McCain announces Justice Advisory Committee
Story here. I have no knowledge of what such a critter does, but the story says it would advise him on judicial appointments. What stands out to me is that it includes:
Sandy Froman, the Tucson attorney who is former NRA President.
Prof. Eugene Volokh, a quite pro-2nd Amendment academic and operator of the Volokh Conspiracy;
Prof. Orin Kerr, a member of the Volokh Conspiracy.
Charles Cooper, whom I recall filing some pro-2A amici, tho the memory is faint.
Former Sen. Phil Graham, with whom I've gone shooting.
Sen. John Kyl, quite pro gun.
Former Sen. Fred Thompson.
UPDATE to comments: Nope, a different Frank Keating! Former Gov. of Oklahoma, not former convictee in AZ. I actually have a bit info regarding the other. McCain was junior Senator, and the senior one, Dennis DeConcini, talked him to going along for a meeting with the agency that was investigating Keating's savings and loan. Supposedly, it was just a meeting to encourage the regulator to act quickly and not delay a ruling any farther. At the meeting, however, DeConcini bluntly pressured the regulator to act favorably to Keating. Who, it turned out, had been ripping off the S&L blind, or equivalent conduct (I forget now).
I was told by officials at the U of Arizona that the outcome made the football games a bit difficult. Both Senators had seating in the, I forget the term, the fancy box seats up on top. McCain was so angry at DeConcini that, to avoid a conflict, they had to work things out so neither Senator entered or left at the same time, and neither passed the other during the game.
Hat tip to Joe Olson....
Permalink · Politics · Comments (11)
NRA celebration to be loaded with former candidates
The Kentucky political blog PolWatchers reports that the NRA's Celebration of American Values in Louisville will be attended by John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Karl Rove, several senatorial candidates, Those backing Ron Paul won't be left out, as he's having his own rally on the 17th.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
Clinton and McCain can sleep easy
This endorsement tells us Obama's candidacy is doomed. Moore has never yet endorsed a candidate that didn't crash and burn. I mean, last time around he backed Wesley Clark, who flamed out two weeks later. Then he went with "anybody but Bush," and we know who came out on top there.
Update: a comment bounced by the spam filter is in extended remarks, below
Continue reading "Clinton and McCain can sleep easy"
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
More on the campaign...
Here. Must be rather disheartening to Brady. Two candidates very favorable to you, falling over each other to tell the public that they're not, and accusing the other of being your true ally, treating such status as a horrible thing.
Busy today, so blogging will be light.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Dave Kopel on the PA primary
Dave has an op-ed in the Wall St. Journal.
Hat tip to reader Marcus P. ...
UPDATE: He's off a little on steel. It was known, at least as far back as the Romans, but nobody could mass produce it until the 19th century. Up thru the middle ages, it was common to make weapons of iron, with a steel cutting edge welded on.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
More dancing around the gun issue
Story right here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Obama's comment....
Hmmm... rural folk are bitter, and that's why they "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
It's a pretty strange observation from a fellow who has spent the last few months trying convince people that:
1. Really likes the Second Amendment;
2. Is quite religious; and
3. Absolutely opposes free trade agreements.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (8)
Hillary finally mentions guns
From the Boston Globe:
"Clinton talked about gangs and drugs as a cause of homicides, but mentioned guns only in passing. She noted "a direct correlation between the illegal gun sales and homicides," as she proposed a new initiative to crack down on interstate gun trafficking and allow federal agencies to share information on the transfer of guns. In addition, Clinton said she would work to renew the assault-weapons ban, signed by President Clinton in 1994 but allowed to lapse a decade later."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (7)
McCain has "work to do with gun owners"
Yep, he certainly does.
Maybe this is this question we should be asking.
Reader Carl in Chicago adds a comment, replying to comments, which the spam filter for some reason blocked:
"I'd love to see a more pro-2A front-running candidate. Probably all of us would.
But regarding voting your principles, protest write-ins, and just staying home on election day, sometimes I fear that some of us have never taken any lessons from Don Quixote.
If you don't comprehend Cervantes, I can use a poker analogy. When you play poker, you play the hand you've got and you make the best of it. Sometimes (very rarely) you win a big pot. Other times, you win a small pot. Sometimes you break even. And yes...sometimes you lose with the hand you have.
But one thing's for certain. You're damned well guaranteed to lose if you fold.
Please folks, don't fold on this. Folding is for when it's time to invoke the purpose of the 2A...and that time sure ain't now."
Reader Renaissance Man responds with a comment, again blocked by the spam filter (which I cannot figure out, but it does stop a hundred or so spams a day, selling everything from viagra to forklifts):
"Carl, the poker analogy is completely bogus. As I commented in a different thread, what we have here is similiar to a labor negotiation. We have power, but the only way to use that power is to cause ourselves short term damage to effect long term gain. A strike causes temporary loss of income which negatively affects the worker and his or her family. However, by accepting such damage the workers as a whole are able to gain a better contract.
The same thing is at work here. As long as the Republican party knows that it will get unquestioning support from gun owners because Democrats are "more evil" then we have NO power. Only by operating en masse and denying McCain the Presidency will we be able to gain or regain the power that we should have."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (11)
Obama aims for gun vote
This election is getting complicated.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (23)
Obama's Smoking Gun?
It's a Townhall column by Sandy Froman.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
Clinton and Obama on the 2A
Alphecca has a post on the subject. Who'd ever have dreamed that someday the two leading Democratic presidential candidates would be claiming they supported the Second Amendment individual right? (Both have fallen back to "but we can regulate it").
I've been involved in this issue for decades, and so have a long term view. It's been steadily downhill for the other side.
1960s: they think they can get national registration and permit systems, at a bare minimum. In fact, the predecessor to the Brady Campaign opposes national registration and permits because it's a sell-out, a compromise that would deprive them of even more. They get GCA 68, which the Washington Post denounces as a worthless compromise. Second Amendment? Hah, we all know that only protects a State's right to have National Guard units!
1970s, early. Still pushing for national registration and permits. No luck.
1970s, late. How about a ban on "Saturday night specials"? Nope. Or snub-nosed handguns? Nope again. Angry that the Carter Admin. made campaign promises and won't follow thru (I've got the memos somewhere, where a low-level govt official says that the message that there will be no push from the Administration had better come from somebody with a higher pay grade). A handful of law review articles claiming Second Amendment protects an individual right.
