6/09/2006
6/08/2006
Democrats won't let Delay Off the ballot
Is this the same political party that got US Senator Robert Torricelli replaced on the ballot with just weeks to go before the election?
In a surprise twist to the Tom DeLay saga, the Texas Democratic Party filed suit Thursday in an attempt to keep the resigning Republican Congressman’s name on the November ballot.
The suit, filed in Travis County 126th District Court, seeks to undo an hours-old declaration by Republican Party Chair Tina Benkiser that DeLay is ineligible to run in the general election.
If DeLay doesn’t serve as the party’s candidate for Congressional District 22, then according to the Texas Election Code, no other candidate is allowed to replace him, the suit says.
Lawyers for Houston’s Riddle & Brazil law firm, which filed the action, obtained a temporary restraining order at about 5:10 p.m. from Judge Darlene Byrne. Sources familiar with the case said the order prevents Benkiser from calling a meeting of the so-called District Executive Committee or taking other measures to replace DeLay as the Republican Party nominee for CD-22. . . .
The suit, filed in Travis County 126th District Court, seeks to undo an hours-old declaration by Republican Party Chair Tina Benkiser that DeLay is ineligible to run in the general election.
If DeLay doesn’t serve as the party’s candidate for Congressional District 22, then according to the Texas Election Code, no other candidate is allowed to replace him, the suit says.
Lawyers for Houston’s Riddle & Brazil law firm, which filed the action, obtained a temporary restraining order at about 5:10 p.m. from Judge Darlene Byrne. Sources familiar with the case said the order prevents Benkiser from calling a meeting of the so-called District Executive Committee or taking other measures to replace DeLay as the Republican Party nominee for CD-22. . . .
"Democrats call Zarqawi killing a stunt"
Get an ad out with these guys statements. Will any of the major media give these guys' statements attention? Unfortunately, that is unlikely.
Some Democrats, breaking ranks from their leadership, today said the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi in Iraq was a stunt to divert attention from an unpopular and hopeless war.
"This is just to cover Bush's [rear] so he doesn't have to answer" for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat. "Iraq is still a mess -- get out." . . .
"This is just to cover Bush's [rear] so he doesn't have to answer" for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat. "Iraq is still a mess -- get out." . . .
6/07/2006
"Burgled [UK] MP wants home stun guns"
It is obviously too politically incorrect to note that there are problems with stun guns (e.g., the criminal wearing rubber soled shoes or heavy coats) and that because of those problems guns have some advantages.
An MP whose house was burgled while his family and visitors slept has called for homeowners to be allowed to arm themselves with Taser stun guns. . . . .
Mr Davies added: "Shouldn't I, at the very least, be able to stand at the top of my stairs with a Taser - which isn't going to kill somebody - and use that as a means of self defence?" . . .
Although voicing support for Mr Davies, Victim Support Wales advised against home owners being armed with the electronic stun guns.
John Trew, Victim Support's national officer for Wales, said; "I don't think there is a problem with people using reasonable force to defend themselves."
But he said if there were burgling your house, people should "ring the police, don't try to take them on." . . .
Mr Davies added: "Shouldn't I, at the very least, be able to stand at the top of my stairs with a Taser - which isn't going to kill somebody - and use that as a means of self defence?" . . .
Although voicing support for Mr Davies, Victim Support Wales advised against home owners being armed with the electronic stun guns.
John Trew, Victim Support's national officer for Wales, said; "I don't think there is a problem with people using reasonable force to defend themselves."
But he said if there were burgling your house, people should "ring the police, don't try to take them on." . . .
So will Canadians Become more Sympathetic to American's on the Terrorism Issue?
Will this scare Canadians to want troops withdrawn or will it convince them to stick closer to the US? I am not sure which will happen.
Suspects arrested last weekend in an alleged terrorism plot planned to storm the Canadian Parliament and hold politicians hostage, and at least one wanted to behead the prime minister if demands to withdraw Canada's troops from Afghanistan were not met, according to a summary of prosecutors' allegations read in court Tuesday.
