H R 1591 YEA-AND-NAY 25-Apr-2007 9:27 PM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Conference Report
BILL TITLE: Making emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes
Why doesn't King want to provide funds for our soldiers?
HR 1591 .S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act, 2007 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
National Journal Picks up Newsday Article about This Blog
April 24, 2007
BELTWAY BLOGROLL
BELTWAY BLOGROLL
'The Blog War In New York'
Last year's election saw the emergence of local blogs that targeted specific members of Congress or promoted favored candidates -- sites like Dump Mike Ferguson that lobbed attack after attack against the Republican incumbent of that name in New Jersey, or like LamontBlog in Connecticut that touted Democrat Ned Lamont in his intraparty bid to unseat Sen. Joseph Lieberman.
Such blogs were relatively rare last year, but there already are signs that they will be far more common in 2008. The latest evidence is a Newsday article focused on "the blog war in New York" alone.
For now, Democrats, who always seem to be five online steps ahead of Republicans, are on the offensive. The piece noted blogs that target GOP Reps. Peter King (Peter King Watch) and Vito Fossella (Veto Vito). There also are blogs aimed at Nassau Legislature Minority Leader Peter Schmitt (Peter Schmitt Watch), also a Republican, and the Nassau GOP (Nassau GOP Watch).
The advantage has local Republican worried. "Readers should consider proper defenses," Scott Scala told his audience at the New York GOP-oriented blog Urban Elephants. "Pro-candidate blogs? Anti-Dem elected officials blogs? Counter posts? Etc. We cannot lose the blog war in New York."
Posted by Danny | 12:11 PM
Monday, April 23, 2007
NY-03 on Cook Report 2008 Potential Competitive Race Chart
Kings district NY-03 is according to the Cook Political Report voting more Democratic than the nation in presidential races. NY-03 is a D+2 which means the district voted 2% more Democratic than the rest of the country.
The Cook Report defines its findings this way..
"2008 POTENTIALLY COMPETITIVE HOUSE RACE CHART
This chart separates incumbents into categories by their Cook Political Report PVI rating.
PVI: The Partisan Voting Index (PVI) is a measurement of how each district performs compared to the nation as a whole. The PVI listed here reflects the results of 2000 and 2004. A PVI score of D+2, for example, means that in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential election, the district per formed an average of two percentage points more Democratic than the nation as a whole, while an R+3 score means that the district per formed three points more Republican than did the nation."
See the report here (opens as .pdf)
The Cook Report defines its findings this way..
"2008 POTENTIALLY COMPETITIVE HOUSE RACE CHART
This chart separates incumbents into categories by their Cook Political Report PVI rating.
PVI: The Partisan Voting Index (PVI) is a measurement of how each district performs compared to the nation as a whole. The PVI listed here reflects the results of 2000 and 2004. A PVI score of D+2, for example, means that in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential election, the district per formed an average of two percentage points more Democratic than the nation as a whole, while an R+3 score means that the district per formed three points more Republican than did the nation."
See the report here (opens as .pdf)
This Site in Newsday Today
If you're visiting from the Newsday mention, welcome and look around a bit. We have an archive full of stuff.
Here's the story from Newsday...
LI's Partisan Blogosphere
Say it five times fast. Partisan bloggers are blogging on the bloggings of other bloggers — and Long Island is the battlefield.
“Urban Elephants” is a New York City Republican-oriented Web site. A recent post expresses concern about “energetic liberal bloggers setting up space on line targeting specific Republican elected leaders,” that is, “blogs dedicated solely to one person.”
As examples, Elephants’ Scott Scala cites Democrat-oriented sites that target Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), Nassau Legislature Minority Leader Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa), the Nassau GOP — all of a piece. Another such site, called “Veto Vito,” whacks Staten Island Rep. Vito Fossella, the five boroughs’ only Republican Congressman.
“Now this does not necessarily mean such easily-set up sites can make an impact,” Scala writes, but “the larger media loves fights... A one-person crusade against one politician has the potential to become Cindy Sheehan-ized in the wrong hands.”
“Readers should consider proper defenses,” he adds. “Pro-candidate blogs? Anti-Dem elected officials blogs? Counter posts? Etc. We cannot lose the blog war in New York.”
At his “Peter Schmitt Watch,” John Rennhack of North Massapequa blogged: “I guess this post from Urban Elephants is flattering...Urban Elephants is well-written (not that we agree with the writing) and thoughtful.” Rennhack also does “Nassau GOP Watch” and “Peter King Watch.”
