Floyd doping? Innocent until proven guilty

Like many I reveled in Floyd Landis's victory in the Tour de France.

Like many I am reeling from the possibility of his doping.

Like few I prefer to wait until all the evidence is in before dragging out the hammer and nails.

Chuck and Selwyn

As we get older, the tactics of day to day life in politics are forgotten. One that pivoted on a friendship yet has had such profound ramifications for Prince William County should be remembered.

In 1971 Selwyn Smith was elected to the State Senate representing all of Prince William County (Manassas and MP were not yet independent cities). As a former Town attorney and-I believe-Commonwealth’s attorney, and loyal campaigner for candidates of the old Byrd Machine, he was already wired into the General Assembly and became an accolyte and fast friend of Senator Ed Wiley of Richmond (who later became the father-in-law of the Kathryn Wiley who had interesting contact with Wm. J. Clinton). Wiley was chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. Because of Selwyn’s clout and his friendship with Ed Wiley, he was able to secure funding to widen Va. 234 between Manassas and Rte. 1. This was on the books, near the top of the highway schedule-and desparately needed in a county that was among the fastest growing in the country.

PWCo was growing fast in those days, and despite the efforts of the Board Chair (elected by the board from among their membership) Chuck Colgan, a group of four called the “Four Horsemen” voted for every spending project that came down the line. Their wild spending found much disfavor in Western PWCo, so much so that it helped drive Manassas and Manassas Park to seek and then receive city status, a developement that did not add to the clout of the western reps on the board-which included Colgan.

PWm was completely in the 8th district, and was represented by Stan Parris, who won the seat in 1972 with a plurality in a three way race. Herb Harris, member of the Fairfax BOS got the democratic nod in 1974, and was endorsed by all elected democratic officials in the district…except Selwyn. Senator Smith was personal friends with Stan Parris, and refused to campaign against him. Truth be told Selwyn was more sympatico politically with the conservative Parris than the much more liberal Harris.

Harris crushed Parris in 1974 in the “Watergate elections”, and set about consolidating control of the area by purging dissident elements He knew he could not control Selwyn, so a primary opponent was needed. Chuck Colgan stepped into the ring, probably eager to get off the County Board but stay in politics.

Selwyn lost the primary, Colgan went to the Senate, and Harris got his purge. Harris held the seat until 1980, when he lost it back to Parris in the Reagan election, then lost again in a 1982 rubber match.

Here is where it gets interesting…the first of the Arab oil embargoes had already kicked in-older readers will remember the odd/even gas rationing, and between that and the Kepone clean-up in Hopewell state funds were limited. The GA was looking for places to cut or reassign funds. Ed Wiley decided there was no pressing reason to widen Va. 234 way up in Godless Northern Virginia, and saw no reason why the man who beat his friend should get the political benefit of the widening. So Ed Wiley moved the improvement down the schedule, where it languished for another decade or two.

Some might question this, and ask for proof of Selwyn’s clout…all I can offer is that upon being defeated the Democrat Selwyn Smith was appointed Virginia Director of Public Safety by Democrat turned GOP Governor Mills Godwin, then reappointed by GOP governor John Dalton. When a circuit court seat came open in Prince William in the late seventies, the General Assembly ignored the recommendations of the PWCo Bar Association and chose Selwyn to hold the seat…a combination of events unlikely to occur to someone without clout in Richmond.

That is the story-or at least the way it was always told at the old People’s Barbershop in Old Town Manassas.

Born Quitting?

For all his talk of being a fighter of the Scots-Irish bloodline, Mr. Webb apparently does have the ability to let personal anger get in the way sometimes. See http://kilosparksitup.blogspot.com/2006/07/jim-webb-1988.html for a view of the 1988 NY Times editorial discussing Webb's resignation as Sec/Navy.