1980s. Fall WAY back to measures so minor that they sometimes outlaw nothing at all, or outlaw things nobody has. Supposed plastic guns and armor-piercing bullets. Only apparent motive is that the gun movement will be forced to defend them and thus take a PR hit. That is one very flimsy strategic goal.
Gun movement gets Firearm Owners' Protection Act. Gets it even though House is Democratic, and its leadership VERY strongly opposed. Majority of House signs discharge petition that gets it out of Judiciary Committee.
1990s: Antigunners finally score a few victories, Brady Act, AW "ban" (which is meaningless in impact) the wiping out of home FFLs (which hurts, but in terms of the overall strategic goal doesn't do a lot Back in 68 the idea had been to make FFLs easy to get, because FFLs have to keep records of gun sales, see picture ID, etc.). As a result, Demos lose control of both houses and the White House.
All the big names in constitutional law begin endorsing an individual rights view of the Second Amendment.
2000s: Antigun cause consists of calling for narrow things (so narrow I can't even recall them now -- secure storage, trigger locks sold with guns, etc.). Even these fail. AW "ban" expires and neither party wants to touch the issue.
2008: Democratic candidates don't even argue collective rights anymore.
Continue reading "Clinton and Obama on the 2A"
Permalink · Politics · Comments (12)
Clayton Cramer's candidacy and an Army of Davids
Comment here. This may just have serious meaning for us all. Perhaps running for office is no longer limited to people who have devoted their lives to that one pursuit, and those who have loads of money.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
Profound and well-written piece on political thought
By David Mamet. No, it's not about the election. A few samples of his insight:
"'I observed that lust, greed, envy, sloth, and their pals are giving the world a good run for its money, but that nonetheless, people in general seem to get from day to day; and that we in the United States get from day to day under rather wonderful and privileged circumstances—that we are not and never have been the villains that some of the world and some of our citizens make us out to be, but that we are a confection of normal (greedy, lustful, duplicitous, corrupt, inspired—in short, human) individuals living under a spectacularly effective compact called the Constitution, and lucky to get it.
For the Constitution, rather than suggesting that all behave in a godlike manner, recognizes that, to the contrary, people are swine and will take any opportunity to subvert any agreement in order to pursue what they consider to be their proper interests.
To that end, the Constitution separates the power of the state into those three branches which are for most of us (I include myself) the only thing we remember from 12 years of schooling.
The Constitution, written by men with some experience of actual government, assumes that the chief executive will work to be king, the Parliament will scheme to sell off the silverware, and the judiciary will consider itself Olympian and do everything it can to much improve (destroy) the work of the other two branches. So the Constitution pits them against each other, in the attempt not to achieve stasis, but rather to allow for the constant corrections necessary to prevent one branch from getting too much power for too long.
Rather brilliant. For, in the abstract, we may envision an Olympian perfection of perfect beings in Washington doing the business of their employers, the people, but any of us who has ever been at a zoning meeting with our property at stake is aware of the urge to cut through all the pernicious bullshit and go straight to firearms."
Hat tip to reader Matt Carmel, of OSHA Data.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Demo candidates may have interesting debate coming up
April 16 debate in Philadelphia. details here. Hard to duck the gun issue in that venue -- a city whose political leaders want lots more control, in a State where gun ownership and NRA membership is remarkably high.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (9)
Aye, an' he must have given the Blarney Stone a big smooch!
It looks as if Obama... or perhaps it should be O'Bama... is actually an Irishman!
Someone play "Danny Boy" at one of his rallies so we can see if he breaks down in tears. That'd seal it!
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Thought on next election
Ed Whelan, at The Weekly Standard, has some serious thoughts about the power to appoint Supreme Court justices. Whoever wins in November will likely get to appoint 2-3 justices on their first term, and perhaps as many in their second.
Via the Volokh Conspiracy...
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Hillary v. Obama
Assessing those two on gun rights issues is a little like debating who was better on freedom of expression, Hitler or Stalin, but.... over at the LA Times blog, Tim Cavanaugh points out one distinction. When the bill to forbid seizures of lawfully-owned guns in the wake of a natural disaster came up, Obama voted for it, and Hillary voted against.
Via Instapundit, who notes that Obama seems to think the Second Amendment is about hunting, and thus has favored complete bans on handguns and semiauto firearms of all types.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (7)
McCain's constitutional qualifications
Now that it's turned to running down McCain, the NY Times has an article questioning whether he meets the constitutional requirement of being a "natural born" citizen. He was born in the Panama Canal Zone, of citizen parents.
Apparently there was a statute passed by the First Congress that included persons such as he among "natural born." I wonder if "natural born" didn't have special meaning then. We still refer to persons who are made citizens after birth as "naturalized," made natural something, rather than made citizens.
UPDATE. Jim Lindgren points out, on the Volokh Conspiracy, that "natural born" indeed was a term of art at the time of the Framing, and under it McCain is clearly "natural born." Blackstone and other sources used "natural born" to mean one who owed allegience to a sovereign from birth, and listed children of ambassadors born over the seas (at the time, the citizens most likely to have left and taken families with them) as "natural born."
UPDATE: laws vary as to what constitutes being born within the country's domain. Some include military and civilian flagged ships, etc.. Ditto with parentage. At least 40 yrs ago, France said you were a citizen if you were born elsewhere but your father (not your mother) was French. We used to use these features to try to create hypotheticals where a person had a maximum number of multiple citizenships. French father, some other mother, born on a British ship while docked in NY harbor...
Permalink · Politics · Comments (23)
Commentary on Obama and the Heller case
At Direct Democracy.
"Obama tells everybody what they want to hear! Who cares if it's irresponsible bullshit?"
What's interesting is that this is from an ANTI-seccond amendment type, complaining about Obama's claiming to support an individidual right.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Nothing like "campaign reform"
The Demo National Committee, through Howard Dean, alleges that Sen. McCain is violating McCain-Feingold. The McCain campaign responds to the charge of hypocrisy with the charge that Howard Dean did the same thing in 2003.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
This story needed a little editing...
The Newsday story is about Hillary Rodham Clinton and a criminal case she defended long ago:
"Rodham was paid a $250 retainer for her services, minus 10 percent for court costs, records show. In her book, Hillary Clinton says the case spurred her to create the first rape hotline in Arkansas.
In 2005, while working in a laundry, she stole several hundred dollars worth of checks from her boss to buy drugs. She is now living in a halfway house and looking for work."
In context, the "her" is Hillary and the "she" is the victim of the crime,
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Campaign doublespeak
Ken Blackwell has an article on Obama in the NY Sun.
