Vivian J. Paige

Karl Rove came to Virginia Beach today for a fundraiser for Congresswoman Thelma Drake. His appearance drew a group of about 40 protesters, according to this PilotOnline article. The protesters held a mock trial for Rove, a portion of which appears in the video here.

Earlier this week, Democratic Delegates Bobby Mathieson and Joe Bouchard held a telephone conference and called for the fundraiser to be cancelled. In response, the Drake campaign has called for Democratic challenger Glenn Nye to return $4,000 received from NY Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel, who has admitted that he may have violated a house ethics rule.

I have an idea: how about Nye giving back the $4,000 and Drake giving back whatever she raised today ($50,000? $100,000?) and we’ll call it even

According to The Free-Lance Star, Fredericksburg Democrats want 1st Congressional District candidate Dr. Keith Hummel, who suspended his campaign two weeks ago, to withdraw:

Wednesday night, the Fredericksburg Democratic committee unanimously passed a resolution asking chairwoman Amy La Marca to “immediately write Dr. Keith Hummel demanding his immediate withdrawal as the nominee.”

The committee also unanimously passed a resolution calling for the resignation of [1st District Democratic chairwoman Suzette] Matthews due to her “failure to properly review” Hummel’s background as well as “her refusal to promptly react” when Hummel’s background surfaced.

Time is getting short for the 1st District to have a candidate in place. This is a tough district for Democrats so a quick resolution is important.

Gotta love this video!

And in case you didn’t see it, check out this campaign website.  Best site ever!

Just a quick reminder that the 200+ Men political forum on race and politics will be held tomorrow - Saturday - morning at 9:30am (refreshments start at 9am) at St. Patrick Catholic School.

Hope to see you there!

I have long argued that a primary battle between Creigh Deeds and Brian Moran was a bad idea and have been calling for the DPVA leadership to step in and settle it before it gets out of hand.

Well, it’s gotten out of hand.

The emails and public comments made as the result of the fiiling of finance reports Tuesday were more than the usual “dick waving” (as George Carlin would have put it). As the day wore on, the level of civility dropped - dramatically. I’m not going to get into who started it, mainly because it reminds me of a schoolyard fight. As one who was involved in enough of those in my formative years, I know that who threw the first punch ultimately didn’t matter - both parties ended up getting suspended.

So cut it out, guys. Show some of that Virginia gentleman spirit that you have. And don’t let your mouthpieces within the campaign do your dirty work, because it reflects poorly on you. Keep your eye on the prize.

Congrats to J.R. at Bearing Drift, who has received blogger credentials to attend the Republican National Convention. Hampton Roads should have good coverage of both conventions.

Did you know today was National Ride to Work Day? Yep. There is an organization out there that encourages people to ride motorcycles and scooters.

Of course, if I was going to ride a motorcycle to work, it would have to be my all-time favorite bike - The V-Max I remember when this bike was released back in 2005. It had 145hp - more than a lot of cars. I think I read that the new one to be released in 2009 (pictured here) will have 200 hp.

The need for speed - the V-Max certainly fits the bill

(Somehow, I don’t think they had this bike in mind for National Ride to Work Day.)

Simply put, the South is no longer the “swing” region in American politics. It has swung to the Republicans.”

In making this statement, author Thomas F. Schaller takes on the likes of Steve Jarding and Dave “Mudcat” Saunders, who believe that Democrats must win in the South in order for us to become a majority party again. The opening chapter of the book, entitled “Partisan Graveyard,” argues that a new coalition - made up of Democrats in the Northeast, Midwest and Pacific Coast states - is what will bring the Democrats back to power.

Schaller says that the South - consisting of the eleven states of the Confederacy - has always been a political outlier. “[S]ocial and cultural issues tend to trump economic considerations for many voters in the South, where race and religion are woven through almost every aspect of the region’s political culture,” writes Schaller. Half of all African Americans - the Democratic Party’s base - live in the South, but due to “racial antagonisms,” a white backlash has been created, with few whites voting for Democrats. Simply put: while the Democratic base is there, African Americans lack the power to move the states into the Democratic column. Add to that the presence in the South of the largest share of of the country’s evangelical voters ~ and evangelicals tend to not vote for Democrats, either.

Schaller points out that there is an increasing number of Southerners who have come of age with no connection to the Democratic Party or the South’s prior history of being a Democratic stronghold. As this number increases, Schaller says, it will be harder and harder to attract voters who have never cast a vote for a Democrat in their lives. Trying to capture this vote is to reach for the “high-hanging fruit. Schaller says the ripe-for-the-picking votes are in the pan-western states, where, unlike the South, there are swing voters and independents.

