Advertisements
Home

WAPO FACT CHECKER GIVES DICK DURBIN’S OBAMACARE CLAIMS FOUR PINOCCHIOS

1 Comment

This is from Breitbarts Big Journalism.

I did not need the Washington Post to tell me that little Dickie Durbin is a liar.

When little Dickie Durbin’s lips are moving he is lying.

 

During Sunday’s Meet the Press, Illinois Democrat Senator Dick Durbin made the wild claim that ten million new Americans have found insurance coverage thanks to Obamacare. He also claimed that Obamacare would lower the deficit. But even The Washington Post fact checker had to give Durbin’s spin its worst rating of four Pinocchios.

As the Sunday, February 5th discussion shifted to health care, host Bob Schieffer pointed out that Obamacare is still confusing nearly everyone, and he asked Senator Durbin if there is “any hope of getting it straightened out.”

Durbin kicked into high spin with his answer.

“Bob, let’s look at the bottom line,” Durbin said. “The bottom line is this. Ten million Americans have health insurance today who would not have had it without the Affordable Care Act–10 million.”

That wasn’t all the spin Durbin had to offer: “And we can also say this. It is going to reduce the deficit more than we thought it would. We were seeing a decline in the growth of the cost of health care, exactly our goal in passing this original legislation. I’m finding people, as I go across Illinois, who, for the first time in their lives, have an opportunity for affordable health insurance for their families.

“Now, there are many Republicans who are wishing that this fails, hoping they can find any shred of evidence against it,” he claimed. “But we had a bad rollout. Let’s concede that point. Since then, we are gaining steam. And I think, ultimately, we’re going to find you can’t go back. You have to extend the health insurance protection to the 25 million, 30 million Americans who will ultimately have it, and we’ll be a better nation for it.

All of this is simply untrue.

To start with, the recent CBO report did not in any way say that Obamacare would bring down the deficit. On the contrary, the report said that the deficit will rise uncontrollably after 2015.

As to the millions Durbin claimed have gotten new healthcare coverage, the Post fact checker noted, “Durbin appears to be combining two figures released by the administration,” and neither number is true.

The paper pointed out that the number pushed by the White House, that 6.3 million have gotten new insurance under Obamacare, is impossible to substantiate because there is no way to know if those who tried to sign up actually got an insurance policy and began paying premiums. The White House is making claims that it simply cannot prove, and Durbin parroted these empty claims.

The paper went on to state that about all one can say is that the number of people who signed up and got new health insurance is no more than 4 million, and even that estimate is “extraordinarily generous.”

Finally, the Post criticized Durbin, stating he “has little excuse for going on national television and claiming that every one of these people had been previously uninsured. This has now become a Four Pinocchio violation.”

Senator Durbin, however, is undaunted in his outlandish claims. After The Washington Post published its fact check, his office replied to the criticism:

Fact check after fact check has confirmed that more than 9 million Americans have signed up for private health insurance or Medicaid coverage through Affordable Care Act. Many of the more than 9 million Americans are being covered for the first time. No matter the number of new enrollees, there is no question that the law is working and millions of people are realizing the benefits of affordable health coverage and the protections it guarantees.

In reply, the paper noted that it is “unaware of any fact checks that have confirmed these figures as all ACA enrollments or evidence that ‘many’ of the enrollees are being covered for the first time.”

Advertisements

Federal action sought on ‘stand your ground’ laws

Leave a comment

This is from The Hill.

The problem Holder and Obama have with the

Stand Your Ground Laws too many of Obama’s sons 

are getng shot trying to rob and rape decent people.

 

A group of congressional Democrats pressed the Justice Department Tuesday to gather new data about the effects of so-called “stand your ground” laws on public safety.

Roughly two dozen states have adopted laws authorizing citizens to use deadly force if threatened, even if they could retreat instead.

The statutes have been the subject of intense debate since volunteer neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last year, even though Zimmerman did not rely on Florida’s stand your ground law in his defense.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have called for reconsideration of the laws and whether they encourage violence.

 

Echoing those concerns, seven lawmakers issued a letter to Holder Tuesday, asking him to direct the Justice Department to adjust the definition of the term “justifiable homicide” in order to capture all cases involving stand your ground laws.

The group is also seeking data on other variables of such killings, including their location, information about who in the altercation was armed, the kind of weapons used and reasons they were justified.

