South of the James

The opening sentence on the website of NBC-12 summed it up succinctly, “Chesterfield Board of Supervisors member Ed Barber is now a convicted sex offender.”  The Midlothian District Supervisor, the lone Democrat who served as Chairman of the Board in 2005, plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of sexual battery related to charges brought by a teenaged family member. He avoided prison – earning a 24-month suspended sentence, community service and sex offender assessment as his punishment – and sidestepped removal from his Supervisor position by avoiding a felony conviction. His final employment status with
Chesterfield’s public schools is still up in the air. 

From the outset, this case was a potential powder keg of personal tragedy and significant political ramifications county-wide. Though there were grumblings about possible political shenanigans at play, aside from one misguided attempt by a former Chesterfield Republican committee official to score political points (which was roundly criticized by numerous of his party’s leaders and members), this situation was surprisingly free of the kangaroo court environment that could have developed. Regardless of political persuasion, many county residents voiced a real sense of sadness for the unfathomable family drama that played out before our eyes. That Barber continued to serve as supervisor while the case proceeded added a surreal quality to board meetings; the proverbial elephant in the room was never quite acknowledged.   

However, with a plea deal, all of that has now changed. There is no getting around the fact that he stands guilty of a sex-related crime, the details of which notwithstanding. His Board of Supervisors colleagues have asked him to resign, a move that must have been difficult for them personally regardless of the political expediency. Thus far, Mr. Barber has not obliged this request, which is unfortunate. He that has now been convicted, his presumption of innocence has expired and been cast aside. While Mr. Barber and his family may be the best judges their own personal best interests, for the good of the county, Mr. Barber should resign his Board seat immediately.  

With his colleagues having called for his departure, should Barber choose to remain on board, he would effectively be an outcast with virtually no political capital. As media reports have noted, the supervisors “feel he has violated the public trust and it would be inappropriate for Mr. Barber to continue to serve on this Board.” By refusing to step down, Barber would also be damaging his own party. With a conviction in hand, Chesterfield Democrats would be well within their rights to withdraw support from Barber to avoid him continuing as the most prominent public face of their party. The 2007 election cycle is already under way, and county Democrats cannot afford to be dragged down by this matter while they work to gain Supervisor seats and help elect Democratic-leaning members to the nonpartisan School Board. Thus, if they do indeed defect from his side, Mr. Barber would essentially lose all political cover on that front.  

In the absence of either political capital based on positional authority or political cover provided by partisan identification, it is unlikely that Barber can be an effective supervisor for his district. Having served honorably for 14 years, he could walk away with a solid legacy of public administration. With the legal proceedings now over, Chesterfield County’s leaders should be solely focused on the locality’s best interests. Part of being an effective public servant is doing what it in the public interest even when that runs counter to one’s own personal interest. Elected offices are not the personal property of individual officeholders; they are positions of public trust that must be handled with the utmost care.  

In explaining his decision to avoid a jury trial by entering guilty pleas, Barber said that “it was not worth the roll of the dice.” Like a jury trial would have been a gamble for Barber and his family, his remaining on the Board of Supervisors is a gamble that Chesterfield County can ill afford to take.  

The June 26 edition of the Bacon’s Rebellion e-magazine is on-line now, and it features my interview with Lowell Feld of Raising Kaine. Lowell has gradually become a force to be reckoned with in the Virginia blogosphere, so much so that Jim Bacon had this to say about him in a blog post about the article:

Not only is Feld a tireless and talented blogger, he combines his writing with political activism and a political action committee. As a key player in the Jim Webb senatorial campaign, he arguably has had more impact on Virginia politics than any other blogger to date.

Check out the article and Jim’s follow-up post, and tell us what you think. And to all of my Republican and conservative friends out there, never fear, you’ll be seeing Blogology interviews with your brethren in short order!

This was originally publised by Bacon’s Rebellion on June 26, 2006.

