Virginia House of Delegates 2005 Elections

Keeping You up to date on the status of Virginia's 2005 Delegate races!

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Bill Bolling Wins

We can now project Bill Bolling as defeating Sean Connaughton to be the Lt. Governor nominee for the GOP.

The GOP ticket is now complete with Kilgore-Bolling-McDonnell


At 7:53 PM, Anonymous RD said...

You're calling that without PWC coming in??

I'm bolling supporter ... but very unsure of NOVA results

At 7:55 PM, Blogger Not Larry Sabato said...

We held out for a little bit on that point, but the lead is too large elsewhere to overcome.

At 7:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Get ready for Katzen II... against a whacko like Bolling, Byrne could actually win.

At 8:00 PM, Anonymous RD said...

Bolling is no wacko - Byrne, however, could qualify

At 8:13 PM, Anonymous Annie in Nova said...

Is Boiling that wacko? I'm pretty worried that Byrne won. She's a liberal Catholic who moved to NOVA from Salt Lake City in 1971 and I wasn't impressed with her when she was my congressperson 1993-1995. I can see the push polling now -- "Is the fact that Kaine and Byrne are Papists from out of state going to affect your opinion of the candidates?" Also the notoriously conservative Arlington Diocese was positively apolectic when Kaine ran for Lt. Gov in 2003 -- imagine the fury over a ticket with not one but two pro-Choice Catholics.

So I'm not sure at all that Boiling will be unpalatable to normally moderate GOPers.

At 8:22 PM, Blogger Ranger03 said...

My prediction: the RNC taps its Catholic outreach efforts in the conservative Arlington and conservative-led Richmond diocese to pull significant numbers of Catholic voters.

According to CNN exit polls, in 2004 Virginia Catholics went 63-36 for Bush. Huge percentage. Look for that to repeat... especially against Byrne.

At 8:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Will the RNC outreach efforts to Catholics bother to deal with the Catholic Church's very strong anti-capital punishment stance or its very strong stance against the U.S. War in Iraq. (To quote the former Cardinal Ratzinger, "if you read the Catechism on just war, and you still think this is a just war, you don't understand the Catechism.") Not likely. Conservative Catholics, sadly aided and abbetted by Church leadership, are just as much cafeteria Catholics as they accuse progressive Catholics of being. And leave to the RNC, which cares so much about religion, to sow the seeds of division between progressive and conservative Catholics just to win an election.

At 8:54 PM, Blogger Maura in VA said...

There are some Catholics in Virginia who still remember that the teachings of Jesus were about love, mercy, and caring for the poor, the dispossessed, the sick, and the forgotten, not issues of sexual behavior. Those Catholics will still vote Democratic when issues regarding reproduction are balanced with others.

Plus, having a pro-choice woman on the ticket will definitely boost turnout among women, which Kaine surely needs to win BIG in order to win.

At 9:41 PM, Blogger Ranger03 said...

Got news for you both: state elections don't determine foreign policy.

More to the point, the teaching on the killing of unborn children is much more solid, black and white, and set in stone than that of the death penalty.

Kerry couldn't carry off his Katholicism, and neither will Kaine or Byrne.

At 9:55 PM, Blogger Ranger03 said...

Oh, and don't go quoting the catechism, particularly not if you're trying to make the case that the war in Iraq is more immoral than abortion.

Paragraph #2271:
"Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law"

"Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense."

" From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a "criminal" practice (GS 27 ยง 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life."

"Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being."

On just war, para. 2309:
"The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

- there must be serious prospects of success;

- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good."

We can debate the points, but there is nothing in the catechism on just war that clearly and explicitly ruled out military action against Saddam.

At 10:53 PM, Blogger Hirons said...

The most meaningless job in the world is going to produce the biggest fireworks in this year's general election. Both parties selected the strongest party line candidates.

At 10:55 PM, Blogger Hirons said...

Oh year, and although I was a Connaughton supporter I do support the entire ticket. Give 'em hell Bill!

At 10:46 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great, concise, and logical argument Shipwrecked. And Hirons, as a Bolling supporter I would have done the same had Connaughton won. Something Russ Potts ought to think about.


Post a Comment

<< Home