Not surpisingly, the folks at Raising Kaine ( see http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3659) claim this is simply an attempt at "Swiftboating" Webb...setting aside the fact that RK has effectively become a Webb supported campaign blog, it takes little to recognize that the GOP quotes they offer to show Webb's resignation was honorable are in fact the typical things that officials say to make a situation go away and not give any more attention to a quitter than they have to.

Of course, RK doesn't go into the matter of why, if President Reagan thought Webb was right, did Reagan not sack Carlucci and keep Webb...so we will have to read and grin at this little bit of analytical two stepping by RK. On the other hand, we must guffaw at the thought of the GOP using the hated NY Times editorial page as a tool to attack an already weakened Jim Webb.

Great Movies coming up in 2006!

We have got some good movies coming up...take a look at the trailers for these films that will come out in the 2nd half of 2006...

All the Kings Men
http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/allthekingsmen/index.html

Rocky Balboa, or more commonly called Rocky VI
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/rockybalboa.html

Although it is no longer in pastels, Miami Vice is back...but will Phil Collins be on the soundtrack?
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/miamivice.html;
_ylt=AqasIzpcXySonSTXloJ5yhZfVXcA

And this from Russell Crow-A Good Year
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/agoodyear.html

Floyd Landis Rocks!

He might be wearing yellow and not polka dots, but Floyd Landis is definitely the King of the Mountain, and now the King of the Tour de France!

I am a long time sports fan...but I have never seen a comeback like he gave in Stage 17 in the Alps, held the distance in Stage 18, and scored big in the Stage 19 Time Trial.

Helluva job, Floyd, Helluva job!

Depends on your point of view

By now you have likely seen the magic World Cup moment when French hero Zidane headbutted an Italian player who-by his own admission-had insulted Zidane's mother and sister.

However, it now appears there are multiple ways to view the incident-see http://www.theregister.com/2006/07/13/zidane_headbutt_outrage/

Is Jim the new Maurice?

George Santayana wrote his way into Bartlett’s Quotations with “…when experience is not retained, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Santayana's works are not widely read in Virginia, at least not in the political realm.

You may be familiar with the scenario. A major political party faces an exceptionally tough candidate in the fall elections. They are desperate for a candidate who can bring excitement to the race and put pressure on the opposition, a man who is being mentioned as a potential President of the USA. In a breathtaking leap of faith they choose not to select a tried and true party regular, a man who was a long time contributor and Washington insider. Instead, they choose a charismatic figure with only loose ties to their party who is seen as a way to energize the party and perhaps pull the upset of the century.

Sound familiar?

When Virginia Democrats narrowly chose Jim Webb over Harris Miller to oppose George Allen in the 2006 US Senate election in Virginia, they moved over well plumbed territory…the GOP passed this way almost twenty years ago.

Few Virginians remember Maurice Dawkins. In fact, more folks probably remember Steve Miller’s “Maurice” and his ” pompitous of love” than remember Maurice Dawkins. He only rates a stub in at Wikipedia.com, not a full article. Mr. Dawkins has not been involved in Virginia politics for nearly a generation, and passed away in October 2001.

But Maurice Dawkin’s senate candidacy might be the template by which Jim Webb should not run his campaign.

Dawkins was an African-American minister and civil rights activist. He was a former president of the LA NAACP, and was the West Coast coordinator the Dr. King’s March on Washington in 1963. He responded to the conservative self-reliance message of Ronald Reagan, switched parties, and became an active republican. He ran for the Virginia GOP nomination for Lt. Governor in 1985, running third of five behind John Chichester and Marshall Coleman. His oratory and stump skills made him a bright star.

Three years later former Governor Chuck Robb announced for the US Senate seat that was being vacated by Paul Trible (who-although he denied it-seemed to be bailing out for fear of losing to Robb. Trible said he wanted to spend more time with his family...so much so that he turned around and ran for governor in 1989). John Warner confidant and long time GOP activist Andy Wahlquist announced for the GOP nomination. Many feared his less than fiery persona would not be enough to press Robb. The idea was to at least keep Robb tied down to Virginia and prevent him from campaigning outside the Commonwealth in pursuit of a future Democratic presidential nomination.

