08/13/06
Classic Connaughton
By Too Conservative
…and this is why Chairman Connaughton is the most honest politician in the state of Virginia…
Yeah, yeah, yeah . . . blah, blah, blah,” Connaughton said. “Listen, they’ve been jumping the gun on this for months. This has to be orderly. . . . You don’t just leave the scene when you have that kind of responsibility.”
Connaughton also took a jab at Stewart.
“Anyone who has any extended exposure to Mr. Stewart understands the concerns expressed by the entire county. It’s a matter of integrity,” Connaughton said, declining to elaborate.
full story here
Throwing out unsubstantiated insults at Corey is hardly “being honest”. It’s childish.
I wasnt referring to his Corey comments..but his “blah blah” ones
You left out the best part of the article. David Brickley might run!!!! Please, please, please run David! You’d get my vote and against a right wing nut like Stewart, you are sure to win. RUN DAVID RUN!!!!
I think time’s running out on the vast array of Rs that the PWC committee’s process is intended to stimulate (according to party insiders). Didn’t they have to get their names in by yesterday?
If Sean continues to trash pro-life stalwart Corey, he will drive away conservatives in droves. Dumb politics.
Re: “…and this is why Chairman Connaughton is the most honest politician in the state of Virginia…”
……….at least until his Citizens’s Resource Protection Area Review Committee (CRPARC) Report is made public.
See for yourself:
Jim:
If you were Chairman of the Prince William Citizen’s Equitable Voting Access Committee would you steer the auspices of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the U.S. and Virginia constitutional protections thereof to a minority opinion of the report? I didn’t think so.
Why then an exception to private property rights and due process?
Plus, why did you invite the planning commission?
Just exactly what is their role with respect to RPAs?
Why do you suppose that Kimberly Hosen was apparently the only one to accept the invitation?
One thing for sure – the Planning Commission is complicit in waiving developer compliance with RPAs, granting them the right to destroy environmental resources.
Maybe they should have been subpoenaed and forced to testify why they routinely recommend approval of developments that violate Bay Reg requirements to respect RPAs, why they routinely make decisions that violate citizens’ rights under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
A corporate director can be tried (and many have been recently) for a breach of fiduciary duty – I wonder what the corollary charge is when a government agent flaunts the law, abrogates the rights of the people?
As an aside, there are no 11th Amendment provisions that shelter State and local (PWC) government officials from civil lawsuits brought against them by citizens for violations of the law.
Jim – did you invite an independent Property Rights attorney to advise them with respect to Constitutional Property Rights?
Why not?
Probably because you didn’t want to hear an independent expert legal opinion that RPAs, as promulgated in compliance with the Virginia Bay Regulations, constitute an unconstitutional regulatory taking of private property.
The RPA Committee was created for the purpose of assessing the impact of RPAs on Private property rights, yet you reduced its importance to a minority report.
Rather than delve into the heart of the matter with diligence – the impact of RPAs on Private Property Rights – it appears you very possibly used your position as Chairman, in collusion with County Staff and Kim Hosen, to evade the primary purpose of the committee.
Vegetated buffers, when properly designed and implemented, can be useful conservation tools.
[By the way, RPAs are not properly designed and implemented vegetated buffers]
But, it was not the purpose of the committee to assess the purpose and efficacy of vegetated buffers, yet you wasted seven months of citizens’ valuable time and taxpayer dollars doing just that.
Roads and schools generally are good ideas too.
When government takes land for those purposes, it respects citizens’ rights to due process and fair compensation.
Yet, the thrust of the committee was to aver that because RPAs might serve a good purpose, it is OK to deny a property owner the use of his land (a Regulatory Taking) without due process or compensation.
Either you simply don’t ‘get it,’ or you are complicit in the corrupt cabal that exists in this County (and Commonwealth) between government and developers to exploit private property for their own benefit.
PWC property owners are not objecting to the alleged beneficial purpose of vegetated buffers – they are objecting to RPA implementation without due process.
There is plenty to debate about the way RPAs are designed and designated and whether they serve their purpose or not – but, that was not the role of this committee.