“We believe this information would prove extremely useful in helping to evaluate the laws that govern the use of lethal force and in quantifying the impact of such laws on public safety and civil rights,” the lawmakers wrote to Holder.

Signatories on the letter were Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), along with Reps. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.), Bobby Scott (D-Va.) and Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio).

The lawmakers are also asking the Justice Department to sponsor research through the National Institute of Justice related to trends in justifiable homicides and state-by-state analyses of the impacts of different variations of “stand your ground” laws.

Durbin, citing existing research, said the laws have led to increased violence.

“But the federal government does not collect adequate data on these laws’ impact,” he said. “That must change.”

While the agency has authority to research the matter, the federal government is largely powerless to stop states from passing or enforcing the laws.

 

Gun rights expert, economist makes case against racism narrative surrounding ‘stand your ground’ laws

Leave a comment

This is from Real Clear Politics.

The race hustlers say Stand Your Ground equals a license

for whites to hunt blacks.

But the facts prove that Stand Your Groud has been used

By more blacks in Florida than whites.

 

 

‘Stand your ground’ laws in states like Florida have drawn scrutiny for the perceived racial disparity with which they’re used in the criminal justice system. A prominent economist and gun policy expert made an effort to rebut that narrative before a Senate panel Tuesday, saying that in fact blacks stand the most to gain from these self-defense statutes.

Testifying at a high-profile Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing that included the mothers of Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis, John R. Lott, Jr., president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, contended that it appears “all people benefit” from stand your ground laws when taking data into account. And contrary to arguments that the laws have a discriminatory effect, they benefit black Americans in particular, Lott said.

“Poor blacks who live in high-crime urban areas are not only the most likely victims of crime, they are also the ones who benefit the most from stand your ground laws,” Lott provided in his testimony. “The laws make it easier for them to protect themselves when the police can’t be there fast enough. Therefore, rules that make self-defense more difficult disproportionately impact blacks.”

As evidence, Lott took figures from the Tampa Bay Times that frequently have been used to criticize the effects of stand your ground laws and put them into broader context.

“In Florida, for example, in contrast to the [Trayvon] Martin and [Jordan] Davis cases, there are 15 cases where black men, who were being threatened, defended themselves and successfully relied on this law in their defense, with their charges either being dropped or they were acquitted,” according to Lott’s testimony. He also crunched data to find that 69 percent of blacks in Florida who raised a stand your ground defense in court were not convicted, compared to just 62 percent of whites.

Still, stand your ground opponents were unconvinced during the hearing. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the subcommittee’s chairman, leaned on separate data from the Urban Institute alleging the policy’s bias — data that Lott has criticized on technical grounds – in attacking stand your ground laws. Durbin said that the statutes have the opposite effect of deterring violent situations or functioning as instruments of legitimate self-defense.

“This law is an invitation for confrontation,” Durbin said.

Sybrina Fulton, the mother of slain teenager Trayvon Martin, and Lucia McBath, the mother of another teenager, Jordan Davis, who was fatally shot outside a gas station in a separate circumstance, agreed with Durbin’s assessment at the hearing. Regardless of the non-role that stand your ground played in the trial of George Zimmerman, Fulton said that “this law does not work” in light of his acquittal. McBath made an emotional plea to the committee to resolve the larger issue, saying that ”even the Wild West had more stringent laws governing the taking of life than we have now.”

Harvard law professor Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr., who also testified against stand your ground before the panel Tuesday, put his argument in pointed terms.

“[The law] tells Floridians that they can incorrectly profile young black children, kill them, and be protected by stand your ground laws,” Sullivan said.

Lott disagrees with the premise of such characterizations.

“Racism shouldn’t be tolerated. Yet, precisely because of its seriousness, false accusations of racism are also unacceptable,” Lott provided in his testimony. “Those making explosive claims of racism  should carefully back up their claims.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the ranking member of the panel, concurred.

“This is not about inflaming racial tensions,” Cruz said. “This is about the right of everyone to protect themselves and protect their families.”

In that vein, Republicans wondered Tuesday why Senate Democrats were focused on disparaging stand your ground laws while failed economic policies have been such culprits in harming black families.

“While Senate Democrats mobilize to discuss ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws, I hope they also plan to rally around black youth facing dwindling opportunities and job prospects across the country,” Orlando Watson, Republican National Committee Communications Director for Black Media, said in a statement. “With more than 10 million black Americans living below poverty level, why aren’t Senate Democrats also holding hearings on the impact their disastrous policies have had on the black community?”

