Well, I finally have found a complete video of the May 25th debate between Virginia’s four Republican senate candidates.

Are you going to vote on June 12th?  Then I hope you watch all three. I don’t think snippets or anything I or anyone else would write substitutes for listening on your own to the full debate.

You can find the other debates at these two links.

Should you base your vote solely on the debates? No. However, I think the debates are important. Because a statesman needs to be able to think on his feet and to be persuasive, if a candidate debates poorly, that is a bad sign.

How was this debate? All the candidates did well.

  • Obviously, since he is the only one who posted the complete video, E. W. Jackson thinks he did well, and he did.
  • Jamie Radtke improved vastly on her last debate, coming across as thoughtful, cool and calm. Thankfully, instead of trying to attack George Allen, she concentrated on explaining her own position. Unfortunately, the Radtke campaign used the debate to take a statement George Allen made completely out of context.View Radtke’s video (H/T to The Virginia Conservative from Allen’s Fatal Flaw), and then compare that with what Allen said 46 minutes and 54 seconds into the debate. Such behavior disqualifies Radtke to serve in the U.S. Senate.
  • George Allen, apparently concerned about retaining his alleged lead, remained careful and circumspect. He said little that will surprise anyone. He just strove to hide the fact that he is the least Conservative “qualified” candidate (besides Tim Kaine) running to be Virginia’s U.S. senator.
  • Bob Marshall, perhaps inspired by Jackson, spoke with a bit more fire. Nonetheless, astute listeners will still be struck by the fact that it is Marshall who has the legislative experience and expertise.

Other Views

Bearing Drift‘s  offers a balanced report in Northern Virginia Republican U.S. Senate Debate Wrap-Up.

In The Final Debate, BVBL offers an excellent report.

In The Final RPV Debate, Sara for America provides a little snippet that is accurate and also kinda funny.

I can’t believe I just sat through the RPV senate debate on the Friday jump-start to Memorial Day weekend.

But I did. (My twitter feed will back me up.)

The overall impression I got was that (with the exception of a mis-statement about war authorization that he cleared up in another answer) George Allen says all the right things.

His challengers just say it better.


The complete video of the May 25th debate between Virginia’s four Republican senate candidates is nowhere to be found yet. However, I did find a copy of the May 11th debate at Virginia Beach. The video is from E. W. Jackson’s youtube website. Jackson admits the quality is not great. Nonetheless, the quality is good enough, and no one else made any effort to provide the complete video of the debate. Why? I can only speculate.

  • The candidates that think the video would help them either lack the funds and the time to post a quality video
  • The candidates that do have the funds to post a complete video think posting a complete video helps their opponents more than it helps them.

Why did I choose “HOW DO WE DEFINE INSANITY?” as the title for this post? When Jamie Radtke provided her closing remarks, she quoted the definition of insanity. Here is the definition.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. — Albert Einstein

During the debate, Radtke made a point of attacking George Allen’s record.  Radtke objected to the possibility that we might elect Allen, someone she clearly considers the sort of career politician who made the mess in Washington that we have right now.

Is Allen the sort of career politician who made the mess in Washington that we have right now? Well, when he was in Washington, he definitely voted for things he should not have voted for, and during the debate Radtke cited some of those examples. So I doubt Allen is much interested in posting a complete video of the debate.  Nonetheless, I suspect most who listen to the debate will decide Radtke seriously weakened her argument by overstating her case.

On the other hand, E. W. Jackson avoided attacking his Republican opponents. Instead, he offered himself as the best qualified alternative to be our senate candidate. Jackson stressed his ability to carry to the Republican Party’s vision and to appeal to people who are not part of our movement, specifically Hispanics and Blacks. Without doubt, Jackson would have more appeal to such minorities than some. Nonetheless, I wish he had not made an issue of it. If I were going to vote for the man, it would be because I admire his character and think he is competent.

Jackson is admirable and competent. He certainly has more substantial experience than the guy we have in the White House. Nonetheless, in his closing, what he essentially asks is that we vote for him because of his oratorical skills. Given how similar his argument is to the one that got Obama in the White House, I doubt that argument will fly with very many Republicans.

I really do wish Radtke and Jackson had run either for Congress or positions in the General Assembly. As capable as both are, neither has the stature required to make a serious run for the U.S. Senate. Nonetheless, when we elected him, Jim Webb was not well known, and he had not served in elected office. So neither Radtke or Jackson can be blamed for asking for our votes.

George Allen for the most part ignored Radtke’s attacks and stayed on message. What message? Allen sounded like a Conservative. His record, however, is not entirely consistent with Conservatism. Hence Radtke’s criticism. Allen asked us to consider what he would do for us in the future as our senator. What he has done or tried to do as our senator — that he did not talk about too much.

Bob Marshall focused on his record, stressing his accomplishments as a delegate in Virginia’s General Assembly. Considering that Allen actually was a senator for six years, I found it odd that Marshall can point to more substantive accomplishments as a delegate than Allen can as a U.S. senator.

Other Views

Bearing Drift provides this summary, Hampton Roads Republican US Senate Debate Summary. For me, here are the most important lines.