Then someone remembered what a great speaker and motivator Maurice Dawkins was…plus he was black! What a marvelous candidate to put up, one who could motivate and mobilize the party, and also strike at a core democratic constituency!...

…and the sirens began to sing, ” Run, Maurice, Run! We’ll back you! We’ll raise money for you! With the GOP base and the black vote you can surely pull, you can win this race! Run, Maurice, Run!”

So the party threw the dice, and Dawkins, who was nominated by convention in 1988. He waved a baseball bat as he accepted the nomination, promising to put the wood to Chuck Robb.

That never happened. His campaign was hopelessly amateurish, the base never responded to him, the hoped for inroads into the African American vote never happened, and the massive fundraising that was promised didn’t.

Robb beat Dawkins 71%-28%, setting the level of the GOP base vote for a generation…and in a race where GHW Bush crushed Dukakis in Virginia.

It’s 18 years later…the GOP has incumbent Senator (and former governor) George Allen seeking reelection, and potentially the GOP presidential nomination in 2008. The Democrats, desperate for a candidate who can beat up on George Allen, reach beyond party regular Harris Miller, a long-time contributor and party regular.

...and the sirens began to sing...

In a heated-and even vicious- primary chose James Webb, former Reagan Secretary of the Navy and endorser of George Allen in 2000. The Democrats did not seem to think Miller could pressure Allen, and chose Webb, former republican appointee who could motivate and mobilize the party, and theoretically make inroads into some core GOP constituencies.

Webb seems to strike a chord with many he meets, but his campaign machinery has been a mess, even amateurish. As of the 7-4-2006 time frame, his fundraising lags far behind Allen.

Webb is going to run better than Dawkins, this we can all be certain of. Nonethless, the parallels to date between Dawkins and Webb are striking.

It is still summer, and there is no doubt in today’s polarized atmosphere that democrats will come out in force for their nominees in November and that Webb will score far better than Dawkins. However, 48% of the vote loses just as neatly as 28% of the vote.

It will be interesting to see if in November Webb manages to write a new page in Virginia history, or serves as a hyperlink to days gone by and is remembered as the second coming of Maurice Dawkins
*********************

Postscript: It is suggested below that I misused the word "Enervate". To my chagrin, Democrat from Arlington is right on the money. On the first point, you are absolutely correct, and it will be changed.

To those tuning in late, I used the word "enervate", which I have always though a derivative of "energize". It is actually a synonym of deplete.

Dictionary.com says ["Sometimes people mistakenly use enervate to mean “to invigorate” or “to excite” by assuming that this word is a close cousin of the verb energize. In fact enervate does not come from the same source as energize (Greek energos, “active”). It comes from Latin nervus, “sinew.” Thus enervate means “to cause to become ‘out of muscle’,” that is, “to weaken or deplete of strength.”]...and the early phrase "enervate and energize" has been amended to just read "energize"

On his/her latter point...nope, that stays.

All Because He Couldn't read

I got this from the cache of a lost link, then on to the real link. For those who enjoy stand-up comedy it is a recollection of some great lost voices. For those interested in education, it offers a cautionary tale about the importance of fundamental things-like reading. If Charles Barnett could read, where would Eddie Murphy be today?
##################################################

The History of Comedy: Five Who Might Have Changed the Game
By Jim Mendrinos
TWO DRINK MINIMUM Issue 10 June 2004
http://twodrinkmin.com/issue10

--------------------------------------------------
When looking back at a time you've lived through, it's amazing how much you remember that never makes the history books. Often, those that history remembers are not the performers and personalities who dominated the era. Having grown up as a comedian in the '80s, I can tell you there is a handful of brilliant comics whom time has forgotten.

