• 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.

Time: VA AG "boasts of bucking" VCDL

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
From Time magazine's issue of January 10, 2011, on the newsstand now, a Briefing article written by Alex Altman on page 16.

All in a Year's Work

The Cuccinelli Doctrine comes with asterisks. He boasts of bucking the gun lobby when he affirmed George Mason's right to limit firearms on campus.

Yet, later in the article, Alex quotes:

I am universally skeptical of the gathering and exercise of of government power.

Observations:

  • This assumes Alex means VCDL when he writes "the gun lobby"
  • Why would the AG boast of what he's doing? Is Ken actually of proud of continuing what Bill Mims started?
  • Why isn't the AG "skeptical" of GMU's exercise of of government power in limiting the RKBA on campus?

Who's the real Ken Cuccinelli?
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Here's an important lesson for all Attorneys General

college_9042.jpg
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
Screwed by the Cooch, part 8

Can there be any doubt?

Did you expect anything less from Judas Cuccinelli?

The Cooch is all about his political ambitions, not about right and wrong.

He thinks that he will be portrayed as being highly moral for putting his "duty" (defend GMU) above his "preference" (support gun rights).

What the article really says is that he is a conniving politician whose moral compass is completely screwed up.

This will anger gun owners far more than a typically open and honest gun grabber would. Judas Cooch is a traitor and in another era we would tar and feather the SOB!

Live Free or Die,
Thundar
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
The Cuccinelli Doctrine comes with asterisks. He boasts of bucking the gun lobby when he affirmed George Mason's right to limit firearms on campus.

Typical BS. A government agency does not have rights, it has powers. Powers that are delegated to the government by the people. And those powers cannot remove or infringe on the rights of the people. One of those rights of the people is the right to keep and bear arms, a right so important that the people chose to put it in both the US Constitution as well as that of our Commonwealth.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Whoa! whoa! whoa!

Never, never, ever accept anything Time says at face value. Never.

1) They are notorious for distortion. The list of people who've reported deliberate distortions by Time is long. Also, people familiar with various issues--meaning they know enough about the picture surrounding a given issue to spot Time's distortions--have come forward across the years to straighten things out.

2) This Time report tends to drive a wedge between the VA AG and gun owners. This is the sort of thing that would need to be double-verified before being accepted.

All it would take is for Cuccinelli to have reported the GMU business straightforwardly, then Time distorts it into a boast. Suddenly, gun owners are at the AG's throat--to the gleeful satisfaction of Time.

People who have first-hand knowledge about Time's penchant for distortion over the years put Time in same category as the National Enquirer.
 
Last edited:

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Whoa! whoa! whoa!

Never, never, ever accept anything Time says at face value. Never.

1) They are notorious for distortion. The list of people who've reported deliberate distortions by Time is long. Also, people familiar with various issues--meaning they know enough about the picture surrounding a given issue to spot Time's distortions--have come forward across the years to straighten things out.

2) This Time report tends to drive a wedge between the VA AG and gun owners. This is the sort of thing that would need to be double-verified before being accepted.

All it would take is for Cuccinelli to have reported the GMU business straightforwardly, then Time distorts it into a boast. Suddenly, gun owners are at the AG's throat--to the gleeful satisfaction of Time.

People who have first-hand knowledge about Time's penchant for distortion over the years put Time in same category as the National Enquirer.

Indeed. This requires some additional observations:

  • Was the interview in person or over the phone?
  • Was the interview recorded?
  • If the AG claims he was misquoted, can he prove it?
  • Did Ken also record the interview?

Regarding a Leftist-controlled mag like Time, either decline to be interviewed, or be very careful and independently record the interview for veracity, just in case it comes down to He Said - He said.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Indeed. This requires some additional observations:

  • Was the interview in person or over the phone?
  • Was the interview recorded?
  • If the AG claims he was misquoted, can he prove it?
  • Did Ken also record the interview?
Regarding a Leftist-controlled mag like Time, either decline to be interviewed, or be very careful and independently record the interview for veracity, just in case it comes down to He Said - He said.

(Not a criticism directed at Repeater. Just a comment to readers in general.)

In a controversy involving Time, I would throw the burden of proof onto Time, given that publication's track record. Can Time prove it? If not, disregard it. No, really. I mean that. Creating or cementing unnecessary disharmony between the AG and gun owners is too important to avoid.

I don't like the AG's stance about GMU, and some of his other positions, but the fact remains he was pro-self-defense and effective (not just lip-service) in the General Assembly. Caution when dealing with him after the GMU brief is different than being upset over something a totally unreliable third party said, and then gun owners burning the AG in effigy, possibly turning a somewhat-ally into an enemy or complete non-supporter of self-defense rights.

We already know to be cautious with the AG because of the GMU brief. So, the "boast" angle of Time's report, without proof from Time, should be ignored.

Think about it for a moment, too. Why would Time even bother to report it as a boast? Were the other elements of his record reported as boasts?
 
Last edited:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
(Not a criticism directed at Repeater. Just a comment to readers in general.)

In a controversy involving Time, I would throw the burden of proof onto Time, given that publication's track record. Can Time prove it? If not, disregard it. No, really. I mean that. Creating or cementing unnecessary disharmony between the AG and gun owners is too important to avoid.

I don't like the AG's stance about GMU, and some of his other positions, but the fact remains he was pro-self-defense and effective (not just lip-service) in the General Assembly. Caution when dealing with him after the GMU brief is different than being upset over something a totally unreliable third party said, and then gun owners burning the AG in effigy, possibly turning a somewhat-ally into an enemy or complete non-supporter of self-defense rights.

