• 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.

Cuccinelli asks colleges to rescind policies protecting gay state employees

richarcm

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,182
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
hunter45 wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Ha! Cooch is a precocious loudmouth who can't help but spew his "legal opinion" on any hot button issue he knows of, from climate change -- to discrimination -- to the President's birthplace.

So recently elected, he is already a laughing-stock, and he is dragging the Commonwealth with him. And when called on his unnecessary gobbledegook, he hides behind the excuse of "legal analysis."

I think -- givenCooch's prediliction for legal Tomfoolerly -- we probably could get a favorableopinion out of him on open carryon campuses.

And with that, politically, set the case for Open Carry state-wide way back . . . .

Your username fits you well. You sound like a jackass.
Guilty as charged! Now perhaps you have something substantive to say. . .
As substantive as your montage of clever and witty attempts to insult "Cooch" without really stating any specific details?
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

richarcm wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
hunter45 wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Ha! Cooch is a precocious loudmouth who can't help but spew his "legal opinion" on any hot button issue he knows of, from climate change -- to discrimination -- to the President's birthplace.

So recently elected, he is already a laughing-stock, and he is dragging the Commonwealth with him. And when called on his unnecessary gobbledegook, he hides behind the excuse of "legal analysis."

I think -- givenCooch's prediliction for legal Tomfoolerly -- we probably could get a favorableopinion out of him on open carryon campuses.

And with that, politically, set the case for Open Carry state-wide way back . . . .

Your username fits you well. You sound like a jackass.
Guilty as charged! Now perhaps you have something substantive to say. . .
As substantive as your montage of clever and witty attempts to insult "Cooch" without really stating any specific details?
e.g.:


http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-march-9-2010/gaywatch---virginia-edition

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/virginia-files-challenge-to-e-p-a-greenhouse-gas-regulation/

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2010/03/calm-down-people-it-was-all-hypothetical.html
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
richarcm wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
hunter45 wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Ha! Cooch is a precocious loudmouth who can't help but spew his "legal opinion" on any hot button issue he knows of, from climate change -- to discrimination -- to the President's birthplace.

So recently elected, he is already a laughing-stock, and he is dragging the Commonwealth with him. And when called on his unnecessary gobbledegook, he hides behind the excuse of "legal analysis."

I think -- givenCooch's prediliction for legal Tomfoolerly -- we probably could get a favorableopinion out of him on open carryon campuses.

And with that, politically, set the case for Open Carry state-wide way back . . . .

Your username fits you well. You sound like a jackass.
Guilty as charged! Now perhaps you have something substantive to say. . .
As substantive as your montage of clever and witty attempts to insult "Cooch" without really stating any specific details?
e.g.:


http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-march-9-2010/gaywatch---virginia-edition

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/virginia-files-challenge-to-e-p-a-greenhouse-gas-regulation/

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2010/03/calm-down-people-it-was-all-hypothetical.html
Good points. Go argue with Sailor Bob. You two ought to get along!
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

peter nap wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Not worth repeating
Good points. Go argue with Sailor Bob. You two ought to get along!
You insult Sailor Bob.

Ken Cucinnelli does not make the laws nor provided the wording therein - the GA does that. He "reads" the law.

More to the point - effectively nobody loses by way of his response. There is much to do about nothing.

Yata hey
 

richarcm

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,182
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
peter nap wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Not worth repeating
Good points. Go argue with Sailor Bob. You two ought to get along!
You insult Sailor Bob.

Ken Cucinnelli does not make the laws nor provided the wording therein - the GA does that. He "reads" the law.

More to the point - effectively nobody loses by way of his response. There is much to do about nothing.

Yata hey
The Democrats are desperate to spin the attention off of them. They need to find a new scapegoat.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
The well-known strategy of the far Left in discrediting their enemies is clearly explained in Rules for Radicals:

Rule 5:
Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
However, Ken has a real backbone and will not back down from a fight.

One important fact the Left chooses to ignore: the Attorney General cannot act on his own accord regarding policies or opinions. His letter (privileged, by the way) clearly is in response to questions that others asked.

