It looks like poor hysterical Abby Spangler and her stuck CAPS LOCK key pulled the Brady Campaign into a fight they could not win with Starbucks. And so now, their campaign against the company, for their own sake, should be considered toast.
I subscribe to some food industry news sites, and yesterday I kept a close eye on anything related to the Starbucks shareholder meeting coming across those wires. Not a peep about guns. No one who cares about the bottom line cared about the fact that Starbucks wasn’t caving to the Brady Campaign. I didn’t even see a mention of it any industry news source or business article on the meeting.
If you want to know what investors are most excited about, it’s their instant coffee brand Via, the drastic expense cutting, and another brand of coffee they acquired in 2003, Seattle’s Best Coffee. In fact, the retailer is going to start growing again, this time being a little smarter about the process. Several analysts were quoted saying they expect very good outcomes for Starbucks based on all of the news coming out of this meeting. This year, their stock was upgraded to Buy from neutral. In other words, people just don’t care about their carry policies.
I know this sounds cheesy, but I just can’t help it. Volunteering makes me feel a little more connected to my community. And it feels good.
As most of you know, we were particularly active with the GOTV efforts in 2008 during the last few days of the campaign. Sebastian took Monday and Tuesday of the election week off, and we spent Saturday through Tuesday walking precincts and calling voters.
Somehow we managed to pick the oddest walks through precincts. There was one house that had no driveway. It was run down, and I wasn’t even sure that someone was living there. There was someone registered to vote there, that was for sure. But this thing looked like it was ready to collapse in the next few years. Today, when I went to pick up m new glasses, I saw that house again. Only now it has new siding, a new railing that leads up the pathway to the door, and even a real driveway. It looks like a nice little home.
I don’t know if the same person lives there as when we came by in November 2008. But if they do, I really want to go congratulate them on their tremendous home improvement projects. And I like that feeling. Even though they aren’t in my neighborhood, I feel a kind of neighborly pride for them. Who knows, maybe I will get to compliment them for their good work if I pick their precinct again.
If there’s one thing that we’ve got going for the gun issue over all of the other general “right of center” issues, it’s a reasonable sense of discipline from both parties. On the fiscal/limited government front, no group comes close – nor, in my experience, do they have any desire to gain such discipline in both parties or even in the one party they claim to support. Because of this lack of general consistency, it’s going to be very tough for these groups to accomplish their real goals instead of just racking up a symbolic win periodically.
The NRA model focuses on the issue first. While senior Democrats may be more openly hostile to gun rights than their GOP counterparts, by taking the view that you reward individual politicians, there’s a huge incentive to make gun rights a moderating issue for Democrats who want to represent more conservative districts. More importantly, by being willing to work just as hard for Democrats as Republicans who support the issue, the NRA has built a general trust with their members and politicians. As you can see, the results of this mean we’ve been fairly safe even as Congress has been lead by anti-gun extremists. Yes, we still have battles, but not nearly the battles we would have if more centrist Democrats didn’t have a huge perceived incentive to stick with us.
The only problem is that among right-of-center pundits and organizations, NRA really isn’t treated with the respect it deserves for taking an issue they all claim to care about – the Second Amendment – and helping foist it above the standard political fray. For other liberty-minded organizations, they should froth at the chance to see that kind of success. That doesn’t mean their battles go away, it just means they have much more say in transforming the political agenda. Perhaps they could open a serious discussion on entitlement reform if they had that kind of influence and respect.
As someone who has had experience working with some of the economic liberty-oriented organizations on the right, it’s disheartening as a believer in smaller government to see them hitching their wagons to the GOP even as the party rolls all over them. When an organization that focuses on earmark reform looks the other way when a GOP leader pushes for a mind-boggling large earmark that benefits his wealthy buddies, well, it means there’s never going to be a serious discussion about earmark reform. Because as long as the group only targets the Democratic earmarks, who cares? No need to reform, and the group will do the legwork for opposition research for future GOP candidates.
There’s a bit of challenge here for groups that promote economic liberty, in that economic liberty fits with the supposed GOP platform more than it does even a moderate Democratic platform. However, by not being consistent on the issues because the only friends they’ve got in Congress are steamrolling them, they aren’t likely to facilitate much in the way of tangible improvements.
