Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

As many of you know, I’ve spent my entire career fighting for Virginia.

I’m proud of the work I’ve done to stand up for our first principles and the most vulnerable in our society.

Whether it’s fighting to stop ObamaCare so you can keep control of your health care, standing up to an overreaching EPA so we can keep opportunity alive, working for mental health reforms or fighting human traffickers and Internet child predators—I’ve always put the best interests of our Commonwealth above my own.

And while you won’t agree with me on every single issue, you will always know where I stand.

In that spirit, I wanted you to know that in recent days, I've managed to arrange to send a check of over $18,000 to a Richmond based charity. I did this to resolve any questions surrounding the matter concerning Star Scientific.

I made the decision to send the check because it is the right thing to do, plain and simple.

This is something that I would have liked to have done sooner, but like most Virginians, writing a check for more than $18,000 is not a simple matter for my family and me. It's taken a while to get our funds together.

For those who've been disappointed in this situation or how I've handled it, I apologize. It's been a humbling set of lessons for me.

In the remaining weeks of this campaign, I intend to focus my campaign on what I have done and what I intend to do for the people of Virginia. That means lowering tax and regulatory burdens, keeping energy prices manageable and ensuring that parents have more control over their kids’ education.

I’m the only candidate in this race with a substantive, positive vision for Virginia’s future who has stood up for the people of the Commonwealth over and over and over.

I don’t have to tell you how important this race is for the future of the Commonwealth. If elected, I will work harder than ever to make sure that our children inherit a stronger Virginia full of greater opportunity.

I appreciate you taking the time to watch this video. I hope you will share it with your friends and family.

Thanks very much.

Sincerely,
Ken Cuccinelli, II

In the world of politics, damage control should be handled swiftly and in the early stages of a campaign. Ken Cuccinelli has a lot of ground to make up and less than two months to do it in.

For our sakes, I hope he can pull this off.

Gee... Maybe if he hadn't done anything that looked like being on the take in the first place...

At least Sarvis isn't a career politician like this guy and McAuliff.

Whether it’s fighting to stop ObamaCare so you can keep control of your health care, standing up to an overreaching EPA so we can keep opportunity alive, working for mental health reforms or fighting human traffickers and Internet child predators—I’ve always put the best interests of our Commonwealth above my own.

One could say he's failed on both the ObamaCare and EPA fronts since we're not in control of our healthcare and coal country has taken a beating. Probably not the best examples to use on why he should be governor.

As he mentioned in the video, it's tough for most people to get 18k together to stroke a check. I wonder if Star Scientific loaned him the money to write the check to donate for the gifts he received from Star Scientific.

ShotgunBlast wrote:
As he mentioned in the video, it's tough for most people to get 18k together to stroke a check. I wonder if Star Scientific loaned him the money to write the check to donate for the gifts he received from Star Scientific.

According to the financial filings, he owned $10,000-50,000 in Star stock. Maybe he just sold that off? It does beg the question - how and why does a guy who can't afford to write an $18k check sink that much money into one company?

I still find it baffling that elected officials accept any gifts. This isn't meant to be against just Cuccinelli, because they all do it, and it's allowed by the rules. I'm a federal government employee, and it's hammered into us not to accept gifts. This has always been common sense to me anyway, and I only had to be told once. I just don't understand how any government employee can justify accepting personal gifts. If you can't afford to rent the vacation house for your family, then don't go. That's what I did when my kids were young and my wife was a stay-at-home mom and we didn't have much money. If the trip is truly job-related, then submit a voucher for the expenses and let the taxpayers pay for it as a legitimate business expense. I guess this is just another example of the rules that apply to us common folk don't apply to the elected special people.

I though the maximum nonreported value was something like $20 or so. That way, folks didn't get nailed for walkimg away with a pen with a vendor's logo on it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

ShotgunBlast wrote:As he mentioned in the video, it's tough for most people to get 18k together to stroke a check. I wonder if Star Scientific loaned him the money to write the check to donate for the gifts he received from Star Scientific.

It crossed my mind as well, dunno if his wife works or what she does, but I think the guy has like a platoon of kids and that can't be easy to manage on an AG salary (150K according to google) in a costly place like NOVA.

I'd like to see Sarvis win. Thank goodness we live in Virginia where we have two pro-gun candidates and one anti-gun; not the other around.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Mindflayer wrote:I'd like to see Sarvis win. Thank goodness we live in Virginia where we have two pro-gun candidates and one anti-gun; not the other around.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes, but as a practical matter, we have 3 candidates but only 2 choices. Sarvis can't win, and a vote for him is a vote for McAuliffe. I know that pisses some of you off, but it is the unfortunate truth.

