Conversely, if you want off my ping-list, let me know.
And my apologies for any redundant pings.
Posted on 01/26/2005 7:57:29 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
(CNSNews.com) - The Senate Judiciary Committee is meeting Wednesday to vote on the nomination of Alberto Gonzales to be the next U.S. attorney general; and with Republicans controlling the committee, Gonzales' nomination is sure to proceed to the full Senate for final (anticipated) approval.
But it won't happen without dissent -- from Democrats and even from some conservative gun owners.
As with the confirmation of Secretary of State-nominee Condoleezza Rice, the full Senate is expected to debate Gonzales' nomination - in full glare of the TV cameras -- before voting some time next week.
The criticism, mostly from Democrats who oppose President Bush's agenda, is expected to focus on the Iraq war and the treatment of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.
Gonzales' liberal critics accuse him of setting the stage for the scandal at Abu Ghraib by arguing that the Geneva Conventions (protections for prisoners of war) did not apply to terrorists captured in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In a January 2002 memo to President Bush, Gonzales said the war on terrorism was "a new kind of war" -- one that "places a high premium" on the "ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians."
Gonzales concluded, "In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."
Gonzales' critics have pounced on that memo to suggest that he condones torture.
"I think that a man who gave the legal advice to the president to allow this (Abu Ghraib) to take place is someone that deserves to be talked about on the Senate floor," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada was quoted as saying on Tuesday.
At his confirmation hearing earlier this month, Gonzales said he "absolutely" does not approve of torture.
In his Jan. 6 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Gonzales said he was deeply troubled by the photographs of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib; and he said he shares President Bush's resolve "that torture and abuse will not be tolerated by this administration."
He also said he would honor the Geneva Conventions "whenever they apply."
Gun ban concerns
Of greater concern to some conservatives, Gonzales has said he supports the reauthorization of the USA PATRIOT Act -- as well as an extension of the now-expired ban on "assault weapons."
In an email alert to its members, Gun Owners of America, a Second Amendment group, warned that Gonzales not only supports President Bush on reauthorizing the federal assault weapons ban - but Gonzales also has indicated that gun control is a "heart-felt position of his own."
GOA notes that at his confirmation hearing, Gonzales "spoke of his brother, who is a Houston SWAT officer, and said, 'I worry about his safety and the types of weapons he will confront on the street.'"
"Hence, he (Gonzales) supports a prohibition on semi-automatics that, in truth, only amounts to a ban on ugly guns," GOA told its members.
"GOA activists are certainly aware of the fact that President Bush has repeatedly trumpeted his support for the Clinton semi-auto ban, which expired last September. But every time Bush has opened his mouth on this issue, GOA activists have led the way in bombarding the White House."
It's time to take President Bush to the "political woodshed" once again, GOA said in the email.
"No, we probably won't change his mind on this issue. But if we barrage his office with phone calls, faxes and e-mails, it is very possible that we will increase his reluctance to push the ban," the email said.
"So please make sure you contact President Bush," the email concludes. "While some might think that an anti-gun Attorney General is limited in the amount of damage he can inflict upon the Second Amendment, we can be sure that his position on critical court cases could affect our gun rights for generations to come."
Gun Owners of America is urging its members to express "outrage" that President Bush "would nominate an Attorney General who supports a federal ban on semi-automatic firearms."
The email message includes a "pre-written letter" that GOA members can send to President Bush, reminding him of their opposition to any gun ban - and reminding him that he was re-elected "in large part, because gun owners opposed the cockeyed positions of your opponent."
Depite the criticism of Gonzales, even Democrats predict that he will become the nation's first Hispanic attorney general.
I'm concerned about overzealous SWAT officers myself...
What guns? I don't have any stinkin' guns!
Gonzales got "released" from the USAF Academy prior to completing it .........anyone have info as to why he left the USAF early ?
BTTT ....
My answer is the same to Republican or Democrat:
Not you. Not mine. Not ever.
The arguments are stupid because the gun-ban position is utterly indefensible.
I don't often get to discuss the issue (with hoplophobes), but when I do, there are two points I will bring up.
1. Gun confiscation always precedes genocide.
2. Who do you want dead?
Why beat around the bush with this issue? This is the end-game.
"I was being facetious (I DID include a sarcasm tag...). ;^)"
I know you were.
DAMN RIGHT WE ARE UPSET BUMP!!
Conversely, if you want off my ping-list, let me know.