NRA has benefitted by mostly raising itself up above partisan politics. Yes, they are known to support more Republicans than Democrats, but it’s most important that the Democrats know they can get a fair shake out of NRA if they stand with us on the issues. A Republican can’t call for a gun ban and still slip by with an A rating while a Democrat who says they might be swayed on a pigeon shoot restriction gets an F. That’s not to say their system is perfect or there haven’t been legitimate disputes. But those disputes are usually based on individual candidate circumstances rather than over party affiliation.
Sadly, until the economic liberty organizations can figure out how to hold both parties accountable, they won’t see much in the way of real reform.
The FDA released new rules for cigarette advertising. These things go so far that I swear, the next thing they will target will be my Christmas tree.
These restrictions are draconian – all in the name of the children.
1) No Sector Sixes. No manufacturer can use the name of a non-tobacco product in a tobacco product name, unless both products existed and shared the name prior to 1995.
2) No freedom to buy less than 20 cigarettes. This is kind of the like Pennsylvania’s beer laws. Bureaucrats want us to drink less, so we have to buy beer by the case at a distributer unless we buy it at a bar. FDA doesn’t want people smoking as much, so it’s only possible to buy cigarettes 20 or more at a time.
3) You may still buy cigarettes through mail-order, but you can’t use coupons or get any samples. (Damn coupon clipping kids!) Vending machines are now outlawed unless the premises bans kids at all times.
4) Free samples of cigarettes – even in a room full of adults – is banned. For smokeless tobacco, it’s severely limited and only about half an ounce per person per day provided that means they do it in a temporary facility surrounded by opaque material at least 7 feet high (and no more than one foot off the ground) where children and alcohol are banned and does not mention anything about tobacco on the outside. I guess that means they will have to start logging names if they hand out samples. Oh, and no samples to sports teams or entertainment groups. And none of these highly restricted non-advertising temporary structures may be set up at a football, basketball, baseball, soccer, or hockey event or any other sporting or entertainment event.
5) Any attempts to advertise outside of pre-defined limits (“in newspapers; in magazines; in periodicals or other publications [whether periodic or limited distribution]; on billboards, posters, and placards; in nonpoint-of sale promotional material [including direct mail]; in point-of-sale promotional material; and in audio or video formats delivered at a point-of sale”) must be be filed with the FDA at least 30 days in advance. Creativity and social media – damn you & your crazy innovation!
6) Declaring a war on color: all labeling or advertising for cigarettes or smokeless tobacco shall use only black text on a white background. Exceptions including the limited places where vending machines are allowed and porn magazines.
7) Declaring a war on music and sound effects: No audio advertisement can have anything other than a voice reading words. No video can have anything other than black text on white background and any associated audio cannot include music or sounds other than words.
8) Declaring a third theater of war on names, logos, and recognizable colors on non-tobacco products: No more hats, shirts, or products without tobacco can be released with the name of a brand, logo, motto, or even “recognizable color” of a brand.
9) Customer rewards are off the table. I remember people who used to clip the Marlboro Miles for random gifts – kind of like you credit card rewards. No more rewarding customer loyalty!
10) No more sponsorships of anything. Technically, the rule only says no sponsorships of any athletic, musical, artistic, or other social or cultural event, or any entry or team in any event. I know that UST has sponsored more than a few things in the gun/hunting world. Does these events qualify as athletic, social, or cultural? Well, we just lost a sponsor. Damn. They were good to our community for a long time. Technically, these companies can still sponsor, but only if they don’t tell anyone who they are or what they produce – which kind of takes the impact out of sponsorship.
So as you can see, it’s not completely a joke that my ornaments probably send the bureaucrats at the FDA into a tizzy. I just have to hope that the next round of rules doesn’t force me to keep the curtains closed while our tree is on display.
In all of that, I assumed her campaign didn’t have much money. Well, I still think that political reality shows this is an more than an uphill battle for Pia – more like climbing the Alps – but I was wrong about the resources in her attempt at a PR coup. She has full page ads in both Philadelphia papers today. They stop you in your tracks, and they get right to heart of matter – “Hate Philly Politics?”
Damn straight, people do hate it. And clearly enough people hate it to help her buy some these ads. And hopefully these ads will lead to more volunteers and votes.
It’s not just a little gun control the Democrats seeking the gubernatorial bid are going for – they are all in. It’s a sad thing to say – the most moderate only wants to ban your EBRs. And, to some degree, Jack Wagner really only said he supported it previously. I haven’t seen him release an action plan to take them. And, yes, that puts him far above the other options for Democratic gun owners have on their primary ballot.
