2012 Election – Page 6 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Suppressing Votes in Florida?

I get the campaigns are large organizations made up of humans who make mistakes. So when I heard that a robocall into Florida from Obama’s campaign gave some people the wrong dates for voting, I gave the benefit of the doubt that it was merely a mistake when recording.

However, now there are reports that not only is the robocalling giving out false dates to votes, but an Obama door-to-door campaign targeting seniors in a county that went Republican is also giving out the false dates, I’m not so sure this is an accident.

As someone who has done my fair share of campaigning, I have never felt the need to resort to lying to supporters of my opponents. I don’t actively encourage them to get out and vote, but I won’t give them false information in hopes of confusing them so they aren’t allowed to cast a ballot.

The Libertarian Case for Romney

Steven Green was one of the first bloggers I started reading back before blogging was cool, and he pretty much echoes my views on Romney, not because Romney will save us, but because he’ll buy us time. There’s been some speculation as to whether time really buys anything, but I think it does. I am not certain whether we can avoid hitting the iceberg looming ahead, but I am pretty sure if we keep moving at this speed, we will definitely hit it. I’m happy to give someone a chance to slam the rudder hard to starboard and at least try to miss it.

UPDATE: More here. h/t Volokh

Mitt Gets the Coveted ‘Stache Endorsement

John Bolton, and his mustache, offer support for Romney on guns.

Declining Accountability

I have a problem with candidates who don’t respond to NRA questionnaires. Regardless of how you might feel about individual legislative and political decisions by NRA, the fact remains that they are a known major interest group with hundreds of thousands of members who vote in Pennsylvania. An unwillingness to even acknowledge questions from such a grassroots organization doesn’t speak well for for their responsiveness to constituents – especially those with whom they might disagree.

So, imagine my surprise when I browsed the NRA-PVF grade listings last night and discovered that almost none of the races had grades for both candidates.

In the PA-13 Congressional District, I have 3 State Senate races and 14 State House races. Of the Senate races, only one has a challenger to the incumbent and the Republican refused to return the questionnaire. In the 14 House races, 11 feature challengers. In 3 of those 11, neither candidate was willing to respond to gun owner questions. In 1 of those 11, the GOP candidate alone remains ungraded. In 6 of the remaining races, the Democrats refused to answer questions. In only one race is there a grade for both candidates.

In the PA-8 Congressional District, Sebastian has 1 State Senate race and 14 State House races. His Senate race is the same as the one in PA-13, so it’s the same situation with the GOP candidate refusing to answer questions about his positions. In his 14 House races, only 10 have challengers. In those 10 races, only 2 of the races feature candidates who both earned grades. In the remaining 8, 1 race has both candidates refusing to answer questions. The final 7 are broken down in failures to be graded as 2 Republicans who refuse to answer and 5 Democrats who won’t be held accountable.

This is a rather disturbing trend of politicians who feel they don’t need to worry about answering to constituents.

If you’re in either of these Congressional Districts (or another area where you see the same trend), get in touch with the candidates at the local level and let them know that their refusal to answer even basic questions of policy disturbs you. Trust me, it makes an impression when voters let candidates know that they won’t support candidates who refuse to answer NRA questionnaires. Even going into his third election, our state representative has never forgotten to respond to NRA ever since his campaign manager screwed up his questionnaire in his first race. He did actually meet a voter who walked out of the polling booth and said he refused to vote for him because he wouldn’t even give a response to NRA. Now, that representative is always responsive to us as gun owner constituents, and he also happens to be A- rated and endorsed.

The Sign Wars

With Silly Season now in full swing, it is once again time for “Sign Wars.” This is one of those thing in politics that seems silly, because who ever has been convinced by a sign? As hard as it is for people who are even slightly civilly engaged to understand, it offers a lot of credit to the kinds of voters who will be deciding a close election such as this one. It is a soft form of psychological warfare, “All of my neighbors like this Romney guy, but I think Obama is a good husband, and a good man. I mean sure, he’s not been the best President, but maybe if my neighbors all like Romney then I should take another look at Romney.” If you can accomplish it, greatly outnumbering the opposition in the sign wars can demoralize partisans and suppress turnout. At least that’s the idea.

So now that October is upon us, the sign wars are starting. Bucks County seems to be blooming in yard signs much later this year than previous years. I’ve seen precious little. Chester County is starting to bloom. A brief drive through neighborhoods on the way to work, so far Romney-Ryan is outnumbering Obama by 10-to-1. These are comfortably wealthy to upper-middle-class neighborhoods in a county that is traditionally Republican, and went red in 2000 and 2004, but went blue in 2008 for Obama. I’d be curious to drive through the super wealthy parts of the ring counties and see how the sign wars are going there.

I tend to believe most people who are comfortably well off will still lean pretty heavily Republican. It’s not until you get into the super wealthy, where they feel the need to assuage their guilt by supporting socialism for the little people, do you get things trending more Democrat.

Paul Ryan Gets a New Gun

He went shopping for camo hunting gear the other day, and now Paul Ryan has a new gun to go with all of that new gear.