One-time candidate Rennhack even responded last year to a “Watch” site targeting King’s challenger, Legis. David Mejias, by creating “Mejias Watch Watch.”
Recent fare on the “Nassau GOP Watch” included a link to the New York Observer “Politicker” site video of GOP state and county leader Joseph Mondello saying of Gov. Eliot Spitzer: “He will self-destruct. You give it a little bit of time.” “GOP Watch” snaps: “So the plan is to wait patiently for Governor Spitzer to `self-destruct,’...Brilliant strategist.”
One recent “Urban Elephants” link, meanwhile, raps Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-Mineola) as having been unable in an interview to define a key term in her own anti-gun bill.
UPDATE: Also part of the scene we're describing is another pro-Democrat site, Nasty Letters, which also whacks King...
Dan Janison"
Here's the story from Newsday...
LI's Partisan Blogosphere
Say it five times fast. Partisan bloggers are blogging on the bloggings of other bloggers — and Long Island is the battlefield.
“Urban Elephants” is a New York City Republican-oriented Web site. A recent post expresses concern about “energetic liberal bloggers setting up space on line targeting specific Republican elected leaders,” that is, “blogs dedicated solely to one person.”
As examples, Elephants’ Scott Scala cites Democrat-oriented sites that target Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), Nassau Legislature Minority Leader Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa), the Nassau GOP — all of a piece. Another such site, called “Veto Vito,” whacks Staten Island Rep. Vito Fossella, the five boroughs’ only Republican Congressman.
“Now this does not necessarily mean such easily-set up sites can make an impact,” Scala writes, but “the larger media loves fights... A one-person crusade against one politician has the potential to become Cindy Sheehan-ized in the wrong hands.”
“Readers should consider proper defenses,” he adds. “Pro-candidate blogs? Anti-Dem elected officials blogs? Counter posts? Etc. We cannot lose the blog war in New York.”
At his “Peter Schmitt Watch,” John Rennhack of North Massapequa blogged: “I guess this post from Urban Elephants is flattering...Urban Elephants is well-written (not that we agree with the writing) and thoughtful.” Rennhack also does “Nassau GOP Watch” and “Peter King Watch.”
One-time candidate Rennhack even responded last year to a “Watch” site targeting King’s challenger, Legis. David Mejias, by creating “Mejias Watch Watch.”
Recent fare on the “Nassau GOP Watch” included a link to the New York Observer “Politicker” site video of GOP state and county leader Joseph Mondello saying of Gov. Eliot Spitzer: “He will self-destruct. You give it a little bit of time.” “GOP Watch” snaps: “So the plan is to wait patiently for Governor Spitzer to `self-destruct,’...Brilliant strategist.”
One recent “Urban Elephants” link, meanwhile, raps Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-Mineola) as having been unable in an interview to define a key term in her own anti-gun bill.
UPDATE: Also part of the scene we're describing is another pro-Democrat site, Nasty Letters, which also whacks King...
Dan Janison"
Sunday, April 22, 2007
King Votes Against D.C. Representation
It has been kicking around for years and it's now passed the House without Peter Kings vote.
H.R.1905: To provide for the treatment of the District of Columbia as a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and for other purposes will finally give the District of Columbia a vote in the House.
"SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AS CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.
H.R.1905: To provide for the treatment of the District of Columbia as a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and for other purposes will finally give the District of Columbia a vote in the House.
"SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AS CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.
- (a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the District of Columbia shall be considered a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives.
- (b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Apportionment of Members of House of Representatives-
- (1) INCLUSION OF SINGLE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MEMBER IN REAPPORTIONMENT OF MEMBERS AMONG STATES- Section 22 of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial censuses and to provide for apportionment of Representatives in Congress', approved June 28, 1929 (2 U.S.C. 2a), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
- `(d) This section shall apply with respect to the District of Columbia in the same manner as this section applies to a State, except that the District of Columbia may not receive more than one Member under any reapportionment of Members.'.
- (2) CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS ON BASIS OF 23RD AMENDMENT- Section 3 of title 3, United States Code, is amended by striking `come into office;' and inserting the following: `come into office (subject to the twenty-third article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States in the case of the District of Columbia);'.
King Campaign Contributions a Net Loss
From our friend over at Nasty Letters...