The role of this committee was to assess the impact of RPAs on private property rights. That’s it.
R.T. Molleur
jimprice@ wrote: August 11, 2006
Robert Molleur
former member
Citizens’ Resource Protection Area Review Committee
Dear Mr. Molleur,
Your recent assertions concerning Kim Hosen’s participation at two meetings of the Citizens’ Resource Protection Area Review Committee (CRPARC) are factually incorrect. I am writing this note to correct your erroneous e-mail statement, copied below.
With the consent of the committee, I twice extended invitations to the entire Prince William County Planning Commission to attend CRPARC meetings for the purpose of answering questions from committee members regarding a few specific development sites and any other questions members wanted to ask regarding the site plan approval process. Unfortunately, only one committee member was able to attend both times; that person was Kim Hosen attending as a planning commissioner, not as director of the Prince William Conservation Alliance. The other planning commissioners did not get back to us with proposed alternate meeting dates. The committee would have been happy to accommodate the other commissioners’ schedules to the extent that we could. On both occasions, Kim Hosen spoke exclusively on various site plans that had come before the planning commission and made some general comments on watershed management and the extent to which the planning commission participates in the approval of development plans.
You would have been aware of these facts had you continued to participate in the committee. However, you chose to drop out of the committee work early on in the process and did so in an ungentlemanly fashion, causing much bad feelings towards you among the remaining members.
As you should remember from the time you did participate, the scope of the committee’s work had been set by the Board of County Supervisors (BOCS) and formally expanded somewhat by the committee well before Ms. Hosen addressed the committee. Ms. Hosen could not have altered the scope of the committee’s work and made no attempt to do so.
At about the same time that the committee expanded slightly the scope of its work, the committee agreed that the report to the BOCS would contain minority opinions. We wanted all voices to be heard by the BOCS and other interested readers of the report. You were still participating when we agreed to this. Your having quit the committee before the recommendations were compiled and before the report was written guaranteed that any of your views not shared by others would not be part of the report. It was you, not Kim Hosen, who removed from the report any dissenting opinions you would have made.
Your concerns about property owners’ rights were voiced by other committee members, who, unlike you, continued to work collegially with the rest of the committee. All of the recommendations proposed by all of the remaining members were adopted by majority vote with one gentleman abstaining. The reason for his abstentions is included in a special section of the report. As I mentioned above, we promised that all views expressed by the members would be in the report. Don’t blame Kim Hosen for your immature refusal to continue to work with the committee.
Finally, among your off-the-wall characterizations of the other members of the committee was the charge that we are communists. The last time I heard anybody else conflate communism with concerns about damage to the environment was back in 1969, when the Cuyahoga River at Cleveland caught on fire. The level of contamination in the river was high enough to make the river itself combustible, and the ensuing fire was intense enough to damage a steel railroad bridge spanning it high over the river. Clearly, there are no valid concerns about water quality. There are only spiteful, selfish communists wanting to take other people’s property. Priceless !!!!
James Michael Price
Chairman, Citizens’ RPA Review Committee
Yes Brickley… Pleeeeeeease run. We’re all begging you. That way, Corey will clean your clock, just like Stan Parris did.
Mr. t.: I guess as far as pro-life is concerned, anything is a step down after Connaughton. Right? I always thought his no exceptions attitude on pro-life issues was his weakest link as far as statewide or national political aspirations. I think he thinks so, too. But he won’t budge and just says that’s what he believes and can’t do anything about it. Fortunately for your concerns, the Board of Supervisors doesn’t get a lot of abortion issues.
Remember is 2003 when Corey repeatedly attacked Mike May for taking Tom Davis “developer” money?
Guess who is Corey’s biggest donor?
Tom Davis!
I couldn’t follow the Molleur comment. Can anyone help?
RE: anon 1147 comment: remember that Sean Connaughton was also a major supporter of Stewart in 2003. Comments like the one in the WaPo article quoted by TC indicate that Connaughton’s support of other Republicans, while generous, has limits. It will be interesting to see how the local GOP committee affects the reconciliation between Stewart and Connaughton that will be important to the possibility of victory and November. I’m sure they have a program in the works.
