Rick Howell Speaks

Terry McAuliffe endorsed by influential Lynchburg Democrats

2009-04-19T09:05:00.000-07:00

As the gubernatorial campaign missives continue to roll into our e-mail inboxes from Deeds, McAuliffe and Moran (they're endless, aren't they?), one in particular caught my attention this past week....

Terry McAuliffe has wrapped up some impressive endorsements from the Lynchburg Democratic Committee, people who might well have been expected to support Creigh Deeds if McAuliffe hadn't entered the race.

Now before you say, "Lynchburg Democrats? Who cares?," you should know: The Lynchburg Democratic Committee has developed into one of the best and most active Democratic party committees in all of Central Virginia. A lot of energy was infused into the committee by a very active John Kerry campaign in 2004 (the meet-up people and the city committee members, not paid staff, which was gone after September, anyway). That energy carried over into Tim Kaine's campaign, and certainly helped Lynchburg Dems get Shannon Valentine elected to the House of Delegates in 2006.

Democrats there hit the streets, make the phone calls, and they hustle people out to vote on Election Day. A key part of this has been the Lynchburg Voters League, an organization founded by African-Americans when they were still fighting the poll tax. Former governor Doug Wilder once lauded the voters league as perhaps "the most effective" such local group he'd ever seen. And he ought to know....

So, looking at the names from the area who endorsed McAuliffe, one stands out in particular: Walter Fore, former president of the voters league and retired president of the Central Virginia Labor Council. Walter has been a presence on the committee for years, and he has the power and influence to deliver votes for McAuliffe in the June 9 primary.

Other names include Bo Driskill, the former longtime chair of the committee who is now "Chairman Emeritus". Bo (a friend of mine.....) remains well-connected; he's a big pick-up for McAuliffe. Other city party heavyweights on the list include Clyde Clark and Yvonne Ferguson. McAuliffe also enlisted the support of city activist Dr. James Coleman, Jr.

I'm guessing that all or most of these people would have supported Deeds....but they've seen something in McAuliffe and in his campaign that sent them the other way. (Deeds, by the way, has made attempts to garner support in the area in the past....he was keynote speaker for the convention that nominated Bob Clarke for Senate in 2003, and spoke at the big party headquarters grand opening in 2004, an event that turned out close to 400 people).

Terry McAuliffe pulled off a nice coup in Lynchburg; and it's not good news for the other two candidates.

The time is now: Free Lori Berenson from imprisonment in Peru

2009-04-02T11:14:00.000-07:00

It's hard to know where to begin for people who haven't heard of Lori Berenson and don't know anything about the nearly 15-year ordeal in Peruvian prisons that this American citizen has endured.

I guess the only thing to do is start at the beginning: In 1995, Berenson was a 26-year-old New York native on a humanitarian and journalistic mission to Peru, a country with a great deal of poverty, two vicious rebel groups whose political tactics were kidnappings and murder, and an authoritarian, right-wing president of Japanese descent named Alberto Fujimori.

Ms. Berenson was there to investigate conditions in Peru - with a particular interest in the widespread poverty and the political repression of the Fujimori regime - and write articles about it. She had press credentials from two small, New York-based magazines.

The two left-wing rebel groups were both engaged in bloody battles with Peruvian police and soldiers. In December of 1995, there was an armed confrontation between the police and MRTA (the so-called Tupac Amura Revolutionary Front....or something like that). Police claimed that they had broken up a plot to attack and bomb the halls of the Peruvian congressional building in Lima.

It was this "plot" to which Berenson was accused of being linked. She was literally taken off a bus in Lima and arrested not long after the gun battle with MRTA. She was hastily tried - before a military tribunal, no less - and given a life sentence.

Now, keep in mind, this was a young woman who was very political and certainly of a left-wing bent. But she had never, ever, advocated violence as a political solution. In fact, she deplored it. She understood what a lousy choice most Peruvians faced if they only had to pick from Fujimori's right-wing views or the violence of MRTA and the "Shining Path" guerillas.

Also, authorities never had anything in the way of hard evidence to link her to any alleged plot to attack the Congress. She'd been based in Lima, and lived in an apartment building where some MRTA members or sympathizers also apparently lived. If I remember correctly, she was implicated by a MRTA member who survived the gun battle. This person certainly "testified" under coercion, if not outright torture. But Lori Berenson insisted to family and friends - and certainly to the Peruvian authorities - that she was not a member or sympathizer of MRTA, and had no knowledge of or role in any plans for violence. It would have been entirely out of character for her to participate in anything violent.

That's the nuts and bolts of what landed her in prison. If some of the details seem fuzzy, it's been a long time since many of us who have tried to get her released have heard much about the case.