"Senator Obama recently gave us a disturbing foretaste of the contradictory doublespeak we could expect under an Obama presidency"
....
"Noting that some argue that the Second Amendment only grants state governments the power to arm National Guard units, Mr. Obama said he rejected that view in favor of the widely held belief that the Second Amendment — like the rest of the Bill of Rights — involves rights held by American citizens. "
....
"[L]ater in that same story it says that in the same news conference where he spoke about an individual's right and the Second Amendment, Mr. Obama also said he supports the D.C. gun ban."
....
"That's like saying you have the right to worship as you choose, but the government has the power to ban attending church. Or that you have the right to free speech, but that government has the power to stop you from speaking about any subject it wants. Or that you have the right against unreasonable searches and seizures, but that anything the government wants to search at your house is automatically reasonable."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (4)
Hillary Clinton's undergrad paper.
Last night the link was up, then failed. Reader Jack Anderson just emailed a link that works. Maybe it was site maintenance.
Online here. I think she ought to have taken to heart one quote from its subject:
"There are two roads to everything--a low road and a high one. The high road is the easiest. You just talk principles and be angelic regarding things you don't practice. The low road is the harder. the task of making one's self-interest behavior moral behavior."
Continue reading "Hillary Clinton's undergrad paper."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
John McCain and the Hanoi Hilton
My friend and fellow gun attorney has an article out on the subject. Jim is author of the first law review article attacking McCain-Feingold, so it's not like he's a big McCain supporter. He's a straight shooter, and spent years in the Hanoi Hilton, and was tortured, so he's an eyewitness to what's under discussion.
By way of background, apparently there are internet rumors going around that are getting pretty wild -- down to claiming that McCain collaborated with his captors and as a result was assigned to a cushy hotel room with two ladies of the evening. I'm waiting for the followup in which he was taken aboard a U boat to celebrate Hitler's 90th birthday in a secret bunker in Antarctica.
More comment in extended remarks below.
Continue reading "John McCain and the Hanoi Hilton"
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
McCain, and an Oregon iniitiative on gun shows
Story in the Oregonian.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
Column on McCain
I'm rooting for Fred Thompson, and dislike McCain's pushing "campaign finance reform," a/k/a "Congress shall make some laws ... abridging freedom of speech." But for all that I have to say this column on McCain does ring true.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
More trouble for Romney
His speech a while back mentioned watching his father march with Martin Luther King, in Grosse Point, MI. Then it was shown he wasn't there, and he explained he didn't mean "saw" literally.
Then the issue arose whether his father had marched with Dr. King at all.
His campaign came up with two witnesses that said they'd seen the two marching there, back 40+ years ago. OK, that was impressive, and the story seemed at an end.
But the Boston Phoenix, which broke the original story, has investigated and reports that on that day Dr. King wasn't in Michigan, he was speaking to the AFL-CIO in Brunswick, NJ.
Via the Carpetbagger Report.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Mitt Romney endorses AW bans, again
Right here. He dances around on the issue, says he signed the MA state ban (but dances on just why: in his version it was because it made owner licensing less stringent, too) and in the end allows "We also should keep weapons of unusual lethality from being on the street."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (15)
Hilarious -- until YouTube starts yanking them
Bitter put me on to Red State Update, a collection of hilarious videos. But I just noticed that they're hosted on YouTube, and about a quarter of them have been taken down in the last hour or two.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
The world turned upside down...
Hillary is attacking Obama as unelectable, because he favored outlawing handguns.
Two candidates with an "F" rating on an issue, fighting out which of them is more un-electable on it.
Update: Obama's campaign is now disavowing the questionaire, and stating that he supports “common-sense limits, but not banning” handguns.
If I was Brady Campaign, and had any hair, I'd be pulling it out just now.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (9)
Taking politics way too seriously
Some whack job just ran into a HIllary campaign office claiming he has a bomb strapped to his chest.
If police sharpshooters get the right setting, he may become quite literally a whack job.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Huckabee gets an endorsement
Mike Huckabee got the endorsement of the Republican Sportshooters Committee. The fellow has pretty impressive gunnie credentials; doesn't seem to have enough backing to get the nomination (the media having already decided that the primaries are Guliani vs. Romney and Hillary vs. Obama), but might have a shot at VP.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Gun blogger on Fred Thomspon steering committee
Gun blogger and author Michael Bane is on the newly formed steering committee of Sportsmen for Fred Thompson.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
I like Fred Thompson more by the minute
Now he's wandering around gun shows, and wishing he had more time and money to spend there.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (9)
Assault cars?
Maddened Fowl has some interesting postings on automobiles being used in slayings and mass slayings. (skim down on the page). Crackhead crashes car into crowd, 40 injured, a dragster goes out of control and kills six, "With today's high performance assault cars, there are many deaths & more injured..."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
"Don't mess with the sportsmen"
That's Scott Bach's suggestion to politicians, based on races in, of all places, New Jersey.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
More on Texas Land Commissioner
Here's a detailed article on Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson. I know him pretty well, and as the article says, he has firm beliefs and will tell you frankly about them. How he got ahead in the world of politics escapes me.....
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Fred Thompson and the UN
I'm out of town again, so blogging will be light for a few days, but Fred Thompson's criticism of UN disarmament measures has drawn some criticism from those who say there's nothing out there, and SayUncle weighs in with a devasting counterattack.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Guliani hires NRA director Joe Allbaugh
Story here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (4)
I can see why the FEC is investigating Stephen Colbert
Yeah, he says he's a comedian and not a real candidate, but if he keeps writing material like this he's soon going to be a viable candidate.
"Our nation is at a Fork in the Road. Some say we should go Left; some say go Right. I say, “Doesn’t this thing have a reverse gear?” Let’s back this country up to a time before there were forks in the road — or even roads. Or forks, for that matter. I want to return to a simpler America where we ate our meat off the end of a sharpened stick."
Hat tip to The Anchoress.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Fred Thompson on 2nd Amendment & the UN
It's at the Field and Stream blog.
Via Instapundit...
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Post on candidate Bill Richardson
Over at Jim Pate's blog. (I've known Jim for years, didn't know that he blogged):
"What really caught my attention was a question that Brian Williams asked him in the first Democratic debate that I watched. I don't remember much of the question or the answer, but I recall Brian Williams saying that Bill Richardson had the highest National Rifle Association rating of any Presidential candidate, Democrat or Republican. My jaw dropped. A Democrat has the highest NRA rating? That doesn't speak well for the Republicans, does it?