They asked if taxpayer supported Virginia universities have the authority to implement policies to protect GLBT human beings.

He said no. His letter provided the legal authority that backs him up.

The Left choose to bear false witness.
 

richarcm

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,182
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

Repeater wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
The well-known strategy of the far Left in discrediting their enemies is clearly explained in Rules for Radicals:

Rule 5:
Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
However, Ken has a real backbone and will not back down from a fight.

One important fact the Left chooses to ignore: the Attorney General cannot act on his own accord regarding policies or opinions. His letter (privileged, by the way) clearly is in response to questions that others asked.

They asked if taxpayer supported Virginia universities have the authority to implement policies to protect GLBT human beings.

He said no. His letter provided the legal authority that backs him up.

The Left choose to bear false witness.
Trust me. The left is not ignoring anything. Their argument is meant to be irrational because it is only meant to attack the newly elected conservative. They know what Kens' job is and isn't. They don't care. They see that their party is imploding VERY quickly and so they are just trying to find someone on the right to take down with them. Its that simple. Ken just happened to give them the perfect opportunity to make a very irrational and misdirected argument only meant to smear someone who is a conservative. They may be very good at acting dumb sometimes.....but they are really just good liars and actors. They know exactly what it is that they are doing.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

Repeater wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
The well-known strategy of the far Left in discrediting their enemies is clearly explained in Rules for Radicals:

Rule 5:
Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.
However, Ken has a real backbone and will not back down from a fight.
Ken just had this published in the American Spectator:

Liberty Is Finite
By Ken Cuccinelli from the March 2010 issue

"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom
of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those
in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations..."
-- James Madison, June 6, 1788
Speech to the Virginia Convention on Ratifying the Constitution
Although spoken more than two centuries ago, Mr. Madison's words to the Virginia Convention have special resonance today in light of the continuing movement by some to nationalize the nation's health care system. While those championing this radical change in our everyday lives may have the best of intentions, the costs of their proposals are not just financial. Rather, much of what has been proposed would eat away at the very liberty that this nation was founded to protect.

The limits on federal power in the Constitution and its first ten amendments were put there by our Founding Fathers not just to protect citizens from those who would take our liberties at the point of a gun, but also to prevent the gradual encroachments effected by those in power who claim to be serving the greater good.

The entire endeavor is inconsistent with the notion of a limited federal government. Furthermore, the coercion of individual citizens and the co-opting of state legislatures violate the plain text of both the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

In seeking to protect the liberties guaranteed by the Constitution, we are vigorously pursuing freedom for our citizens in the face of a government that, no matter how well intentioned, seeks to expand its power at citizens' expense.

For me, I will stand for liberty.
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

The Coochwrote:
Furthermore, the coercion of individual citizens and the co-opting of state legislatures violate the plain text of both the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"[size=Proponents of liberty must use all of the tools the Constitution provides to defend against this onslaught on our liberty. While the champions of health care centralization will tout their benevolent motives and complain about the inefficiencies and technicalities imposed by various constitutional provisions, citizens should remember that those inefficiencies and technicalities were placed there for a reason -- they are truly the bulwarks of individual liberty. If we ignore them to allow for the perceived crisis of the moment, they and the freedoms they protect are lost forever. ][/size]
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"[size=In seeking to protect the liberties guaranteed by the Constitution, we are vigorously pursuing freedom for our citizens in the face of a government that, no matter how well intentioned, seeks to expand its power at citizens' expense. ][/size]
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"[size=The bottom line is that fighting the further centralization of health care isn't just about money, it's a fight to preserve liberty, and it's a fight worth having. ][/size]
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"[size=For me, I will stand for liberty. ][/size]

In other words, if the Health Care Act passes, Cooch, with trumpets ablaze, intends to file a Quixotic lawsuit in Virginia's name that will seek to overturn 150 years of established Constitutional precedent andinvalidatethe federal law.

He will fail. He will waste Virginia taxpayer money. But he doesn't care: He is guided by his "higher" ideological calling.

