Letter to the Editor: Marro Challenges Vogel Voting Record

Letter to the Editor:

You have done your readers a great service with your series of interviews with Jill Vogel, Shaun Broy and I.  Thank you.  And though you must accept on my word that attacking opponents isn’t my campaign style, my dilemma is whether an opponent’s claims that are exaggerated or simply not true should stand.  I conclude they should not and therefore challenge Mrs. Vogel as follows:

Clarke Daily News - Opinion & Editorial

The 2011 budget bill votes reveal Mrs. Vogel actually supported the budget bills, whereas she claimed she was opposed.  Mrs. Vogel and her conservative Republican colleagues actually left it to the Governor to restore budgets on state trooper overtime (#46), land conservation (#43-4), sexually violent predators (#34) and virtual schools (pertinent to rural broadband, #18).

I also take offense at blithe promises ignoring truth.  So broadband is problematical?  And Mrs. Vogel wants government (meaning taxpayers) to pay when communications companies won’t?  Really?  Why?  We have schools, fund those; and books, and satellite, and iPads and Kindles.

It is this disregard for promising what can’t be delivered that I find objectionable, and likewise pretend endorsements, which are much the same thing.  A letter from four of five Sheriffs in the 27th Senatorial District ostensibly supported Mrs. Vogel.  For those of you taking such letters seriously, the first question is which Sheriff wrote this letter.  Or was it collaborative with each contributing in rotation?  Sheriff Simpson’s computer, dictation equipment or pen apparently wasn’t working since he didn’t sign, or maybe he doesn’t share these sentiments?

The letter is not much more than a posterior covering exercise.  As to substance, the Sheriffs purportedly praise Mrs. Vogel’s support of their efforts, as shown by a bill, SB329, from 2010.  A direct quote reads that “no one has worked harder or done more to support the men and women who protect the public in the Commonwealth”. Huh?  SB329  failed!  Why? Because former Commonwealth Attorneys of Mrs.Vogel’s own party voted against it. And Mrs. Vogel was unpersuasive with her own colleagues in the House to pass it.  And it wasn’t her bill.

Now to the exaggeration no one has done more than Mrs. Vogel.  How’s that possible when the bill used as emblematic of her efforts wasn’t her bill, and didn’t pass.  And her record shows no legislation from Mrs. Vogel on behalf of Sheriffs.  What pertinent legislation she had was largely opposed by Sheriffs, having to do with guns in glove compartments, for instance.  Not a single law enforcement officer in the United States favors guns in the glove compartments.

To now, I didn’t engage in characterizing voting records except to call Mrs. Vogel a loyal soldier moving in lock step with her conservative Republican caucus.  I violated that but won’t  brook exaggerations.  Mrs. Vogel’s record is guns in glove compartments, opposition to universal healthcare, allowing Cuccinelli witch hunts and curtailing women’s reproductive rights.

It’s too bad we won’t be debating this or any other issue since Mrs. Vogel declined debates.  But it’s conservative Republicans who refuse to provide adequate revenue for Sheriffs, the courts, and the medically and economically disadvantaged.  Politics do make strange bedfellows, no?

Donald C. Marro        

The Plains, Virginia 

Mr. Marro is an Independent candidate for Virginia’s 27th District Senate seat

Comments

  1. Another View says:

    Mr. Marro is an interesting candidate. He is wrong as characterizing Jill Vogel as “conservative”; rather the incumbent is “opportunistic”. If she maintains steadfast principles, she has kept them a secret.

    Mr. Marro is not the answer, as his main goal appears to be creating a stir in Richmond. Such would make for great entertainment, but it is hardly a governing philosophy. Mr. Broy is similarly unsuitable, as he is a socialist. Thus, Senator Vogel is much like Mitt Romney; we seem to be stuck with her, despite all dissatisfaction.

    What a shame.

  2. “Mrs. Vogel’s record is guns in glove compartments”

    My wife and I both have these

    “opposition to universal healthcare”

    Yet another entitlement we can’t afford

    “allowing Cuccinelli witch hunts”

    You mean taking an unconstitutional law to court?

    Sounds like the person I’ll be voting for

  3. Hmmmm…. Now I am a unsuitable socialist. It is disappointing that the political rhetoric today seems to be centered all too much around labels. It seems as though DEMOCRAT equals SOCIALIST these days no matter the candidate, so I guess it just come with the turf.

