Happy Independence Day

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Exploiting Terrorism

Great article by Arinnna Huffington on the terror plot in England called "The Upside of Flaming Cars: Politicians and the Press Exploit the British Terror Attacks."
Here's her take on Peter King and his ilk "Also making the pitch for an unfettered president, free to eavesdrop on whomever he wants, whenever he wants, was Rep. Peter King, ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee. Appearing on CNN's Late Edition, King said that the failed British attacks show that the best way to fight "the war on terrorism" is "to not allow people to cut into electronic surveillance, to stop that, to not be tying the hands of the president, neither here or in foreign policy."

The thinking of people like Lieberman and King (to say nothing of Bush and Cheney), when it comes to terrorism is as illogical as it is entrenched. It goes something like this: When someone attacks -- or tries to attack -- us or one of our allies because we are a free society, we should respond by making ourselves less free. That'll show the bastards!

This is not in any way to suggest that we shouldn't take terrorist threats seriously -- or that there aren't a lot of very dangerous people intent on carrying out attacks against us or our allies. But surely the answer isn't allowing Bush and Cheney to shred the Constitution -- and to continue making the spurious connection between Iraq and the war on terror. As Gordon Brown told the BBC on Sunday, "We are in the business of dealing with a long-term threat, a sustained threat that is unrelated in detail to one specific point of conflict in the world."

Kings Candidate Guiliani is Just Like Him

We've noted in the past how King is supposed to be some great friend of Bill Clinton but then turns around and blames 9/11 on Clinton.
Now its Guiliani's turn to change his tune (h/t Town Crier)

Last month Rudy said...

"Islamic terrorists killed more than 500 Americans before Sept. 11. Many people think the first attack on America was on Sept. 11, 2001. It was not. It was in 1993," said the former New York mayor.
Giuliani argued that Clinton treated the World Trade Center bombing as a criminal act instead of a terrorist attack, calling it "a big mistake" that emboldened other strikes on the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia, in Kenya and Tanzania and later on the USS Cole while docked in Yemen in 2000.
"The United States government, then President Clinton, did not respond," Giuliani said. "(Osama) bin Laden declared war on us. We didn't hear it."

But back in 2006, Rudy said....

"The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don't think he deserves it," Giuliani said during a stop in Florida. "I don't think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists - the Islamic fanatics - who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it."

Rudy needs to fire up the republican base so he attacks Clinton. Show you what kind of "man" he is.

King Lets Slip that Bush is a Little Nuts

In a Washington Post article about how bad things are going for Bush, King thinking he is helping makes Bush look like a nut.

"King, the GOP congressman, introduced him backstage to a soldier injured in one eye. Bush teared up and asked the young man to take off his dark glasses so he could see the wound, King recalled. "Human instinct is when someone has a serious injury to look the other way," King said. "He actually asked him to take them off. He actually touched the eye a little. It was almost as if he felt he had to confront it.""

WHAT??????
Seriously.
Who asks to see a wound and then wants to touch it?
Maybe a curious child?
Looking the other way is one extreme and wanting to touch a wound is another extreme.

20 years ago, I injured my eye and had to wear an eye patch for 4 months. I don't believe anyone asked other than my doctor asked to see the eye. Much less touch it.
I had a "Out of Order" sign on the patch and even that casual attitude towards my injury didn't encourage anyone to ask me to take that patch off.

On Hiatus - Enjoy The Video

Taking a few days R&R.. Enjoy the BEST street performers EVER.
The song choice is classic.



UPDATE: The band is 'The Wrong Trousers.' Visit them on MYSPACE http://www.myspace.com/thewrongtrousers

King Assails Thompson, Boosts Rudy, Sounds Stupid in Process

Former Senator and current Actor Fred Thompson is poised to enter the 2008 presidential race. Our dear Peter defends his boy Rudy by saying "Rudy had 9/11, and Fred .Thompson had 'Law & Order."
Yes Peter, keep using 9/11 for Rudy. Keep using it because the more you highlight it, the worse its gonna be for Guiliani.
From the lack of upgraded radios for the FDNY to insisting on the Office of Emergency Management Command Center be located high in the sky at the Trade enter site, Rudy has a poor 9/11 record.
9/11 groups are getting ready to beat the crap out of Rudy. This is from Jim Riches, a deputy chief with the FDNY who lost his son on 9/11... “We have all the UFA, the UFOA, and the fire members are all behind us -- the International Association of Fire Fighters.... And we’re going to be out there today to let everybody know that he’s not the hero that he says he is.”
“If somebody can tell me what he did on 9/11 that was so good, I’d love to hear it. All he did was give information on the TV”
“He did nothing... He stood there with a TV reporter and told everyone what was going on. And he got it from everybody else down at the site.”

Not that I'm a fan of Thomspon but he does have a resume beyond his acting...
- Assistant US Attorney from 1969 to 1972
- Co-chief counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee
- US Senator

King is just doing what he always does, opens his mouth just to hear himself speak.