On the heels of Jim Webb’s victory in the Virginia Democratic Senate primary, Lowell Feld has seen his profile raised among Virginia bloggers. Originally known for helping create the Raising Kaine blog and political action committee ahead of the November 2005 statewide elections, Feld, a former federal bureaucrat, helped lead the move to “draft” Webb as the man to face popular Republican incumbent Sen. George Allen. Speaking on the impact of blogs on Webb’s electoral success, “Mudcat” Saunders, a top Webb adviser said, “The bloggers were driving this.”

Q: Lowell, what is your background - where you’re from, education, job, family?

LF: I was born in New York City (1962) and raised in Connecticut. I have a bachelor’s degree in international relations and psychology from the University of Pennsylvania (1984). I have a Master’s Degree in Middle East Studies, with concentrations in international economics and national security policy, from the George Washington University (1986). Until about 3 months ago, I worked as a “team leader” at the U.S. Energy Information Administration, running that agency’s most popular program on its website (the Country Analysis Briefs) and also covering world oil markets. I live in Arlington and have been married for 10 years to a beautiful jazz singing Scots-Irishwoman.

Q: You seem to have a deep interest in politics. Do you have a long history of involvement in it? You also mentioned being supportive of John McCain in past years, but now you are an active Democrat. How do you account for this?

LF: I first got involved in politics when I was 13 years old as a Teenage Republican (TAR) - believe it or not! - in Connecticut. As a TAR, I did volunteer work (envelope stuffing, mainly) for Ford/Dole. In 1979, I attended former Senator Lowell Weicker’s one-week summer intern program in Washington, DC. Weicker was definitely my kind of Republican, unfortunately a dying breed these days. In 1980, with the rise of the religious right and the “supply side”/”trickle down” pseudo-economists, I started moving away from the Republican Party, casting my first-ever Presidential vote for John Anderson. After that, I moved more and more firmly into the Democratic camp, in large part because the Republican Party had left me as it became more and more extreme on a wide variety of issues. I also came to realize increasingly that my true political philosophy was a sort of Teddy Roosevelt Progressivism, combined with the best of FDR, Harry Truman, JFK, LBJ and RFK.

While in grad school and as a federal employee, I was only lightly involved in politics, although I followed it closely. After Bush stole the 2000 election from Al Gore, and then after 9/11, I became re-politicized. In 2003, I was heavily involved in the Draft Wesley Clark movement, running two grassroots websites (“Enviros for Clark” and “Hispanics for Clark”) and serving on Clark’s “environmental leadership council.” When Clark lost, I volunteered for Kerry/Edwards, started Raising Kaine, and finally took the initiative with a few friends to get Draft James Webb off the ground.

By the way, my vote for John McCain in 2000 was based on my feeling that McCain was a straight-talking, Teddy Roosevelt Progressive. Unfortunately, it has turned out that this is not the case.

Q: Where did the impetus for launching the Raising Kaine blog come from? What influenced the decision to create a PAC? What are the upsides/downsides with that operational model?

LF: Depression. I’m only half kidding. After Kerry lost in November 2004, like a lot of Democrats and Progressives, I was really, really bummed out. For about 1 ½ months I wallowed in a major funk, kind of going through the stages of grieving (Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance). Except I seem to have skipped the “acceptance” part. Ha ha. Instead, I went back to anger and decided I had to fight the right wing. I looked up from my semi-depressive semi-stupor and said, “Hey, there’s an important election IN MY OWN STATE next year. I talked to my good friend Eric the Super Techie, and we decided to start up the blog called “Raising Kaine.” The goal was to help elect Tim Kaine, but also to “raise Cain” in a broader sense, taking it to the so-called “conservatives” for a change. I feel like we’ve certainly done that the past 1 ½ years.

Regarding the state PAC, we (Brian Patton and I) decided to try our hand at raising money to help elect Virginia candidates. We managed to raise enough money to run several newspaper ads, but I wish we could have done more. Honestly, I see no particular downside to having a Virginia state PAC, except that it takes some time and attention.

Q: Raising Kaine offers itself as the “Voice of Progressive Virginia” and refers to historic national politicians such as Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, JFK and the like in term of ideology. What is Raising Kaine’s vision of progressive politics? Are there any Virginia politicians who typify this perspective?