Some were overlooked because they were the last generation of pure standups. They were artists not particularly designed to do sitcoms and movies, but rather were at their best with a mic in front of an audience. Some of these comics still tour, usually appearing in bigger rooms as opening acts. Some have retired or gone into writing. A few passed too soon.

Among those who died in the late '80s and early '90s, there was a core group that was solidly on the rise. They were dominant figures in stand-up comedy, especially on the East Coast. When you were booked with them, you knew you'd watch every show, because each would be a masterpiece and you would become a better comic just by watching them.

Charlie Barnett will be the most remembered of this bunch, but only as the answer to the trivia question, "Why did Eddie Murphy get Saturday Night Live?" "Because Charlie Barnett couldn't read." He wasn't smooth, but he was a performer you couldn't take your eyes off of. Sure, Barnett wound up doing TV and film, and he even did some headline dates in comedy clubs. He was great in whatever medium he was in, but in the park he was fluid. More then any comic I've ever seen, Barnett created a dialogue with the entire audience. Every face in the crowd felt like they were part of the show. Barnett would incorporate every nuance of an audience to give them the exact show they wanted. He never failed.

Rick Aviles was another such comic. He was a gravel-throated fast-talker who kept his foot pressed to the floor the entire time he was on stage. He was starting to make a name for himself as an actor when he passed, most notably as Willie Lopez in the film Ghost, but the true brilliance of Aviles could only be felt on a comedy stage.

The Bitter End was the stage where you most wanted to see him. This Village landmark still did comedy during the '80s, and Aviles was the king of Tuesday nights. Why wouldn't he be? Aviles talked about a young, urban culture, about kids scoring drugs in the park or having to deal with pigeons. He spoke about a life The Bitter End audience could understand.

Even more then the material, the audience connected with Aviles. He was a huge presence on stage: lanky, fluid and often supporting a stingy brim hat like he wore on his HBO special, Aviles was a master of control. Sometimes he would relentlessly pound the crowd with jokes, but at a moment's notice he would weave an elaborate story that mixed comedy and pathos. He was perhaps the best performer of his generation.

Ronnie Shakes was a throwback. His style was rapid-fire one-liners built around a theme, like a smoother version of Dangerfield. Every line was crisp; every joke perfect in both construction and delivery. Even when you saw him break in new material at Catch a Rising Star, it looked polished.

You didn't want to see Shakes in clubs; his act was built for television. He was the perfect six-minute spot: in short sets in front of a camera, Shakes' one-liners told stories. You were lured into enjoying the rhythm of his jokes and the cadence of his voice. The construction of each line could get repetitious at longer club sets, but on television he was perfect.

His first Tonight Show spot might be the best-constructed TV spot ever. Each line seemed to get an applause break. When he was silent between jokes, his twitches and ticks got laughs. There was a logic and flow that many comics have tried to mimic when performing on television, but few have mastered it. In a word, it was flawless.

Dennis Wolfberg was what many comics who came after him wanted to be: an all-around great stand-up comic. Wolfberg used vocal contortions, bulging eyes and short bursts of energy to frame some of the best-crafted material in the world. He was a consummate comic who, even after he became famous, frequently returned to the stage to work out new material.

More often than not the stage he returned to, and the stage that comics wanted to see him on, was The Comic Strip. It was more than a club for Wolfberg, it was a gym. He seemed to be putting new material through its paces every time he hit the stage. Comics would crowd into the sound booth or flood the balcony to watch him. Some nights there would be more comics than audience members.

Wolfberg was fresh every time you saw him. He kept himself interested by constantly bringing new material and new life into his act; you could watch him dozens of times and never see the same set twice. His love for stand up was evident every time he stepped on stage.

Bob Woods was not nearly as accomplished as the other comics I've mentioned, but he was a powerhouse, as well as one of the best-received comedians of his time. He was a huge man who did impressions that sometimes were so dead-on it felt like he was going beyond mimicking; he seemed to be channeling.

