Scott York A Republican Again?

By Loudoun Insider

Joe B put up an interesting opinion piece at NVTH advocating for the return of Scott York to the Loudoun Republican ranks, much to the consternation of certain bloggers who thought they had dibs on the story (a ridiculous notion).  There have been informal discussions about this possibility for some time now, and who knows how it will pan out. 

One thing is for certain, Scott York does not need the LCRC.  He will have an easy re-election bid, especially if it ends up being a two way race against wacky Democrat Tom Bellanca.  I’m sure he would like to avoid a three way race, but with the only Republican name really being bandied about being that of Bruce Tulloch, that three way race or something similar would be no problem for York to win.

It will be interesting to watch how this pans out.  The professional York haters in the LCRC will have a cow, but I think their numbers and influence have been waning.  The Dems won’t be happy, but what do they expect after absolutely going off the deep end lately and filing a clueless Chairman of the Board candidate?  One thing is for sure, York is in the driver’s seat on this decision.  Either way he goes, he’s a winner.

On a related note, as mentioned at NVTH, York led the charge to change the names of two ridiculously named districts – Ashdowne is now Ashburn, and the Dean District is now the Dulles District, much to the chagrin of the LCDC and their off the wall candidate there, Larry Roeder.  I am very surprised that the racial pandering didn’t stick.

UPDATE:  Tom Bellanca shows up in comments and proves why I call him “wacky”!!!


Comments

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    I have no idea what Barb is talking about. It has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    I am again to blame for helping with the derail… sorry.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    David and eb–you’ve connected a lot of dots. Good for you. Still don’t see a religious plot, but it must make for good politics somewhere.

    Janet Clark was on council when these projects were approved. Okay. Legitimate dot.

    Does Janet Clark control VDOT? That’s where some of the trees went. Is Janet Clark still on council, and responsible for monitoring the construction site? That’s where the barn went. I do have to agree with those who want to know why the BRL managed to video for two hours without any response. Why not video for two minutes, and run the camera over to town hall? Maybe that would have pushed a response through channels sooner, and saved more from damage? Makes better noise this way though, doesn’t it.

    A road network or a school in the suburban areas tacked on to make Blue Ridge “viable” is going to make a much bigger difference to the majority of voters in those areas than people who don’t live and can’t vote in Pville yelling about trees and a barn.

    Hate to break it to you, but renovating the rink and proffering adaptive reuse of the structures at Cole is the kind of planning that most people might support, and if trees died in the process, plant new ones. Someone would have to eventually, in any case. They die on their own, or in stroms, and so on. Even if you try to “save” them, they can die. Recall that had the powerline been buried along the W&OD for the trees, many would have died from the ground up, because of the distrubance to their root structure.

    Whose job was it to supervise the daily work at the barn site? the developer. They screwed up, and they’ll need to pay for that.

    eb, you created this derail hon, you didn’t just “help” it:

    “edmundburkenator
    on April 6th, 2011 at 8:19am

    Thanks for offering up “projection” Barbara. I won a bet!

    Remember everyone: The PEC controls everything (well, the thing that controls the PEC controls everything).

    They are even behind the tree cutting and the barn demolitions in Purcellville, I’m sure of it.”

    woops.

    You’re right, LI–here is a thread about York maybe running as an R, and we have a whole thread about the trees and barn in Pville. Isn’t the one devoted to that getting enough traffic, either at your blog, David, in Purcellville Eric, etc?

    I agree, it is screwed up, and bad.

    Is it a reason to reelect Burton? Or for people who ALSO don’t live in the suburban portions grafted on to Blue Ridge to listen to bloggers about why Janet Clark is ba-a-a-a-a-a-ad?

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Hon, er… Barbara, if you want to play “Who Started It”, it was your oddball statement on the use of “product” and your disgust over it.

    You also offered something up about the PEC and liberal guilt (I really had not pegged you for a winger — a bummer).

    Certainly not what I would call on the rails.

    Hint: go re-read the thread.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    You too, hon, and start with the first comment, where the district names were referenced.

    That’s what I responded to in suggesting a better reparation for the guilt of abandoning one of their own by the PEC-PAC backed majority.

    I agree that the spokesperson for VSS/VLF/? made an oddball statement with “product”, but no more oddball than their continual statements in 2000 that “85% of Loudoun voters” supported VSS policy…when there had been a 33% turnout resulting in a 51-49 split.

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Ok. District names = Randall/PEC/disgust.

    Got it.

    And now we’re on too……… VSS policy?

    You can’t de-derail a thread, can you?

  • AFF says:

    She just can’t get her enough of that PEC. She just can’t quit it.

    Besides. LI is right on. Unless York goes back into the LCRC there’s no way the VLF endorses a local republican this time around. Look at the field. Unfortunately there simply isn’t a local republican deserving of an endorsement from a PAC looking out for Loudoun’s long term sustainable future.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    aff, the problem with “sustainability” (the UN version, as opposed to the what’s-not-to-like-about-sparkly-unicorn version for public consumption) is that it has very little to do with Loudoun’s long term future, other than as a cog in somebody else’s wheel.
    —————————————–
    eb, of course I can go off on tangents. Guess what? So do you.

    As to VSS, pay attention, since you are supposedly an authority that is never wrong: VSS is VLF. And they’ll be something new this year, unless they figure it’s time to unpack the old VSS stationary again.

  • Eric the 1/2 troll says:

    “…the problem with “sustainability”…is that it has very little to do with Loudoun’s long term future…”

    Well, if the current LCRC slate gets elected that certainly is true…in fact, you could strike the term “long term” as well and be even more accurate.

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    Eric, I meant as a soveriegn entity called “Loudoun County”, responsible to the voters of Loudoun County, and not some grant and overlay hamstrung UN testtube project.

    We can agree to disagree how “sustainable” our continued growth in government is–there’s a “footprint” that bears reducing, at all levels, at least IMO.

  • Loudoun Insider says:

    Ugh. Please stick to the topic people! I’ll have to do an open growth debate thread soon for all of you!

  • G.Stone says:

    What a missed opportunity here. Derail is not the word, this train is in a ditch on its side. The subject of Scott York rejoining the party was lost in the opening remarks. This has become the ADD or ADHD blog site.
    Focus !

  • Barbara Munsey says:

    yessir! I’ll try to be a grownup, and see if I can’t make 2+2=4 today.

  • G.Stone says:

    Barbara, If you get that 2+2 to work out you will be way ahead of a few members of our current board 😉

Leave Comment