The Clinton administration seemed generally receptive to attempts to get her freed, or at least get her a civilian trial. But the terrorist attacks in this country in 2001 left Berenson languishing in jail indefinitely. She had been branded a "terrorist" by the Peruvian government, and anyone with that albatross around their neck didn't officially exist for the Bush and Cheney crowd, even if it was an American.

After her imprisonment, her parents, Mark and Rhoda Berenson, with the help of family friends, set up the "Committee to Free Lori Berenson." That's how I stumbled onto the case sometime around 1999...I volunteered my services to do whatever I could locally to make people aware of her plight. Living in the Lynchburg area at the time, I spoke about it once at Lynchburg College, and got a local columnist to write about it. I went to one or two meetings in D.C. But after 9/11, it was hard to get much sympathy for anyone linked in any way whatsoever to "terrorism."

Lori did eventually get a civilian trial, and the life sentence was reduced to 20 years. She became a model prisoner. A few years back, she married a Salvadoran man. She also struggled with health problems, especially back problems.

But here is what has changed....President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have promised new levels of engagement with the other nations of the world. Now that there's a new team in Washington that seriously wants a better global reputation for the United States, there could well be a new opportunity for the adminstration to reach out to Peru on Lori's behalf.

There's been a serious change in Lori's situation, too. She's pregnant. Eight months pregnant (yep, conjugal visits). But her pregnancy is complicated due to her back problems. Being 39 years old is not making it any easier. She was recently moved to a better prison facility in Lima, where her pregnancy can be monitored more easily. It is said, too, that she will need back surgery sometime after the baby is born.

I'm convinced, as many others are, that this woman did not deserve what happened to her. She has now served 13 years. If she was guilty of anything beyond being naive, well, she has certainly paid for it. Most of her youth has been passed in squalid, remote, mountaintop prisons where she has endured her imprisonment with grace and intelligence, while at the same time insisting upon her innocence.

I urge you to go to the Web site, www.freelori.org and decide for yourself. If I understand the intentions of the committee, there's going to be a new push for Lori's release. There is a page on the Web site where you can print out and sign a letter to Secretary Clinton encouraging new efforts to get her out.

I'd also recommend her mother's book: "Lori: My Daugher, Wrongfully Imprisoned in Peru," by Rhoda Berenson. Copyright 2000. Published first by Context Books, then by Northeastern University Press two years later.

A great injustice was done to an American citizen in a foreign country in 1995. Justice has still not been done all these years later.

It's time Lori Berenson was set free.

The making of a great president

2009-03-29T20:11:00.000-07:00

Anyone who saw President Barack Obama on CBS' "60 Minutes" last week saw why so many of us voted for this man and are proud to support him in his efforts to set this country straight.

What came through again - as it has so many times - was his deep and abiding intelligence, something that is such a pleasure after we witnessed Bush's tortured attempts to speak the language and reach some kind of logic in his remarks (not to mention his policies).

It was great, too, the way he so totally put Dick Cheney in his place by reminding people that the United States can't attract support in the Arab world when we're torturing terror suspects.

We saw, too, the reputation as no-drama-Obama, as he even managed to produce a smile and a laugh when asked about how he handles the job. I think it's cool, also, that this particular president is very informed about sports. His Final Four picks haven't gone very well, but how many other presidents would even talk about such things?

(As a Dallas Cowboys fan, I regret his love of the Pittsburgh Steelers, but I understand it given the support he received from Steelers owner Dan Rooney.)

What we may in fact be witnessing is the making of a great president. His programs will have to succeed, of course, and we don't know the outcome of that just yet. But at this point, he has the confidence of the majority of the American people, the same majority that put him in office and was so willing to turn away from the horrors of the Bush years.

Sometimes, things really do change for the best.

Five Republicans now want to replace Del. William Fralin

2009-03-25T12:55:00.000-07:00

Five....count 'em five. That's the number of Republicans who now want the party's nomination to replace retiring Roanoke area delegate William Fralin.

They are - and the first two are the latest - :

Chris Head: Botetourt County businessman; Bill Cleaveland, Botetourt County attorney; Josh Johnson, Roanoke attorney; Melvin Williams, Roanoke attorney; and Mike Wray, former Roanoke County Supervisor.

Wow....there could even be one or two more. Meanwhile, Sam Rasoul's "major announcement" turned out to be a dud....he held a news event just to announce his "endorsement" of the only Democrat in the race, Roanoke city council member Gwen Mason.

Given that he could have endorsed her in an e-mail or a press release, it's pretty clear that his event was more about him than about her. What's unclear, though, is how he can help her win the district, considering the paltry amount of votes he got there in last fall's congressional race.