But for a few thousand votes in New Hampshire, Al Gore would have pulled it off [won the election] while winning the popular vote; more astounding, but for the switch of about 60,000 vote in Ohio, Kerry nearly did so despite losing the popular vote.

There are votes to be had out there, but they happen to not be in the South.

Chapter 2, “The Southern Transformation,” focuses on the history of the South from 1964 through about 2006, the date the book was published. This chapter is a must-read for anyone wanting to to understand the depth and breadth of the Republican takeover of the South.

Most point to the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as the starting point for the South’s turning away from the Democratic Party. But Schaller says that was not the case. Schaller says it happened 16 years later, when Republican presidential nominee Ronald Reagan gave his first major speech after receiving the nomination in Neshoba, Mississippi. The county had demonstrated “a severe case of electoral schizophrenia: 95% of their votes went for Barry Goldwater in 1964, 82% for George Wallace in 1968, 88% for Richard Nixon in 1972 and then, by 32 votes, Jimmy Carter carried the county in 1976. Schaller says that Neshoba was a bellwether for the South on matters of race. In his speech, Reagan gave his support of “states’ rights,” which Schaller calls the “friendly term” for opposition to civil rights. Schaller credits Reagan for “perfecting the southern strategy of luring away white southern Democrats,” although it was Goldwater who first used it.

The Republican takeover of the South has three aspects: elections won and governing majorities achieved, how it has changed national policy and politics, and the significance of the South’s takeover of the Republican Party itself. Schaller takes the reader through the last 40 years, looking at the presidency, Congress and governors as well as state legislatures.  Then starting with Barry Goldwater, Schaller looks at each major figure in the Republican Party - Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush - and how each man strengthened the party’s grip on the South.

At the end, though, it is the Republican Party which has been taken over by the South, not the other way around.

Stripped bare of the platitudes and catchphrases, the southern-based Republican majority stands naked as a ruling cohort no longer interested in limited government, in states’ rights, in judicial review, in consensus-building filibusters, or any of the other measures of restraint that once informed the political philosophies of movement conservatives.

Southerners have captured the GOP and with it, they bring the evangelical movement and their desire for a “rapturous accounting.” In doing so, though, they are alienating the moderates in the party who live outside the South. And these are the people who the Democrats can win over.

Starting today, I’m going to try to post each Tuesday a quick roundup of technology stuff I’ve run across over the previous week.

Sony has launched a new line of sleek computers, the VAIO Z series. They weigh just over 3 pounds and sport a 13.1″ screen, along with most of the standard features now expected on laptops. Optional features include Sprint Mobile Broadband, a dual channel 128 GB solid state drive and Blu-ray disc.

Also from Sony is the new VAIO FW series, a 16.4″ wide multimedia notebook.

Funambol has released a free plug in for the iPhone 3G that allows syncing of contacts wirelessly.

Mindmapper has released a USB version. The software is used to make it easier to grasp, organize, and visualize information, and is a great tool for brainstorming and planning sessions. The 2008 USB version comes ready to run on a 4GB drive.

Get ready for some football Gameloft has released NFL2009, which allows for playing the game on your mobile phone. To check availability of the game from your carrier, text “QB” to 82174 on your mobile phone.

Did you know that 66 million people worldwide suffer from stuttering? New therapy has been developed by Hollins Communication Research Institute in Roanoke “with advanced behavioral, electronic and computer technologies that significantly improve the ease of learning and retaining fluent speech.”

How about a 24-carat gold-plated 8GB USB drive that weighs less than a nickel? It’s supposed to be available this week from New Egg for less than $40.

Music lovers should check out the new Creative ZEN X-Fi. It delivers higher quality music than any other MP3 player. And its wireless LAN capability enables you to wirelessly stream and download music from your PC to your player over your wireless home network.

More next week

And in case you missed it, Warner announced raising nearly $3 million in the second quarter, with about 81% of the individual donors being Virginia residents.  A summary of  his filing can be seen here (pdf).

Last Thursday, former Bush advisor Karl Rove “defied a congressional subpoena and refused to testify” before the House Judiciary subcommittee. His failure to appear may result in contempt of Congress charges. Rove is scheduled to be in Hampton Roads this coming Friday for a fundraiser for Congresswoman Thelma Drake.

