Who knew LWV & AARP were “left-wing” organizations?

ken_cuccinelli_370x278Virginia AG and gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli, speaking in Norfolk yesterday, was asked why he turned down “The People’s Debate,” sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Virginia and the AARP:

Apparently, Cuccinelli is referring to the proposed moderator of the debate, CBS This Morning host Norah O’Donnell, who used to work at MSNBC. But he fails to consider that the pair of non-profits have hosted debates in the past: In 2009, the gubernatorial debate between Bob McDonnell and Creigh Deeds (I was there for that one) and last years Senatorial debate between Tim Kaine and George Allen. Does Cuccinelli think McDonnell and Allen are “left-wing” as well? Or is it just that the moderator is a former MSNBC employee? Joe Scarborough is an MSNBC employee, too. Is he “left-wing?”

Or is he just afraid of being seen on TV by voters across Virginia, so close to the election?

Just this morning, I learned via VANews that the Virginia Bar Association debate, to be held at The Homestead on July 20, will be livestreamed for the first time.  While I am thrilled that they have worked this out, not everyone has access to a computer to watch it. (Plus, I suspect that the general public has other things to do at 11am on a July Saturday.)

That Cuccinelli turned down this debate says more about him than it does about the organizations sponsoring it. I think he’s just afraid – afraid that the voters might see and hear something that would make them less likely to support him.

And that’s really sad for someone who wants to lead our state.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Who knew LWV & AARP were “left-wing” organizations?

  1. The purpose of participating in debates is to address meaningful issues of concern to the sponsoring organizations. Failing to honor this time-tested forum, the Attorney General has snubbed well-known and respected non-partisan organizations under the auspices that the moderator is liberally “hand-picked”. To be clear, moderators are just that. The content and queries originate from the organizations. Cuchinelli’s refusal discloses a flaw and weakness in his character that he is too willing to shy away from the tough issues that may be presented by this forum. If anyone is more prone to picking and choosing, it is Cuchinelli himself. Ironically, Cuchinelli is limiting the expansion of his base support by appealing to an audience that is more often attended and viewed by predetermined voters. Somehow he has construed quantity over quality as advantageous to his electioneering. In all likelihood, his rhetoric for an unreasonable number of debates will not materialize, thus his insistence his an obvious negativity ploy.

  2. Uh, OK. Just go to the LWV website and tell me which of their positions is right-of -center. Same for the AARP. On all the issues on their pages — climate change, gun control, Social Security, etc., they take the left-wing position.

    “Who knew?”

    Who DIDN’T know?

    1. That some people consider LWV positions left-wing, as you apparently do, is a comment on how much the middle has moved to the right. Many LWV positions have remained much the same for decades and they are formed by study, discussion and consensus votes taken by its bipartisan membership. It may be the case that those who are interested in actually studying a position, rather than reacting to its politics, are attracted to League membership, which may say something about the intellectual standards of the League as a whole.

  3. Smart move on the AGs part, He needs to realize he is probably down 4-5 points. He is behind in raising money as well. After labor day to attack may be his best option with inferior resources. T.M. needs to spend now to establish his identity with the voters

  4. Who needs moderators anyway?

    Just hook the candidates microphones to a chess clock. When a candidate presses the button on his side of the clock, his clock stops and his microphone is turned off, and his opponent’s clock starts and his microphone turns on.

    When a candidate is out of time, his microphone is permanently disabled.

    If the candidates twice in succession press their clocks without speaking, they have demonstrated that they have no more to say and the debate is over.

Comments are closed.