She had certainly not been clamoring for his "endorsement," and did not appear with him. There's only one thing we can take from this: He will almost certainly be a candidate for Congress again next year (probably running outright by later this year......).

But that's in 2010.....right now, Democrats appear likely to go with Mason alone as their candidate. That means the party can help her get organized while 5 or more Republicans fight it out......

Advantage Dems, so far.

Joining the Star City Harbinger...and, Rasoul is back?

2009-03-22T16:28:00.000-07:00

Don't look now, but he's baaaaaaaaack. Or at least he may be.

Sam Rasoul, who was crushed without mercy last fall by Bob Goodlatte in the Sixth District congressional race, has scheduled a news event tomorrow (Monday) at which he may announce he's a candidate for the party's nod to replace William Fralin in Virginia's 17th House district.

That would mean that he would oppose Roanoke City Council member Gwen Mason, who has already announced her candidacy. Word of Rasoul's possible interest has set tongues to wagging in Roanoke area Democratic circles....most people can't believe it.

But again....we don't know just yet what young Mr. Rasoul will do until tomorrow. Should be interesting. Some have already said that Sam doesn't even live in the district, that he in fact resides in Del. Lacey Putney's district. Could it be that he wants our party's nomination to take on Putney? I find it hard to believe that even Sam would be that much in desire to suffer more pain in the political arena. Putney is unbeatable in the Bedford area, and anyone running against him is on a fool's mission.

At any rate.....we must wait until tomorrow to see what Rasoul will announce.

On another matter, I am happy to report a new association as a contributer to the well-known Roanoke Web site of politics and civic involvement.....the Star City Harbinger. Check it out at http://starcityharbinger.com

You'll find my first post, this time on the governor's race.

Hey.....it's spring, isn't it? And wouldn't you know it? Politics is in the air along with blooming trees and bushes, and a bit of warmth, too. A complete analysis of Mr. Rasoul's announcement will be forthcoming.

House races in Roanoke, Lynchburg shaping up

2009-03-08T12:09:00.000-07:00

Lots of news and movement lately in two key House districts in the Roanoke and Lynchburg area.

In Roanoke, in the 17th House District, things were rattled loose by Republican Delegate William Fralin's sudden retirement from politics. This opened a possibility for Democrats they didn't expect to have.

On Monday, Roanoke City Council member Gwen Mason will announce her candidacy. Her colleague on council, Dr. David Trinkle, is still thinking about running. Yet another council member, Court Rosen, thought about it, too, but opted out. Rich Cranwell's name has also been mentioned, but it doesn't appear he will make the race, either.

Even the son of Vic Thomas, the late delegate who held the seat for so long, is apparently considering the race. Another week or so should tell whether Mason will have a battle on her hands or face no opposition in getting the nomination on the June 9 primary ballot.

I have to say, even as one who lives in this district, while it's great that Democrats can at least make the GOP sweat and spend some money, this is likely to be a difficult seat to pick up. If Republicans can nominate someone in the mold of Fralin - who was basically a moderate and very responsible legislator - that person would have to be the favorite to keep the seat.

Nevertheless, I could be happy with either Mason or Trinkle as the nominee. It would at least be good to have a strong Democrat to vote for in November....

In the 11th district, currently held by Democratic Delegate Onzlee Ware, some opposition has arisen for the primary. But Onzlee probably doesn't have too much to worry about. His opponent will be Martin Jeffrey, who has had a somewhat schizophrenic existence in Roanoke area politics.

For example, in 2004, Mr. Jeffrey showed up on the very day of the Sixth District Democratic Convention in Lexington and told all of us there that he wanted to be the party's congressional candidate. Mind you, he hadn't campaigned previously or given any public indication that he wanted to run.....it was more than a bit bizarre. I was on the committee then. The late David Layman, being the gentleman he was, suggested that we give Mr. Jeffrey a hearing. So we did. At some point, he said that even if we didn't nominate him he'd run as an independent. I think we were all thinking the same thing at that point: Let's wrap this up quickly so we can all go home.....Mr. Jeffrey was not nominated.

Onzlee Ware has done his job as a delegate, and most Democrats won't have any reason to replace him as the nominee.

In Lynchburg, in the 22nd district (I think....), two Republicans hope to challenge Del. Shannon Valentine in the fall. One, Jeff Helgeson, is what you might call a Liberty University conservative...and we all know what that means, right? The other is Dr. Scott Garrett, who serves with Helgeson on the city council.