LF: It’s hard to speak of Raising Kaine’s overall vision, since we are a group blog with a mix of contributors. Current participants in RK range from conservative Democrats to traditional liberals to former Republicans to “TR/RFK Progressives” like myself. Personally, my goal with RK is to elect strong, fighting Democrats, while pushing for Progressivism as much as possible.

In my view, Progressivism transcends stale “liberal” and “conservative” labels, or any particular political party for that matter. Historically, Progressives fought against party bosses, robber barons, monopolies, and child labor. They fought for good government, women’s suffrage, public education, progressive taxation, direct election of senators, and the environment. In general, I see Progressivism as distinct from modern American liberalism in that Progressivism is not based on narrow, “interest group politics.” Instead, it looks towards a broad, sweeping vision for a better and greater America – not just for the rich, but for ALL Americans.

In today’s politics, I would say that Wesley Clark and Jim Webb both fit the mold of strong “Progressives.” In Virginia specifically, I certainly see Mark Warner and Tim Kaine as fighting for good government, the environment, public education, and a “forward together” viewpoint in general.

Q. Your blog was given some credit for helping Gov. Kaine win last November. Can you identify specific ways in which RK made a difference?

LF: I have no empirical evidence that Raising Kaine helped (or hurt) Tim Kaine win his election last year. However, what we TRIED to do was to constantly put out the good word about Kaine, to counter misinformation and distortions from the Republicans, and to get the truth out to the media and general public about who Jerry Kilgore was and what he stood for. In addition to the blog, we produced flyers that were distributed at Metro stops and other public places/events. And we used our PAC to publish several newspaper ads in favor of Tim Kaine.

Q: These days, RK is best known for being the leading blog in favor of the Jim Webb Senate candidacy. Top campaign officials and political observers acknowledge the bloggers played a major role. What was it that drew you to the Webb effort?

LF. After Tim Kaine’s victory in November 2005, my thoughts – and several of my friends and colleagues – turned to 2006, an important mid-term election year. One of the top priorities, in my mind, was for the Democrats to find someone who could seriously compete with, and possibly defeat, George Allen. In late October 2005, Jim Webb said in a newspaper interview that he was thinking about running as a Democrat for U.S. Senate from Virginia. When I saw that, I immediately started researching Webb, and was extremely impressed with his background and political potential. I e-mailed him in the hopes of setting up an interview with Raising Kaine. Instead of an interview, I ended up corresponding with Webb through late December, when I finally had the opportunity to sit down – along with Josh Chernila and Lee Diamond – and talk with him for about 1 ½ hours.

All three of us, from different wings of the Democratic Party, were extremely impressed with Webb’s character and politics. However, we were concerned that he might not run if he didn’t believe he would be welcomed by Democrats. To help remedy this situation, within a few days we started the “draft” movement as a means of convincing Webb that there was significant support for his candidacy. In a little over a month, we collected around 1,000 online “signatures” and $40,000 in pledges, all through blogging and other “word of mouth.” I personally believe that this show of support helped encourage Jim Webb to throw his hat in the ring (Webb himself said that we “got him into this”), although obviously there were many other influences and factors at work.

Q. While it was clear that RK was leading the “Draft Webb” effort, what role did RK play with respect to the campaign once Webb declared?

LF. Once Webb declared [his candidacy], the vast majority of RK members ratcheted up their efforts even more in support of Webb. Of course, we kept blogging on RK, Daily Kos, etc. In addition, most of us volunteered dozens or even hundreds of hours of our time phone banking, canvassing, “tabling,” marching in parades, talking up Webb to politicians we knew, etc. We also gave money, of course, to the Webb for Senate campaign. I believe that all this “offline” activity was at least as important, probably more so, than the “online” activity. This is a key point: We are not just “bloggers” floating ethereally out in cyberspace; we are citizen activists who are willing to get out there and get our hands dirty in the “real world” as well.

Q. During the campaign you and RK took a lot of hits for your actions from Democrats and Republicans alike. What do you make of these criticisms? Did they affect your work on behalf of Webb?