As I did some research in preparation for this post, I found that Richardson has actually received a decent mark from another conservative/libertarian organization: the Cato Institute. In the Cato Institute's Fiscal Policy Report Card on America's Governors: 2004, Richardson received a "B," which is in stark contrast to Mitt Romney's "C" and Mike Huckabee's "D."..."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
Mitt Romney on banning "extreme weapons"
Red's Trading Post has received a letter from Mitt Romney, in response to a question about his understanding of the Second Amendment, which to my mind shows... he has none:
"I strongly support the Second Amendment right of Americans to keep and bear arms. I am proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms."
.....
" I also recognize that some types of extreme weapons, those which were not meant for hunting, sport, or self-defense, have no business being on the streets."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (25)
Strange happenings in Louisiana
They elect an Indian-American governor who is pro-gun, anti-tax, wants to go after corruption -- is that allowed in LA? I thought they had laws against this sort of candidacy.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
Ron Paul and gun rights
Reader Mechanic recommends Noel Gibeson's blogpost on Ron Paul and gun rights.
UPDATE: dwlawson, of Chicago Handgun Rights comments, in a comment blocked by the spam filter:
I'm having a hard time staying with Fred. He needs to get it in gear and get out there. I really like RP as well and he's battling like he means it. I've contributed to both, but not sure how my vote will go in the primary yet.
If Rudy or Mitt gets the primary nod, I doubt I will vote for them. If we can't elect a real pro-rights candidate we deserve Hillary.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (8)
Great cover story on the presidential race
In Radar magazine.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Rudy overdoing it a bit
From the Wall Street Journal Online:
"The fact is that people inside the Giuliani campaign are appalled at the number of times their candidate has felt compelled to interrupt public appearances to take calls from his wife. The estimate from those in a position to know is that he has taken such calls more than 40 times in the middle of speeches, conferences and presentations to large donors."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (8)
What Rudy's wife REALLY said during the NRA event
Now, THIS is funny.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Guliani was about to muff it...
Stop the ACLU catches Rudi slipping as he is saved by the phone call from his wife...
“After all the second amendment is a freedom every bit as important as the other freedoms in the first ten amendments. Just think of the language of it — ‘the people shall be secure’ –let’s see, this is my wife calling…”
Whoops... lots of places you can slip up on the language of the Second Amendment, but it's not a good idea when addressing an NRA conference!
Michelle Malkin at Hotair is on the story, too, and notes that Rudi has a habit of being interrupted by phone calls from his wife during a campaign speech.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (4)
Irony...
On Friday, Rudy Guliani is explaining to an NRA conference that he really's isn't antigun.
And on the same day, NYC is arguing in court against a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against gun dealers that he initiated.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
C-SPAN to cover GOP candidate remarks to NRA Friday
Story here. It'll be on C-SPAN2 at 9 PM EDT.
For some reason the MSM has been referring to this as addressing the "rank and file" of NRA which (apart from TV coverage) it isn't.
In the meantime, Guliani and McCain spar on the gun issue.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Fred Thompson and the NRA
Seems there's a dispute as to whether he's a life member or an endowment member. Story here.
Continue reading "Fred Thompson and the NRA"
Permalink · Politics · Comments (7)
Guliani & Paul repeat stance on guns
In the debate last night:
GOLER: Mayor Giuliani, Senator Fred Thompson -- and we do wish he was here -- says the Virginia Tech tragedy might have been lessened if some of the students had been allowed to carry guns. He also says that...
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
He also says he never felt safe in your city because of its gun control laws. What do you have to say to him about either of these assertions?
GIULIANI: Well, I would say to him the FBI would disagree with that. New York City was, during the years that I was mayor, the safest large city in the United States. In fact, in 2000, which was one of the last years that I was mayor, it was 191 for crime in the country.
For example, in Boston, there was a 59 percent greater chance you'd be the victim of a crime than in New York City. In many other cities, there was 100 to 300 percent greater chance that you'd be a victim of a crime than in New York City.
One of the things I accomplished as mayor of New York City was the impossible.
GIULIANI: I took a city that was the crime capital of America, and I made it not only the safest large city in America, I made it safer than 189 small cities. So, I mean, people have their right to their own feelings. The reality is, you were safer in New York than just about any other city in the United States after I was mayor for about three or four years.
GOLER: And the idea of letting college students carry weapons?
GIULIANI: I think states have a right to decide that. I mean, states have a right to decide their gun laws. The second amendment grants you the right to bear arms.
We have a federal system. A lot of these issues work in America where we have people of different views and different conscience because we are a federal system. We allow states to make different decisions.
The focus of our laws should be on criminals. That's what I did in New York City. I reduced shootings in New York City by 75 percent. And I did it by focusing not on guns but on criminals. Putting them in jail, putting them in jail for long periods of time when they committed crimes with guns, and it worked.
(APPLAUSE)
GOLER: Congressman Paul, another gun issue for you, if you will. You have said that the 9/11 attackers might have had second thoughts if they'd felt that some of the passengers aboard the airplanes might have been armed.
We have seen airplanes -- airflights diverted because people heard Arabic on planes, because they heard Muslims praying. What do you think it would do to the travel industry of this country if passengers felt others were carrying guns aboard, sir?
PAUL: Well, first off, you're quoting me incorrectly.
GOLER: I'm sorry.
PAUL: I said the responsibility for protecting passengers falls with the airline, not the government -- not the passengers. The airline's responsible for the aircraft and the passengers.
If we wouldn't have been dependent on the federal government to set all the rules, which meant no guns and no resistance, then the terrorists may well have had second thoughts, because the airlines would have had the responsibility.
PAUL: But we assumed the government was going to take care of us. After 9/11, instead of moving toward the direction of personal responsibility and private property and second amendment, we moved in the opposite direction. We turned it over to the federal government. And look at the mess we have now at airports.
I mean, the airlines -- private industry protects their property all the time. People who haul around money in armored trucks protect their money all the time. But here is one example when the federal government was involved and they messed it up, and if we put the responsibility on the right people, respected the second amendment, I sincerely believe there would have been a lot less chance of 9/11 ever happening.
(APPLAUSE)"
Hmm... Guliani's pitch could be interpreted as (1) "I believe in the Second Amendment, but don't believe the 14th Amendment incorporates that as against the States, so States are free to experiment but the Feds are not," or (2) "I believe in the Second Amendment, but in a version of that that leaves government free to pass whatever laws it wants anyway." I tend to suspect version (2) is the one intended here.