 

 

Durbin fabricated story about GOP, says White House

Leave a comment

This is from Bizac Review.

Imagine a lying DemocRat and from Illinois also.

Little Dickie Turdbin is a pathological liar. 

 

The White House is refuting claims by U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who posted a message on his Facebook page saying an unnamed GOP leader told President Obama during government shutdown negotiations that “I cannot even stand to look at you.”

Durbin wrote:

Many Republicans searching for something to say in defense of the disastrous shutdown strategy will say President Obama just doesn’t try hard enough to communicate with Republicans. But in a “negotiation” meeting with the president, one GOP House Leader told the president: “I cannot even stand to look at you.”

What are the chances of an honest conversation with someone who has just said something so disrespectful?

When asked at Wednesday’s White House daily briefing, chief spokesman Jay Carney confirmed he’d discussed the claim with others present at the time, saying they denied it ever happened, according to The Hill.

“It did not happen,” Carney said, explaining he discussed the incident with a “participant in the meeting,” The Hill reported.

After House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, gave a simple one-word denial, his spokesman added that Durbin’s claim “appears to have been invented out of thin air.”

“The senator should disclose who told him this account of events, retract his reckless allegation immediately, and apologize,” the spokesman, Brendan Buck, said.

Rather than argue an issue on its merits, Durbin appears to prefer ad hominem accusations, much like U.S. Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., the No. 1 Democrat in the Senate. Durbin is the No. 2 Democrat. He’s learning well.

 

Sen. Dick Durbin gave false facts about his own daughter in Obamacare speech

1 Comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

I am shocked Dickless Turdbin (D-Ill) would like about his dead daughter.Dodges thunderbolt.

I think the Senator is lower than whale droppings on the ocean floor.

Obama and the DemocRat party are a bunch of shameless SOBs.

 

Sen. Dick Durbin movingly described his sick child’s preexisting condition as a reason to support Obamacare last week, but the Illinois Democrat neglected to mention that his late daughter was easily covered by existing insurance, and that he used taxpayer money to reward the hospital that treated her.

Despite her preexisting condition, Christine Durbin, who suffered from a lifelong heart condition and died at age 40 in 2008, was eligible for coverage under existing laws in multiple states, including the senator’s state and the state she ultimately settled in.

Durbin also neglected to mention that he sent his daughter to one of the best children’s hospitals in the country, to which he earmarked millions of dollars from 2002-2010.

“I’ve had a situation in my family — a child — who had serious physical problems, who could not have qualified but for group health insurance available to me as a member of Congress,” Durbin said in response to a pointed question to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

“If I had gone on the open market to buy a policy I’m not sure I could have bought one for my family to cover my child,” said Durbin, who was first elected to Congress in 1982 when his Christine was fourteen.

In fact, Durbin wasn’t sure about buying a policy on the open market because he never had to, having been a state employee from 1969 to 1982 and a federal employee from 1982 to now. His daughter, Christine, who was born in 1968, never went without the cushy government benefits offered to government workers and their families

State law also addressed the problem of individuals in the open market suffering from preexisting conditions. In 1987, Illinois passed the Comprehensive Health Insurance Plan (CHIP, which covered any Illinoisan who could not “obtain individual coverage from private insurance companies because of medical conditions.” Thirty-five other states have similar programs, including Maryland, where Christine ultimately settled.
Durbin also sent his daughter to the very expensive Children’s Memorial Hospital for care. Durbin was able to pay Children’s Memorial Hospital back with U.S. taxpayers’ money, giving the hospital over $650,000 in just one earmark in 2002.

“This new state of the art facility will enhance Children’s Hospital’s reputation as one of America’s best pediatric hospitals,” Durbin told the Chicago Tribune in 2012, at the opening of a new 23-story building.

Managed by the politically-connected Crown family, Children’s Memorial Hospital is one of the hospitals that has received the most federal earmarks of any hospital in the country, having received millions from Durbin and then-Sen. Barack Obama.

In 2009, Durbin, sent two earmarks, one $951,000 and another for $500,000, to the children’s hospital. In 2010, he sent another two earmarks, totaling $1,000,000.