According to authorities, the group also planned to bomb power plants in Ontario and invade the downtown Toronto studios of the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., according to the written statement submitted to the court by defense attorney Gary Batasar and read into the record at his request.
According to authorities, the group also planned to bomb power plants in Ontario and invade the downtown Toronto studios of the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., according to the written statement submitted to the court by defense attorney Gary Batasar and read into the record at his request.
6/06/2006
May be everyone does understand the importance of defensive gun use?
The votes on these bills have been absolutely overwhelming. If this doesn't show that everyone understands that guns are necessary to defend people when the police can't be there, I don't know what does.
Start of hurricane season triggers gun debate
By Carrie Sheffield
THE HILL
June 6, 2006
The start of hurricane season has become a selling point for gun-rights legislation spurred by Hurricane Katrina.
During the during storm’s chaotic aftermath, government officials hoping to ensure public safety seized hundreds of legally owned guns from Louisiana residents, some seeking to protect themselves from pillagers and assailants. The seizures have triggered outrage among gun-rights activists, spawning a lawsuit and bills nationwide to ban future confiscations.
“These people were left to defend themselves from criminals,” said Chris Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association (NRA). “It really became the proving ground for what American gun owners have always feared, and that’s the day that bureaucrats threw the Bill of Rights in the trash can.”
Cox and other lobbyists are pushing for a bill that would ban government officials from seizing firearms during emergencies, saying it would ensure protection for law-abiding citizens when they need it most. Opponents say it could hamper law enforcement’s ability to stabilize turbulent situations. . . .
Since Katrina, state legislators in Louisiana, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida and Arizona have unveiled bills that would ban weapons seizures by state and local officials during emergencies. In Washington, S. 2599 and H.R. 5013 would prevent federal officials from making the confiscations. Proponents are using the start of the hurricane season last week as a selling point for moving the legislation swiftly.
“It’s a very important bill based on our experience, especially with hurricane season starting June 1 this year,” said the bill’s House sponsor, Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-La.).
Gun-rights strategists say they will easily garner enough votes to approve the federal measure, prompting critics to condemn what could result in the suspension of local gun-control laws and could make criminals of law-enforcement officials who confiscate abandoned weapons.
In the House, members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, including ranking member Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), approved the bill on a voice vote May 17. . . .
By Carrie Sheffield
THE HILL
June 6, 2006
The start of hurricane season has become a selling point for gun-rights legislation spurred by Hurricane Katrina.
During the during storm’s chaotic aftermath, government officials hoping to ensure public safety seized hundreds of legally owned guns from Louisiana residents, some seeking to protect themselves from pillagers and assailants. The seizures have triggered outrage among gun-rights activists, spawning a lawsuit and bills nationwide to ban future confiscations.
“These people were left to defend themselves from criminals,” said Chris Cox, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association (NRA). “It really became the proving ground for what American gun owners have always feared, and that’s the day that bureaucrats threw the Bill of Rights in the trash can.”
Cox and other lobbyists are pushing for a bill that would ban government officials from seizing firearms during emergencies, saying it would ensure protection for law-abiding citizens when they need it most. Opponents say it could hamper law enforcement’s ability to stabilize turbulent situations. . . .
Since Katrina, state legislators in Louisiana, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida and Arizona have unveiled bills that would ban weapons seizures by state and local officials during emergencies. In Washington, S. 2599 and H.R. 5013 would prevent federal officials from making the confiscations. Proponents are using the start of the hurricane season last week as a selling point for moving the legislation swiftly.
“It’s a very important bill based on our experience, especially with hurricane season starting June 1 this year,” said the bill’s House sponsor, Rep. Bobby Jindal (R-La.).
Gun-rights strategists say they will easily garner enough votes to approve the federal measure, prompting critics to condemn what could result in the suspension of local gun-control laws and could make criminals of law-enforcement officials who confiscate abandoned weapons.
In the House, members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, including ranking member Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), approved the bill on a voice vote May 17. . . .