LF. Actually, I feel like we received far more praise than criticism, although sometimes the critics were the loudest (unfortunately). I believe that SOME of the criticism stemmed from people who were upset about a challenge to their “chosen” candidate, Harris Miller. Sad to say, but it appears that SOME establishment Democrats feel threatened by the rising influence of the “netroots,” instead of embracing it as a tremendous opportunity for growing the party. Others might not have liked our tone at times, which overall was wildly enthusiastic about Webb and not at all friendly towards Harris Miller (especially after his campaign started attacking Webb as anti-women and anti-African American). In general, although there may have been a downside, I feel like our efforts helped the Webb effort. I also believe that if you asked everyone who was involved, the vast majority would do it all over again in very much the same way.

Q. Now that the primary is over, what will RK’s role be for the general election campaign? How will you and RK respond to the low turnout numbers outside of Northern Virginia and Webb’s under performance in locales with a significant African-American presence?

LF. Tough questions. On RK’s role, I’d say that we will attempt to do what we did last year with Tim Kaine and Jerry Kilgore, but now with a much larger readership base. Much of what we do or don’t do will depend on the resources we have at our disposal. We are always looking to expand our reach into groups that traditionally don’t get their news online, but that’s easier said than done. We also are always looking for contributors from different parts of Virginia, from different walks of life, and from different ethnic/racial groups. Regarding Webb’s “under performance” with African Americans, I believe that largely stems from negative mailings by the Miller campaign, and a financial inability by the Webb campaign to respond effectively. My own view is that Jim Webb will be a great friend to African Americans – and all Virginians, for that matter - when he is in the US Senate.

Q. What does the future hold for Lowell Feld? For RK? Are you attempting to be the “DailyKos” of Virginia or do you plan to “go national” on your own?

LF. What does the future hold for me? I have no idea. All I know is what I’m going to keep fighting against - “conservativism” in all its guises – and what I’m going to keep fighting FOR - Progressive values and turning Virginia “blue.” For now, I think that’s enough of a goal, in addition to helping elect Jim Webb and as many Democratic Congressional candidates as possible this year. And paying attention to my wife, cleaning the house once in a while, going out for a beer with friends occasionally, etc.

Just in case you hadn't had enough, blogger Semi Truths gives a great rundown of the commentary on the recent Sorensen Institute "Summit on Blogging and Democracy in the Commonwealth." Be sure to check out his own personal accounts of the events as they definitely reflect his dedication to "Truth, Justice, and American Cheese." Granted, I'm a Provolone type of guy…

The magic carpet ride of the past week continues for me as the folks at the Sorensen Institute decided to run my profile today. The last time that I gave some insight into my own life and thought processes, it inspired quite a response. Who knows what will happen this time around? In case you are wondering just why I am what I am, take a look. Eventually, the music of the moment will die, but for now, I'll just enjoy these little spurts of attention.

Today's Style Weekly - "Richmond's alternative for new, arts, culture, and opinion" - ran an updated and edited version of a blog post that I did a few weeks ago on the use of trailers as classrooms in local school district. Style, which is owned by the very-MSM Landmark Communications, offers a creative contrast to the more traditional Richmond Times-Dispatch. I hope to contribute more work in the future for the newsweekly on a variety of subjects…if they'll have me. At any rate, in light of recent discussions about the convergence of blogging and journalism, especially in Virginia, it seems fitting that this piece ran when it did. Enjoy!

by Conaway B. Haskins IIIThis was published on June 21, 2006 by Style Weekly.

Every now and again, Richmond’s local media outlets start poking around the region’s schoolyards to dig up material for their readers.For example, in May the Richmond Times-Dispatch broached the subject of the fleet of trailers that double as classroom space for crowded schools in Chesterfield County, and the Chesterfield Observer reported in October on the capacity issues that county schools face in using nearly 300 trailers.

These articles, and others like them, tend to play out thusly: Parents lob complaints about their children having to leave the confines of the traditional schoolhouse; school board members decry their lack of control over the process and lay blame at the feet of the planning commission and/or board of supervisors; some teachers talk of preferring the “learning cottages” to the more distraction-prone school environment; and pro-trailer interests promote the efficiency and lower costs of these “mobile classrooms” compared with the increasing expense of building new schools.