Take Dan Onorato. Apparently, there was early speculation that he was pretty pro-gun. He squashed that rumor at his campaign launch saying that any speculation about his support of the Second Amendment was “a mischaracterization.” Turns out that may be the understatement of the year.
Yesterday, he released his “plan for safe communities.” In it, we find a plan to end preemption (say goodbye to carry in Philly!), a proposal for statewide lost-and-stolen, and a plan to challenge Heller/McDonald.
Say what?
Yup. Dan Onoranto wants to force all gun owners who have minors in the home to lock their guns. Apparently he missed that key part in Heller:
In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.
You don’t lose your right to read scary news or watch violent movies just because there are kids in the home. You shouldn’t lose your right to self-defense over the same. There is a factor of common sense, but that hasn’t been a serious problem for the overwhelming majority of families. Just like most parents don’t let their 6-year-old watch a gory horror flick or read extremely graphic descriptions of war to them at bedtime, gun owners take care when children are around their guns. There’s a difference between discovering the right solution for your home and the state removing your right to immediately defend yourself and those same children you love.
I think we can all agree that any perception of Dan Onorato supporting civil liberties is, in fact, a mischaracterization. He was absolutely right about that – just about the only thing he’s been on right on in this campaign.
I don’t know if y’all have noticed, but Obama really enjoys coming to the Philadelphia area. He’s here often enough that when Sebastian complains about all the cops out when he drives to or from work, we can safely assume that Obama is here.
I think I just figured out why that is. It’s not because the City of Brotherly Love is showed him so much love in the last election (in the form of men armed with batons blocking polling places). It’s because the stench of Democratic corruption must remind him of Chicago.
For those who have forgotten, Obama won his first campaign unopposed. Which is interesting considering there was a sitting Democratic incumbent who did not retire. He challenged all of her signatures to get her thrown off the ballot – along with any other competitors.
The intriguing campaign I mentioned yesterday is facing a similar problem. Only instead of her being an incumbent, she’s a political newbie who has no shot of winning the overwhelmingly Democratic district represented by the head of the Philadelphia Democratic Party. But he wants her off the ballot anyway. There’s no room for anyone else once you factor in his ego, I suppose.
While researching my list of federal candidates on social media sites, I came across a longshot campaign for Congress against Rep. Bob Brady in Philly. Brady heads the Philadelphia Democratic machine. At the big Democratic shindig/nominating party, he was right up on stage with Nancy Pelosi – the only non-statewide office holder or candidate I saw up there with her. The head of Pittsburgh’s Democratic Party wasn’t around, just Philly. I don’t think the dead girl/live boy rule even applies to this former union organizer.
But this 27-year-old girl not only has a great website, she has a message that could disconnect some of the younger voters from the entrenched Philly politicians. (That won’t win races, but it’s just interesting.) Here’s what I like:
Focusing on where the incumbent leadership has failed: “Today, the First District has the distinction of being the second hungriest district in the nation. It has some of the worst schools, the highest crimes rates, the most strangling taxes and the greatest pension problems. For too many years, this district has been abused by those who have ravaged this birthplace of the American dream under the guise of brotherly love.”
Specific example of broken promises/wasted resources that tangibly makes district life worse: “In an attempt to revitalize the city by bringing a green real estate project to the district (without grants or government aid), I came head to head with the inner politics that go on here every day behind the scenes. The Industrial Empowerment Zone, a nation-wide government program started by President Clinton, was meant to bring industry back to Philadelphia but we know industry is not coming back. Philadelphia has been given millions of dollars in federal funds to essentially blight neighborhoods causing homeowners and landlords to drastically lose property value. These properties are being purchased by well connected insiders at bargain-basement prices at the expense of the residents of the First District. Our project was rejected by the zoning board the day after Michael Nutter promised to make Philadelphia the greenest city in the nation in his inaugural address. Today, the land still sits vacant.”
Confidence in style. Take a look at her website. She at least knows how to make you to stop and take a look.
According to her site, she wants to use this opportunity to create a PR plan for free markets that others can use around the country. I like the attitude of experimentation here. It’s beyond an uphill battle, but sometimes those are the best opportunities to try radical ideas to see if anything sticks. It may not win this race, but maybe something useful will come out of it.