"In the crucial test of political fund-raising, Peter King flunked out this quarter. He reports a low $99,005 in receipts, with $115,700 spent, for a grand ANEMIC total of -$16,695. That's right, he LOST MONEY this quarter!
Granted, some of the expenses doubtless relate to tying up the '06 Campaign. But still, for a newly competitive district, King did not raise impressive numbers this quarter. Perhaps most significantly, he currently has only $287,090 Cash on Hand. At this point in the last election cycle, King was showing $776,990. In other words, he's down $489,900 from this time two years ago, or nearly $500 K.
From a progressive standpoint a strong challenge to King, such as a Dave Mejias rematch, can go head to head on fund raising. King's '06 victory, despite being down in numerous polls, can at least partially be attributed to his 2 to 1 spending advantage; he spent over $2.1 Million in the '06 Cycle. This time around, unless he ups his game hardcore, he won't be so lucky."
"In the crucial test of political fund-raising, Peter King flunked out this quarter. He reports a low $99,005 in receipts, with $115,700 spent, for a grand ANEMIC total of -$16,695. That's right, he LOST MONEY this quarter!
Granted, some of the expenses doubtless relate to tying up the '06 Campaign. But still, for a newly competitive district, King did not raise impressive numbers this quarter. Perhaps most significantly, he currently has only $287,090 Cash on Hand. At this point in the last election cycle, King was showing $776,990. In other words, he's down $489,900 from this time two years ago, or nearly $500 K.
From a progressive standpoint a strong challenge to King, such as a Dave Mejias rematch, can go head to head on fund raising. King's '06 victory, despite being down in numerous polls, can at least partially be attributed to his 2 to 1 spending advantage; he spent over $2.1 Million in the '06 Cycle. This time around, unless he ups his game hardcore, he won't be so lucky."
First 2008 King Opponent in the Massapequa Post
Local coverage this early is pretty good.
Third Party candidate to run against Congressman King
by Tiffany Elliott
Pete King Third Congressional District residents would vote for a new third party candidate if they are convinced the candidate would listen to them and vote on the basis of what the majority wants, according to North Massapequa resident Bill Corrigan who just announced his run for the seat currently held by Congressman Peter King (R-Massapequa).
"We found that 74.9 percent of our survey takers are staying away from the polls come election day because they believe they have too little of a choice. It's like the lesser of two evils," said 36-year old Corrigan, an independent candidate who said he would most likely run under the "Long Island" or "Islander " party banner.
According to the political newcomer, 8,000 registered voters responded last month to his online website "Democracy Direct" and completed the survey."
"I believe I would be a good candidate for the seat because I would have the humility to say 'this is what the people want' and I'd be able to listen even if I don't agree," he said.
"After 15 years in his seat, King has become ineffectual," added the candidate, who works on Wall Street."
Reached in Washington, King said: "I am running hard for reelection, no matter who my opponent is. I encourage people to get involved in the political process."
Third Party candidate to run against Congressman King
by Tiffany Elliott
Pete King Third Congressional District residents would vote for a new third party candidate if they are convinced the candidate would listen to them and vote on the basis of what the majority wants, according to North Massapequa resident Bill Corrigan who just announced his run for the seat currently held by Congressman Peter King (R-Massapequa).
"We found that 74.9 percent of our survey takers are staying away from the polls come election day because they believe they have too little of a choice. It's like the lesser of two evils," said 36-year old Corrigan, an independent candidate who said he would most likely run under the "Long Island" or "Islander " party banner.
According to the political newcomer, 8,000 registered voters responded last month to his online website "Democracy Direct" and completed the survey."
"I believe I would be a good candidate for the seat because I would have the humility to say 'this is what the people want' and I'd be able to listen even if I don't agree," he said.
"After 15 years in his seat, King has become ineffectual," added the candidate, who works on Wall Street."
Reached in Washington, King said: "I am running hard for reelection, no matter who my opponent is. I encourage people to get involved in the political process."
Monday, April 02, 2007
King Thanks God Bush is President... Bush Insiders, Not So Much
Peter King is a huge fan of Geirge W. Bush. Thinks he's a great president who is at the top of his game.
Peter King thanks god every night that Bush is president.
It seems a growing number of Bush true-believers and inner-circle-types are jumping ship and telling what is really going on.
And it ain't pretty.