On the surface, the advent of trailer usage may feel problematic, and for those who prefer to see students receive their entire education inside the brick walls of a school building, that is understandable. However, when we probe a bit deeper, the trailer issue is more complex, with several factors at play that demand that we look at this issue more holistically, including those pesky nuances that are often lost in heated policy debates.

First, the overcapacity of the county schools is partly a symptom of the top-notch education and high quality of life that attract parents — especially those new families that are filling up the sprawling planned communities — to Chesterfield. Despite their critics, the fact remains that Chesterfield enjoys an excellent reputation among the school districts in the commonwealth. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the selection of former county superintendent Billy Cannaday Jr. as Virginia’s Superintendent of the Year in 2005 and his recent tapping as state superintendent of public instruction by Gov. Tim Kaine. By most reasonable metrics, Chesterfield is educating its students well, and people want their kids to be a part of that environment.

Second, the overcapacity issue can be blamed in part on the county’s reluctance to spend precious taxpayer dollars on new school construction in a time frame that would completely satisfy the increased demands. While there are truly needed upgrading and replacement of some facilities, in a perverse sense, using trailers represents a measure of fiscal prudence. Sure enough, new schools and all of their accoutrements are a source of civic pride for a district and for parents. But with the constantly increasing construction and transportation costs that the economy has witnessed in recent years, trailers are simply a lot cheaper to accommodate.

Third, the overcapacity and resulting trailer usage have not necessarily been linked to lower educational performance. As the news articles note, a number of teachers actually find advantages in the separate facilities, not the least of which are the ongoing potential for distractions normally found in a regular building. Conversations with teachers in Chesterfield and other districts support this notion.

The research presents a mixed picture. While studies do indicate that the physical environment of classrooms affects student achievement, the conclusions revolve mostly around issues related to air conditioning, cleanliness, lighting and noise. Other factors, such as direct access to computers, also play a role. National trade groups actively promote mobile classroom structures, and the federal government highlights some models as eco-friendly alternatives to bricks-and-mortar projects.

Trailer classrooms are not without their drawbacks, however, in terms of braving bad weather and the ever-present fears for student safety. Still, the argument has not sufficiently been made that trailers, on their own, are detrimental to a student’s education. The short answer is: It depends.

On a personal note, this writer is young enough to recall being educated in the same types of trailers during his grade-school years. I grew up in rural Virginia, and my school district could not afford to add physical capacity and build new schools to the same extent as wealthier districts like Chesterfield. As a result, our schools had to rely on “learning cottages” to relieve overcrowding. Sure, we students were not happy to be taken out of the traditional school building to attend classes in trailers, but our sentiments were more a reflection of our desires to socialize and make mischief than our concerns for high-quality educational environs.

The physical separation seemed to work better for some of our teachers, giving them more control over classroom discipline and more flexibility to experiment with instructional methods that may have raised a few eyebrows in the more traditional setting, where administrators, central office staff and various public officials roamed the halls. The trailers used by our regional governor’s school did indeed become incubators for student and teacher talent and creativity, the result of which is at least one writer whose words you are now reading. On balance, the trailers not only measured up to the regular classrooms, but in hindsight, they were much, much better.

Undoubtedly, the issue of trailer usage will continue to vex high-growth localities like Chesterfield. Until school capacity, residential development, public infrastructure and revenue streams come into closer alignment, the issue will remain a hot-button one for citizens, politicians and the media alike. In the interim, all one can hope for is that all sides consider the issue in a thoughtful (even educated, perhaps?) manner. Acting like children will not help us to educate them. S

Conaway B. Haskins III is a writer who lives in Chesterfield County and publishes the blog www.SouthoftheJames.com. Opinions expressed on the Back Page are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Style Weekly.

Cross-posted on Bacon's Rebellion.

A good number of bloggers have already provide ample overviews of the Sorensen affair, thus I will only add some key takeaways that continue to resonate with me. First, Michael Shear made strong arguments for why the vast majority of bloggers are not journalists in the classic sense, and Bob Gibson and others reinforced these points in their comments and in subsequent chats. The significant points of departure revolved around blogging's lack of self-policing with no widely accepted codes of conduct and ethics - and the dearth of editorial and institutional oversight or structure that is typical of most MSM endeavors. This blog, for one, has proposed some voluntary blogging standards of practice, and in light of what was discussed at Sorensen, I would offer that this idea is worth revisiting.

