• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Popcorn time: Cuccinelli Nominated for Virgina Supreme Court

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Well this one is going to be interesting to watch!

Senate Courts panel nominates Ken Cuccinelli for state Supreme Court

The Senate Courts of Justice Committee today placed former Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's name in nomination for the state Supreme Court to succeed Justice Jane Marum Roush.

Sen. Gen H. Sturtevant Jr., R-Richmond, who has thwarted GOP efforts to replace Roush, backed Cuccinelli in committee today and says he would support Cuccinelli on the floor.

Sturtevant could give the GOP the crucial 21st vote it needs to put Cuccinelli on the court.​

TFred
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Why do you feel that way?
Why do I feel that way? Because I've seen both sides of the man and find him inconsistant in his apparent standards.

I was all the way with Cuccinelli in the beginning. Even have a Cuccinelli for president sticker somewhere. He seemed such a strong advocate of things I hold dear.T

Then a bad decision here and waffling there. Also didn't/don't like his near plagerism of another attorney's legal entity/name. Promoting prepaid legal representation (with his firm) did nothing to polish his image.

They could do worse, but frankly I would hope for a better jurist. So yes, I have mixed feelings on this.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I think it's safe to say the gun-haters will go nearly insane protesting his nomination.

TFred

Without the "nearly," that is a ringing endorsement! Even with it, it is a solid plus.

'Sides I didn't say that I would actively oppose such an appointment - only said that I had mixed feelings.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Without the "nearly," that is a ringing endorsement! Even with it, it is a solid plus.

'Sides I didn't say that I would actively oppose such an appointment - only said that I had mixed feelings.
One thing to consider... while I don't remember all the critical details, I do remember that he let gun-owners down a time or two, when he could have made better decisions.

I would like to think that in a Supreme Court justice position, such political influences (which are always at play among those who face reelection, etc.) may be reduced, allowing him to more accurately proceed according to the intent of the Virginia Constitution, which I believe he fully supports.

One can never truly know the heart of another, but when you consider the broad spectrum of potential candidates for a Supreme Court judicial nomination, is there any plausible candidate you would PREFER take that spot?

TFred
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
One thing to consider... while I don't remember all the critical details, I do remember that he let gun-owners down a time or two, when he could have made better decisions.

I would like to think that in a Supreme Court justice position, such political influences (which are always at play among those who face reelection, etc.) may be reduced, allowing him to more accurately proceed according to the intent of the Virginia Constitution, which I believe he fully supports.

One can never truly know the heart of another, but when you consider the broad spectrum of potential candidates for a Supreme Court judicial nomination, is there any plausible candidate you would PREFER take that spot?

TFred
Without any hesitation, my number one draft pick would be Dan Hawes - he even projects the old school image. :)

Unfortunately, I think he would withdraw his name from consideration for many reasons.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Without any hesitation, my number one draft pick would be Dan Hawes - he even projects the old school image. :)

Unfortunately, I think he would withdraw his name from consideration for many reasons.

Actually, that's the one job I'd take. But there's no way The System would seriously consider me. I'm an Old Virginia conservative = an Eighteenth Century British liberal - I believe in the rights of man and limitations on sovereignty and state power, that agents of the state should behave honestly and justly with deference to the limitations of just-plain-folks, and that business ought to be free to do business as long as they're not hurting anybody. I don't think that kind of thinking is allowed. I'd be apt to approve petitions The System would prefer not to have argued. Nope, too much of a social deviant.

Thanks for thinking of me, though.
 
Last edited:

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Cuccinelli was on WMAL this morning. Thinking about all the moving parts here...

Cuccinelli has not ruled out another run for Governor in 2017. We know the GOP Establishment hates him, they abandoned his run for Governor in 2013, leaving us with McAwful, and by less than 3%, even then.

What better way to get him out of their way, in favor of an Establishment candidate in 2017?

They know he can't do as much conservative "damage" on the Supreme Court as he could in the Governor's mansion!

TFred
 
Last edited:

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
And here we go! Didn't take long!

TFred

Opposition to Cuccinelli for state Supreme Court mounts

Lt. Gov. Ralph S. Northam this morning urged defeat of the surprise nomination of Republican Ken Cuccinelli II, a former attorney general, as a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia.

“This is an embarrassment and affront to the people of Virginia and to the judicial process. Ken Cuccinelli has spent his career as an activist trying to outlaw abortion and birth control, denying science and climate change, and aggressively denigrating and denying our LGBT community of basic rights,” said Northam, a Democrat.