Delegate Bob Marshall was not as impressive or memorable in Hampton Roads as he was in Roanoke. Perhaps he just wasn’t as funny. He did have his share of one-liners (“By the grace of God, I have never been endorsed by the Washington Post”), but the majority of his responses consisted of well-prepared bulleted lists that contained a combination of experience and legislative strategy. To the politically astute and to those who recognize that procedure can be just as important as philosophy, Marshall’s answers were impressive; but to those who fawn over candidates for their artistry in speech rather than their science of parliament, these answers may have been lost on them. If there were no Seventeenth Amendment, Del. Marshall might lead the polls.

Virginia Right provided an even more detail report with this post, E.W. Jackson Wins Va Senate Debate – Jamie Radtke Marginalizes Her Campaign as the Far Right Fringe Candidate. For me, here are the most important lines.

Bob Marshall is undoubtedly the most knowledgeable of the minute details of an amazing number of bills and has been an effective legislator with enough foresight to pen the right bill at the right time to position Virginia in a way that makes federal intrusion into the Commonwealth fare more difficult on anything from ObamaCare to illegal immigration. The average voter, however, may fail to comprehend Bob Marshall and appreciate his technical prowess and “wonkish”  understanding of the art of governance. Still, for fans and supporters of Bob Marshall, his performance at the debate was solid and he did nothing to hurt his campaign.

For the sake of gaining readers, both reporters and bloggers love to stress drama. However, when we go into the polling booth, we are picking someone we want to protect our rights and spend our dough. The guy with the technical prowess and a “wonkish”  understanding of the art of governance may not have the best oratorical skills; he may not make the most wonderful promises (which he cannot deliver anyway), but if he is the best qualified fellow to protect our rights and spend our money wisely, he is the one to vote for.


Here is the latest email from Delegate Bob Marshall, and it is actually rather interesting

Dear Friends,

Have you heard the news? The game has changed.

The May 3 survey by Public Policy Polling shows voters now prefer Del. Bob Marshall for U.S. Senate by more than 2 to 1 over Jamie Radtke.

And this comes after Radtke has campaigned more than 17 months and raised, according to Federal Election Commission records, more than $700,000 in contributions.

The same poll shows Del. Bob Marshall leading E. W. Jackson by the even wider margin of 4 to 1.

We knew this would happen. Many voters know Marshall’s record and those who don’t are learning that…

  • Marshall never voted for a tax increase.
  • Marshall has won 11 consecutive general elections for the House of Delegates.
  • Marshall was the author and sponsor of the Va. Health Care Freedom Act, the law Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is using in the U.S. Supreme Court against Obamacare.
  • Marshall was the author and sponsor of the Human Life Bill that was designed to give the pre-born the most protection possible under that judicial overreach known as Roe. V. Wade.

Now, as the campaign moves into the final five weeks, Del. Bob Marshall will widen his lead over his Non-Allen opponents and then be in position as the sole, meaningful challenger to overtake George Allen.

Marshall has now passed Radtke by more than 2 to 1.

Marshall has now passed Jackson by more than 4 to 1.

Yes, we have some significant ground to make up before Marshall can catch George Allen.

But Marshall has broken out of the pack. So watch out George, here comes Bob Marshall!

Bob Marshall, The Game Changer. It’s now a whole new ballgame!

Bob Allen
Campaign Manager
Bob Marshall for Senate

P.S. Now that Marshall has passed Radtke and passed Jackson, give $25, $50 or even $100 to Marshall for Senate. Bob Marshall is the only one with a clean record to go after Tim Kaine.

And if you’ve been especially blessed, give $250, $500, $1,000, even $2500 for Bob Marshall who has done so much to advance the cause of constitutional conservatism.

The Marshall campaign is using a low cost, high efficiency, targeted strategy that can win this race. Make your contribution today! And for Bob Marshall, thank you indeed.

Consider the Senate race in Indiana, Poll: Indiana Sen. Lugar behind by 10 points. Sen. Richard Lugar is a Republican “moderate”. As this article explains, Tea party targets Sen. Richard Lugar: Can moderate Republicans survive?, the Tea Party has effectively opposed Lugar. Key to success is the Tea Party has gotten behind one candidate, the candidate who can win.

What the race in Indiana demonstrates is that an activated citizenry can beat an Establishment Republican, even an incumbent with a big campaign war-chest.

Not satisfied with former governor/senator George Allen? Concerned he is too moderate? Worried that an incumbent who could not beat Senator James Webb, a Democrat running for his first elected office, will be crushed by former governor Tim Kaine? Then consider lending in your support to Delegate Bob Marshall, and don’t wait. The primary is June 12th.


Here is a full-length video of the GOP Senate Candidates Debate in Roanoke, Virginia – April 28, 2012, courtesy of .

I encourage you to listen to the full video.

  • When Jamie Radtke explains the magnitude of the Federal Government’s assault on our families and our freedom, take the time to understand why she is alarmed.
  • Answer E.W. Jackson’s fiery call for good men to come to the aid of their country.
  • Contemplate Bob Marshall’s seasoned assessment of what we must do take back our country.
  • Decide for yourself when George Allen’s answers came from the heart.

And wonder.  Is this election about things we want or about the values that we cherish?