I never had a problem with Sean, until he started bad-mouthing my boy Corey.
t -
If you read the article, Corey bad-mouthed Sean again as he has done on numerous occasions since he was elected in 2003.
Integrity is an issue…
“Honest”!?!?!
Yeah, he was quite honest when he accused Young Republicans of ballot-stuffing when he lost a straw poll for LG at the 2004 County GOP Convention.
And then there was that whopper about “lowering taxes” as PWC County Chairman.
I suppose by the standards of this blog … yeah, that’s the ticket.
t is as committed to electing Corey as he has been in previous efforts to elect Chapman, Eugene, Staton, Black, and Marshall to their respective seats. These are ALL Godly pro-lifers who have earned every bit of the toil, tears, and sweat that we can muster on their behalf for victory. t asks every blogger on TC to join t and donate time and energy to the Corey campaign. For the babies.
Hey T,
Sean Connaughton is pro life…I personally met with him during the AG nomination race and I have no doubts that he is pro life. I am from the Ricmond suburbs, you know one of the only areas in the state where dems/liberals still poll with under 50% approval ratings (ie. Tim Kaine)….and I check into this blog a few times a day. While I did support Bolling for the AG nomination, I would have been completely comfortable with Connaughton had he received the nomination. It seems to me that you guys have invented false divisions amongst conservatives in parts of NOVA. I hope your next PW County Chairman is half as honest and ethical as Connaughton.
“I couldn’t follow the Molleur comment. Can anyone help?”
Yes, I can help… Molleur is a mental patient.
Jehrico Billy is correct that Sean is pro-life — from the moment of conception until natural death. NOVA Scout is correct that BOS does not deal with a lot of abortion-related issues.
Molleur WOULD post the whole exchange as proof to remove any lingering doubts that he’s truly lost it.
Jehrico-
Connaughton and Bolling ran for the Lt Gov. position not the AG position.
The next time someone insists the CBOS has nothing to do with abortion, ask yourself the following — what do Tom Davis, Jo Ann Davis, Jim Moran, Patsy Ticer, Mary Margaret Whipple, Chuck Colgan, Jim Scott, and Michèle McQuigg all have in common? Why, they all served on either a County Board of Supervisors (CBOS — the proper title — NOT!!!!!!!! Board of County Supervisors/BOCS) or on a City Council (Mrs. Ticer also served briefly as Mayor of Alexandria, as did Jim Moran for several years). That’s just a list from Northern Virginia among the CURRENT Congress and legislature. Add names like Stan Parris, Herb Harris, Joe Fisher, Charlie Waddell, John Russell, Ken Rollins (former Leesburg Mayor), Dick Fisher (Vienna Town Council), George Lovelace (Vienna Town Council), and Chap Petersen. If you want to include constitutional officeholders, let’s not forget that Paul Trible originally served as Essex County Commonwealth’s Attorney before being elected to Congress, the late Rep. Howard Worth Smith started out as Alexandria Commonwealth’s Attorney, or that Warren Barry spent a term as Clerk of the Circuit Court in Fairfax between his two General Assembly stints. And Del. Kris Amundson, of course, served on the Fairfax County School Board (elected). If you think I overstate the case, look up everyone I just listed. Above, I cite nine current and twelve past legislative office holders (General Assembly and Congress) who ALL originally served in local elective office. Every one of these folks (except perhaps Howard Smith) has had more than one opportunity to cast a pro-life or pro-abortion vote in his/her current legislative office. And every single one of those 21 folks cited his local elected experience as grounds for a promotion to higher office. So don’t listen to the claptrap that a Board of Supervisors race has NOTHING to do with abortion. It most certainly does.
For good measure, don’t forget Bob Calhoun, who originally served on the Alexandria City Council.
… As well as Wiley Mitchell.