Durbin worked to save federal funding for the hospital and other Chicago-area hospitals from Clinton-backed Medicaid cuts in 2000. He also fought federal cuts to Children’s Memorial Hospital’s budget in 1995 despite then representing Springfield, Il. in Congress. The hospital has seen its share of politics: Gov. Rod Blagojevich once threatened to withhold an earmark of $8 million if he didn’t receive a $50,000 donation from a Children’s Memorial Hospital executive.

When Christine was 24, she began working for the U.S. Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C., which also had cushy government benefits. She worked there for sixteen years before dying from an unspecified congenital heart problem.  Most insurance plans cover congenital heart problems, albeit at an elevated rate.
Durbin’s office did not return a request for comment on how the senator could have known which policies he could have bought on the open market given his longtime status as a government employee and the heart condition his daughter suffered from.

Durbin opposes the Vitter Amendment, which would force some federal employees, including members of Congress, onto the Obamacare exchanges.

“Senator Durbin wants to force Obamacare on average citizens while he wants a taxpayer-subsidized deluxe health plan for Congress.  That hypocrisy explains why he goes to such lengths to change the subject.  If Obamacare is so great, why do Mr. Durbin and other senators want to be exempted from the plan they want to impose on the public?” Ken Boehm of the ethics watchdog group, National Legal and Policy Center, told The Daily Caller.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/01/sen-dick-durbin-gave-false-facts-about-his-own-daughter-in-obamacare-speech/#ixzz2gZg2m2M2

 

AP ‘real reporters’ spread disinformation to support gun ban agenda

Leave a comment

This is from The Examiner.

The media knows there are sheeple that will believe everything they report.

The media will never be fact  checked by the sheeple.

 

Those behind a late-night attack … used an assault-style weapon to spray the crowd with bullets, making it ‘a miracle’ no one was killed,”an Associated Press “report” by “Authorized Journalists” Carla K. Johnson and Herbert G. McCann breathlessly declared. “Ballistics evidence shows that those behind Thursday night’s attack used a 7.62 mm rifle fed by a high-capacity magazine, police Superintendent Garry McCarthy told reporters.”

That’s as opposed to “personal defense capacity” magazines when “patrol rifles” are in the hands of government-sanctioned “Only Ones” like Chi-Town’s finest.

That “type of weapon,” McCarthy said, “belongs on a ‘battlefield, not on the street or a corner or a park…’”

If one didn’t know better, one would think he and his media chroniclers were talking about a select fire-capable rifle, the kind that actually are found on battlefields. Or one would think that’s what they want us to think.

Does anyone think Associated Press “reporters” don’t know better, or don’t know that McCarthy’s well-publicized objective is a nationwide semi-auto and magazine ban? Does anyone think Johnson and McCann are unaware of just whose talking point they’re all parroting?

“I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals,” Barack Obama proclaimed, himself parroting a ubiquitous gungrabber meme, “that they belong on the battlefields of war and not on the streets of our cities.”

Does anyone truly think professional reporters are unaware of the well-known and longstanding deception promulgated by the Violence Policy Center — which laid out the strategy back in 1988– by declaring that “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons”?

Does anyone think that seasoned newshounds, with research skills and all the resources of the mighty AP at their disposal, could possibly be unaware of The Journalist’s Guide to Gun Policy Scholars and Second Amendment Scholars, providing access to any number of recognized experts, listed by specialty, location and name, whom they could consult on any issue imaginable pertaining to guns? If they wanted to…?

Does anyone wonder why “straight news” correspondents didn’t even try to solicit an opinion from someone who might have inputs on why banning semi-automatic rifles will not reduce violent crime? Or someone who might point out that McCarthy is exploiting them as a megaphone toscore political points with? Does anyone think they really believe his opinion is objective, or that they don’t know they’re being used — and approve of it?

Does anyone think the Associated Press — which didn’t even regard Fast and Furious government-facilitated “gunwalking,” where estimated hundreds have been killed, as a big enough story to rate inclusion in their “Top Ten” news stories for 2011 — has any interest in doing anything that doesn’t promote more government control, while ignoring, spinning and suppressing stories that don’t?

Does anyone think Carla and Herbert are lazy, incompetent, agenda-driven, dishonest, or some combination of these (perhaps all), or is there an alternative explanation that could account for the crap quality of their thinly-disguised propaganda piece presented to an unsuspecting public as “news”?

Does anyone have any questions about why Joe Biden refers to such as these using the term “legitimate news media,” and why Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin are so eager to legislate just who the government will recognize as a “real reporter”?

