burlingtonfreepress.com

Sponsored by:

vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen


8.02.2006

 

Early start?

How early was Martha Rainville thinking about stepping down as adjutant general of the Vermont National Guard and possibly running for political office?

The conventional wisdom is that it was sometime last year, either before or after Senator James Jeffords announced he would not seek re-election in 2006.

Now comes informaton that suggests that she was toying with the idea of elective office a lot earlier than that, like two years earlier.

The evidence? Her own remarks to the Free Press Editorial Board on Tuesday and the fact that she registered the martharainville.com domain name on the Internet on July 21, 2003, about 20 months before Jeffords' retirement announcement caused an earthquake on Vermont's political landscape. Martharainville.com is now the Web site for her GOP House campaign.

Rainville, talking with the Freeps editorial board, acknowledged she always thought she'd pursue a career in "public service" after her days were done as adjutant general, but didn't know when that might happen, or what form it would take.

Asked after the meeting by yours truly about her motives behind creating martharainville.com of the Vermont National Guard, she explained she took the step on the advice of her son, who told her about how some people make it their business to buy up Web sites named after prominent people and then sell the site back to the person at an exorbitant price later on.

"I knew I wouldn't be adjutant general forever," she told me. "I thought I might run for office some time, or go on the lecture circuit, and I knew I wanted my name protected."

She insisted she wasn't thinking about a particular elective office in 2003 when she plunked down the $25 to establish martharainville.com, which would remain dormant until her exploratory committee took form last year.

Vermont Democratic Party staffers, who were the ones who first stumbled on the info that the origins of her Web site pre-date her entry into politics by two years, told me they're uncomfortable with her explanation, particularly the timing of when martharainville.com was created.

"At a time our soldiers were fighting for our country in Iraq and risking their lives, the fact that Martha Rainville was contemplating her future political career was a disservice," said Andy Bouska, a staffer for the Ds.

--Sam Hemingway

Comments:
As long as the Dems keep engaging in personal attacks on the flimsiest of grounds, the more Rainville will imnprove in the polls. Why is it okay to besmirch people's reputations these days on the basis of little or no evidence? And you wonder why Rainville is focusing on the issue of character, integrity, etc. Who is Andy Bouska to question a former general's long service to her country?!!! All to score cute political points that probably make his cohorts smirk and smile. It really is pretty sickening when you think about it.
 
A domain name was registered (and we're not talking something that rainvilleforcongress.com), and that is carte blanche to impugn a public servant's integrity? Heaven knows Peter Welch never thought ahead about his political future, right? No wonder good folks don't want to get involved in politics.

Whatever happened to reasonable people agreeing to disagree about substantive issues, and being able to have a respectful, spirited dialogue in the public square? Why is all political debate reduced to gutter-sniping cr*p these days.

I view government as an honorable calling. What is being done in the name of partisan politics these days is insulting to all who hold our governmental institutions dear.

But, hey, Bouska is apparently a looker. That makes it all okay.
 
Does anyone here realize how groundbreaking it is to be able to yell back to a print reporter?

Yeah Hemmingway! More substance!

Wow. That's awesome.
 
civilityplez -- Here are a few facts:

1. As I posted elsewhere, she advocated for a program as she had since 1999. She neither decided which vendors get contracts for the program, nor advocated for any vendor.

2. If you believe those making the accusations, sure. Not surprisingly, you choose to do so. But if one chooses to believe others (namely Rainville and others on her side of the aisle), it isn't a "fact" at all.

3. Rainville has not conducted a single "push poll." The poll I assume you are referencing was doen indpenedent of her, and isn't much of a "push" poll at that.

Because you believe anything coming from the left side, you judge that Rainville has no credibility. I'll put her credibility up against Peter Welch's any day of the week, and the voters will have the final say. In the end, I'll bet they go with the side that doesn't believe the best way to enhance their candidate's character is by trashing the other side.
 
For context, dear readers, my reference to Bouska as a "looker" above was a reference to the preceding post, which has now been deleted. I wouldn't know Bouska if he came up and bopped me on the nose.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   June 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008   December 2008   January 2009   February 2009   March 2009   April 2009   May 2009   June 2009   July 2009   August 2009   September 2009   October 2009   November 2009   December 2009   January 2010   February 2010   March 2010   April 2010