At a policy, rather than constitutional, level, one would have to ask: if states should be free to experiment, would you favor repeal of a fair portion of GCA 68 -- e.g., the prohibited person categories -- in favor of a provision that simply says no person shall sell a firearm to someone prohibited by state law to have it.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (8)
Soros group gets $775,000 fine
America Coming Together just got hit with a $775,000 fine by the FEC. It was one of those astroturf groups, supposedly a popular movement, in reality funded by George Soros and others, and financed at over a hundred million bucks.
All I can find at the FEC website is a pdf of the complaint. It was filed in 2004, and asked the FEC to dismiss it so a lawsuit could be filed to enforce it, pointing out that the election would likely occur before FEC could decide the issue. I gather FEC didn't dismiss it -- and so the decision comes three years after the election. Showing about how much good the system is. A few tidbits are in extended remarks below.
Hat tip to Bill Taggart....
Continue reading "Soros group gets $775,000 fine"
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Karl Rove's parthian shot
I say this is Rove's greatest move yet: make Cheney president, establish a conservative military government -- and do it all at the instigation of the Left, and with the endorsement of the Huffington Post.
"Rove was a genius," they'll mutter while watching endless O'Reilly Factor re-runs in the re-education camps, "an evil genius."
Via Instapundit....
[OK, just for the record: I do not really think that Karl Rove set this up to make Dick Cheney a military dictator with the approval of the Huffington Post, nor that the left should be sent to re-education camps, or that, if they were, they should watch endless re-runs of the O'Reilly Factor. Even in a military dictatorship, some limits of decency should apply.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
John Edwards and straw man transactions
Story here.
(To be fair, there's no indication that Edwards knew he was the beneficiary of a straw deal -- that is, it sounds as if the donor knew very well that he was setting up thousands of dollars in straw donations, but at least just now there is no indication that Edwards knew of the arrangements.).
Via Instapundit...
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Ted Nugent gives considered opinions on '08 race
Since this IS Ted Nugent, I suppose a "strong language" caveat would be superfluous...
(UPDATE, Sat. morning: Jim W.. had a comment that was blocked by the spam filter for some reason, so I added it in extended comments below).
Continue reading "Ted Nugent gives considered opinions on '08 race"
Permalink · Politics · Comments (13)
Fred Thompson on NY gun laws and suits
Right here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
If you like law or sausages...
... don't watch either being made. The House of Reps big fight over who won the vote the other night... here's the WashPo's rundown (I'd assume biased as usual) of what happened:
"Democrats appeared to have won the vote, but with the voting time apparently having expired, GOP leaders persuaded three Latino Republicans who had voted with the Democrats to change their votes. At the same time, Democrats say, five Democratic lawmakers who had voted with Republicans were scrambling to change their votes as well. With two of the GOP votes changed, Democrats gaveled the vote shut, 214 to 214, and declared that they had won. But the public tally showed that the Republicans had won, 215 to 213, just as the vote was declared for the Democrats. The official final tally was 216 to 212 in the Democrats' favor....[E]lectronic records on the vote disappeared from the House's voting system and on the House clerk's Web site."
One might ask why, if the time for vote had expired, the voting was still going on. And why, in those closing seconds or at most minutes, the GOP managed to persuade three members to change their votes, and at the same instant five Demos suddenly decided to change their votes as well.
I have a guess. It's not uncommon, on a controversial issue, for congressmen to make a private deal along these lines: "We five will vote against you UNLESS you come within five votes of winning. Then we'll switch and vote for you. You in turn will not criticize us to your members (or if deal is made with political party, will not hold it against us), if you don't get within five votes, since we would have sided with you except that it made no difference."
Advantage to legislators making that deal: if the motion fails, you voted against it, and those who opposed it will think you were on their side, while those who were for it won't hold it against you.
My guess is that the three Repubs and five Demos who suddenly were trying to change their votes had made deals like that. And cutting off the vote was timed for an instant when those in power *thought* the changes had made the vote go their way, but they mistook the timing a bit.
Welcome to Washington...
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Richardson flip-flop on gun shows?
Story here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Presidential debates
I rather liked what I watched of the ones last night, if only because it made the candidates' pandering to people so obvious. I mean -- the lesbian couple who asked, if you were president, would you let us get married, and every candidate saying yes. How about "No, because the president of the US doesn't issue marriage licenses. And marriage is not a federal issue, talk to your state legislature. And if you want a constitutional amendment, or to be protected against one, the president doesn't even have a veto power over those. So I can't do a blamed thing in the area, talk to someone else."
Joe Biden, as would be expected, came down hard on a guy who asked about gun control (and referred to his rifle as his baby):
QUESTION: Good evening, America. My name is Jered Townsend from Clio, Michigan.
To all the candidates, tell me your position on gun control, as myself and other Americans really want to know if our babies are safe.
(MM : Mr. Townsend shows the audience a black rifle - looks to be an AR but not totally sure. Some on AR15.com think it was an AK)
This is my baby, purchased under the 1994 gun ban. Please tell me your views.
Thank you.
COOPER: Governor Richardson, you have one of the highest NRA ratings.
RICHARDSON: The issue here, I believe, is instant background checks.
RICHARDSON: Nobody who has a criminal background or is mentally ill should be able to get a weapon. That is the key, and that includes gun sales. That includes gun sales at gun shows.
The key is going to be also attacking poverty, bringing people together, dealing with those kids in the ghettos that are heavy users of gun violence and they are victims of gun violence, to make sure that this country attacks the core problems of poverty, having child care, bringing parents together.
COOPER: Senator Biden, are you going to be able to keep his baby safe?
BIDEN: I'll tell you what, if that is his baby, he needs help.
(APPLAUSE)
I think he just made an admission against self-interest. I don't know that he is mentally qualified to own that gun. I'm being serious. Look, just like me, we go around talking about people who own guns. I am the guy who originally wrote the assault weapons ban, that became law, and then we got defeated and then Dianne Feinstein went to town on it and did a great job.
BIDEN: Look, we should be working with law enforcement, right now, to make sure that we protect people against people who don't -- are not capable of knowing what to do with a gun because they're either mentally imbalanced and/or because they have a criminal record, and...
COOPER: Time.
BIDEN: Anyway...
(APPLAUSE)
COOPER: We got one more question. Before...
BIDEN: ... I hope he doesn't come looking for me.
BTW, the Influence Peddler says that Biden's claim to have filed the first AW bill is a bit of ... plagiarism?
