Play on Taxpayer Concerns when Fighting Gun Control

Ultimately, the Albion Borough Council which previously banned guns on city property rescinded their ban after they realized it would cost a pretty penny to defend against lawsuits that they could very likely lose.

The financial cost to taxpayers is a talking point that non-gun owners can identify with, and a major source of contention in Pennsylvania after last year’s state budget fiasco and the simple fact that the Governor has been simply unable to deliver a budget on time since he’s been in office. Local budgets can’t afford partisan political games from Harrisburg, so they definitely don’t have the spare cash to fight lawsuits. It doesn’t have to be your only argument against local gun control, but make sure it gets made.

Gun Owners Aren’t Welcome at Church

That’s the attitude of the reverend of St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Richmond. He offers up the church which sits across from the Capitol for political use by lobbyists for all sorts of favored causes – unions, healthcare, and gun control. Rev. Wallace Adams-Riley claims that the church is available for just about any lobbyist to use as a headquarters – as long as they aren’t supportive of the Second Amendment. He points out that the one group he would actively turn away is the NRA. One might wonder if he has the same belief about turning away NRA members from his church.

The Most Interesting Races in the Must Watch State

Everyone says we should look to Pennsylvania as a bellwether of 2010 politics. We have the most number of competitive Congressional races, and we’ve got major statewide elections that will drive people out to the polls more so than other states in this year’s non-presidential cycle. We also have a very good shot at turning the Pennsylvania House over to GOP – a strictly partisan move I would not have cared much for until the very centrist Democrat House Speaker announced his retirement. I do not trust who might move up to that top spot if the Democrats remain in control. (Here is an effort to draw attention to states with closely split legislative houses that can be flipped by pushing just a handful of candidates.)

Last night was the local GOP vote for John Murtha’s former seat. Due to the timing of his death, this election cycle is pretty complicated with two different elections with some of the same and some different candidates held for the same seat on the same day. The shorter story you need to know is that both parties have selected candidates for their races who are political unknowns. The Democrats chose Murtha’s former district director who clearly has political experience, but isn’t on the record with his own views. We don’t know if he shares Murtha’s dedication to gun rights. On the GOP side, there’s a businessman who brings new energy to the grassroots and who the Democrats have resorted to calling mean because he once built a successful business, sold it, and the other owners laid people off. (I expect PA-12 to turn into a children’s playground at the rate the campaign is going because of outside candidates who didn’t have local support. Expect spitballs and screams of “I’m gonna tell on you!” any day now.) As a political newbie, GOP candidate Tim Burns also doesn’t have a record on gun rights yet. So this should be interesting. The district has always been reliable for guns, but we don’t know if it will remain that way.

Depending on how things go, we can see it as a blessing or a curse that we’ll be losing that district anyway. Given that the candidate will have only served a term and a half, it is likely that both parties will agree to do away with PA-12 when we have to give up a seat following the Census.

Depending on how much you like politics, this is either a political junkie’s dream world or a cynic’s worst nightmare. For me, it relies on my mood. Since the political attitude is more anti-incumbent than pro-Republican, I’m really not sure how this will play out. Given that uncertainty, and the fact that the local GOP is trying to actively drive voters into the arms of Democrats, I’m leaning more toward a nightmare mood.

If you’re a Pennsylvania politico, or just a politics watcher who generally has a feel for what’s going on, take the PoliticsPA poll (on the left, about halfway down) on which will be the most interesting May 18 race. Also leave your answer as a comment if you’re so inclined. I’d like to know which races you guys are interested in.

NRA Board Member First Candidate on TV

According to Hotline, the two top candidates in the GOP primary for Arizona governor are bickering about web ads. Meanwhile, the longshot campaign of NRA Board member Buz Mills has just gone on television with his first ad.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF_G80p32dg[/youtube]

One of the interesting observations: He has a mobile campaign. I read something the other day about campaigns using mobile campaigns that suggested they go ahead and lay out the big cash to buy their own “text to” number. Apparently, you can basically rent a word that uses the same text number as many other campaigns.

For Buz, that word is GOBUZ. However, it turns out he is far from the only one using the same number. For example, if you’re in Lake Charles, Louisiana, you can use the same number and text CASA for free queso dip or margarita at this joint. If you’re a golfer who loves wine, you may want to check out the 19th hole event text that could have gotten you special information about a golf event that, presumably, involves wine. If you want to see a biotech shop kiss ass to environmentalists, just use BIOTECH. Taste of Dallas will hook you up if you use the same number with the word TASTE.

Fortunately, it looks like there’s not any craziness sharing the same number as Buz’s campaign. But, you can see how this could get funny for any candidate.

