After more than two years of operating JohnnyCamacho.com, I am announcing my retirement as a solo blogger. I’m one semester away from completing my second year of college work. Academia has, for the most part, consumed my soul. I spend a large amount of my time on schoolwork, and I spend a great deal more stressing over transfer applications and my prospects of getting into my dream school: UVa.

I do have some spare time to devote to politics and writing, but not enough to blog as prolifically as I would like to. That left me in an awkward position. I considered blogging way too much fun to give up altogether, but I simply lacked the time necessary to be a good solo blogger. A few months ago, I explained this quandary to my friend, Kenton Ngo.

As fate would have it, he had developed similar feelings about his own blogging, and so the idea for a new cooperative community blog was hatched. We then got our mutual friend, Aimee Fausser (of Donkey With a Trunk and Daily Whackjob), on board, and we ran with the idea. The working title of this new blog became “The New Dominion Project (NDP),” and I’m pleased to announce that the (fundamentally) finished product went live today!

The new blog runs on SoapBlox. As most Virginia blog enthusiasts know, SoapBlox is a very interactive platform that allows registered users to post their own analysis and opinions in the form of a diary. Since NDP is very new, we are encouraging (urging, really) anyone and everyone who visits to sign up for an account and post their thoughts!

JohnnyCamacho.com won’t actually go anywhere. I plan on keeping the domain name and hosting space indefinitely, and there’s a possibility that I will use it often for personal posts. However, from this point on, my inner political animal will roam exclusively at NDP.

I’ll see you there!

Count me among those Democratic activists fuming over the coddling of Joseph Lieberman by the Senate Democratic Caucus today. Joe Lieberman is in the high position of power that he is today (chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs) because of his affiliation with the majority party. He was elected by the people of his state by running on a a Democratic platform. In 2000, he was the Democratic Party’s candidate for Vice President.

In spite of all of this, Joe Lieberman has nothing but contempt for the Democratic Party. He thought so little of the Party in 2006 that, after losing a Democratic primary to Ned Lamont, he became an independent and ran aggressively against Lamont in the general election. The moment he did that, he should have been disowned by the Democratic Party, but he wasn’t, because he was the 51st vote, and the Democratic leadership needed him.

The leadership capitulated, and they let Lieberman stay where he was on the Homeland Security Committee in exchange for his allegiance on procedural matters. He may have stayed in the caucus then, but, in the time that followed, he was far from an ally. He aligned himself with the most hawkish faction of the Republican Party on issues of foreign policy and national security, and he frequently denounced the policies put forth by his fellow Democrats. Then, in 2008, he put what should have been the final nail(s) in his coffin by endorsing John McCain for President, attacking Barack Obama, AND speaking at the Republican National Convention.

“Just wait,” I thought, “after this election, we will have picked up enough seats to show Lieberman the door. There’s no way he’ll be allowed to keep his chairmanship or stay in the Democratic caucus after everything he’s done!” I was wrong. Joe Lieberman, once again, managed to get the Democratic leadership in a headlock. For a second time, he was permitted to enjoy the perks that come with being a member of the majority party, without having been even remotely loyal to the majority Party.

In 2006, I was somewhat forgiving. After all, I figured that the pros of finally being in the majority would outweigh the cons of keeping Lieberman in the caucus. This time, however, there was no reason for Democratic Senators to bow down to Joe as they did in 2006. With the Democratic Party’s expanded majority, Joe Lieberman simply does not have the leverage that he did two years ago. So, why was he allowed, by the same Party that he has repeatedly stabbed in the back, to get off the hook? Because those who lead the Democratic Party are cowards, plain and simple.

Their rationale for letting Joe get away with disloyalty this time was that stripping him of his chairmanship and driving him from the caucus would send the wrong message in a time when America needs to come together to solve its problems. I would respectfully submit that this rationale is the dumbest thing I have ever heard, and that anyone who gave voice to this rationale lacks the intellectual faculties necessary to be an elected official.

If you ask me, the message that the Democrats have sent by allowing Joe to remain a part of the club is far more counter-productive than any message that would have been sent by showing him the door. What the Democrats have made abundantly clear by their failure to hold Lieberman accountable is that they are fully prepared to be pathetically submissive at the first sign of potential for conflict. The next congress will tackle major issues confronting America, which will lead to fierce ideological battles.