    I do happen to support much of what Mr. Marro has to say in this letter. In a basic examination of the facts, in which he lays out before us all, it’s a wonder why exactly the Sheriffs all came out together to support such a candidate who has done so little, but according to the Sheriffs has done so much to protect us all. When many of them have been critical of Jill Holtzman-Vogel in the recent past.

    I think when “Another View” uses the term “opportunistic” to characterize Vogel. The same term should be used to describe these partisan Sheriffs of our communities. If I remember correctly, Mr. Millholland (one of the Sheriffs who signed the letter supporting Vogel, and now appears in Vogel campaign mailers) was pictured in ads and mailers sent out by the Karen Schultz campaign the last time out, which was critical about Schultz’s opponent and her stances on issues related to fighting crime, her opponent just happened to be Jill Holtzman-Vogel. Opportunistic? You betcha!

    • Could it be the Sheriffs might not 100% agree with everything Jill Vogel has done as a Senator (even I don’t agree with every position), yet they have logically concluded out of the three candidates running she is the one most qualified for the position?

    • Another View says:

      Mr. Broy is the one who supports the President’s agenda. He stated so in the interview, and has said so on other occasions. The President’s agenda is openly socialist and tyrannical. Ergo, if Mr. Broy supports a socialist agenda, he is a socialist. And socialism is a threat to freedom, liberty and Virginia’s principles and traditions.

      • But the Patriot Act and all its civil liberty intrusions, like warrantless wiretaps, is not socialist? Interesting…

        • You mean the same Patriot Act Obama extended?

        • Another View says:

          How is the Patriot Act socialist? Taking over General Motors and Chrysler is socialist. Monitoring, detaining at Guantanamo and killing foreign enemies is just sound national security.

  4. Roscoe Evans says:

    Folks living in Clarke County, home of The Byrd Machine — dedicated to school segregation and maintaining a 19th century social and economic structure — ought to take care about which of Virginia’s principles and traditions they want to uphold.

    There are worse things than socialism, and we’ve seen them right here.

    As for Cuccinelli, his case was thrown out of court. Just what we need as Virginia’s lawyers: a lawyer whose client has no standing to sue.

    • Another View says:

      Virginia’s law suit shall be vindicated and victory shall be achieved at the Supreme Court.

      And history teaches that the 19th century was a period of great progress, with increased standards of living and opportunity for all. We should be so fortunate to experience that level of growth today.

      Finally, history also teaches that slavery, Jim Crow, segregation and Massive Resistance were all the province of today’s party of big government–the Democrat Party. I repeat–the Democrat Party instituted and enforced all the racist laws, from separate but equal to affirmative action.

      Hmmmm.

  5. So there are some people with names and others with Halloween fixations. Sarge, hello again. And my compliments to the others hidden in the bushes.

    Let’s makes this a serial disposition of the soundbites.

    Another View: yes, I aim to shake things up – you, on the other hand, think the staus quo is just perfect, do you? doesn’t sound like it to me – but it does sound like you think accepting the lesser of two evils is OK. what are your thoughts on other lesser evils constructs – you choose: Healthcare via emergency room, a middle class closed to blue collar workers, National Socialism or communism, Wall Street self-regulation.

    Clarke conservative: and what makes Mrs. Vogel the best qualified? Incumbency? A skin of the teeth win last time? “No”, as public policy? Going along to get ahead, voting while claiming to hold your nose?

    Sarge: what are you afraid of, my dear sir. you need a gun to protect you from gun-toting lunatics? better answer is the police and no guns unless you’re hunting or defending your country. and you’re one of those who applauded the example of letting someone die rather than getting universal healthcare? St. Peter or the keeper of the Happy Hunting Ground, whichever is your afterlife belief, is looking forward to meeting you.

  6. If it means ‘no’ to higher taxes, ‘no’ to government healthcare, ‘no’ to abortion on demand and ‘no’ to the socialist agenda of President Obama, then I vote ‘yes’ for Jill Vogel.