 

The bully in the U.S. Senate: Dick Durbin’s still on a pout over the Florida verdict

Leave a comment

This is from The Washington Times.

Little Dickie Durbin is from the land of Al Capone.

So he knows how to bully and extort people.

Durbin and Obama make Nixon look like a Piker.

 

 

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois thinks the Internal Revenue Service targeting of conservative groups hasn’t gone far enough, and he wants to help. He’s doing some bullying of his own.

Mr. Durbin wrote to hundreds of corporate and foundation supporters of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a nonprofit organization that advances conservative policies in the state legislatures, demanding they tell him where they stand on Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law. “Although ALEC does not maintain a public list of corporate members or donors,” he wrote, “other public documents indicate that your company funded ALEC at some point during the period between ALEC’s adoption of model ‘stand your ground’ legislation in 2005 and the present day. … I am seeking clarification whether organizations that have funded ALEC’s operations in the past currently support ALEC and the model ‘stand your ground’ legislation.”

Actually, he’s not seeking “clarification” at all, but revenge. Mr. Durbin, a Democrat, knows that ALEC focuses on economic and budget issues, and he’s trying to use the controversy over the Trayvon Martin case to intimidate corporate donors into discontinuing their support. He’s still pouting over the verdict of the jury. The spirit of Richard Nixon’s “enemies list” lives.

One senator stood up to the bully. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, a Republican, suggests that the donors to ALEC stand up, too. “Senator Durbin’s request for ALEC supporters to announce an official position on gun laws in advance of a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing is inappropriate, and I encourage recipients not to respond,” Mr. Cruz wrote. “In light of the currentIRS targeting scandal, this action raises concerns about retaliation against those who may disagree with the chairman and the Obama Administration.”

Mr. Durbin’s bullying recalls the bullying of the NAACP during the civil rights struggles in the South. In 1956, the state of Alabama tried to force disclosure of the group’s members, knowing that many of them would feel threatened if their names became public knowledge. The Supreme Court intervened. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice John Marshall Harlandeclared that “this Court has recognized the vital relationship between freedom to associate and privacy in one’s associations .” He agreed that making the names public would expose them to “economic reprisal, loss of employment, threat of physical coercion, and other manifestations of physical hostility.” Similar economic reprisal is what the senator suggests, and not so subtly, with his letter.

Foundations, corporations and plain citizens have the right to support political causes of their choice without fear of reprisal from the government, or even from a U.S. senator. ALEC’s effectiveness on the state level has made it a target of the left for decades. Mr. Durbin’s bullying is unacceptable and makes a strong case for laws to keep contributions to political groups — Democrat, Republican, liberal or conservative — confidential. The IRS is under investigation by Congress for harassing political organizations, and deserves no help from anyone, not even a U.S. senator. Mr. Durbin should keep his cheering and bullying to himself.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/16/the-bully-in-the-us-senate/#ixzz2cWkMaWGz
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Senate Judiciary Committee to examine state ‘stand your ground’ laws

1 Comment

This is from The Hill.

The libs can not get it through their block heads that during

George Zimmerman’s trail Stand your ground didn’t apply.

Liberal politicians never stand their ground.

Just ask Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Politicians have armed bodyguards that keep them safe.

The average American has only themselves for protection.

 

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Friday that the Senate Judiciary Committee would hold a hearing in September to examine “stand your ground” laws in the wake of George Zimmerman’s acquittal in the Trayvon Martin case.

The “stand your ground” self-defense laws in Florida and two dozen other states allow individuals to defend themselves without requiring them to attempt to evade or retreat from a dangerous situation. Although Zimmerman did not specifically employ a “stand your ground” law defense to combat second-degree murder charges in the killing of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, the trial has brought a renewed scrutiny to the statutes.

 

“September’s hearing will examine the gun lobby’s and the American Legislative Exchange Council’s influence in creating and promoting these laws; the way in which the laws have changed the legal definition of self-defense; the extent to which the laws have encouraged unnecessary shooting confrontations; and the civil rights implications when racial profiling and ‘stand your ground’ laws mix, along with other issues,” Durbin’s office said in a statement.

President Obama, in surprise remarks on the Martin case on Friday, said the laws were worthy of further scrutiny.

“If we’re sending a message as a society in our communities that someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there’s a way for them to exit from a situation, is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we’d like to see?” the president asked.