I think her campaign video has a few issues, the first of which is a little too hard hitting for most voters who aren’t that comfortable taking a leap to something new in rough times. But, I do think it’s a great example for others to follow in support of candidates to specific constituencies (i.e. rallying the base). I love the ending – a real call to action to not let them get away with this anymore. It’s not enough to bitch, action has to be taken.
Contrast her message with Bob Brady’s campaign site which is nothing but why you should give him money and how you should give him money. He’s not interested in telling you about himself or really giving a damn about what you want to hear.
I have no illusions about how this campaign will turn out in November. But sometimes losing can teach us lessons about how to approach other battles. What I like about her web presence isn’t so much a “sexy/MTV” vibe, but how real issues are addressed and not just talking points. Even when she does rely on talking points, she remembers to put in the request for you the viewer to help take back the country and make it a better place.
I can respect those who actually take a stand to try something new. It is the spirit of America, and I hope that Pia does find a few elements that stick, even in solid blue Philadelphia.
Why? Because I’m fascinated by this stuff. Â And I spent two days studying district maps, Googling unknown candidates, and otherwise trying to find every bit of information on these elections that I could in order to make a more useful resource for gun owners this year.
Of the 6 Senate races in the area, 4 incumbents were A rated in their last election cycle. One was a B rating, and the other F.
There are 30 House races in the area. Only 8 of these races are (so far) uncontested. Six of those are districts in Philadelphia.
Of the 8 unchallenged incumbents, 2 had Fs, 2 had Ds, 1 had a C, 1 had a B, and 2 have maintained A ratings.
Looking at the full list of races with incumbents running (28), we have: 3 ?s, 3 Fs, 10 Ds, 3 Cs, 4 Bs, and 5 As.
The two open seats were previously represented by lawmakers with A and F ratings.
I think our pro-gun Senate seats are safer than the pro-gun House seats on the whole. One of our B rated guys in Philadelphia is actually facing charges, though to be honest, that doesn’t turn many Philly voters off. So I maintain that even though he has challengers from his own party and the other, it might not be much of a race for the new entrants to the race.
The House races are especially important for those who fall on the right side of the political aisle. Right now the Democrats control the House by just a handful of seats. The Senate is safely Republican, and is likely to become even more so after this year’s elections. This will be legislature that redraws all of the district lines and erases at least one Congressional district from the state.
I spent the better part of two days examining every single state race going on in our districts – PA-8 & PA-13. If you live in Bucks, Montgomery, or North Philly and own guns, you should go find your local races and get an idea of what’s going on.
For those of you not in the area, here are a few interesting observations:
For the federal races, both districts will have competitive Republican primaries with no Democrats on the ballot other than incumbents. In PA-13, it won’t really matter since the chances of unseating Schwartz run at about 1 in a million if you’re feeling generous to the challenger. Other than the more sparsely populated northern tier of her district, that area is solidly Democratic – and pretty far left Democratic at that. In PA-8, I have my doubts about all of the GOP candidates against Murphy in the fall. However, professional political observers in DC say that if Fitzpatrick can pull out a win in May, he’ll have a good shot at beating Murphy. I’m on the ground and am far more skeptical.
Out of the 6 state senate districts in the area, only one is held by an incumbent with less than an A or B from NRA. Granted, she’s got an F, but she represents primarily Philly. In smaller races with less direct influence from Philadelphia, we can still do reasonably well. Regardless of whether you live in this area or even another state, that’s something to keep in mind if you have a safe anti-gun Congressman. There may be local races where your help can make the difference.
Bad news: A lot of poorly rated Philadelphia politicians have no challengers this year from either side. In theory, a write-in campaign could change this. In reality, it’s not likely to make a difference without serious planning and the incumbent over a dead body.
Good news: A handful of friendly (or at least not hostile & willing to listen) lawmakers – even some from Philly! – also have no challengers from either side. Again, this could change with an effective write-in campaign. While that makes it an uphill battle, gun owners should still keep an eye out.
Of all of the races that are re-matches from 2008, the GOP looks like it could pick up seats in all but one. One re-match was decided for the Democrat by less than 900 votes in a record-setting Democratic year. While the Republican candidate still has to beat the incumbency factor, this is a great year to pick up this battle again.
If you are in the area and have a favorite already, get in touch and I’ll let you know how you can get involved.
So the other day I 