If memory serves, it was Garrett who got the most votes in the 2007 council election, when he ran as an independent. But are there enough more-or-less moderates in the Lynchburg GOP to nominate him? If not, they'll go for the ideological bomb-thrower, which is Helgeson. That means they'll also probably lose, too.

Given that Valentine has basically the same support that always elected Preston Bryant to that seat - meaning moderates from both parties - she will surely be the favorite in the fall. Some Lynchburg Democrats cringe at a few of her votes in the legislature (especially the ones regarding legal abortion rights), but they're proud that she holds the seat and they won't lose it without a fight.

In the middle of the area between Lynchburg and Roanoke is, well.....Bedford, my hometown and "my personal Mayberry," if you will. Bedford is the fiefdom of the very powerful Delegate Lacey Putney. Hopefully, Democrats won't again put up the kind of weak candidate they offered two years ago, because it was a waste of time then and would be a waste of time now. Nobody will ever beat Putney. Period.

Stay tuned.....

Rich Cranwell takes Bob Goodlatte to task...and rightfully so

2009-02-21T07:39:00.000-08:00

Sixth District Congressman Bob Goodlatte had a weak excuse for not making the recent meeting with Gov. Tim Kaine and Virginia's Congressional delegation. He said he had a "scheduling conflict." His absence was notable in part because the other Republican congressmen skipped the meeting, too.

It's an annual meeting, but this time the focus, as I understood it, was to be on how Virginia might use its money from the Obama stimulus package recently passed by the Congress and signed by the president.

That's a pretty important topic, given our state's own budget shortfall. But Goodlatte didn't show up, and didn't even send a staffer to take notes. He and the other GOP congressmen (a minority now in the Virginia delegation) were clearly showing their contempt for the stimulus.

In the Feb. 18 edition of the Roanoke Times, C. Richard Cranwell Jr. ("Rich" to his family and friends) laid out all the proper and credible reasons why Mr. Goodlatte failed his constituents with this petty show of posturing.

Normally, I'd provide a link. But there's something up with blogger.com these last few days and the usual tools for such things don't seem available. But I do urge you to read Cranwell's op-ed. Go to www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary/wb/195005

Mr. Goodlatte is apparently feeling pretty smug over his re-election for yet another term beyond the number of terms he ever promised to serve...but he should take heed. Democrats in the Sixth District just might get their act together and nominate an effective candidate against him. When they do, he could realize that everything changes and nothing lasts forever. Just ask Virgil Goode.

As for Cranwell, he flirted briefly with seeking the Democratic nod against Goodlatte in 2008 but decided instead for Roanoke City Council. Given some of the results on that governing body since then, many of us still feel it's a shame he fell short in that effort. I've told him myself and I don't mind saying it here....I'd love to see Cranwell be our party's nominee against Goodlatte at some point in the future. That decision will remain with him and his family.

But for now, he has laid out a very impressive case against the machinations of Goodlatte in snubbing Tim Kaine and snubbing every citizen of the Sixth District.

Be sure to read it...

Obama's first lesson: Bipartisanship is over-rated

2009-02-15T17:10:00.000-08:00

In the wake of the passage of the president's stimulus package, Barack Obama may be contemplating the usefulness of whether to continue to frame every goal around the theme of "both parties working together."

As we all know, his stimulus bill got no Republican votes in the House and very, very few in the Senate. This was the reality after all the president's talk on the campaign trail and since his inauguration about "working together," "both parties solving problems for the American people," etc., etc.

It's noble rhetoric, and it certainly does have an understandable appeal for a lot of voters. But I've never been quite carried away with it. Our political system is based on a competition between two major parties. Democrats (mostly liberal) and Republicans (mostly conservative) put their ideas forward and the voters decide which program they want. In the 1980s, the GOP under Ronald Reagan held sway. More recently, Republican ideas have become discredited (especially under the awful tenure of the regrettable George W. Bush) and Democrats now hold both houses of Congress and the White House.

As a partisan liberal Democrat, I will never make any apology for wanting to defeat conservative Republicans. I firmly believe that my ideals and the views of those who also hold them are superior to the opposition. I'll be glad to "work with them" on the rare occasions where we truly do agree. Otherwise, I want my viewpoint to win and theirs to lose. Isnt' that the way politics is supposed to work?

After a while, all this stuff about "both parties working together" almost begins to sound like an appeal for a one-party state. If we all wind up sitting around the same campfire singing the same song, uh....that would be North Korea, wouldn't it? I prefer the partisan, competitive politics of the United States.

Here in Virginia, we're used to the "bipartisan" rhetoric of new Sen. Mark Warner. He's made a career of talking about that. Now, I love Mark Warner as much as any Virginia Democrat. But just once I'd love to hear him say...."You know what? I just love to kick Republican ass!!"