Of course, it is not always such a waste to tilt at windmills. But what we expect of an Attorney General is to have the prudence to pass at least a few of them by: otherwise he (and we, as Virginians) are quite fair game for the Jon Stewarts of the world. It doesn't take Saul Alinsky to remind anyone that the escapades of crusading Cooch attacking every Constitutional windmill in thename of conservative purityhas some comic value.:p

So whenCuccinelli decided the sound off on GBLT issues most "conservatives" ran for distance or for cover, and Cooch quickly found himself embracing McDonnell's Executive Decision to the contrary.

Nowwhen it comes to open carry on campuses, and Cooch is asked whether some kind of a Dillon Rule ties the hands of school authorities to regulate studentcarry offirearms, you can bet the indefatigable Cooch will "climb every legal mountain" to reach a "Constitutional" opinion. Butthat probably means takingyet another "hot button" decision out of the hands oflocal decision-makers.

With Cooch's ideological reputation, how do you think that will fly in the state legislature?

I question whether having himpurport to decide the issue over the heads of local authorities is in the interests of gun rights.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
I question whether having himpurport to decide the issue over the heads of local authorities is in the interests of gun rights.
Are we to understand then that you do not see state preemption in Virginia as being total?

Yata hey
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
I question whether having himpurport to decide the issue over the heads of local authorities is in the interests of gun rights.
Are we to understand then that you do not see state preemption in Virginia as being total?

Yata hey
Total for local governments, but not preempting universities regulating student conduct.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
In other words, if the Health Care Act passes, Cooch, with trumpets ablaze, intends to file a Quixotic lawsuit in Virginia's name that will seek to overturn 150 years of established Constitutional precedent andinvalidatethe federal law.
Do you really deem it wise to go down this road?!?

TFred
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
I question whether having himpurport to decide the issue over the heads of local authorities is in the interests of gun rights.
Are we to understand then that you do not see state preemption in Virginia as being total?

Yata hey
Total for local governments, but not preempting universities regulating student conduct.
Do not state universities derive all of their power and authority from the General Assembly. How are they autonomous?

How about for state agencies. Are they too autonomous?

Yata hey
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

TFred wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
In other words, if the Health Care Act passes, Cooch, with trumpets ablaze, intends to file a Quixotic lawsuit in Virginia's name that will seek to overturn 150 years of established Constitutional precedent andinvalidatethe federal law.
Do you really deem it wise to go down this road?!?

TFred
I think this issue was resolved when Washington and Hamilton won an argument with Jefferson and Madison over the "General Welfare" clause, although there is some contrary authority. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Butler
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
I question whether having himpurport to decide the issue over the heads of local authorities is in the interests of gun rights.
Are we to understand then that you do not see state preemption in Virginia as being total?

Yata hey
Total for local governments, but not preempting universities regulating student conduct.
Do not state universities derive all of their power and authority from the General Assembly. How are they autonomous?

How about for state agencies. Are they too autonomous?

Yata hey
Check Code of Virginia 23-38.91. Makes colleges and universities somewhat autonomous.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
I question whether having himpurport to decide the issue over the heads of local authorities is in the interests of gun rights.
Are we to understand then that you do not see state preemption in Virginia as being total?

Yata hey
Total for local governments, but not preempting universities regulating student conduct.
Do not state universities derive all of their power and authority from the General Assembly. How are they autonomous?

How about for state agencies. Are they too autonomous?

Yata hey
Check Code of Virginia 23-38.91. Makes colleges and universities somewhat autonomous.
Familiar with it.

Somewhat but not quite - still believe that they exceed their authority. Nothing therein changes that for me.

Yata hey
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

Law which delegates "full responsibility for the management of the institution" subject to certain conditions seems a pretty broad delegation -- certainly broader than what local governments get
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
Law which delegates "full responsibility for the management of the institution" subject to certain conditions seems a pretty broad delegation -- certainly broader than what local governments get
"may enter into negotiation with the Governor to develop a management agreement"

Would seem to leave the element of control beyond the sole control of the colleges.

Yata hey
 
Top