Vic Gold a long-time Bush family friend has a book coming out 'Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP' and he tells the Washington Post (h/t Crooks and Liars) "For all the Rove-built facade of his being a 'strong' chief executive, George W. Bush has been, by comparison to even hapless Jimmy Carter, the weakest, most out of touch president in modern times," Gold writes. "Think Dan Quayle in cowboy boots."
Gold is even more withering in his observations of Cheney. "A vice president in control is bad enough. Worse yet is a vice president out of control."
For Gold, Cheney brings to mind the adage of Swiss writer Madame de Stael, who wrote, "Men do not change, they unmask themselves." Cheney has a deep streak of paranoia and megalomania, Gold suggests — but he says he did not see it at first.
He was hiding who he really was," Gold says. "He was waiting for an opportunity."
Another Bush insider Matthew Dowd is going public too. From the NYTimes “I’m a big believer that in part what we’re called to do — to me, by God; other people call it karma — is to restore balance when things didn’t turn out the way they should have,” Mr. Dowd said. “Just being quiet is not an option when I was so publicly advocating an election.”
"He said he thought Mr. Bush handled the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks well but “missed a real opportunity to call the country to a shared sense of sacrifice.”
He was dumbfounded when Mr. Bush did not fire Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld after revelations that American soldiers had tortured prisoners at Abu Ghraib."
"He said he clung to the hope that Mr. Bush would get back to his Texas style of governing if he won. But he saw no change after the 2004 victory.
He describes as further cause for doubt two events in the summer of 2005: the administration’s handling of Hurricane Katrina and the president’s refusal, around the same time that he was entertaining the bicyclist Lance Armstrong at his Crawford ranch, to meet with the war protester Cindy Sheehan, whose son died in Iraq.
“I had finally come to the conclusion that maybe all these things along do add up,” he said. “That it’s not the same, it’s not the person I thought.”
"In a wide-ranging interview here, Mr. Dowd called for a withdrawal from Iraq and expressed his disappointment in Mr. Bush’s leadership.
He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a “my way or the highway” mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.
“I really like him, which is probably why I’m so disappointed in things,” he said. He added, “I think he’s become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in.”
Peter King thanks god every night that Bush is president.
It seems a growing number of Bush true-believers and inner-circle-types are jumping ship and telling what is really going on.
And it ain't pretty.
Vic Gold a long-time Bush family friend has a book coming out 'Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP' and he tells the Washington Post (h/t Crooks and Liars) "For all the Rove-built facade of his being a 'strong' chief executive, George W. Bush has been, by comparison to even hapless Jimmy Carter, the weakest, most out of touch president in modern times," Gold writes. "Think Dan Quayle in cowboy boots."
Gold is even more withering in his observations of Cheney. "A vice president in control is bad enough. Worse yet is a vice president out of control."
For Gold, Cheney brings to mind the adage of Swiss writer Madame de Stael, who wrote, "Men do not change, they unmask themselves." Cheney has a deep streak of paranoia and megalomania, Gold suggests — but he says he did not see it at first.
He was hiding who he really was," Gold says. "He was waiting for an opportunity."
Another Bush insider Matthew Dowd is going public too. From the NYTimes “I’m a big believer that in part what we’re called to do — to me, by God; other people call it karma — is to restore balance when things didn’t turn out the way they should have,” Mr. Dowd said. “Just being quiet is not an option when I was so publicly advocating an election.”
"He said he thought Mr. Bush handled the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks well but “missed a real opportunity to call the country to a shared sense of sacrifice.”
He was dumbfounded when Mr. Bush did not fire Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld after revelations that American soldiers had tortured prisoners at Abu Ghraib."
"He said he clung to the hope that Mr. Bush would get back to his Texas style of governing if he won. But he saw no change after the 2004 victory.
He describes as further cause for doubt two events in the summer of 2005: the administration’s handling of Hurricane Katrina and the president’s refusal, around the same time that he was entertaining the bicyclist Lance Armstrong at his Crawford ranch, to meet with the war protester Cindy Sheehan, whose son died in Iraq.
“I had finally come to the conclusion that maybe all these things along do add up,” he said. “That it’s not the same, it’s not the person I thought.”
"In a wide-ranging interview here, Mr. Dowd called for a withdrawal from Iraq and expressed his disappointment in Mr. Bush’s leadership.
He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a “my way or the highway” mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.
“I really like him, which is probably why I’m so disappointed in things,” he said. He added, “I think he’s become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