Reflecting on this, it seems that the real issue at hand is not whether blogging is or is not journalism but whether bloggers who are not reporters can be considered journalists on par with opinion writers and analysts. Seeing as how journalism is a broad field, and given the prevalence of "advocacy journalism" with the likes of The Economist, New Republic, Weekly Standard, and most op/ed pages, the disconnect seems to revolve around the absence of editors. In the end, that's more of a market innovation issue rather than a fundamental flaw of the blogging medium. In the end, those of us who aspire to raise our craft and produce MSM-quality work should not look to reporters like Mike as our standard, but rather to leading local, state, and federal opinion writers (unless we can play both sides of the fence like Norm's penpal, Jeff Schapiro). We can also look at local newsweeklies and alternative newspapers which tend to relax traditional notions of objectivity.

Second, Gordon Morse excoriated bloggers for shying away from covering and investigating public policy issues. He correctly noted that most political bloggers prefer the daily soap opera of politicking to discussions of critical issues of importance such as healthcare, public finance, education, and the like. In Virginia, the policy implications of legislative and bureaucratic actions are mostly left off the table of the blogosphere, despite going mostly untouched by the MSM. Waldo's General Assembly blogging and most of Bacon's Rebellion are notable exceptions, but for the most part, Morse's observations hold.

Third, bloggers better mind the store when it comes to campaign finance and election laws. One of the more fascinating tidbits that came out of the session on campaign finance (aside from the notes that my buddy Steven Sisson kept passing me) was that MSM institutions are mostly exempt from these laws due the press exception established by courts and legislatures. So far, the legislative and judicial branches have gradually granted status to bloggers, yet they have not delved as deeply into a universal standard of blogging as a MSM equivalent. However, some groups are pushing that envelope fast at the state and federal levels.

It stands to reason that since blogging is a communication medium, is an outlet for public service, and as bloggers are essentially "embedded citizen journalists" (not my creation), we should take steps to build an infrastructure for our own protection. Whether it is incorporating our blogs as businesses or non-profits, joining relevant associations, or banding together to create our own version of the Virginia Press Association, we would all be wise to pre-empt the courts and the legislatures just to be safe.

It will be interesting to compare and contrast the topics covered at the Sorensen Summit with those being developed for the "Bloggers United in Martinsville for free Speech" confab in August. Two months is practically an eternity in the blogosphere, and we will see if any of the lessons learned in Charlottesville will have any practical application in the interim. As I'm on the agenda as a presenter, I will definitely be paying greater attention not only to what I produce but what others do also.

By Conaway B. Haskins IIIThis was published by Bacon’s Rebellion on June 15, 2006

Kenton Ngo is one of Virginia’s youngest – and widely regarded as one of its best – political bloggers. Describing his 750 Volts blog as the “Best, Worst and Utterly Shocking of Life and Virginia politics,” Ngo mixes political commentary and analysis with occasional snippets about his adventures as a student. An active Democrat, Ngo is known for his dexterity at using mapping technology to highlight political trends in the Commonwealth.

Q: Currently, you are a 15 year-old high school freshman in Fairfax. You started blogging in November 2004. What motivated you to take up political blogging?

KN: A combination of post-election boredom and a desire to do something politically once the campaign was over.

Q. “750 Volts” is the name of your blog. Can you give us insight into why you chose that name?

KN: I rode the Metro down to [John] Kerry [presidential campaign] headquarters in downtown D.C., and noticed one day the “Danger: 750 Volts” sticker on the third rail covers. I figured it was unique enough to name a blog after.

Q. Given your relative youth, you are well-respected by the grayer heads in the blogosphere. What has been the key to your gaining this success? Have there been any major downsides to your age in terms of being taken seriously?

KN: I’m not actually sure. I just sat down, blogged, and let it fly. I’m sure that people think twice because I’m only 15 and I don’t blame them for that. I’m not as well qualified as many bloggers are, but blogging is a medium that’s designed for practically anyone.