Sorry, David, but you are wrong; and in fact, have been wrong before on this very point…
“Why, they all served on either a County Board of Supervisors (CBOS  the proper title  NOT!!!!!!!! Board of County Supervisors/BOCS)…”
It took me three minutes to go to the state website, look up the state code on local government and find the following…
§ 15.2-402. Board of county supervisors; election; terms; chairman; vacancies.
A. The powers and duties of the county as a body politic and corporate shall be vested in a board of county supervisors.
What’s sad is that the point you were trying to make about abortion may have been a good one. But you BLEW your credibility by making this false and ill informed statement.
“Yeah, he was quite honest when he accused Young Republicans of ballot-stuffing when he lost a straw poll for LG at the 2004 County GOP Convention.”
You know, I’m a little sick of this constantly being brought up by you James. I’ve seen you throw out this accusation numerous times and been silent, but no more. Your good friend Steve Chapman PERSONALLY ask me to vote for Bolling more than once. If you recall, it was a fundraiser for the YRs, $1/vote, and I told him that I didn’t have that much cash on me…so he told me, don’t worry about it, just keep on voting. I didn’t, of course, but it certainly WAS stuffing the ballot box. Actually, given what Chapman told me, I never suspected that they were going to use it as a serious poll. In my YR days, when you call something like that a fundraiser, that’s exactly what it is…not a poll.
Oh, and if you’re wondering why I waited this long to call you on that…it’s such a piddling, ridiculous thing that I felt no one could take seriously that it wasn’t worth watching you rant and rave at me for pointing it out. No more…it’s all fair game.
How often do the Board of Supervisors vote on county funding for abortion-related services at county/city hospitals, schools, etc.?
Every one of these folks (except perhaps Howard Smith) has had more than one opportunity to cast a pro-life or pro-abortion vote in his/her current legislative office. And every single one of those 21 folks cited his local elected experience as grounds for a promotion to higher office. So don’t listen to the claptrap that a Board of Supervisors race has NOTHING to do with abortion. It most certainly does.
â€â€David C.F. Ray
What votes did these individuals cast while on BOCS (or similar office) that dealt directly with funding of abotion-related services?
Well, AWCheney, once more, you’re caught in a lie. Though I had nothing to do with the straw poll — I wasn’t involved with the YRs by that time, so I certainly didn’t “use it as a serious poll” — I asked if my minor sons could cast ballots (paying the $1 donation, of course). I was politely declined. After the ballots were cast, Steve approached me and asked me to help count them. I did. I was then shown a list of Convention delegates (I don’t remember seeing your name on it, but perhaps you were there), each with a check mark next to his or her name, indicating that they had cast ballots. The number of ballots cast was identical to the number of check marks next to each name (as well as the money collected).
The fact is, Chairman Sean didn’t show up at the Convention until well after the poll had been concluded, just to speak briefly, but told a local reporter when asked about the result that he has seen the ballot box stuffed. So even assuming arguendo that your statement is accurate, Chairman Sean tendered his misrepresentation simply in reflexive mode.
Of course, the difference between my report and yours here is that I said it in print. And if Chairman Sean had a basis for his falsehood, he could have and would have sought redress in the courts.
And of course, we all know that you wouldn’t ever say anything you had to in order to denigrate Steve Chapman. Your despicable.
Well Jimmy, I could just as easily call you a liar…but I won’t. You could have been easily fooled (names checked that didn’t vote, for instance)…FAR too easily fooled.
You seem to think that everyone lies and you are the guardian of the truth, yet I’ve never seen you actually make any attempt to get to the truth. Ever been to the PW Courthouse and checked out anything that BVBL (the original) checked out re. Chapman? Have you ever checked out ANYTHING before calling someone a liar? No, not that I’ve seen.
As I said in my previous comment, I never mentioned this before because I didn’t feel like getting into a “pissing” match with you, but I really don’t care anymore. You’re just not worth the aggravation.
Besides, it’s too much fun watching you lose it all the time.
I love this thread!!!
Young -
I voted more then once at the Convention and all I did was give Steve Chapman money for it.