You wanted to work with Woodsie at East Side. You'd sit with him there at the bar and pound drinks while he held court and told tall tales. As the audience filed in, they'd greet him like they were welcoming a good friend. Woods was a walking party, and everybody in the audience was invited. The party may have just gotten started at the bar, but when he hit the stage it was in full swing.

Woods did impressions of both men and women. When you'd see a perfect Edith Bunker or Granny from the Beverly Hillbillies come from the mouth of this behemoth, the incongruity would floor you. Woods was a larger-than-life figure in the mold of a Jackie Gleason, and he was always fun.

Each of these performers had their own special way of being brilliant. They are united in the fact that they were each cut down in their prime. Though they may never be as revered as Hicks or Kinison, each left a legacy of laughter and comedy that can still be seen today, even by those who never saw the originators.
********************************

sic transit gloria mundi...

It's the Time of the Season for...Tabiya's???

Mid-summer is here, and we are about to go into the tabiya period of elections.

Huh? Ta-What?!

Let me explain…

Long before I followed politics I played tournament chess. Tabiya is an Arabic word that at one time was used to refer to the beginning positions of the chess pieces. As openings became better analyzed and for longer sequences of moves, tabiya is used to refer to a position several moves into an opening that reflects known analysis and marked the point where the original game actually begins. In some openings, the tabiya might be reached in five moves…in others it might be closer to 20.

With the first polls on the Virginia Senate race being released, and the first general election period finance reports coming due soon, we are encountering certain acts that are preordained and so predictable as to constitute political Tabiyas.

The first tabiya occurs in polling, and the moves are as follow: A poll is released. If the results are in your favor, you applaud the veracity of the poll and its process and claim it shows magnificent progress by your campaign. If it does not go in your favor, you attack the methodology, the pollster, or say that if it was accurate it was taken during a time period that was unrepresentative or was taken before some big media buy, major event, etc., that was so important as to render the poll results moot.

The polling tabiya can be executed with equal skill by either incumbent or challenger. The second tabiya is in fundraising, and is more likely to be used by the challenger. The finance reports come in, and one side has raised more than the other. If candidate A has raised more than candidate B overall, but B led for the period-no matter how small the difference-candidate B will trumpet this as proof of the growing velocity of their campaign. If candidate A has raised more money overall than candidate B, and has out raised candidate B during the time period, candidate B will spin the result as simply the logical outcome of some strength candidate A has (incumbency, personal wealth, etc.) and say the results in now way reflect the mood of the district.

Next is the statistical tabiya, and is typically executed by challengers. The challenger finds some statistical “fact”, and claims it is symptomatic of some greater ill. My favorite one is where a challenger to a long time incumbent claims said incumbent is in the pocket of an industry, proof of which is in the incumbent taking x $$ from said industry in campaign donations. This tabiya is the most misleading, because it is not put in a frame of reference. Example: Challenger says incumbent-a four term senator-is in the pocket of the Coal operators because they have accepted $100,000 from said industry. This type of claim will be seen widely throughout the summer and fall. However, it fails to note the following:

*What % this sum reflects of the total donations the incumbent has received
OR
*What % this sum reflects of the total donations made by the industry
OR
*How the challenger arrived at that sum

Instead, it is just a bald claim without frame of reference. In fact, the intrepid challenger can make multiple claims on the same donation.

Example: The CEO of Dixie Trucking donates $2000.00 to Long Term Incumbent. Dixie Trucking hauls coal. It is also hauls poultry and textiles, although presumably not in the same run. It is not unusual in the statistical tabiya for the challenger will make charges, and lump that single $2K contribution into multiple claims that the incumbent is alternately in the pocket of the coal industry, the poultry industry, the trucking industry, and the textile industry.

So watch and enjoy for…

• The polling tabiya…
• The fundraising tabiya…
• The statistical tabiya…

All coming soon to a political campaign in your neighborhood!