  7. “Sarge: what are you afraid of, my dear sir. you need a gun to protect you from gun-toting lunatics? better answer is the police and no guns unless you’re hunting or defending your country. and you’re one of those who applauded the example of letting someone die rather than getting universal healthcare? St. Peter or the keeper of the Happy Hunting Ground, whichever is your afterlife belief, is looking forward to meeting you.”

    Well, first of all, the 2nd Amendment tells the government that I have a right to own arms and there’s not a thing the government can do about it. Second, I’d much rather have a weapon and never have to use it than to need a weapon and not have one.

    http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx

    The police can’t be everywhere.

    As for Obamacare, sorry, but we don’t need another unfunded entitlement program foisted upon us by the government. Ultimately, the law will be shot down in court next summer and in case no one noticed, we’re broke.

    In the meantime, we’re suffering with near 17% unemployment, but what did Obama choose to do with his supermajority? Not a jobs bill that would have passed no matter what the Repubs said, but instead he jammed a giant entitlement program down the throats of people that clearly didn’t want it. A program that only now is seeing the little goodies surface that were tucked into the bill, like direct IRS access to your bank account. Like the government having access to your provate medical records. All sorts of goodies

    Now, had he concentrated on cost control and tort reform in the medical field he might have hit a chord. But no, he decided, against the will of the people, to give us European style craddle to grave government health care.

    That is the Obama legacy. And I’m sorry, but IMO the last thing we need is mor thinking along those lines

  8. My thanks to Sarge and the Clarke Conservative (might I suggest using something flashier, say, like The Scarlet Pimpernel – but I digress) for another round of talking points.

    Though Sarge does make sense respecting Obama – understand Sarge, that George W. set out to avenge George Herbert Walker in Iraq, and Barack set out to show Bill and Hillary how to do it – you’re right, it was stupid, but not for what it was but rather for how it was. Obama listened to Geithner and Sommers because he is about as financial as my 4 year old grandson, and neither the genius who uses turbotax poorly nor the academic egomaniac should have been allowed to exhale in White House circles, never mind advise. But..

    Sarge, my penpal friend, you can have your gun – just don’t whip it out too often when you hear something go bump in the night or in your car. I don’t want to learn your real name because you popped someone who was talking on their cellphone or trying to get you to become a Mormon later at night than you’re used to.

    And, Sarge? Tort reform isn’t necessary to protect doctors – the AMA already does that marvelously well. So do malpractice caps. What you want is standing to sue the AMA for misfeasance in self-policing the creeps in white that know how to get whiter than whites in their clothing but shouldn’t be allowed to fix anything more complicated than dangling participles.

    And, Sarge? The police can be everywhere – we just don’t want them to be, not because we’re all dangerous hombres when aroused but because of privacy, restrictions on pre-emptive detention, you know, our rights. I will find it in my heart to find your heart or head or neck if you want to insist upon being someplace you have no right or reason to be, say, in my home, but I support my local police and would rather make it impossible for firefights between amateurs.

    Now, to CC, the Clark Conservative. No to higher taxes, to government healthcare, to abortion on demand, to Obama “socialism”? Upon cursory examination, I’d say your mind is closed to reason, but let’s try.

    Do you think any taxes are appropriate or do you refuse any tax-supported government benefits? Do you think that those without healthcare should get medical attention in emergency rooms or not at all? Do you suppose not aborting an unwanted, misbegotten or malformed fetus does the fetus, mother or society any good, or is unthinking acceptance of religious dogma paramount in your life, like with those who refuse medical care as against their beliefs, or who insist upon continued medical interventions on the brain dead. And socialism is bad because it isn’t capitalism, and capitalism is good because it’s democracy? CC, do you think the capitalists don’t want government and its favors, subsidies and toothless regulations. Do you think capitalists want economic panics every 7-10 years like in the good old days, and a workforce that died early and regularly to service the complex jet engines, gene-sequencers and espresso makers (with the built-in cholesterol and diabetes testers) that we have today. Ask them, not Rush or Glen or Rupert’s boys and girls.

    I pine for the 19th Century sometimes, too, than awake to the reality that if I actually lived in any century but this, my chances of being alive today at my age would be remote, the political system under which I lived would likely be pretty horrible to blacks, women, unpropertied or rural whites (especially immigrants like my family), and that my longing would not be for this to continue but to change. Pronto. Subito. Quick.

    Capisce?