And my apologies for any redundant pings.
I'm not too happy about it myself. The Bush Administration needs to remember "dance with the one that brung ya." I expect better from them than this sort of nonsense.
Very interesting, Squantos.
I didn't know that.
I don't trust this guy, and his selection was simply some more of GW's pandering to the Mexican community.
GW panders to the Mexicans and the Muslims.
I wonder when he's going to start pandering to his political base?
Additionally he was on the board of directors of La Raza!! Consider the implications of that!!
The way to make this even more effective is for all of us to use the same color post cards--red, in this case. (you can pick up red cards at places like Kinko's--or make your own out of something around the house)
Your message should be short and to the point, and you must include your name and address.
Time is short--let's get these cards out today--they won't know what hit them!
Same problem in Wisconsin--one of the Pubbie candidates for Attorney General/WI is anti-CCW--that would be Paul Bucher, the current DA for Waukesha County.
He can't even argue his case on CCW coherently...
Congress AND George II should be flooded by complaints about this guy.
He's not fit to serve, even if he IS an old buddy of George II.
I emailed GWB as soon I as I received my GOA newsletter:
AG-nominee Backs Semi-auto Ban
-- Gonzales tells Senate he supports gun control
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Testifying before the U.S. Senate last week, Alberto Gonzales announced he supports President Bush's position on the semi-auto ban.
"The president has made it clear that he stands ready to sign a reauthorization of the federal assault weapons ban if it is sent to him by Congress," Gonzales said. "I, of course, support the president on this issue."
While some might be tempted to give Gonzales a "pass" since he was parroting his boss' position, Gonzales went even further, indicating that gun control was a heart-felt position of his own.
He spoke of his brother, who is a Houston SWAT officer, and said, "I worry about his safety and the types of weapons he will confront on the street." Hence, he supports a prohibition on semi-automatics that, in truth, only amounts to a ban on ugly guns.
GOA activists are certainly aware of the fact that President Bush has repeatedly trumpeted his support for the Clinton semi-auto ban which expired last September. But every time Bush has opened his mouth on this issue, GOA activists have led the way in bombarding the White House.
And that is why it is VERY important that gun rights supporters take the President to the "political woodshed" once again. No, we probably won't change his mind on this issue. But if we barrage his office with phone calls, faxes and e-mails, it is very possible that we will increase his reluctance to push the ban.
Most likely, our stiff opposition in the past has already accomplished this. A frequent complaint during the campaign last year was that Bush was doing very little to press Congressional Republicans to send him gun ban legislation.
Remember the third presidential debate last year? Bush was asked, "You said if Congress would vote to extend the ban on assault weapons, that you'd sign the legislation, but you did nothing to encourage Congress to extend it."
Yes, maybe Bush was trying to have it both ways. But your outspoken opposition to the ban has certainly not hurt our efforts to restrain the President from pushing it.
So please make sure you contact President Bush. While some might think that an anti-gun Attorney General is limited in the amount of damage he can inflict upon the Second Amendment, we can be sure that his position on critical court cases could affect our gun rights for generations to come.
Remember that it was former Attorney General, John Ashcroft, who opposed us on the important Emerson case that came before the Supreme Court not too long ago. A Fifth Circuit District Court had initially ruled in favor of Second Amendment rights, arguing that a federal gun statute was unconstitutional -- the law disarmed citizens who were not guilty of any crime or had not been convicted by any jury. After the Appeals Court reversed the decision, Dr. Emerson appealed to the Supreme Court.
While the Supremes refused to hear the case, gun owners did not fail notice that General Ashcroft was in full support of how the Emerson case was ultimately decided -- thus, putting him in total support of the federal gun restrictions.
Not only that, but the Ashcroft-led Justice Department also opposed gun owners in the Silveira semi-auto ban case and the Lamar Bean case.
All of this to say, it is imperative that we speak out once again -- if for no other reason than to remind President Bush there are millions of gun owners that he, and his party, cannot afford to take for granted.
ACTION: Please contact President Bush and express your outrage that he would nominate an Attorney General who supports a federal ban on semi-automatic firearms.
You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send a pre-written e-mail message to President Bush. To call or snail mail the President regarding the semi-auto ban, you can use the following contact info:
President George Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Fax: 202-456-2461 or 202-456-1907
Phone: 202-456-1414
----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear President Bush:
I am very disappointed that you would nominate an anti-gun Attorney General such as Alberto Gonzales. He supports the Clinton ban on semi-automatic firearms, and I think that's a travesty.