How on earth can the Democratic Party be expected to stand up to the Republicans on issues such as health care, education, and climate change, when it’s not even prepared to stand up to the Junior Senator from Connecticut? The Democratic Party has greatly emboldened its political opponents by very publicly displaying that it lacks a spine. But, hey, at least we’re united, so it’s all cool!

Rather than listing the dozens of reasons why I’ve not posted anything here on JohnnyCamacho.com for over 2 months, I have decided that it would be far better to simply get right back into the swing of things. Like any other Liberal-minded person in Virginia, I was mostly mesmerized and relieved by the results of the recent election, and have remained mesmerized in the days since by the closeness of several undecided races all over the country.

One of the most interesting races has been the one for congress in Virginia’s Fifth Congressional District, where Tom Perriello has declared victory over Virgil Goode in a massive upset. This, of course, will ultimately leave Virgil free to pursue his lifelong dream of becoming a stand-up comic.

With Tom Perriello almost certain to be the Fifth District’s next congressman, I would like to share with my readers a story about the first (and only) time I met him. I was in the Hampton Roads Convention Center, where I had been all day for the Virginia State Democratic Convention (I was an Obama delegate). The voting and political speeches had come to a close, and the post-convention receptions and parties were starting to wind up. I went upstairs for a reception to which I had tickets. The reception itself turned out to be somewhat of a snoozer, so I left the room for a moment. I had only been standing right outside of the room for a few minutes when I saw Tom Perriello and his very small political entourage approaching.

Without receiving any sort of a prompt to do so, Mr. Perriello came directly up to me and introduced himself. I knew exactly who he was, so I was excited that I had finally been given the chance to meet him in person. I introduced myself. “I’m johnny Camacho,” I said. “Oh! Okay,” he replied enthusiastically, “You’re one of my Facebook friends, and you have a blog, right?” You could’ve knocked me over with a feather. Never in my life had I received that sort of personalization from someone that I’d never even met. I was amazed and impressed to the point of confusion. My bewilderment must’ve been obvious to Mr. Perriello’s campaign staff, because one of them said, in a joking manner, “Yeah. Tom’s kind of weird. He’s memorized all of his Facebook friends.”

Mr. Perriello interjected. “No, I haven’t,” he said, “‘Johnny Camacho’ is just a hard name to forget once you see it.” I laughed, and told him how impressed I was with his recollection. He then asked why I wasn’t inside at the reception. I told him that, since I was blogger, I had an inherent aversion to socialization. He smiled and said, “I’ll bet that comes in handy when you’re politicking.” I nodded in agreement while laughing. The conversation continued likewise for a few more minutes before it came to a close and Mr. Perriello continued into the aforementioned snoozer reception.

The fact that I remember that conversational exchange so vividly says volumes, I think, about the type of person that Mr. Perriello is. He has that rare ability to make a total stranger feel like an old friend. I believe that this ability will serve him well as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives. It will allow him to form genuine and lasting friendships with his colleagues on both sides of the aisle, which will greatly increase his efficacy as an advocate for the people of the Fifth District, the people of Virginia, and the people of America. That might be nice for a change.

All of the following photos were taken with my Canon HG10 (the Swiss Army knife of my technology arsenal) on Wednesday and Thursday night of the convention.

Here are the full remarks of Barack Obama and Joe Biden from today’s rally in Springfield, IL. The rally marked the first time that Sens. Obama and Biden appeared together as running mates, and the speeches are truly electrifying.

I’m currently watching CNN, which was the first network to confirm that Senator Joe Biden will, in fact, be Barack Obama’s running mate. I will write more on this later. Right now, I shall just bask in my current state of euphoria.

An article penned by David Brooks, called “Hoping It’s Biden,” just went up on the New York Times website. Brooks makes a very strong case for Joe Biden as VP, and the article was so well-written, I just had to post an excerpt here:

Even today, after serving for decades in the world’s most pompous workplace, Senator Biden retains an ostentatiously unpretentious manner. He campaigns with an army of Bidens who seem to emerge by the dozens from the old neighborhood in Scranton. He has disdain for privilege and for limousine liberals — the mark of an honest, working-class Democrat.

Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, have trouble connecting with working-class voters, especially Catholic ones. Biden would be the bridge.

[...]