[snip]​
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
And just like that, it's over.

TFred

Cuccinelli withdraws name; Senate GOP proposes McCullough for high court

Senate Republicans are now proposing Court of Appeals Judge Stephen R. McCullough of Spotsylvania County for the Supreme Court of Virginia, after former Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli took himself out of the running.

The General Assembly elected McCullough to the Court of Appeals in 2011. His term expires in 2019.

McCullough previously served as senior appellate counsel in the Attorney General's Office.​
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
And here we go! Didn't take long!

TFred

Opposition to Cuccinelli for state Supreme Court mounts

Lt. Gov. Ralph S. Northam this morning urged defeat of the surprise nomination of Republican Ken Cuccinelli II, a former attorney general, as a justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia.

“This is an embarrassment and affront to the people of Virginia and to the judicial process. Ken Cuccinelli has spent his career as an activist trying to outlaw abortion and birth control, denying science and climate change, and aggressively denigrating and denying our LGBT community of basic rights,” said Northam, a Democrat.

[snip]​

I think that Mr. Cuccinelli has a lot in common with the folks who consider themselves "social conservatives" (but they're not the same - a true conservative believes in the supremacy of the Constitution over "traditions" and religious dictates; Mr. Cuccinelli is, in my opinion, a "legal relativist", an appellation that also suits Mr. Obama's nominee for U.S. Sup. Ct.)
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Last edited by a moderator:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
“I have been approached to consider an appointment to the Virginia Supreme Court,” Cuccinelli said in a statement Tuesday evening. “I am humbled and honored to be considered for such a position, but it is not something that my wife and I have previously contemplated
http://www.richmond.com/news/virgin...cle_f1708a66-ab2c-5693-9926-ebab0b9f995c.html ^^



WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED HIM FIRST ????!!

<chuckle>

Looks like we don't even have second-string for Republican politicians in this state. Looks like third-string or junior varsity.

They should take a few lessons from the giants of political history: find or create the leverage, and then offer your opponent one of three choices, all of which you engineered and benefit you. They need to read up on Julius Caesar,* Pompey, Crassus, Octavian, Cicero, Mark Antony. (Well, maybe not Mark Antony.)

------------------------------------------------------

* Do you remember something from high school history class called The First Triumvirate? Julius Caesar approached four men about forming an alliance. The fourth was Rome's greatest orator, a senator named Cicero. Cicero believed in republican government, and turned Caesar down. Of the other two, Pompey was a successful general and had a very large number of troops at his command. Crassus was the a hugely successful businessman, perhaps the richest man in Rome. Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus formed the First Triumvirate--an agreement whereby each agreed not to oppose the other in government. They supported each other in the senate. They worked together. Basically, the three of them ruled Rome by way of their previously agreed cooperation.

Here's the amazing part. Caesar--the architect of the alliance--totally subverted the Roman constitution. In secret, Caesar subverted the Roman constitution, seized the reigns of power, and three men essentially ruled Rome, all while leaving the Roman constitution in place!! To the common people, the Roman constitution was still operational. Of course, the senate figured out what was going on. But, Caesar pulled it off and achieved several of his highest-priority goals.

Now that was a master politician scumbag.

This bunch we've got ruling us today are rank amateurs by comparison.

Oh, I want liberty and freedom. But, if I'm gonna be ruled by suppressive, repressive, self-interested, power-hungry, arrogant slime, I insist on the best. Insist on the best, I always say.

And, this current bunch ain't cutting it. Not at the VA state level. And, certainly not at the national level. Hillary? Pathetic. She wouldn't last ten seconds against Caesar or Cicero. Jeezus! Cicero out-maneuvered an attempt to prosecute him for the deaths of revolutionaries trying to take over Rome. And, Caesar out-maneuvered a concerted attempt to prosecute him for a number of corruption charges. Hillary can't even out-maneuver a simple question of emails at the State Department. Trump? Puh-leeeze. His tactic seems to be bombast.

No, no, no. This will never do. I insist on being suppressed and repressed by the very best. Not this ham-handed crowd we've got today. They're only slightly better than Kim Jong Il of North Korea. Anybody can tell lies and make assertions. How well can they maneuver? How well can they "set up" their opponent, leaving him only the choices they themselves engineered? That's what I want to know.
 
Last edited:
Top