We already know to be cautious with the AG because of the GMU brief. So, the "boast" angle of Time's report, without proof from Time, should be ignored.

Think about it for a moment, too. Why would Time even bother to report it as a boast? Were the other elements of his record reported as boasts?

I happen to agree with Citizen insomuch as it needs to be taken with considerable skepticism..

BUT, because of the article and other recent actions by his Assistant AG's, I'm going to see if I can get a pre-lobby day interview with him.

It's no secret that I like Ken personally and that O.V. N. endorsed him during the election while deliberately NOT endorsing McDonnell. These questions need to be answered though.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
The Cuccinelli Doctrine comes with asterisks. He boasts of bucking the gun lobby when he affirmed George Mason's right to limit firearms on campus.
Yep, Time has by no means earned the benefit of the doubt, but rather has earned extensive doubt...

Quite simple note to the author: "Cite please..."

It's a sad state of affairs when an internet forum like OCDO has higher reporting standards than a nearly ninety year-old national "news" magazine.

TFred
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
Before even reading past the first post it occured to me that Time was perhaps attemting to stoke the fires of dischord between the AG and gun owners. Have I been satisfied with the AG in suits like that of GMU? No, but I'm not willing to take the report of a filthy rag such as Time magazine to allow further distrust.
 

Tess

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
3,837
Location
Bryan, TX
Whoa! whoa! whoa!

Never, never, ever accept anything Time says at face value. Never.

1) They are notorious for distortion. The list of people who've reported deliberate distortions by Time is long. Also, people familiar with various issues--meaning they know enough about the picture surrounding a given issue to spot Time's distortions--have come forward across the years to straighten things out.

2) This Time report tends to drive a wedge between the VA AG and gun owners. This is the sort of thing that would need to be double-verified before being accepted.

All it would take is for Cuccinelli to have reported the GMU business straightforwardly, then Time distorts it into a boast. Suddenly, gun owners are at the AG's throat--to the gleeful satisfaction of Time.

People who have first-hand knowledge about Time's penchant for distortion over the years put Time in same category as the National Enquirer.

And I would maintain that those who have seen evidence of Politician Cuccinelli's actions as they fail to reflect his apparent promises know that there is very likely a pebble of truth in the article.

Too soon to tell, but he's gotten a pass from gun owners (and others) way too many times, IMNSHO.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
And I would maintain that those who have seen evidence of Politician Cuccinelli's actions as they fail to reflect his apparent promises know that there is very likely a pebble of truth in the article.

Too soon to tell, but he's gotten a pass from gun owners (and others) way too many times, IMNSHO.

I understand. Tell me more. As for gun owners, all I really know about is the GMU brief and his evasiveness after we howled about it.

I'm not thrilled with his stance on women's reproductive rights.

And, I'm not thrilled with the report that he covered the bare breast on the state seal (if that report is even true--I only know of it from the Time website.)

But, I know very little about him outside of the VCDL information pipeline.

What other reversals, and general politician-type behavoir can you tell us about?
 
Last edited:

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
I've yet to discover the "perfect politician" who is a mirror image of myself - so I'll take the best of the lot and hopefully the citizens will have a positive sway on his or her positions. They each have 2, 4, or 6 years before they can be replaced, and that should probably happen more than it does.

Time is the equivalent of CNN in print. They seem to orbit around each other in stories and how they deliver such stories. When trying to find the truth on an issue, get it from either Time or CNN (even MSNBC at this rate), and invert it.

Let's put out the torches for now. It is hard to find anyone that you will agree with 100% of the time, but I am not going to use Time as the gold standard for news at any rate. The cover is red for a reason.
 

Tess

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
3,837
Location
Bryan, TX
I've yet to discover the "perfect politician" who is a mirror image of myself - so I'll take the best of the lot and hopefully the citizens will have a positive sway on his or her positions. They each have 2, 4, or 6 years before they can be replaced, and that should probably happen more than it does.

Time is the equivalent of CNN in print. They seem to orbit around each other in stories and how they deliver such stories. When trying to find the truth on an issue, get it from either Time or CNN (even MSNBC at this rate), and invert it.

Let's put out the torches for now. It is hard to find anyone that you will agree with 100% of the time, but I am not going to use Time as the gold standard for news at any rate. The cover is red for a reason.

Keeping the torch lit. Have had it lit, in fact, since the primary, when Politician Cuccinelli sent me hate-filled mail.

If I'm going to protest Cantor for simply refusing to move a fundraiser so that I can attend, why on the gods' green planet would I not protest Cuccinelli for way more egregious violations to gun owners?
 

Tess

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
3,837
Location
Bryan, TX
I understand. Tell me more. As for gun owners, all I really know about is the GMU brief and his evasiveness after we howled about it.

I'm not thrilled with his stance on women's reproductive rights.

And, I'm not thrilled with the report that he covered the bare breast on the state seal (if that report is even true--I only know of it from the Time website.)

But, I know very little about him outside of the VCDL information pipeline.

What other reversals, and general politician-type behavoir can you tell us about?

Citizen, your post requires more time than I have right now, requiring research and citation. I owe it to you, though.
 

VAlitigator

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
39
Location
Richmond, Virginia
I would be very interested to see the AG's response to inquiries about exactly what he said, and then present that to the reporter if it differs greatly.
 

Dutch Uncle

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
1,715
Location
Virginia, USA
Believe it or not, I used to have a subscription for Time ! But I was young then, and little aware of media bias. I know when I stopped my subscription: late 1976. Ironically, I kept may last issue and still have it. It was from Jan 1977, and the feature stories were Carter's inauguration and the threat of "Global Cooling". (I kid you not !) It looks as though Time hasn't changed much.......
 
Top