This afternoon, Delegates Bobby Mathieson and Joe Bouchard held a telephone press conference on the subject. Both Mathieson, who represents the 21st House District, and Bouchard, who represents the 83rd House District, live in the 2nd Congressional District which Drake represents. Citing his nearly 30 year career in law enforcement, Mathieson said that he was taught to obey the law and to use good judgment when dealing with issues such as these. Bouchard, a career Naval officer, previously served in the White House and has testified before Congress. Should Rove be held in contempt of Congress, Drake will have to vote on it. Bouchard sees this as “a serious conflict of interest,” saying that Drake is “appearing to endorse his [Rove's] defiance.”

“I hope she will cancel the event,” Bouchard said, “and choose her constituents over her loyalty to Rove.” Mathieson also said that he hopes she will “do the right thing.”

As noted in the linked USA Today story:

House Republicans called Thursday’s proceedings a political stunt and said if Democrats truly wanted information they would take Rove up on an offer he made to discuss the matter informally.

Neither Mathieson nor Bouchard agrees with this assessment. Mathieson said that Drake serves in Congress and Rove is defying the power of Congress. Bouchard, who hold a PhD in political science, pointed out that there is always politics involved when discussing the executive versus the legislative branches of goverment. However, he said, the constitution does not “endorse a concept of absolute executive priviledge,” which is what Rove and others are relying on. “Rover’s offer [to discuss the matter informally] is disengenuous, ” Bouchard said, “and not consistent with any constitutional law.”

I suspect this is not the last we have heard of this.

The front page of Monday’s Virginian Pilot contains a story about the indictment of four of the seven members of the Board of Supervisors in Gloucester:

A scathing and sometimes colorful grand jury report alleged that the supervisors conspired to fire two top county officials and illegally seize their computers in a midnight raid with help from the sheriff. The report said the supervisors illegally pressured the Planning Department director to interpret county law in favor of a developer who supported them.

The charges are misdemeanors, and if convicted, the supervisors - Chairwoman Teresa Altemus, Michelle Ressler, Gregory Woodard and Bobby Crewe - face 1 year in jail and a $2,500 fine. Also indicted was their developer friend, George Woodhouse II, who faces 10 unrelated felony charges.

What really caught my eye, though, was this:

Many Gloucester merchants and residents interviewed after the indictments said they were afraid to speak out publicly because they feared retaliation.

There is something very wrong when voters are afraid of those who are elected to represent them. So close after Independence Day, I find it disturbing that we have right here in Hampton Roads a constituency far too similar to that which our forefathers fought some 250 years ago. Voters should support the recall petition:

“The grand jury did their job, and now it’s up to the taxpayers,” said Garr Johnson, a retired poultry science professor who’s spearheading the recall effort. “If what’s going on isn’t enough to light a fire under us, democracy is beyond hope.”

Yeah. What he said.

When Tim Kaine was running for governor in 2005, as is normal, they did a fly-around the weekend before Election Day. Traveling with Kaine was Barack Obama. Truth be told, at their appearance in Norfolk, people were much more enamoured with Kaine than they were with the junior Senator from Illinois.

In February 2007, Kaine announced his support of Obama’s presidency and has served as a national co-chair of his campaign. Kaine has been a cheerleader for Obama, both here at home and throughout the country. His no-so-subtle arm-twisting of various folks, both in the General Assembly and outside of it, resulted in a number of people jumping on the Obama bandwagon.

His high profile has not gone unnoticed by political pundits. When all of this first started, I figured such talk was just that: talk. After all, Kaine leaving the governor’s mansion a year early would mean leaving Virginia with a Republican governor. At the same time, I looked at the political landscape in Virginia for Kaine and it is indeed bleak. There is no reasonable political future in Virginia for the 50-year-old Kaine. While I originally thought that Virginia Democrats would never forgive him for leaving us Bill Bolling, the truth is that the governor may never really need our support again, at least not ours alone. If asked, I think Kaine will accept the VP slot.  The only downside for Kaine is that if the ticket loses, he’s out of politics a year earlier. Not much of a downside. And the upside, even if the Obama/Kaine ticket loses, is that he has raised his national profile, putting him in a position to run for the presidency down the road.