Biden’s the one. The only question is whether Obama was wise and self-aware enough to know that.

On the Republican side of the Veepstakes, Mark Halperin of Time Magazine reports that he has spoken with two Republican sources close to McCain who say that Sen. McCain has settled on Mitt Romney as his VP. It should come as no surprise to anyone that I’m not really in tune with Republican political buzz, so I’m not sure whether the GOP’s base would consider it a victory or disappointment if McCain chose Romney as his running mate. Maybe some of my Republican friends in the blogosphere can tell me their thoughts.

Will my longtime wish for an Obama/Biden ticket come true? The punditocracy is increasingly convinced that it will. We’ll soon see.

Who, I ask, should be Obama’s VP?
Probably someone from the military.
He should have a résumé that’s pretty lengthy,
Or maybe it’d be better if he were a she.

How ’bout that Republican from the state of NE?
But two Senators on a ticket is far too risky.
A Governor’s needed for a Democratic victory;
One from a swing state whose votes will be key.

He must be a blue dog (that’s a necessity);
Not some bleeding heart Liberal like John Kennedy.
That’s what we need to rack up EVs,
And recapture the power in the thick of D.C.

Just don’t let Katherine Harris announce the final tally.

I attended the Warner vs. Gilmore debate at The Homestead yesterday, and, I’ll be honest, it was predictable and a bit dry. Before I go into full detail, I’ll touch on some of the major elements of each candidate’s debate performance:

Warner: Gov. Warner emphasized his bipartisan record as Governor, and mentioned by name (on more than one occasion) some of his high-profile Republican supporters. He talked of the need for a coalition of “radical centrists” in the Senate. He talked about the growth of Virginia under his leadership, and its decline under the leadership of Gov. Gilmore. Warner referenced and admonished the vitriolic tone of Gilmore’s campaign so far, and accused him of “name calling.”

Gilmore: Gov. Gilmore did a lot of talking about trust. He kept stressing that Virginians will have a choice this fall between a candidate who does what he says he’s going to do (I assume Gov. Gilmore was talking about himself), and a candidate who said he wasn’t going to raise taxes when he ran for governor and then did it anyway. He also tried his best to make the majority of the debate about energy policy, with emphasis placed on offshore and ANWR drilling. Gilmore accused Gov. Warner of intentional mischaracterizations several times throughout the debate, and kept calling him a typical Washington politician.

As I just mentioned, the big issue of the day was ANWR and offshore drilling. Health care was touched on only briefly, and I can recall no discussion at all on educational policy or social security. Even the Iraq War, which is normally an attention magnet in debates, took a back seat to drilling. This was to be expected, of course. Gov. Gilmore’s campaign believes quite firmly that they can use the issue of domestic oil drilling to their own advantage. If they can frame the issue just right, they’re hoping that they will seem considerate of Americans being robbed at the pump while making Gov. Warner seem like an out-of-touch tree hugger.

Here’s the essence of the oil drilling arguments presented yesterday:

Gilmore: I support a comprehensive energy plan that includes wind, solar, biofuels, coal, and nuclear. But, I also support off-shore drilling and ANWR drilling, because those are the two things that will offer the most immediate benefit to Virginians in distress. Oil prices will go down if it’s clear that there’s more on the way! Mark Warner doesn’t want to drill!

Warner: I also support a comprehensive energy plan, but, unlike Jim Gilmore, I don’t think that drilling is the primary solution. I agree with John McCain’s plan to lift the federal moratorium on offshore drilling and leave that decision up to the states. ANWR should remain protected and off-limits from the impact of oil drilling. We need sensible energy policies that emphasize fuel efficiency and renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and biofuels (but not corn-based ethanol).

Gilmore: That’s a mischaracterization! I don’t believe that ANWR and offshore drilling is the primary solution, but it has to be part of the mix, and will yield the most immediate benefit. Mark Warner agrees with radical Democrats on ANWR and has changed his position on offshore drilling!

Warner: Have not. I have the same position on offshore drilling that I’ve always had! The states should decide!

Gilmore: Have, too! You can’t be trusted! *sticks out tongue*

While I may have exaggerated the above discourse a little bit, most of it is pretty true to what was actually said. I didn’t think that either candidate emerged from debate on the issue of drilling as the winner. It was more like a long and bloody dagger fight with no coup de grâce. This was one of those times during the debate when both candidates were unimpressive simultaneously.

