission.
Subparagraph 4.2.1. lists any civil office in the U.S Government that is an elective office; requires an appointment by the President; or is a position on the executive schedule under sections 5312-5317 of title 5, U.S.C. (Reference (i)).
In summary, if you are on active duty, you cannot run for elective office; however, if the Secretary concerned grants you permission then you can run.
For those of you that are thinking, “What about the Hatch Act?” The Hatch Act doesn’t apply to military members.
At the candidate forum, Scott was asked a question on whether or not he ever attended a campaign event while he was in uniform.
Let’s take a look at Scott’s answer, completely uninterrupted and in its’ entirety:
You had to be in the room, as he was giving his answer, to see the look of shock on attendee’s faces. He flatly denied attending democratic events while in uniform, but it is what else he had to say that left folks speechless.
Scott essentially admitted that he had been campaigning openly for the seat for at least the last 3-years:
I’ve attended numerous events as a Colonel. That was part of my 3-year strategy. The campaign that I’m running right now isn’t just something we didn’t just throw together. I’ve been planning this for years. You’re right; I have been planning this campaign.
Scott went on to say:
When I was at the Pentagon, I took days leave…And then I would go out and speak to Rotarians, Lions [and] what other group I were invited.
[…]
And then after I spoke at a club, I would go meet with Democratic Operatives.
Since the candidate forum, I’ve heard from many retired service members who were aghast at these revelations. For many of them, it is unfathomable that someone on active military duty would be campaigning for a partisan office. It certainly appears that Scott violated DoD Directive 1344.10.
Scott also mentioned that he attended the 2009 JJ Dinner in Stafford. Due to these new revelations, I did a little research and found out that Scott Robinson actually bought 3 tickets to this event. He bought a ticket for himself, his wife and a person by the name of Lela Graham. Lela Graham is a well-known Political Consultant in democratic circles. The JJ Dinner took place on March 14, 2009, well before Scott retired from the military in July of 2009.
I don’t believe that anything would preclude him from attending such an event, but what is more interesting is his professional relationship with Lela Graham. For those of you that don’t know, immediately upon Scott retiring from the military he hired Lela Graham as his Campaign Manager (she actually recently switched positions in his campaign). This wasn’t the first event that she had attended with Scott. She had been working with Scott for a considerable amount of time, accompanying him to other events throughout the district.
So it now appears that he wasn’t just meeting with Democratic Operatives, but he, while on active duty, had already hired his Campaign Manager. She may not have “officially” joined the campaign before he retired, but she was certainly promised a position.
Listen, I think this is a very damaging revelation on his part, especially for current and retired service members; however, I also think his performance at Saturday’s forum was just as damaging.
I think that Scott has quite a bit of explaining to do…
Comments (0) 
As we approach the first set of caucuses in Virginia’s First Congressional District, to determine the democratic nominee, Krystal Ball continues to rack up key endorsements. Today’s press release:
Themocracy