Q. Has blogging enhanced your academic performance or other areas of your life? Do your teachers see the value in what you’re doing?

KN: I haven’t won any extra credit points for this. Some of my teachers like the idea, some don’t know. It’s not something I push often in school.

Q. Younger generations of Americans are blessed with a variety of online outlets for personal expression (blogs, myspace.com, etc.) to a much higher degree than those generations before them. What effect do you think this will have on the evolution of American society as they grow into adulthood and eventually positions of leadership?

KN: I think it will have much of the same effect every new communications innovation brought–the telephone, the radio, the television. The internet will probably become a dominant, if not the dominant, source for news, entertainment, and communication. Campaigns ignore blogs at their peril nowadays.

Q. You are also one of the more technologically savvy bloggers in Virginia politics, particularly with your GIS and related data projects. What is your take on the role that these technologies play in politics at the local and state level?

KN: We’re seeing the computerization of the world, and politics is no exception. Voter databases and software are essentials nowadays to any campaign–some pinned the 2004 election’s outcome on the fact Republicans had superior technology. Campaigns that can’t pull up information efficiently are doomed to lose.

Q. Have any bloggers in particular helped foster the development of your work?

KN: Oh, that’s a tough one, singling people out. I started out on my own, not really seeing any other Virginia Democratic bloggers, and watched the blogosphere blossom.

Q. In the long run, how do you think that having younger folks such as yourself, Ben Kyber, and Vince Harris as significant players in the Virginia blogosphere will impact this community?

KN: Eventually we’ll be tomorrow’s old fogies and a new generation will come in. There will always be a farm team in everything, politics included. Tomorrow’s leaders are bred today, of course.

Q. What does the future hold for Kenton Ngo? Do you have a political career in mind?

KN: can’t imagine ever leaving politics. We’ll see.

– June 12, 2006

Posted on ThinkSouth.org on June 13, 2006 

After a 3-month long primary battle between technology lobbyist Harris Miller and former Reagan Navy Secretary and novelist Jim Webb, Virginia Democrats (and others) head to the polls to pick the man they want to face off with Sen. George Allen in November. With the Commonwealth’s “open primary” and lack of party registration, turnout is hard to predict, though some pundits and observers have settled on a 5% figure. During the 2005 statewide election season, voter turnout for the 4-way Democratic Lt. Gov primary (the only competitive Democratic race) was just 2.62%, compared to near 4% for the Republican races.

This race has been notable for its viciousness with each side hurling insults and charges that have reverberated through the normally genteel intra-party politics of Virginia Democrats. However, with the first seriously competitive Senate nomination race in ten years, a new factor has emerged - the so-called “netroots” - that threatens to shake things up for that party’s future. Powered by bloggers and tech-savvy volunteers, the Webb campaign has adopted a populist stance, fighting in what it claims is the spirit of Andrew Jackson and garnering the support of prominent national Democratic figures such as Sens. Chuck Schumer and John Kerry. His opponent Harris Miller, by no means a stranger to technology after a long-time stint as head of the Information Technology Association of America, has run a more traditional campaign relying on connections to state party officials, paid staff, and heavy self-financing. Miller is running on a platform of continuing in the vein of popular former Gov. Mark Warner and current officeholder Gov. Tim Kaine.

In light of the recent attention that Democratic and progressive bloggers have garnered with the YearlyKos event in Las Vegas, a Webb victory could signal a change in the guard of Virginia’s politics and signal a coming sea change throughout the Southeast as the politics of moonlight and magnolias gives way to Macs and microchips. Given the anti-establishment stridency of the pro-Webb cadre, a Miller victory could close the door to many of the more vocal and creative bloggers who fought for Webb. Regardless of the outcome, Democrats and progressives can ill afford to ignore the prominence of blogging as a medium of political discourse and information.

In the absence of strong talk radio, the blogosphere is the one arena in which the “blue” voices can counteract the rise in the Right. With the midterm elections about to kick into high gear, Democrats and progressives region-wide should take a look at what happens in Virginia to quickly discern lessons learned as the Congressional races head into summer. What they find may surprise them.