Obama said that those weighing in on the laws in light of the Zimmerman trial should consider the possible consequences of what would have happened had the roles been reversed.

“If Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk?” Obama asked. “And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman, who had followed him in a car because he felt threatened? And if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, then it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.”

Attorney General Eric Holder also called for a closer examination of the state statutes during a speech to the NAACP earlier this week. That earned a condemnation from the National Rifle Association, which accused the Obama administration of politicizing the Florida teen’s death.

“The attorney general fails to understand that self-defense is not a concept, it’s a fundamental human right,” NRA Executive Director Chris Cox said in a statement. “To send a message that legitimate self-defense is to blame is unconscionable and demonstrates once again that this administration will exploit tragedies to push their political agenda.”

Durbin’s office said more details about the planned hearing would be announced in coming weeks.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/312371-durbin-announces-hearing-on-stand-your-ground-laws#ixzz2ZmpHy6Bm
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

 

Feinstein calls for banning more than 150 types of firearms during dramatic press conference

1 Comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

The Wicked Witch Of  The West is trying to strike again.

We need to call, write and email our Congress Critters and sound our opposition.

The fight to preserve The Second Amendment is under way.

We must defiantly say Molon Laube! 

 

                                          I will get you my pretty and your little gun too.

 

WASHINGTON — California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein staged a dramatic press conference Thursday on Capitol Hill with 10 weapons at her side and unveiled legislation instituting a government ban on more than 150 types of firearms, including rifles, pistols and shotguns.

Flanked by other anti-gun liberal lawmakers, including New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, Feinstein announced the introduction of the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.”

The legislation being pushed by Feinstein — who has long history of calling for gun bans — would prohibit the sale, transfer, importation and manufacture of certain firearms.

 

Feinstein said the country’s “weak” gun laws allow massacres like the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occur.

“Getting this bill signed into law will be an uphill battle, and I recognize that — but it’s a battle worth having,” Feinstein said in literature handed to reporters at the Thursday event.

Others who joined the Democrats for the press conference included Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter and Washington National Cathedral dean Gary R. Hall. (RELATED: Episcopal dean of National Cathedral teams up with Democrats on guns)

This sort of stunt from Feinstein — displaying weapons for dramatic effect while discussing new gun laws — is hardly new. Joe Morrissey, a Democratic delegate in Virginia, caught some colleagues by surprise last week by bringing an AK-47 onto the floor of the House of Delegates while calling for gun control.

And David Gregory, the moderator of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” found himself in hot water for displaying a high-capacity gun magazine during an interview with a leader of the National Rifle Association in December. NBC studios are in Washington D.C., where having possession of such magazines is illegal. While DC police investigated the incident, no charges were filed.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/24/feinstein-calls-for-banning-more-than-150-firearms-during-dramatic-press-conference/#ixzz2Iwc2goS0

 

Graham: Norquist is Wrong

1 Comment

This is from Yahoo News.

Lindsey Graham is wrong about taxes.

The what else is new about Lindsey Graham being wrong.

The voters of South Carolina need to fire Lindsey Graham.

I read where little Dickie Durban said DemocRats were open to entitlement reform.

This is the best laugh I have had in years.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., bucked Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist and his anti-tax pledge on Sunday, the second Republican senator to do so in less than a week.

Although Graham will not give way to raising tax rates, he said Republicans need to be open to increasing government revenues.

“I think Grover is wrong,” Graham said on ABC’s This Week. “I will violate the pledge … for the good of the country.”

Last week, Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., told a local television station that he is more worried about the fiscal cliff than he is about adhering to the no-new-taxes pledge, prompting a response from Norquist, Politico reported.

With fiscal cliff negotiations starting up again following the Thanksgiving break, Graham sounded optimistic that Congress could reach a deal in time to stave off the massive spending cuts and tax increases slated to take effect at the beginning of next year. Joining him in that optimism was Sen.Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

“We can solve this problem,” Durbin said on ABC“Tomorrow, there’s no excuse: we’re back in town.”

Durbin, the Democratic whip, said the House should pass a Senate-approved bill to keep the Bush-era tax cuts for most Americans, leaving negotiations over the rates for wealthy Americans for later debate.

Durbin said Republicans should be open to raising rates, citing Democratic willingness to examine changes to entitlement programs.

 

%d bloggers like this: