On October 12, the editorial board of the Washington Post endorsed Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe for governor of Virginia. Calling the endorsement a clear choice between “pragmatic and moderate or polarizing and provocative,” the editorial board acknowledged that “many Virginia voters have expressed disappointment with both major party candidates for governor on next month’s ballot.”
Apparently, the Post’s editorial board failed to read the dozens of stories in their own paper that outlined McAuliffe’s career as a fast-talking crony capitalist.
It is perhaps fitting that the Post used a purely “Clintonian” definition of the words it selected to describe McAuliffe, a man who has built an entire career upon his ability to hustle donations for former President Bill Clinton.
The Post refers to McAuliffe as “moderate.” McAuliffe’s political philosophy, however, cannot accurately be called “moderate.”
He has, for instance, publicly declared that he supports and will be a dutiful soldier in President Obama’s war on coal, a very important industry in the state. He has also made it clear that he will support NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s war on the Second Amendment, and as governor will push to enact the same kind of gun control laws the state of New York recently made law.
The Post also describes McAuliffe as “pragmatic.” The Random House Dictionary defines “pragmatic” as “of or pertaining to a practical point of view or practical considerations.”
Little in McAuliffe’s political philosophy fits this definition of “pragmatic” as “a practical point of view” when it comes to the interests of the residents of Virginia. McAuliffe’s embrace of President Obama’s new regulations in the war on coal means that many existing coal fired electric power plants in Virginia will be shut down, and no new coal fired electrical power plants will be built in Virginia. Overall demand for coal will decline, and the number of jobs for Virginians who are currently mining, transporting, or marketing coal will be cut dramatically.
These outcomes are not practical. They are, in fact, impractical–the consequence of Mr. McAuliffe’s unquestioned support of the left wing ideologies embraced and promoted by the current national leadership of the Democratic Party.
Mr. McAuliffe’s record of business accomplishments fits this definition of “pragmatic” only as it relates to the personally practical accomplishment of creating wealth for himself and a few of his close friends. His career has been built around raising money, getting in and out of business deals where he can make a fast buck, then running to the hills when the wreckage he has left behind collapses.
McAuliffe made his first big money in the 1990s, when he was an investor in the politically connected Global Crossing telecommunications firm. McAuliffe put up less than $100,000, then walked away with millions shortly before the company declared bankruptcy.
As chairmen of electric vehicle startup GreenTech Automotive from 2010 to 2012 and chairman emeritus since then, McAuliffe has played a key management role in a company currently under investigation by the Inspector General’s Office of the Department of Homeland Security for its role in selling visas to Chinese nationals, and by the Securities and Exchange Commission for its role in making “disallowed” investment claims to those same Chinese nationals.
GreenTech Automotive has also been the recipient of huge government investments both in the United States and abroad. In Mississippi, the company persuaded the state government to loan it $5 million to build a manufacturing facility that was supposed to be operational by now but is presently a parcel of land covered by recently poured cement. In China, the company’s joint venture has been entirely dependent on funding by the Chinese government. When that funding dried up, the joint venture’s operation was suspended, with virtually nothing substantive having been accomplished.
Most recently, McAuliffe invested in a fund created, managed, and promoted by Estate Planning Resources. The company’s founder, Joseph Caramadre, was a donor to McAuliffe’s 2009 gubernatorial campaign and allowed McAuliffe to invest in a scheme that was found to have profited from stealing the identities of terminally ill people. In 2012, Caramadre was convicted of theft in the deal and ordered to pay millions in restitution to his victims.
His opponent Ken Cuccinelli, as the Post‘s editorial board proclaims, is “polarizing” and “provocative.” This description of a conservative who has been criticized for defending traditional American social values tells you all you need to know about the political and moral philosophy of the members of the Post’s editorial board.
But it is not Cuccinelli’s traditional views on social issues that are polarizing. Instead, it is the picture painted of him by the non-stop onslaught of the mainstream media, led by the Washington Post and millions of dollars of left wing establishment “non-profit” advertising, that has created the impression of him as polarizing in the minds of some voters.
In fact, McAuliffe’s campaign is built on one theme selected because it fits its Alinsky-ite tactic of polarization and demonization of its opponent: Cuccinelli is anti-women.
The Post contends that by electing McAuliffe, Virginia voters will “stick to [the state’s] long tradition of moderate, pragmatic governance.” The editorial board then makes one of the most laughable statements ever written in a political endorsement by a major newspaper. McAuliffe, they assert, “represents continuity in a state that has been well served by comity, compromise and political coexistence between the parties.”
This, of course, is pure fantasy. As governor, Terry McAuliffe would take a blowtorch to Virginia’s tradition of moderate governance and replace it with a corruptocracy matched only by the Chicago style of political thuggery President Obama has brought to Washington, D.C.