Obama and the Democrats in Congress did exactly that in passing the stimulus program. It came down to simply having the numbers that - thanks to the decisions of voters - Democrats have and Republicans don't.

As many commentators have suggested, it's possible that President Obama will indeed secure more Republican support for future initiatives. But that certainly didn't happen this time. And he won, anyway.

It will be interesting to see if he makes any changes to his approach in the future.

President Obama's first approval rating: 68 percent

2009-01-25T21:14:00.000-08:00

The Gallup Poll. Isn't that the oldest of presidential approval ratings? If I'm correct, the Gallup Poll existed long before the others....

This weekend, we heard the news that the new president, Barack Obama, has an approval rating of 68 percent. This comes after just a few days upon which Americans have had any chance to approve his actions.....which include:

* An order to shut down, within a year, the notorious prison camp for "terrorists" at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The word belongs in quotes because most of those held there are simply fighters captured on the fields of Afghanistan. Most there have been held for years without trial, and some have been tortured. This so-called camp has done as much as anything else to ruin the reputation of America around the world, once thought of as a beacon of justice and fairness.

Obama said in his Inaugural Address that we'd win the legitimate fight against terrorism (I refuse to say "war on terror"), but that we'd do it on our terms, meaning we'll conduct ourselves in a manner consistent with the Geneva Convention and with our own long-held principles of not behaving as our enemies do.....apparently, this meets with the approval of most Americans;

* Another order to lift the ban on assistance to international aid groups that provide access to abortion or information about the procedure, something that has been treated as a political football score for conservative Republicans to please their religious base when they hold the White House. In poverty-stricken countries with problems of over-population, it is simply illogical not to offer abortion access as one option. Banning abortion when you can't feed the children you already have is asinine; again, this order reflects the support of the majority of the American people, who, not coincidentally, approve of legal abortion rights and have for a long time.

Obviously, many more issues and challenges await our new president. But he's clearly off to a good start.

At last...President Barack Obama!!

2009-01-20T13:05:00.000-08:00

He is, finally, the 44th President of the United States. He has been sworn in, and has delivered his Inaugural Address. He has escorted the former president to the helicopter that leads him to retirement.

Sometimes, long-awaited events can be anti-climactic when they actually occur. But I have no such feeling today...this is the moment that so many of us have waited for over the last eight years. First, as Democrats, we remember the pain of what seemed to be a theft of the presidency in 2000. We suffered after the narrow result of the bitter 2004 election. But in 2008, we watched as our candidate soared to a mighty victory in every region of the country.

While it is necessary for the new president to appeal to all Americans, as he did not just today but throughout his campaign, I personally won't apologize for feeling that my beloved Democratic Party has finally gotten the victory it deserved over the other side. As a liberal/progressive, I take pleasure in the defeat of conservatism, because I think we're right and they're wrong. Therefore, like many other Americans, my love of the entrance of Obama is equal to my joy in the departure of Bush. This should hardly be a surprise...

With Obama's rise to power, there will be a return to the kinds of ideals that conservatives seem to believe can only come from capitalism and the marketplace. Obama knows - as FDR did when he was first inaugurated in 1933 - that the engine of government has to be active to help solve the economic crisis. Only the central government has the power to take the kind of action that can create a wave that's large enough to move the economy.

That's why Obama will invest in America, through job-creating programs, middle class tax cuts, and a rejection of the arrogance and hubris that marked the foreign policy of the previous administration. There will be a new day both in economic and foreign policy. Voters really did select "change," and now they will get it.

It's clear, too, that many Americans, even many of those who voted for Sen. McCain, are ready to welcome the new president and even support him. As Inauguration Day began, it was reported that Obama had the approval of 78 % of voters as he prepared to enter office. Most Americans are ready to give him a chance. I remember granting that deference even to Ronald Reagan; most Americans seem of the same mind.

It's heartening to know that: the war in Iraq will finally end; Gitmo will be closed and torture is out as official U.S. policy; we will at least talk to nations before we decide whether to attack them; we will make the effort to establish new and lasting forms of energy; we won't sacrifice our liberty for notions of security; we will respect the non-faith of non-believers as much as we respect the rights of all religions.

This is a fascinating time in which to live. Not only have we made history with the first African-American president, but we have rejected an ideological mindset that brought us unnecessary war, political extremism and a swaggering approach to the rest of the world.

Barack Obama has the potential to be an undeniably great president. Only time and the reality of events - many of which he won't be able to control - will tell whether he becomes that.

But today has indeed been a joy. I'm glad to have been one of the many millions who has chosen hope over fear.