Permalink · Politics · Comments (11)
Political effects of the JFK assassination
[Via Instanpundit] Ed Driscoll has a review of the book "Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism."
The theme is that the liberal movement was unable (at an emotional, subconscious level) to deal with the fact that a popular (and regarded as liberal, anyway) president had been killed by, well, a communist who'd defected to the Soviet Union and demonstrated in favor of Castro. In trying to cope, it (1) went off on conspiracy theories that tied in the government and/or (2) on anti-Americanism: Oswald hadn't killed him, America somehow had. It wasn't helped by the fact that in the early 60s a major liberal theme had been the dangerousness of right wing movements -- now turned on its head by the identity of the assassin. If he'd just been a John Bircher, everything would have fit together emotionally -- but he was quite the opposite.
I wonder if it deals also with the assassination of Robert Kennedy, gunned down by a palestinian -- a third worlder, as it were. A neo-nazi, maybe an Israeli fanatic, would have fit emotionally, but not a palestinian.
I recall reading a similar commentary on 9/11. Not quite so striking there, but again liberalism (already much modified) is faced with a horrific crime committed by people it tends to idealize -- third worlders. Ah, here it is, in the form of a novel. Do read the intro first -- part of the novel's plot is that a group of self-absorbed types have founded a think tank, so if it reads a little strangely, that's part of the plot. The key to the colors mentioned is that in the novel he breaks down political thought on emotional lines. Red=anarchic fighters (good fighter pilots). Blue = rules conseratives. John Aschcroft. (good cops and military). Orange = Jeffersonian, sometimes an early liberal. Green = the modern liberal/left. Not allowed to be judgmental, must be sensitive to everything, esp. that which is different from you.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Mike Huckabee on the 2nd Amendment
He sounds pretty solid. (I'm not sure which party he's with, but he might be scouting for a VP slot, too).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (8)
Op-ed on the 2nd Amendment and Ron Paul
Here it is.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
Fred Thompson news
There's a comparison of Ron Paul and Fred Thompson over at Republic Renaissance. (Since the blog has R. Paul's picture in the margin, you can guess how the comparison works out).
And Thompson himself has a post over at Powerline. (Hat tip to David McCleary and to Instapundit).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
Marion Barry walks again
A federal magistrate rules against revoking his probation for failure to file taxes while on probation for not filing taxes.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (4)
Bad sign for John McCain
A fellow staked out about 20 "elect McCain" type URLs, is selling them on Ebay, with opening big of $150 for the lot, and is unable to get a single bid.
Via The Kausfiles.
Some interesting polls in early primary states suggest Ebay's market reflects political reality. [Via Instapundit].
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Courtroom fallout from US Atty firings
Story here.
[Hat tip to David McCleary]
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Instapundit on Bill Richardson
Instapundit suggests there are several reasons to like Bill Richardson.
UPDATE: Here's a nice piece on him in the LA Times.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Indicted Rep. Wm Jefferson required to give up guns
Newsbusters has the story. And Here's his recent voting record on the issue.
Via Instapundit.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Friends of Fred Thompson
I just added a sidebar on the left, for donations to Fred Thompson. You can get the html for your own sidebar at Friends of Fred Thompson.
[I don't like that he voted for McCain-Feingold, but I think he's strong on just about everything else I value.)
BTW, if anyone wants to stick their own favorite candidate's websites in the comments, feel free. I think I set the spam block to moderate anything with more than 2 htmls, to keep out the &%$#^ spambots, so you might want to stick to one for sure or maybe two. If they don't appear promptly, it just means they were held for my clearance. Spambots will come up and post 5-10-20 webpages, for everything under the sun.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (7)
Fred Thompson website
I've established a rough website for Sportsmen for Fred Thompson. There is no organization by that name yet, but I'm sure there will be one, and then I'll turn it over to them. I'd appreciate any links to the page, as I'd like it to have a decent Google rating by he time he declares and such a group is set up.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
Take the test
Who said it, Al Gore, or the Unabomber?
[Via the Volokh Conspiracy]
Update: one of the comments suggests you might take a similar test: Porn Star, or My Little Pony. The link couldn't posted since "porn" is blocked due to the thousands of spam comments using that term. (I even get spam for fork lift buying sites).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (4)
Fred Thompson may declare around July 4
The Politico has the story.
There's a candidate I could back. I mean -- he quotes Don Kates on the Second Amendment, says that right to carry laws decrease crime rates, and blows away Michael Moore.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Leading candidates' positions on firearms
The Miami Herald has a brief summary.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Fred Thompson quotes Don Kates on the 2d Amendment!
Right here. This is staggering -- a possible presidential candidate who understand the Second Amendment, down to having read the scholarship on it. No "I support the Second Amendment" (leaving you to guess what I think it means). Instead, he quotes Kates, and observes "Unfortunately, the [NY Times] article falsely portrays the individual right argument as some new interpretation held only by a few fringe theorists. The truth is very different, as civil rights attorney and gun law expert Don Kates has pointed out recently."
I just realized -- what he's quoting comes from an email Don sent out, via Dan Gifford, to a small number of pro-second amendment types. Don doesn't even blog. His email was mentioned on John Lott's blog and one this blog, that's it that I can find.
One way or another, Thompson is interested enough in the right to arms to pick up on postings to scholarly email lists on the subject, or else hangs around pro-gun blogs. This is just incredible.
Anybody have a mailing address for him? I want to send him a copy of my Second Amendment documentary.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (13)
Fred Thompson -- now there is a candidate I could vote for!
Just read his article in Nat'l Review Online. A few excerpts:
"The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so."
"In recent years, however, armed Americans — not on-duty police officers — have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Fred Thompson
A caricature, and a great quote. I'd happily vote for anyone who can come up with “After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood.”
[via Instapundit]
When they were filming "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" in DC, the cameraman remarked to me that, what with working Hollywood, he was accustomed to dealing with gigantic egos. But, he added, the egos of Washington astounded him.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
More on Romney and hunting
AP story here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Mitt Romney--"lifelong hunter."
Well, it might be true in a very narrow sense. He went hunting once at age 15, and a second time last year. Story here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
More on Guliani on guns
John Lott has an interesting Guliani quote to the effect that gunmakers must know they are feeding an illegal market because they make 600-700% of the number of guns needed to fill the legal market,
Permalink · Politics · Comments (7)
Marion Barry continues to self-destruct
Former DC mayor (and present councilman) Marion Barry managed to avoid being jailed for a probation violation today. He'd been convicted of failing to pay income tax for 1999-2004, and given probation on the condition he start paying taxes and obey the law. Well, he sorta forgot to file his 2005 DC and Federal returns. And last November he tested position for cocaine and pot.
Gad, the guy is 71 years old. I think it was Cicero who remarked, of a skirt-chasing Roman senator, that old age has embarassments enough, one need not add to them those of youth.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Don Kates' take on Guiliani
An email from Don Kates:
Throughout his political career Bill Clinton’s "position on the Second
Amendment" was a bald-faced lie. Every time the subject arose he falsely
proclaimed his "belief in the Second Amendment." Insofar as there was
any truth in this scam, what Clinton meant was that he believed that the
Second Amendment does not mean anything.
Rudy Giuliani employs the exact same scam in the exact same way by
proclaiming that he believes in the Second Amendment. By carefully
reviewing his assertions in the context of his record it is possible to
ferret out his real beliefs and intended program. He believes that
people living in low crime areas may be allowed (as a privilege, not a
right) to have guns for sport. But no one other than public employees
and the politically powerful has a right to possess firearms for
self-defense. Worse yet, he believes the key to reducing crime consists
of disarming everyone who believes in a right to possess arms for
self-defense and who lives in an area where the incidence of crime is
such that they have some likelihood of using arms for self-defense.
Giuliani is, in short, a paradigm Republican, i.e., someone who is
dedicated to the interests of Big Business and for whom the rights of
little people are, at best, easily dispensable in the interest of public
safety (read Big Business).
If I were Sarah Brady faced with a contest between Hillary and Rudy I
would vote for Rudy. Each wants to ban and confiscate guns. But it is
far less likely that a Democrat could get away with trying to outlaw gun
ownership than that Rudy could do so. Remember that Harry Truman could
not end the Korean War, but Eisenhower could. And that no Democratic
president could come to detente with Russia or China but Nixon could.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (8)
Hot news from Drudge Report
Bill Clinton gropes, and may sleep with, his wife.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (4)
Mitt Romney's shifting positions
National Review Online has a nice summary.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
More on Guliani and guns
Here. Don't think he quite gets it that the constitution right isn't about duck hunting.
[hat tip to Dan Gifford]
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
NSSF alert on Guliani
The National Shooting Sports Foundation has issued a statement regarding Guliani's candidacy and record.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Alphecca on guns and the next election
Alphecca has a good post on the issue, with notes that New Mexico's Richardson might be a Demo candidate solid on guns and on western issues.
Which tends to minimize his chances of getting elected -- I mean, it sounds as if a measurable portion of the Demo party is now finding Hillary too right-wing for their tastes. And of course the media has decided that the contest will be between her and Obama.
(Via Instapundit).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Guliani dancing on second amendment
Captain's Quarters has the transcript:
"HANNITY: You inherited the gun laws in New York.
GIULIANI: Yeah. And I used them to help bring down homicide. We reduced homicide I think by 65, 70%. And some of it was by taking guns out of the streets of New York City. So if you are talking about a city like New York, a densely populated area like New York, I think it's appropriate. You might have different laws other places and maybe a lot of this gets resolved based on different states, different communities, making decisions. We do have a federal system of government in which you have the ability to accomplish that.
HANNITY: So you would support the state's rights to choose on specific gun laws?
GIUILANI: Yeah. A place like New York that is densely populated or maybe a place that is experiencing a serious crime problem like a few cities are now. Thank goodness not New York but some other cities. Maybe you have one solution there and in other place more rural, more suburban, other issues you have a different set of rule.
HANNITY: Generally speaking do you think it's acceptable if citizens have the right to carry a handgun?
GIULIANI: It's part of the constitution. People have the right to bear arms. Then restrictions have to be reasonable and sensible. You can't just remove that right. You got to regulate consistent with the second amendment."
OK, so he respects the Second Amendment ... and thinks New York City's gun laws are consistent with that. That's a firm position for you. The Bill of Rights protects this liberty -- but doesn't prevent putting the strictest and most arbitrary government permit sytems upon its exercise, if a state or locality (or presumably, the national government) thinks there is a need.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (20)
Funny spoof of Webb's State of the Union reply
"Let me share with you this deguerrotype of my great great great great grandfather, a penniless drunkard and street-corner pugilist who sat in a Dublin jail, until he was paroled and came to Virginia in 1724, just in time to join in the massacre of the peaceful Massapequasimolie Indians. I would hope you draw strength from this tomorrow when you return to your janitorial duties, brooding about the hour when you will rise up against the robber barons of the beef trust, but none of you are likely to have understood those historical references anyway.
But let me get to the real reason we are here, besides your mandate to disband the Mark Foley Man-Boy Love Association: to change course in Iraq."
That's just the beginning...
(Via Instapundit).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Presidential candidates' ratings
Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Dave Kopel rates the candidates on Second Amendment issues.
Of possible GOP frontrunners, Gilmore draws nearly perfect. Of possible Demo frontrunners, none get near. Gov. Richardson of NM does get a high ranking, altho his chances for Demo nomination don't seem high (if only because the press has decided this is a Hilary vs. Obama race).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Debate: Romney v. Romney
Pretty amusing.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
More on Romney's record
The Boston Globe notes that Mitt Romney's gun position has, er, varied a bit over years. As have his positions on other mattters....
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Mitt Romney backtracks on support for gun laws
The Boston Globe has the story.
Then:
"That's not going to make me the hero of the NRA," Romney told the Boston Herald in 1994.
At another campaign stop that year, he told reporters: "I don't line up with the NRA."
And as the GOP gubernatorial candidate in 2002, Romney lauded the state's strong laws during a debate against Democrat Shannon O'Brien. "We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them," he said. "I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety."
Now:
He now touts his work as governor to ease restrictions on gun owners. He proudly describes himself as a member of the NRA -- though his campaign won't say when he joined. And Friday, at his campaign's request, top officials of the NRA and the National Shooting Sports Foundation led him around one of the country's biggest gun shows.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Looking forward to John Conyers as House Judiciary chairman
He's already got his first citation for ethics problems, and Congress hasn't yet convened. The GOP at least had the decency to obtain power before abusing it.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Just about sums it up
Sen. Evan Bayh, on throwing his hat into the ring for the Demo presidential candidacy in 08:
""We need someone who can deal with the dysfunction here in this city so that our government begins to empower our people to fulfill their potential."