Mindflayer wrote:I'd like to see Sarvis win. Thank goodness we live in Virginia where we have two pro-gun candidates and one anti-gun; not the other around.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'd love to see that too, but it ain't likely. It's disturbing to me that McAuliffe, a self proclaimed "hustler" who's main political experience is shady fundraising for the Clinton's, is a serious contender, much less leading by most polls. This election should be Cuccinelli vs Sarvis, with McAuliffe pulling the single digits.

dorminWS wrote: Yes, but as a practical matter, we have 3 candidates but only 2 choices. Sarvis can't win, and a vote for him is a vote for McAuliffe. I know that pisses some of you off, but it is the unfortunate truth.

All it would take is for thinking people to get over their man crush on the AG. I know that pisses some of you off, but is also an unfortunate truth.

SpanishInquisition wrote:

dorminWS wrote: Yes, but as a practical matter, we have 3 candidates but only 2 choices. Sarvis can't win, and a vote for him is a vote for McAuliffe. I know that pisses some of you off, but it is the unfortunate truth.

All it would take is for thinking people to get over their man crush on the AG. I know that pisses some of you off, but is also an unfortunate truth.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That's wishful thinking and a cheap shot and you know it, SI. If and when a third-party candidate presents a plausible chance to actually get elected, and if that candidate also has a sincere platform with which I am in sympathy, I will jump on board with both feet. In the meantime, I have and will continue to make financial contributions to candidates that offer better choices even when they can't get elected so as to encourage forward progress by right-thinking individuals. What I will NOT do is waste my vote on a pretty package that has no hope of getting elected. Not even if you get all pissy and throw around terms like "man crush". Cuccinelli, whatever warts may be on him, is light-years better than that simpering statist McAuliffe, and Cooch is vastly more likely to get elected than Sarvis. So I'll vote for Cuccinelli. If we elect people like Kaine and McAuliffe a few more times because the republican challenger isn't a simon pure and lilly white conservative, it will be too late for ANYBODY to restore the Commonwealth to something approximating the one our fathers cherished. You can't put out the fire by pissing on the firemen.

SpanishInquisition wrote:

dorminWS wrote: Yes, but as a practical matter, we have 3 candidates but only 2 choices. Sarvis can't win, and a vote for him is a vote for McAuliffe. I know that pisses some of you off, but it is the unfortunate truth.

All it would take is for thinking people to get over their man crush on the AG. I know that pisses some of you off, but is also an unfortunate truth.

Hardly a man crush, if you could refrain from such rhetoric. A certain level of pragmatism is to be expected of those of us that have been adversely affected by blindly voting for ideals when confronted by a well-oiled political machine. And that is the truth.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

If you honest-to-god like KC and plan to vote for him that's great, but Virginia Republicans are going to have a few rough elections coming up. The people at the top of the Va GOP are calling the shots in who gets the nod (convention style instead of primary), and people who espouse lines like "taking back the party" end up holding their nose and pulling the lever for R anyway out of fear of losing to D, but in the end the Republicans still lose. People like the idea of a third candidate, but most are too chicken to actually vote for one saying they have no chance of winning. Of course if all those people actually voted for the third candidate they might actually win and break the stranglehold the Republican leadership has on the party. Instead, the Democrats will continue to win and the Republicans will continue to scratch their heads wondering why they're not winning elections.

McAuliffe's political machine will still get people to come out and vote whether they like the guy or not, but Republicans that are turned off will just sit home. Not a good strategy when you're already outnumbered. I'll be stunned if KC pulls this off.

Stratojaxter wrote:

Mindflayer wrote:I'd like to see Sarvis win. Thank goodness we live in Virginia where we have two pro-gun candidates and one anti-gun; not the other around.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'd love to see that too, but it ain't likely. It's disturbing to me that McAuliffe, a self proclaimed "hustler" who's main political experience is shady fundraising for the Clinton's, is a serious contender, much less leading by most polls. This election should be Cuccinelli vs Sarvis, with McAuliffe pulling the single digits.

its not cuccinelli vs sarvis because no one knows who sarvis is,if the left leaning newspapers in this state(and rtd you know who you are)would talk sarvis up maybe he would have a chance

It would be nice to see a 3rd party candidate that actually fell in line with my beliefs. Sarvis hits a few of them (if I take him at his word) but KC is far closer (judging from what he has done thus far). I'll actually feel pretty good about voting "R" this time

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Sarvis' "not my table" position on the murder of small children is a deal killer in my book. I have a few non negotiables and this is one of them

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Cuccinelli voted to overturn former Gov. Mark Warner’s (D) veto of the partial birth abortion ban, drafted Virginia’s parental consent law, led efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, and demanded that the state’s abortion facilities meet the same health standards as other surgical centers.

Virginia Democrat gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe has been caught on tape saying that, if elected, he will issue a directive to unilaterally allow abortion clinics that do not meet state health standards to remain open.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... If-Elected

Rekon that McAwefulls nose could get any furter up Obummers posterior?

If you like rest areas and a budget surplus elect KC. McAwefull will have us back peeing on the side of the road and in debt. But abortion on demand will be secure.