"Gun Sales Rise as Crime and Accident Rates Fall"
The data below was collected from the NSSF. I strongly disagree with their positions on issues such as gun locks and their position on Project ChildSafe, because I think that it actually costs more lives by making people fearful of guns. In any case, they have updated some interesting data:
NEWTOWN, Conn.--New statistics show that firearm and ammunition sales are on the rise, coinciding with steady downward trends in gun crime, suicide and accident rates, in the U.S.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the shooting, hunting and outdoor industry, has released U.S. Dept. of the Treasury figures indicating that 2005 retail sales of firearms and ammunition rose 2.6 percent for a total volume of $2.1 billion.
For the year, approximately 4.7 million new guns were sold, bringing the estimated number of citizen-owned firearms in the U.S. to more than 290 million. The number of American households with at least one firearm is now estimated at nearly 110 million.
Of the various firearm types, the sharpest gains were seen in retail sales of handguns (pistols and revolvers). Handgun sales rose 3 percent while long-gun (rifle and shotgun) sales rose 1.8 percent.
Ammunition sales rose 3.5 percent. . . .
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the shooting, hunting and outdoor industry, has released U.S. Dept. of the Treasury figures indicating that 2005 retail sales of firearms and ammunition rose 2.6 percent for a total volume of $2.1 billion.
For the year, approximately 4.7 million new guns were sold, bringing the estimated number of citizen-owned firearms in the U.S. to more than 290 million. The number of American households with at least one firearm is now estimated at nearly 110 million.
Of the various firearm types, the sharpest gains were seen in retail sales of handguns (pistols and revolvers). Handgun sales rose 3 percent while long-gun (rifle and shotgun) sales rose 1.8 percent.
Ammunition sales rose 3.5 percent. . . .
6/05/2006
Lack of news coverage by mainstream media about congressional candidate encouraging illegal aliens to vote in race
This is from John Fund writing in today's OpinionJournal's Political Diary:
But almost no national media outlet has covered the late-breaking news that may decide the election. Last Thursday, Ms. Busby addressed a group of supporters and in response to a question in Spanish about how someone who was an illegal alien could help, she answered: "You don't need papers for voting," she said. "You don't need to be a registered voter to help." Even more troubling for her is the fact that someone in the audience taped her statement and gave it to San Diego talk-show host Roger Hedgecock.
The San Diego Union-Tribune picked up on the story over the weekend, and included Ms. Busby's strained explanation that she intended only to say that people too young to vote could still help with volunteer work in her campaign.
The incident hurts Ms. Busby because much of her campaign has been focused on her fight against corruption, especially in the sullied area of Congressional "earmarks," the pork-barrel projects that figured prominently in Rep. Cunningham's votes-for-cash bribery scandal. Now Ms. Busby has been caught in an apparent endorsement of either vote fraud or, most charitably, encouraging illegal aliens to help in her campaign. Should she lose on Tuesday, it will be interesting to see if the national media belatedly identify her slip of the tongue as a factor in her defeat. Alternately, should she win on Tuesday, will media outlets ask any questions about possible voter irregularities, such as whether any of the thousands of newly registered voters in the district weren't eligible?.
The San Diego Union-Tribune picked up on the story over the weekend, and included Ms. Busby's strained explanation that she intended only to say that people too young to vote could still help with volunteer work in her campaign.
The incident hurts Ms. Busby because much of her campaign has been focused on her fight against corruption, especially in the sullied area of Congressional "earmarks," the pork-barrel projects that figured prominently in Rep. Cunningham's votes-for-cash bribery scandal. Now Ms. Busby has been caught in an apparent endorsement of either vote fraud or, most charitably, encouraging illegal aliens to help in her campaign. Should she lose on Tuesday, it will be interesting to see if the national media belatedly identify her slip of the tongue as a factor in her defeat. Alternately, should she win on Tuesday, will media outlets ask any questions about possible voter irregularities, such as whether any of the thousands of newly registered voters in the district weren't eligible?.