These straw polls are silly little things, distracting for campaigns, easily manipulated, very little security, and generally designed to fleece money out of the candidates and others for local fund-raising purposes. When I’m implored by all GOP factions to replace Kate Griffin, I’ll ban them statewide on the GOP side. (It probably won’t happen fast enough to help us in 2007).
Anon 32, you’re even more pathetic than AWCheney. At least she’s willing to attach her name to her misrepresentations.
As for “NoVA Scout” 33, alas, you’re not allowed to run pseudonymously.
Young ownage is why I keep coming back. Great work AWC.
When you reduce them to using “pathetic”, you can rest assurred that the veins in his forehead are bulging, too.
:clapping:
And finally, as for you, AWCheney, I DON’T throw around the term “liar” loosely, and — like “RINO” — far less loosely than my lying critics would have some people believe.
As for going “to the PW Courthouse and checked out anything that BVBL (the original) checked out re. Chapman,” no, I haven’t. Never claimed to, and never called “BVBL (the original)” a “liar” either. As I have said repeatedly, I don’t know where the truth lies in that little contretemps. I can make surmises based upon the character of those who have made the allegations — such as you, who said that Harry’s campaign had nothing to do with the criminal charges brought against Chapman, “other than reporting them when they came to our attention”; such as the coward who hid in anonymity and disappeared when it became clear that he might be called to account for his statements — but doing so simply wasn’t worth my time.
It is certainly hilarious, though, that you would challenge anyone’s research, considering the half-a**ed, witless effort you made to attempt to disparage me a few months back.
What I do know is that it was quite clear that, like you, “BVBL (the original)” appeared to be quite adept at shading things, and certainly was involved in casting a Republican candidate in as negative a light as possible. If you spent nearly as much time attacking Democrats and their ideas as you do attacking Republicans who fight Democrats and their ideas, and less time defending Republicans who advance Democrat ideas, we would all be a little better off.
While I have a lot of things to do right now as being Credentials Chairman for the special election convention to nominate our candidate to replace Chairman Connaughton, I was alerted to this latest post exchange by James Young and Ms. Cheney. While I find Young and Cheney’s trading barbs to be quite entertaining, this one has caused me some consternation.
As many may know Steve Chapman and I were in charge of the straw poll and I submit that the poll was conducted with highest ethical procedures. Unfortunately, the veracity of the vote total has once again been brought into question. It is quite disturbing to hear from Ms. Cheney the unsubstantiated charge that conveniently she was the source of the “fact” that Chapman offered her to vote two or more times just as long as she paid the donation fee. This is the same falsehood that was first put out by Connaughton the day of the vote. Connaughton in response to Keith Walker asking about the poll results charge that something afoul had occurred and Chapman and myself were to blame.
First and foremost, I strongly call Ms. Cheney charge false and question her allegation of ballot stuffing to be more an opportunity to launch yet another scurrilous charge against Chapman than to be based on facts. Simply the facts don’t support her convenient attack on Chapman more than two years later. Since Ms. Cheney’s charge has no independent collaboration and the facts can not support her allegation, her allegation should be disregarded.
Here are the facts– each delegate to the County Convention checked into the convention and was given their name tag and, then if they wanted to, they could proceed to the YR table and participate in the straw poll. Each person had to show their name tag and that name was checked off the convention delegate list (to prevent duplicate voting). They were asked for a donation to the YR’s but that was a requirement for the vote. Upon the closing of the poll we asked one representative from the Connaughton campaign and one representative from the Bolling campaign and a representative from the YR’s and a final representative from the County Committee to be tellers. Each ballot was retrieved and checked against the number of delegates that were marked off the official convention list. This number corresponded to the exact convention list total and no objection to the procedures were raised by any teller or any convention attendee at the convention. If there was voter fraud then where was the outrage and gnashing of teeth at the convention where the poll results could have been disputed. The story being offered shortly after the convention by Connaughton and his allies now might have a source– “Ms. Cheney”. All this time I just thought Connaughton had lost his mind accusing me of deceit and deception. Maybe he was just duped by the false allegations of Ms. Cheney. She has certainly shown herself to stoop to any level to achieve her desired results.