David Dlubak, owner of the Ithaca Gun Company, presents Republican vice presidential candidate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., with a special edition Romney/Ryan Ithaca shotgun before Ryan speaks to the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance annual banquet Saturday in Columbus. A Romney/Ryan logo was engraved on the stock of the gun.

Some Election Season Humor

Via Kevin:

Blogs & The 2012 Election

No one who reads or contributes to blogs really ponders the impact of blogging on elections anymore. We’ve known it can make an impact for many years at this point. I’ve seen two great examples of blogging that can make an impact in a race so far this year.

One is Prof. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection and his reporting on the Elizabeth Warren law license problem. His top notch reporting on the issue got this comment from an initial Warren defender:

…I wanted to let you know ASAP that I concede that your discovery this morning answers all of my arguments and is a gamechanger. Your diligence in investigating this matter is commendable.

If you haven’t been following the story, Prof. Jacobson has basically uncovered the Elizabeth Warren has likely been practicing law in Massachusetts in violation of Massachusetts law. Rather than clearing the air, the campaign is refusing to answer any questions about the matter which leaves many wondering if she is, in fact, hiding from a possible crime admission. Talk about a huge piece of original reporting that could very well end up leading to an October surprise moment.

Yes, this is the thorough vetting of the Massachusetts Democratic Party – and the White House for that matter, since she served in the administration. If the Dems blow this race twice with terrible female candidates, it will not reflect well upon female candidates in the future of politics there. I admit being embarrassed for Jane Swift when she started crying during her concession speech.

The second bit of good election-related posting I noticed today stood out because it’s a thoroughly local take on a local race targeting a specific demographic. Great Satan, Inc. attended the NRA endorsement event for Jeff Flake who is running for the open Arizona Senate seat. But what I appreciate is that they highlighted not just that Jeff Flake is backed by NRA, but just how far his opponent would go in pushing gun control. They feature a quote from Richard Carmona that notes his support for training mandates to own firearms. Considering we saw the nightmare of training requirements through Emily Miller’s experience in DC, this is a big deal that isn’t just a happy talking point on safety and education. It can be a true roadblock to owning a firearm, and that has nothing to do with the owner’s ability to shoot.

So, in conclusion, reporting by bloggers is still relevant to elections. And you owe to yourself to check out both of these examples.

Buying Camo is Child Abuse?

Paul Ryan took a little time out of campaigning in Ohio to pick up some hunting gear for his daughter who wants to get out to the field with him this fall, apparently. She already has her own rifle, so he has truly walked the walk when it comes to passing his shooting sports traditions. And, of course, when it came out that he was buying camo gear for his daughter, some came out screaming child abuse.

I appreciate that they highlighted there was no such “concern” from the these same folks when Obama announced that he was comforted by the fact that his daughters are protected by guns. Yet, apparently, teaching a girl to safely use one of her own is just horrible. Sexism much?

Misinformation About Louisiana RKBA Ballot Measure

There’s a lot of folks who seem to think this is gun control, because it changes:

Section 11. The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged, but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person.

to:

Section 11. The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms is fundamental and shall not be infringed. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

A bit further down on the original link above:

For a â€œRightâ€ to â€œnot be infringedâ€ there can be NO â€œrestrictionâ€ placed on it whatsoever. NONE. Privileges can have restrictions placed on them. â€œRightsâ€, as defined in the Declaration of Independence of 1776 cannot be â€œrestrictedâ€ in any manner, as they are â€œunalienable,â€ which means not â€˜alienableâ€™â€¦.not able to be taken away, transferred orÂ RESTRICTEDâ€¦!!

This was a fear of mine, that the uninitiated would have no idea what strict scrutiny meant, legally. Now we have that, and people latching onto the word “restricted,” and interpreting this provision as some form of gun control. Nothing could be farther from the truth. By demanding strict scrutiny in the constitutional provision, it is a detailed, specific instruction to the courts to give the right the highest protection the courts currently offer when considering the scope of fundamental rights. To date, most courts have adopted intermediate scrutiny so that they may engage in balancing tests to justify numerous restrictions on the right, and the Louisiana Supreme Court effectively gutted their RKBA constitution guarantee back in 2001:

“The State of Louisiana is entitled to restrict that right for legitimate state purposes, such as public health and safety.”Â State v. Blanchard, 776 So.2d 1165, 1168 (La. 2001).*

So really, this is a choice between any restriction the state wants to place, which is the current status quo, or any restrictions being subject to a very high level of scrutiny by the courts. Clearly the latter here would be far better.Â I really hope that people will spread the word and help relieve the ignorance at work here, especially if you know folks in Louisiana, or see people spreading this.

Unfortunately, the unscrupulous among us will also see a fundraising opportunity here, and will likely play on this ignorance to drum up support for their organization. But it’s very important that this get passed, both for the sake of Louisiana, and to send a message to the federal courts about how Americans expect their rights to be treated. If this ballot measure goes down in a sea of ignorance on the part of gun owners, the other side will be guaranteed to spin this as Americans believing that harsh restrictions on state power to regulate guns is just peachy.

* Source: Defend Your Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Louisianaâ€“Vote â€œYESâ€ on 2!