(Pat on the back for anyone who can identify the movie reference)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmzrTN52m2g

§ 58.1-3819. Transient occupancy tax.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+58.1-3819

“…shall be designated and spent solely for tourism and travel, marketing of tourism or initiatives that, as determined after consultation with the local tourism industry organizations, attract travelers to the locality and generate tourism revenues in the locality.”

The money is not being spent “soley” for tourism in Loudoun, and no one consulted with the local tourism industry organizations, no showing how this would “attract” tourists…

The Board should definitely do this over… and ask some questions this time, send it through the proper process, and get the right answers from our local tourist industry organizations…

The only reason that TJTHG got money from our board is because one person, who lives in Waterford, where TJTHG has its office. TJTHG has very little to do with Loudoun other than having an office here, and we should not be in the business of giving away our money to people who are politically connected, just because they want it. You think TJTHG is great–let Gettysburg, Monticello, fund the hospitality training…. why are we handing over our precious dollars—seems like a scam, and yes I do blame TJTHG.

Then their prefrontal cortexes mature, and they realize the errors in their immature logic.

Being a moderate myself, I find this statement patently false.

” the vote in California was pretty narrow”

California is California, and a narrow margin was a major victory given all the money raised to defeat it.

If there is anyone being ridiculous in this discussion it is you. You are throwing out little more than personal attacks and unsubstantiated opinion. Sorry, but I don’t drink kool aid. If you have concerns about JTHG it might serve you well to get the facts, rather than daydreaming up innuendo, and ranting about it here.

I agree that there is no need for hospitality training for JTHG. It is also true that Dan Snyder doesn’t need this funding. I do think the BOS shot themselves in the foot with this decision, and I also believe that it is a significant error in judgement to critique JTHG over the BOS action.

oh well, we’re just going to have to live with the fact that after 14 years in power the biggest thing the conservative “movement” managed to accomplish was a few state bans on gay marriage.

…well that and PEPFAR, which is well intentioned (but then again so was the Iraq war). We could throw the tax cuts in there, too. But it’s hard to make the case that they did their job of improving the economy, seeing as how we’re now in the worst economic situation since the great depression and all…

If you look at how much has changed on the issue of gays in general in the last 20 years, it’s pretty remarkable. You’re on the wrong side of history on this one, Joe, though I suspect you will eventually moderate your opinion as well.

None of the sights or sites you speak of are tourist draws needing Hospitality Training related to the civil war… yes, I have a problem with the Board giving our money to this group, but it is also the group’s problem in that they asked for it, don’t need it, and it just looks fishy.

Why is it such a problem for us to know what the salaries are? Let Pennsylvania and Maryland, and Albemarle County with the major sites pay for their hospitality training.

You are being ridiculous blaming only the Bos and not the group that is asking for this– and yes, I do think what her father and law and husband are up to show a lot about who she spends her time with and her “influence” and I think things from her past show her morality too– so it is all important to me to know before we hand over hard earned tax money.

If I was going to revisit the issue, which it appears we are destined to do, I suppose my response would be that the VA Marriage Amendment was not promising to make the world a better place, but to keep it from becoming a worse place. Let’s not split hairs over that sentence, but the basic fact is true, no?

(I can’t believe I am getting roped into this conversation. Soon we will have Jonathan here yelling at me and it will be just like old times.)

I think if you are going to evaluate the MI or VA or CA gay marriage bans, it would be more accurate to view them as simply reflections of popular opinion rather than advocacy toward an envisioned future. To me it is more interesting to see it this way.

Take our local case: In the 2006 and 2007 elections there were strong hints Loudoun County was turning bluer (not the least of which was a nearly complete Democrat takeover of the Board of Supervisors, and a respectable Democrat (though I think still majority Republican) delegation sent to Richmond. In 2008, Obama won here pretty handily, not a landslide but the first time the area has voted for a Democrat for president in many elections. So it would be fair to surmise the area has become more “liberal” the past few years. Yet in 2006 the VA Marriage Amendment passed by a large margin – I think over 57% of the vote – despite a strong advocacy effort from the other side.

I really do not think the margin was the result of conservative activism, either. From what I saw of the pro-Marriage Amendment movement here, it was a pretty shoestring-and-duct-tape run affair. The other side definitely had more money to spend, and an equal or greater number of boots on the ground.

And I bet if gay marriage was to come up again in 2009 (it can’t, I think 2012 is the soonest, but for argument’s sake) it would lose again. A lot of people have a problem with it.

And I will tell you, the majority of the population increase here has been through immigration. This might well contribute to the further “bluing” of NoVA, especially if the GOP continues to be viewed as “anti-immigrant”. But I will bet this would also INCREASE the electoral bias against legalizing gay marriage.

So whatever is going on, I don’t think it’s all that useful to see the prohibition of gay marriage as misguided or counterproductive. Perhaps it is, but so what? Public sentiment is against it by a wide margin. That is just reality.

we did a similar ban in MI, and let me tell you, I am countin’ the days now my friend! My only regret is that we didn’t do it sooner! If we had banned gay marriage 30 years ago, I’m sure the Big 3 wouldn’t be in the situation they’re in right now. Hell, we’d probably all be flying corporate jets right now!

Same goes for Cali. Now that gays can’t get married, I expect to see a steady rise in standardized test scores coming out of that state over the next decade (look out, Holland!), and within 10-15 years we should expect divorce rates in that state to be hovering right around zero. I look forward to saying “I told you so” when it comes to pass (assuming that Obama hasn’t shut this blog down by then!)