I am going to turn my attention back to the duties at hand and work to ensure our Republican nominee is selected on Saturday in a fair and balanced process. I do hope that Ms. Cheney doesn’t have another attack of delusional activities if she doesn’t like the outcome on Saturday.
Just my Thoughts-
“It is quite disturbing to hear from Ms. Cheney the unsubstantiated charge that conveniently she was the source of the “fact†that Chapman offered her to vote two or more times just as long as she paid the donation fee.”
Didn’t “offer[ed]“…he tried to talk me into it. (Note to normal people: Can you see why I NEVER brought this up before?)
Well Trent (nice to see you here as yourself
), I take it that YOU’VE never been to the Courthouse to check records either. Insofar as being a source for ANYTHING that Sean said at that convention, I never even spoke with him there, and you and Steve Chapman accusing people of deceit is really quite amusing. I would, however, like to thank you for keeping your insults civil. There are some people here incapable of that…well, one or two.
What was that momentous straw poll vote, anyway – 51-39 or something like that? I don’t think there were even 100 votes cast. does anyone recall the actual totals? Why does anyone give a fig about it? It was just a little fund-raising exercise. I guess some people tried to attribute significance to it, maybe that’s why it was talked about then, but I can’t imagine why it’s being talked about now.
Exactly NoVA…as I said before, I’m just tired of having Jimmy Young continually call Sean a liar over a punk YR straw poll. When was that…2 or 3 years ago?
In my experience, people who lie about small things also lie about large ones, to-wit, AWCheney. Truth be told, that was the first indication that I had that among Chairman Sean’s character flaws was not only overweening ambition, but also rank dishonesty. Of course, this was soon to be coupled with the whopper that he “lowered taxes” as PWC BOCS Chairman.
As for your comments, “NoVA Scout,” you certainly seem to have a lot of information for a Fairfax resident. My recollection is that you are correct; fewer than 100 people voted; for some reason the numbers 71 or 81 stick in my head. The percentages were something like 70% for Bolling, 27% for Connaughton, and 3% for Joe May (?).
The reason why anyone gives a fig about it is the insight that Chairman Sean’s response gave us into his character: when greeted with unfavorable and embarassing news, his first instinct was to lie (whether it was just an on-the-spot creation or based upon some misrepresentation by another such as AWCheney is the only fact open to question). Of course, the poll had little independent significance, save to demonstrate that Chairman Sean was embarassingly unpopular among GOP activists in his home county.
As for AWCheney’s rantings, I can only attest to the counting of the ballots, as one of the tellers identified by Trent, and to my own experience when I tried to vote. It is most assuredly interesting that, while he offers facts, AWCheney offers — as usual — character assassination and non sequitors.
And finally, as for why it’s being talked about now, “NoVA Scout,” it is because someone thought to call “Chairman Connaughton … the most honest politician in the state of Virginia.” If so, that’s a sad comment upon the integrity of politicians in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Actaully, the first sentence of the penultimate paragraph should read “… my own experience when I voted and tried unsuccessfully to stuff the ballot box with my children’s votes.”
I have only my own experience from which to speak. In that, I could go through a litany with regard to the character and/or veracity of the people here quick to call others deceitful…but I won’t. Everyone can judge well for themselves. I wonder who the “Connaughton” counter might have been?
We can then agree on the poll’s insignificance, James. All these words! The horror!
Ms. Cheney-
I do hope you were not aiming that statement at me. If so, then it would be very unfortunate. As I have kept my comments above board I would hope that you would do also.
NoVA Scout
The poll itself is insignificant but the allegations of fraud made by Ms. Cheney are significant. I had to respond with the facts about the poll’s integrity and correct her posting.
Just my Thoughts-
I told you Trent…at least you keep your insults civil. That’s appreciated.
Apparently, Trent can still cast pearls before swine. I prefer to give them their due.
Well, looks like Jimmy is expanding his repertoire.
AWC, can you almost see the veins ready to burst in his forehead?