Mildly Amusing Observation

I’ll admit that I have an offbeat sense of humor. So I’ll admit that I was way too amused by this description of a new release posted to Hacking Netflix today:

Nine strangers face the mind-bender of a lifetime when a hooded madman locks them in a basement and announces that he will slay one of them every 10 minutes until they uncover the mysterious connection they all share. But starting without a single clue, can any of them solve the puzzle in less than 90 minutes?

Movie time: 86 minutes.

So I guess at least one survives. Damn.

Voting Freedom First

The Brady Campaign thinks they can compete on the grassroots front with us. It’s so naive that I think it’s kinda cute. This morning they put out a call to action on Twitter and Facebook asking their followers (a good number of whom are actually pro-gun) to go vote in a Wall Street Journal poll on whether Starbucks should cave and insert themselves into this issue. (Don’t follow the link @bradybuzz sent, it’s wrong. Use this one to vote freedom first today.)

Then a writer for Consumerist decides to profile the situation and only quote anti-gun leaders before putting up a poorly-worded poll about the issue. They claim the company has changed their policy to allow guns, but that’s not true. No policy has changed. However, they have still added a poll to gauge support for the issue. Here’s another chance to vote freedom first by choosing either the 2nd or 4th option – supporting the policy or don’t care and will buy anyway.

So if this is the game that Paul wants to play, let’s show him how it’s played. It will be a nice little preview of November.

Who’s Bringin’ the Stupid Today?

I pose the title question in a format that Senator Daylin Leach may understand – given that it reflects his own rhetoric against those with whom he disagrees.

Senator Leach, in all the wisdom he can muster, tried to explain his theory – which we will call Leach’s Law – on the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court that might have reached #fail proportions.

Our favorite 5 are nothing if not predictable. You don’t even have to know the issue before the court to know who is going to win. All you need to know are the litigants. So for example, if it’s a prosecutor vs. a criminal defendant, well then the prosecutor is going to win. If it’s a civil-rights plaintiff vs. a company accused of discrimination, then the company is going to win, unless the plaintiffs are white guys, in which case the white guys are going to win. In fact, its a pretty good rule of thumb that if the case is white guys against anyone else for any reason the white guys are going to win.

Using Senator Leach’s theory, let’s examine the McDonald case.

Otis McDonald is not white. Colleen Lawson is not a man. Chicago, in this case, plays the role of prosecutor. And both McDonald and Lawson, along with the other plaintiffs, are seeking relief from a civil rights violation. Under Leach’s Law, the five Justices will vote that the handgun ban stands and governments are free to continue denying a fundamental right to minority citizens.

Wait. That’s not the conclusion he reaches. I guess even Leach’s Law is meant to be broken every once in a while since he actually believes the minority parties will win over the government oppressing a civil right.

If you want more of his twisted logic, feel free to click on over and read why he looks forward to the result of the case so he can push more gun control. (See, I told you it was twisted.)

The Washington Experience

Over the course of the weekend, we met up with at least four lobbyists from wildly varying industries/issues who all know each other and work together from time-to-time when their issues cross. And while you hear some politicians decry “special interests” in politics, every single one of them represents real people on the ground or industries that make products you and I use every day. These people are not just my friends and acquaintances, they really do represent me. And if you read and enjoy this blog, they represent you, too. Remember that any time a politician decries a “special interest,” they are really complaining that someone who disagrees with them has the nerve to speak up.

Seattle Residents: The Starbucks Saga Continues

If you are anywhere near Seattle, you should stop by the flagship Starbucks store around 10:30am and order some food or drink. Then maybe you should let the manager know that you think the people outside are nuts and you hope they don’t get involved in politics with those weird people lying on the ground.

Why are you Seattle folks feeling like a little Starbucks from the original location today around 10:30am? Because Abby Spangler just announced her next lie-in today. She’s outraged that Starbucks has refused to make a political statement on her pet issue. There’s also going to be a Brady press conference, where they will present their petition. So let’s make sure that enough paying customers speak up and just ask that Starbucks stick to coffee and leave the politics to the DC-based groups.

Interestingly, the Brady Campaign doesn’t even care about this enough to bother letting their fans know about it.

One of Life’s Greatest Mysteries Solved

As most of you know, I attended a women’s college. One of the biggest mysteries to me was why many of the men I know asked me whether or not we used to have pillow fights. I cannot tell you how many have confessed that they just have this stereotype/fantasy of college girls in a single-sex environment having pillow fights.

I think I just found out why that fantasy exists – and how come it seems to be the same across age groups.

This dates back to 1897 and comes to us courtesy of Thomas Edison – yes, that Thomas Edison. He would have been 50 at the time, so I’m sure he quite enjoyed the short scene of romping young ladies.