Please realize that you were reelected President, in large part, because gun owners opposed the cockeyed positions of your opponent. I would expect to see a bigger difference between the two of you when it comes to Second Amendment issues.
In the future, I hope you will use the Second Amendment as a litmus test in nominating candidates who oppose gun control when filling important administrative and judicial positions.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Joe, please put me on your 2nd Amendment ping list. Much obliged!
Many say that Bush announces his support of the Clinton gun ban to make it a non-issue with the Left, then sits on his hands not supporting his talk with any walk. I guess that works, but I don't like that type of lipspeak from a "principled" man. If that is the same strategy being used by Gonzo, it is sad to see this dishonest approach at staying honest to the Constitution. What needs to be done is to tell the Left that they LOST, and their agenda to dissarm good citizens has been derailed.
I expect this will go just like the Specter deal.
We'll be told, don't worry, he'll be on a tight leash, and then he'll get in and proceed immediately to knife us in the back.
Sometimes it seems the only thing worse for the Constitution than democraps is republicans.
Here's what's going on in Oregon, now the rats control the state (not the House) Senate:
Oregon Firearms Federation
P.O. Box 556
Canby, OR
97013
Voice: (503) 263-5830
http://www.oregonfirearms.org
OFF ALERT 1/26/05
Hearing information
We have received many e-mails and phone calls asking what to expect at Friday's anti gun-rights hearing.
For any who are planning to attend, what follows is some basic information you should have.
Burdick and the anti-gun Democrats have scheduled this meeting at the Multnomah County Courthouse for one reason. To discourage gun owners from attending.
If you have a concealed handgun license, DO NOT come to the courthouse with your self defense firearm. You face arrest.
If you are traveling with a firearm, you will need to leave it unattended in your car.
Treat entering the courthouse as you would getting on a plane. No firearms, no knives, no nail clippers. The minute you step through the courthouse doors, you leave your rights behind you on the street.
There WILL be a large police presence at this hearing. The entire point of having this hearing where they are having it, is to intimidate gun owners.
If you plan to give testimony at this "hearing" be sure to look for a sign up sheet when you arrive. Place your name on it.
Understand that Burdick has complete control over the proceedings at this event. So, you may or may not be allowed to speak.
You may be given a time limit.
It is likely that the supporters of the bill will be invited to speak first. It is also likely that they will be given as much time as they want. Do NOT expect the same courtesy.
This bill is scheduled for a "hearing and possible work session" on Friday. Work sessions are where the bill is amended and usually voted on. This means that Burdick's plan is to move this bill out on Friday.
This is a very fast track for a bill that is this controversial.
What this means is basically this;
Burdick would NOT hold hearings on this bill unless she had received assurances from the other Democrats on the committee that they would vote to pass the bill out of committee onto the full Senate.
There are four Democrats on the committee. ALL are vocally anti-gun and they are the majority.
If you are planning to come and "educate" the anti-gun members of the committee about how dangerous and counterproductive this bill is, understand this. THEY ALREADY KNOW.
The four Democrats on the committee know very well that CHL holders pose no threat. They are supporting this bill in spite of the facts, not because they don't know them.
Your time would better be spent simply telling the committee, that as a law abiding, gun owning Oregonian, you will work to defeat anyone who votes for this bill.
None of the Democrats on this committee have the slightest interest in any facts you can present to demonstrate the danger of this bill. Their agenda is to take your gun rights away and you may as well try to explain to a mugger why crime is bad for people.
Senate President Peter Courtney sen.petercourtney@state.or.us arranged to have this hearing in a place that was guaranteed to be hostile to gun owners. DO NOT expect to be treated fairly.
Remember, this hearing is being held ONLY for the benefit of the media.
The members of this committee are:
Ginny Burdick, Chair Anti- gun rights
Floyd Prozanski Anti-gun rights
Charlie Ringo Anti-gun rights
Vicki L Walker Anti-gun rights
Charles Starr, Vice-Chair Pro-gun rights
Roger Beyer Pro-gun rights
Doug Whitsett Pro-gun rights
________________________________________________________
Did someone forward this to you? To receive the
most up to date information consider subscribing
directly to the Oregon Firearms Federation e-mail
list. The volume of mail usually is quite low.
To subscribe to, or to be removed from the OFF
E-mail Alert list please go to:
http://oregonfirearms.org/adduser/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.