Tom Perriello, the Democratic challenger for the Fifth District congressional seat, went on the attack against incumbent Republican Virgil Goode on September 3 during a debate in Danville before a crowd of more than 300.
He attacked Goode’s effectiveness as a congressman: “Southside has not been getting its fair slice under Congressman Goode. The numbers sound impressive until you compare them to what Congressman Rick Boucher (D-Ninth District) and others have done.”
He attacked him on national security: “You and the rest of the gang in Washington have sat on your rear ends while things have gone south in Afghanistan.”
He even attacked him on immigration, saying that Goode’s position was so extreme that he was out of touch with the Republican Party and “tilting at windmills.”
 Tom Perriello, left, couldn’t stop talking about a “new generation” of politicians. Virgil Goode couldn’t stop talking about “anchor babies.” |
The debate was organized by UVA’s Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership and moderated by Executive Director (and former Daily Progress reporter) Bob Gibson along with former Danville mayor Linwood Wright. Both candidates were asked a host of questions that focused on four main topics: economic development, energy policy, national security and immigration.
Goode stood by his record, pointing out the $23 million in federal dollars he had secured for the Institute of Advanced Learning and Research in Danville, where the debate was held.
“The persons here in Danville and Pittslyvania County know that I have brought home the bacon and delivered the goods for the Institute,” said Goode, who was most vociferous about the need to drill offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as well as the plague of “anchor babies”—the children of illegal immigrants who are citizens by virtue of their birth on U.S. soil.
“There’s not going to be a consensus in Congress to fix the anchor baby situation until you get more persons like me who are willing to say no to the anchor baby and no to the Nancy Pelosis of this Congress who depend on the Hispanic Caucus,” said Goode, who said the problem would have disappeared 10 years ago if a bill of his had passed.
Perriello parried: “Under a Republican-led Congress, your bill only generated 47 supporters. …Your own presidential man [John McCain], whom you’ve stood beside several times tonight, doesn’t support this bill, so anyone who wants to vote on this issue should be well aware that there’s exactly zero chance of motion on any sort of bill to this effect.”
Goode tried so hard to link Perriello with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that Perriello took a moment to let the crowd know, “Contrary to what Mr. Goode seems to think, I’m not Nancy Pelosi.” He called out Goode for conflating ideas that have the chance for bipartisan support, like cracking down on employers of illegal immigrants, with ideas that have no chance of support, like cutting off “anchor babies.”
“You can’t confuse the things we can get done with the things that we can’t get done,” said Perriello. “That’s exactly why you’re not getting anything done on Capitol Hill.”
But for all of Perriello’s strong rhetoric, he’s still facing an uphill battle against Goode. During the debate, Goode constantly dropped the names of influential people in Southside as well as the many law enforcement offices, community colleges and businesses he has helped secure federal funding for. Knowing those names has a lot to do with why he’s been in office for 12 years.
There were plenty of partisans in attendance for both candidates, though the Perriello crowd was somewhat louder. It was the second debate for the candidates, who first faced off in a Charlottesville event August 13. The debate is available as a podcast from the Sorensen Institute’s website.
“It was a much bigger crowd, much more enthusiasm, much more content than I ever expected,” said John Hollins after the event. He was one of the only members of the crowd without any sort of gear that gave away his lean in the race. “I thought the questions were outstanding. And I thought the answers were good, they reflected their particular views. They both did extremely well.”
C-VILLE welcomes news tips from readers. Send them to news@c-ville.com.