This morning’s talk shows were full of “Kaine for VP” talk. Perhaps it is because some higher profile candidates - Jim Webb and PA Governor Ed Rendell, among them - have removed themselves from consideration that Kaine’s stock has risen. There are those who think that Kaine, despite his lack of foreign policy experience, would add value to the ticket by putting Virginia in the Democratic column for the first time since 1964. The electoral math seems to indicate that the path to victory for Obama runs through Virginia. While I remain unconvinced that Virginia will turn blue, the odds are higher than they have been for years, mainly due to the presence of Mark Warner on the ticket.

So what does it do for Virginia if Kaine is on the ticket? Well, for one, it puts the Republican Party of Virginia in a tough spot. At this point, they have already decided that AG Bob McDonnell will be their nominee and LG Bill Bolling will run for re-election. Should Bolling be elevated to the governor’s mansion, does he step aside and allow McDonnell to run? Or does he run instead, despite his reasons for not pursuing the nomination? I find it difficult to believe that Bolling would step aside. In fact, serving as governor kinda makes his reasons (committment to family and colleagues) moot.

A second thing that Kaine on the ticket may accomplish is a settling of who the Democratic nominee for governor will be. I believe Kaine has been reluctant to negotiate a compromise between Senator Creigh Deeds and Delegate Brian Moran because he needed the support of both of them in order to try to advance his agenda in the General Assembly. Freed of this, Kaine could sit the two of them down and work out a compromise, drawing straws if necessary. Avoiding a costly (and potentially nasty) primary would work to the advantage of Democrats in 2009, setting the stage for a third consecutive Democratic governship. And it would go a long way towards healing whatever animosity Democrats in Virginia would have towards Kaine for leaving us with Bolling.

Finally, if Obama/Kaine is a winning ticket, can you imagine the value of having the sitting VP campaign for the Democratic candidate in Virginia in 2009? Virginia has a long history of chosing its governor from the opposite party of that of the president. If Kaine campaigns vigorously for the gubernatorial nominee, and Virginia Democrats remain engaged, the potential for a Democratic governor goes way up. (And if Bolling is the Republican nominee, they go way up.)

So I’m coming around on the idea of Kaine being VP. (Despite my support of Hillary Clinton, however, I do not believe she should be the VP. But that’s a post for another day.)

Technorati Tags: Tim Kaine, Bill Bolling, Bob McDonnell, Barack Obama, Creigh Deeds, Brian Moran

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

An article written by my father, the Rev. C. Thomas Paige, as it appeared in the Tri-State Defender on the date shown.

For a long time I have been searching for a word or a group of words that would definitively describe the current conditions of our world. This is not it but it comes closer than anything I have found to date. It is on a paraphrase of one of the most popular hymns of the church but oh, what a paraphrase:

Backward, Christian soldiers,
Marching as in fear.
With the cross of Jesus
Going to the rear.
Christ the royal Master
Leads against the foe
But we are going backwards,
Our banners do not flow

Like a bunch of weaklings
Moves the church of God.
Brothers, we are treading
Where no saints have trod.
We are all divided,
Not one body we!
United in dissensions
And one in apathy.

— Rev. U. G. Murphy

These are the words of a preacher — a preacher, mind you — who has dedicated his life to making this a better world, a Christ-centered world. Now with the evening shadows closing about him, he cries out, “Backward, Christian soldiers.”

What words could better describe our conditions today? Yes, we are going backwards — and backwards fast. Anyone who holds to the ideas of some decades ago is quickly labeled “old-fashioned.

A few days ago, I walked down one of our streets and saw one of my favorite slogans: “HE WHO FOLLOWS THE CROWD WILL ONE DAY WAKE UP LOST IN IT.” The day has come when most of us have become lost in the crowd. There was a day of heterogeny in thinking, in behaving, in life’s goals. Today it is no longer true. We are all moving toward a period of homogeny. All of us, to a large degree, think, act, behave and everything else alike. The lines between what is right and what is wrong is thinly drawn. We lose ourselves in the complacency that everyone else is doing it. Instead of the church going into Christ-centered society, the world has come into our churches and we are more concerned about having a new dress or a new suit to show than we are in serving God.

Last Sunday, I attended service in one of the local churches. I purposely went in late and sat in the back. After I took my seat, my eyes dropped down to the feet of the lady sitting next to me. She sat with a baby squirming in her arms and wearing stockings that were more “runs” than stocking.

As I looked at her there rocking her baby and joining in the singing of the hymns, I was touched. To me, she represented the old school of thought as far as going to church is concerned. Whereas she was willing to take her baby to church and wear those stockings, there were many who would have used such apparel as a reason for staying home. We find ourselves in a society where we are moving further and further backward from those things that have had meaning and will have meaning as long as there is a man on this earth.

