Column by Chris Graham
Maybe it’s just me, but I thought I heard something in Bill Bolling’s comments yesterday about his decision regarding the 2009 governor’s race that sounded like a dig at Bob McDonnell.
“Because I’m not independently wealthy, and do not currently have a full-time government position, I have to work for a living, just like each of you, to pay the mortgage, college tuition, the power bill and all the rest”, Bolling said in his announcement.
“My first responsibility has to be to my family, and I have reluctantly concluded that it would be impossible for me to hold down a very demanding job in the private sector, fulfill my duties as lieutenant governor, and run a successful campaign for governor at the same time.”
Well, McDonnell isn’t what you’d necessarily call independently wealthy, but he is the sitting attorney general, which is a full-time state job, unlike the lieutenant-governor job that Bolling holds, which is part time.
Sounds to me like Bolling is saying at least in part that the reason he’s not running for governor next year is because his chief rival for the Republican Party nomination, McDonnell, would be able to run while collecting a salary from the state taxpayers.
He’s certainly not saying anything there about the two Democrats who are running for their party’s gubernatorial nomination, Sen. Creigh Deeds and Del. Brian Moran, both working lawyers who again aren’t the types that you would call wealthy. State-legislative positions are also part time.
Why did Bolling have to go into detail about job status – unless his goal in doing so was to dig at McDonnell a bit?
Could it just have been oversight on his part?
I ask because I can only imagine that this will become an issue next year when either Deeds or Moran squares off against McDonnell.