On the other hand, some of us would feel mightily empowered of Washington would just leave us alone and let us fulfil our potential.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Politics and whatnot
The Hill has an interesting perspective on how the Democrat/progressive/left/liberal (or whatever title you'd prefer) learned to play the game while it was a minority in Congress... a useful perspective for their opponents, who now must play the game. Go for the cause, rather than partisan gain, try to gain beachheads in both parties, etc..
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Former Sen. Edwards, Walmart, and why DC is the way it is
Hmm... former Senator John Edwards, a serious critical of Walmart, is said to have tried to buy a Playstation 3 at that retailer.
His explanation: he knew nothing of it. He just happened to mention wanting one for his kids, a staffer overheard, and he instructed a campaign volunteer to go out and get one. The volunteer in turn called Walmart and dropped Edwards' name in an attempt to pull strings and get one.
I'd believe it. But it tells you a lot about national politics. A moderately big figure (former senator, unsucessful VP candidate) has only to be overheard wanting something, and his staff rush to satisfy him and kiss up (even at personal expense of several hundred bucks). They hand it off to a volunteer, who deems it a sacred quest. The volunteer figures he can drop the boss's name and get special consideration, over a game system, of all things.
If you want to know how the corruption/scandal cycle works in DC, just figure this is a tiny example. They guy on top is treated as a demigod, and starts to believe it.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Election and next term
The Brady Campaign is rejoicing. The New York Times announces that New York (led by Chuck Schumer, the "giant of Brooklyn") is back in power and that Rep. Charles Rangel, likely future chair of Ways and Means, "sketched out an expansive federal agenda: Teaming up with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg on gun control, passing new tax incentives for urban job programs, and redirecting federal money to New York in return for the outsize tax collections that the federal government makes here."
Yup, this is the same spiel where he uttered the famous “Mississippi gets more than their fair share back in federal money, but who the hell wants to live in Mississippi?” Of course NY comes off worse than MS in terms of federal taxes collected vs. those spent. Federal income tax is progressive -- individuals, and states, with high incomes payment. Federal civilian expenditures are (hopefully) the other way round -- less goes to rich states and more to poor. Apparently the NY delegation finds that liberal financial principle objectionable when applied to them.
UPDATE: Here's an article from the LA Times on the new Demo majorty and the gun issue.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Ideas for new political parties
Wikkipedia has a page devoted to frivolous political parties.
I particularly like the Rhino Party of Canada (at one point the country's fourth-largest party), whose platform included:
repealing the law of gravity,
reducing the speed of light because it's much too fast,
paving Manitoba to create the world's largest parking lot,
tearing down the Rocky Mountains so that Albertans could see the Pacific sunset, or moving them one metre west as a make-work project,
making all sidewalks out of rubber to prevent inebriated people from hurting themselves when they fall down
adopting the British system of driving on the left; this was to be gradually phased in over five years with large trucks first, then buses, eventually including small cars and bicycles last,
selling the Canadian Senate at an antique auction in California,
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Pro v. antigun count
At the Volokh Conspiracy, Dave Kopel has an early-evening count of the electon impact on gun issues. Net result: a tiny loss in the Senate (1.25 votes), a larger but not disasterous loss in the House (14 votes). It's interesting how many major races involved essentially a pro-gun and anti-war Demo vs. a pro-gun and pro-war Republican. (Virginia and TN being clear examples, with the Demos running conservative, pro-gun types who are Demo in little more than oppositon to the war in Iraq).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (12)
Political telemarketers
I don't know how it is in the rest of the country, but I've been getting 2-3-4 pre-recorded calls a day, disembodied voices urging me to vote for my party's candidates. I find those quite annoying.
Got the same before the primary, when the local party was touting some hitherto unknown as a challenge to Randy Graf. All it did was to firm me up to vote for Graf as the fellow who wasn't tying up my telephone. I encountered Graf later and mentioned it, and he said his campaign had gotten so many responses like that that they resolved never to try it.
Anyway, if you want the NRA endorsements and grades, here they are.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Gun control: this election's non-starter
A perceptive article in the Univ of Chicago Maroon.
"Rather, it seems that the silence on gun control is the result of Democrats finally realizing that no one actually gives a s**t about gun control because, frankly, it is irrelevant."
[Hat tip to Joe Olson]
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Brady files FEC complaint against NRA, GOA
News release here, but no details. A general guess: under the various finance campaign laws, a nonprofit can advocate the election or unelection of a candidate, but only in messages to its members, not in any aimed at the general public.
UPDATE: Second Amendment Fdn. has filed a complaint against Brady, on the same grounds, pointing out that their press releases, circulated on the internet and by wire service, also reach their nonmembers.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
VA Senate race
Countertop has his take on the Allen-Webb race in Virginia, Lively comment section, too. (Via Instapundit).
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Kopel on elections and the gun issue
Dave Kopel has a post at National Review Online, regarding the upcoming elections and the firearm issue.
His thoughts are essentially: if the House goes Demo, there will be antigunners in the relevant leadership slots and thus risk. If the Senate goes Demo, Harry Reid is pro-gun, as are, to greater or lesser degrees, a majority of the Demo senators, which should give insurance.
I know he's got a good read on the local race for the House. Randy Graf won the nomination, fighting the GOP establishment's last second pick, and winds up with the national GOP withdrawing all support. The Demo candidate is leading by 8-10 points and will likely win.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Dead folks voting
The Poughkeepsie Journal is reporting a study indicating that 2,600 New Yorkers managed to cast ballots after they were dead. These political zombies were for some reason very partisan; Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 4:1.
[Via The Volokh Conspiracy].
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Florida Atty General race
Just got an email from United Sportsmen of Florida:
Whether Walter "Skip" Campbell, Democrat Candidate for Florida Attorney General, is flip-flopping, playing chameleon or plain out lying, one thing is clear -- that's not the kind of man you want for Attorney General (or any other elected office).
Campbell told the NRA and Unified Sportsmen of Florida that he supported legislation to protect the right of law-abiding citizens to have lawfully owned firearms locked in their private vehicles when their vehicles are parked in business parking lots.
Campbell then changed his position when appearing before the Florida Chamber of Commerce, which represents anti-gun businesses that want to ban guns from private vehicles if they are parked in parking lots while customers shop.
The Palm Beach Post reported (10/25/06) that Campbell said Florida businesses should be able to restrict the rights of employees and visitors because "the rights of the property owners are "sacrosanct" because they pay property taxes and insurance."
We find it egregious that Campbell, a man seeking the office of Attorney General, wou