We live in a society where people take greater pride in being anything but a Christian. I heard a young man ask a young lady, who had recently finished college, what church she belonged to. She looked at him and said, “Are you kidding?” A long time ago, the young woman would have said to the young man, “I see learning this has made thee mad.”

Today we are living in a society filled with mad people. We are marching backward and backward fast. The paths we are traveling, the things we are doing, and the thoughts we are nourishing in our hate-filled bosoms can do nothing but lead us backward.

It has been nearly 20 centuries since Jesus came down here and suffered, bled and died for the salvation of mankind. His suffering was a method whereby this world was to get better and better and better through his efforts. But what have we done? Man’s inhumanity to man marches daily before all of us, showing that we are going backward and backward fast. We have lost that zeal, we have lost that deep-seated yearning, we have lost that inner desire that makes each of us want to be more and more like Jesus. Only in proportion that we are willing to let the life of Jesus become a part of each of our lives will the ever-hastening process of backward marching cease.

This Sunday’s On the Record will feature Steve Yetiv, who teaches political science at ODU and is the author of several books on our policy and practices in the Persian Gulf. Yetiv joins host Joel Rubin to discuss our relations with Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and other nations in the Gulf and whether the war in Iraq has made things worse.

In the second segment, Rubin talks with George and Frances Sadler, a local couple who spent six months sailing from Norfolk through Caribbean.

In his “My Minute” segment, Rubin takes on the General Assembly and the twin issues of transportation and judgeships.

Catch OTR at 11:30am on WVEC. If you miss the airing, it will be available on the website on Monday.

According to PilotOnline:

A July 18 public hearing has been postponed on health care projects, including a downsized Bon Secours DePaul Medical Center, Michael Byrnes, executive director of Eastern Virginia Health Systems Agency, said this evening.

Byrnes said a new date has not been set. A 30-day postponement was requested by Bon Secours Hampton Roads Health System.

Will post more information once it becomes available.

About 10 days ago, I ran across an op-ed in The New York Times by Thomas Schaller. In it, he discusses why the Democrats cannot win the South in November. As it turns out, this is just a brief synopsis of Schaller’s book, “Whistling Past Dixie: How Democrats Can Win Without the South.” On the strength of the article, I ordered the book and started reading it a few days ago.

I’ll post a review in parts next week, but while I’m only through the first three chapters, I can say that this book should be read by Democrats and Republicans alike, if for no other reason that to gain some understanding as to how we got here. At times, I have been depressed. Having lived in Virginia for all but 3.5 years of my life, it’s really hard to swallow that the ability of Democrats to recapture the South is virtually nonexistent. At the same time, the book has given me hope for America. Republicans should be afraid ~ if Schalller is correct, the South will be the only place in the US where Republicans will rule in a few years.

You are cordially invited to the

announcement of

Brent McKenzie

as a

Candidate for School Board

in the

Rose Hall District of Virginia Beach

on

Tuesday, July 22nd

6:00 - 8:00 PM

at the

Town Center City Club

222 Central Park Avenue, Suite 230
Virginia Beach

Kindly RSVP to

757-816-2736 or Mckenzie.brent@gmail.com

“Superintendent” $250 “Principal” $100

“Teacher” $50 “Student” $35

Please make checks payable to Friends of Brent Mckenzie

Evisceration of the 4th amendment - at the hands of Democrats. A shameful day. For those playing catchup, here is a nice summary of the impact of the FISA vote. (h/t Blacknell.net)

The final vote was 69-28 in favor of the bill. Among those voting against was Senator Hillary Clinton. Her statement on this is below the fold.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ON THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008

July 9, 2008

One of the great challenges before us as a nation is remaining steadfast in our fight against terrorism while preserving our commitment to the rule of law and individual liberty. As a senator from New York on September 11, I understand the importance of taking any and all necessary steps to protect our nation from those who would do us harm. I believe strongly that we must modernize our surveillance laws in order to provide intelligence professionals the tools needed to fight terrorism and make our country more secure. However, any surveillance program must contain safeguards to protect the rights of Americans against abuse, and to preserve clear lines of oversight and accountability over this administration. I applaud the efforts of my colleagues who negotiated this legislation, and I respect my colleagues who reached a different conclusion on today’s vote. I do so because this is a difficult issue. Nonetheless, I could not vote for the legislation in its current form.