Obviously, Jim Gilmore failed to impress on the issue because he actually believes that drilling for more oil at the expense of the environment is good policy if we want to… um… move away from using oil and save the environment.

Mark Warner failed to impress because he didn’t speak strongly enough about how truly ridiculous Gilmore’s drilling plans are. Instead, he gave a pretty vague answer as to why he doesn’t support ANWR drilling and then he made clear to everyone in the room that he agrees with John McCain’s plan: we should lift the federal moratorium on offshore drilling and then let any states that want to drill do so. It was a very mild answer on a subject that I, for one, feel passionately about. I’m sure most readers of this blog feel the same way.

That said, I’d like to take a moment to run through the highs and lows of the debate as a whole.

Jim Gilmore’s high points were:

1. Channeling the debate and post-debate coverage onto the infernal issue of oil drilling, which is what he had wanted to do all along.
2. Remaining on the offensive for a larger portion of the debate than Gov. Warner.
3. Avoiding any huge gaffes (In other words, not saying anything more crazy than usual).

Gilmore’s low points were:

1. Making a group of applauding spectators feel stupid when he didn’t enter the room until about 15 minutes after his introduction.
2. A less-than-convincing argument in favor of oil drilling: Common sense says that If you’re going to frame an entire debate around your opponent’s opposition to domestic oil drilling, you’d better be able to effectively sell your own position in favor of it. Someone forgot to tell that to Jim Gilmore.
3. Repetition: Gilmore sounded a bit like a broken record. He accused Mark Warner of mischaracterizations more times than I could count, he tried on multiple occasions to paint Mark Warner as the typical politician in the race, and he kept talking about “trust.” His debate performance was just not dynamic.
4. He may have alienated some moderate Republicans by harshly dismissing Warner’s crossover appeal, and suggesting that Gov. Warner’s Republican supporters were all “big-spending” politicians who supported Warner’s “big-spending” programs.
5. His decision to speak in favorable terms about President George W. Bush.

Warner’s high points were:

1. The “more successful Governor” debate: Gov. Warner did a very good job contrasting his own governorship with Gilmore’s. His message was that both men running for Senate have been elected Governor by the people of Virginia. One proved himself to be an incompetent leader in that capacity; the other made Virginia the “best-managed state in the nation.” He conveyed this message pretty well.
2. The children’s health insurance debate: Warner asked Gilmore at one point during the debate why his administration dropped the ball on SCHIP, which coaxed Gilmore into a diatribe against SCHIP and the irresponsible Liberal welfare mentality that it represents. The result was that Gov. Warner looked caring, while Gov. Gilmore looked like a total creep.
3. Successfully tying Gilmore to Bush: Warner was presented with an opportunity to do this when Gov. Gilmore was asked about his view of President Bush’s policies. Warner seized the opportunity, which resulted in what may have been the hardest hit from either candidate in yesterday’s debate.
4. Consistently parrying Gilmore’s attacks well enough to avoid any hard hits or lasting damages.

Warner’s low points were:

1. A tenuous attempt at rebuking Gilmore’s loopy energy policy.
2. Making some Liberal Democrats in the audience feel a little bit alienated by openly agreeing with John McCain on domestic drilling, appearing to distance himself from the Obama health care plan, and flatly rejecting Al Gore’s latest environmental challenge.

Overall, I’d say Warner had the better day, but nobody in the room was blown away by him. Gilmore did nothing at the debate that was of any real benefit to his campaign, but, as I said, he also didn’t shoot himself in the foot (although, look for the bit about George W. Bush to end up in a pro-Warner ad later this year).

The debate won’t be remembered as a key point in this campaign, but, then again, if the debate were meant to be high-stakes in the first place, it wouldn’t have been held in Bath County, and it would have been televised. It was intended primarily to cap off the Virginia Bar Association’s annual summer meeting, with its secondary intent being to provide political junkies with something neat to do on a Saturday morning. I’d say it did both.

On a personal note: After the debate, I was walking through the halls of The Homestead on my way out, and I suddenly realized that David Broder was walking right behind me. I’ve watched Meet The Press every Sunday since I was 14 years old, so I’m quite familiar with his work, as well as his prestige as a journalist. As you can probably imagine, spotting him in my home town of Hot Springs was surreal.