The legislation would overhaul the law that governs the administration’s surveillance activities. Some of the legislation’s provisions place guidelines and restrictions on the operational details of the surveillance activities, others increase judicial and legislative oversight of those activities, and still others relate to immunity for telecommunications companies that participated in the administration’s surveillance activities.

While this legislation does strengthen oversight of the administration’s surveillance activities over previous drafts, in many respects, the oversight in the bill continues to come up short. For instance, while the bill nominally calls for increased oversight by the FISA Court, its ability to serve as a meaningful check on the President’s power is debatable. The clearest example of this is the limited power given to the FISA Court to review the government’s targeting and minimization procedures.

But the legislation has other significant shortcomings. The legislation also makes no meaningful change to the immunity provisions. There is little disagreement that the legislation effectively grants retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies. In my judgment, immunity under these circumstances has the practical effect of shutting down a critical avenue for holding the administration accountable for its conduct. It is precisely why I have supported efforts in the Senate to strip the bill of these provisions, both today and during previous debates on this subject. Unfortunately, these efforts have been unsuccessful.

What is more, even as we considered this legislation, the administration refused to allow the overwhelming majority of Senators to examine the warrantless wiretapping program. This made it exceedingly difficult for those Senators who are not on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees to assess the need for the operational details of the legislation, and whether greater protections are necessary. The same can be said for an assessment of the telecom immunity provisions. On an issue of such tremendous importance to our citizens – and in particular to New Yorkers – all Senators should have been entitled to receive briefings that would have enabled them to make an informed decision about the merits of this legislation. I cannot support this legislation when we know neither the nature of the surveillance activities authorized nor the role played by telecommunications companies granted immunity.

Congress must vigorously check and balance the president even in the face of dangerous enemies and at a time of war. That is what sets us apart. And that is what is vital to ensuring that any tool designed to protect us is used – and used within the law – for that purpose and that purpose alone. I believe my responsibility requires that I vote against this compromise, and I will continue to pursue reforms that will improve our ability to collect intelligence in our efforts to combat terror and to oversee that authority in Congress.

Thank you, Senator Clinton and the 27 others, for voting against this monstrosity.

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Bon Secours DePaul Medical Center has removed 30 beds from service, according to The Virginian Pilot. The removal means that there are about 135 staffed beds out of the total 238 licensed beds for the facility. Interesting, as that figure is almost identical to the 134 beds that the city’s consultant determined was appropriate and which the DePaul Emergency 134 group endorses. Heading into next week’s public hearing, whose position does such a move improve?

Buried at the end of the story is a comment by Mayor Paul Fraim regarding a meeting that he participated in on Monday with Bon Secours officials.

“They did not mention anything about the downsizing that was announced today,” he said Wednesday.

How can you announce a downsizing that was effective Wednesday, including the relocation of the staff, and not have that mentioned in a meeting held just two days prior? It’s no wonder, then, that Norfolk officials don’t believe that Bon Secours has been upfront and truthful with the city.

~

Since I wrote the initial story last week on the DePaul situation, I have gotten a number of emails and phone calls from people on both sides of this issue. Yesterday, I participated in a taping of Norfolk Perspectives (which, after a whole lot of effort, I managed to capture the live stream and post here). Over the course of time, a couple of things have become clear to me.

First, the decision by Bon Secours to downsize DePaul to 64 beds was one done mostly out of the public eye. Like so many things, the public seemed to only become aware of this in recent weeks, although it was first brought to my attention some time ago. Despite the fact that Bon Secours has quietly engaged certain citizens, including some members of council, the city seems to have dropped the ball on this, not heeding the warnings of those like DePaul Health Foundation board member Bruce Holbrook, who now heads the DePaul Emergency 134 group.

Second, I don’t think Norfolk residents realize what the ultimate cost of the downsizing may be. In our taping yesterday, Fire Chief Loy Senter brought up the fact that a smaller DePaul hospital with fewer services will result in the routing of emergency patients to a hospital that is further away from them - either Leigh or Norfolk General. That will mean longer wait times for service. Ultimately, Norfolk citizens will have two choices: wait longer or pony up more money for more rescue positions. We all know how that will turn out.

The saving grace for Norfolk residents is that Bon Secours’ initial plan was denied by the decision-makers in Richmond. But time is running out. Let your voice be heard. If you can’t make the public hearing on July 18, by all means contact those who will be making the decision.