Will "The Nanny" Take on King?

And I bet she knows more about international affairs than King does....

From the NY Daily News:

"Appearing tomorrow afternoon at the North-Shore LIJ Cancer Center, the liberal-leaning actress will give a keynote lecture about her 2000 diagnosis with uterine cancer and her successful struggle against the disease.

But her appearance in front of a positive audience on Long Island fueled speculation she might also announce a run against Republican Rep. Peter King.

"If she's going in 2008 and she's going after King's seat, you do it at an event in King's district," said Baruch College Prof. Doug Muzzio, a political expert. "You declare war on enemy turf."

Drescher denied the possibility of such an announcement, even if she has thought about having a career in Washington down the line.

"If I had my druthers, I'd rather be a senator" than a representative, she said. "But that doesn't mean that's necessarily where I'd start."

And the Check is in the Mail

The Iraq funding bill compromise between the Democrats and Bush has $1Billion less for Homeland Security.

From Newsday:
Rep. Steve Isreal says "What's going on is the Bush administration has a reckless disregard for the homeland security needs of New York... The president did not ask for a single penny for homeland security ... it was the Democrats who sent him a bill that had adequate levels for homeland security. He vetoed our bill. And he has threatened to veto the bill a second time."

NYS Deputy Secretary for Public Security Mike Balboni says "These reductions add up to a billion dollars of missed opportunities to invest in a variety of crucial security programs... Continued support is essential in order to encourage states and localities to believe in a partnership with Washington and make their own investments in homeland security."

"Israel said the compromise still boosts homeland security funding. "Would I have preferred more than that?" he said. "Yes. But the administration said they'd veto it and we'd end up with zero."

Peter King... "said he expected Congress to allocate more security funds as part of its regular budget process."

And the check is in the mail.

Why doesn't Bush want more Homeland Security funds and why does King stick up for Bush?

No Peter, He Resigned from THAT Job

King says "The troops need the money, and the president as commander-in-chief should not be bound by the Congress as far as strategy and tactics."

Sorry but Bush resigned as Commander in Chief of the military when he got himself a "War Czar."
Bush is no longer Commander in Chief. He gave that job up.
Even right-wing nut-job Michelle Malkin finds a "War Czar" odd.

And....... Corrigan is Out!

The first announced challenger to King in '08, independent candidate Bill Corrigan of Massapequa is out. We first told you about Bill Corrigan a few months ago.
The story of Corrigan running was picked up by Newsday and then the Massapequa Post He was mentioned on The Politicker and he even started a thread over at Urban Elephants.
Corrigan started the 'Long Island Party' and according to his website began polling and reaching out in the district.
And now.... Nothing.
Corrigans blog content about his run is all gone and the 'Long Island Party' blog is now empty.
His name was on Race Tracker 2008 and that is gone too.
No announcement or reason for dropping out so completely was given.
The last post we saw was Corrigan saying he likes King and voted for King and agrees with King on issues. That didn't sound like an opponent.

King Takes Tumble on Long Island Press Power List

Each year, the Long Island Press prints as "Power List" of influential Long Islanders. This year many republicans have taken a fall down the ladder. King drops 22 places.

"27. Peter King

Last year #5"

Even Conservatives Find Kings Stance Unreal

Our friend over at Nasty Letters has the story "Peter King: So Very Wrong on Immigration"

"Regardless, King's position is incredibly short-sighted, as illustrated by a recent study calculating the benefits of Latino immigrants for Long Island's economy:

Some of the nation's most virulent anti-immigrant proposals have erupted from Long Island's elected officials, from Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy to local Congressional Representative Peter King, co-sponsor of the harsh and unworkable immigration bill H.R. 4437...

The report, which is not yet available online, finds that Long Island Hispanics contribute nearly a billion dollars a year in taxes and other revenues to local government, far more than they use in public services, producing a net benefit to the public of $202 million a year. Consumer spending by Hispanics produced an additional $5.7 billion impact on the Long Island economy, creating more than 52,000 jobs.

Even Newsday's conservative columnist Raymond Keating gets the picture:

"Locally, it's time for some groups to stop kicking around immigrants, and instead start recognizing the role they play in keeping Long Island's economy afloat. Common-sense economics and basic human decency dictate welcoming immigrants and aiding their assimilation.

Meanwhile, our congressional representatives should be pushing for comprehensive immigration reform. Yes, tighten up the borders for national security purposes, but also expand legal avenues for immigration to keep our economy chugging along. It's clear that immigrants are not an economic burden, but instead a blessing."

Keating points out "So the importance of Latinos to the local economy has expanded. Torras and Skinner found that employment among Latinos on Long Island grew by one-third from 2000 to 2004. And between 1997 and 2002 the number of Latino-owned businesses on Long Island jumped by 35 percent, with growth in Suffolk County particularly strong at 51 percent. To sum up, the authors estimated that the Latino population in Nassau and Suffolk had a total economic impact of $5.7 billion in 2004, including helping to create more than 52,000 jobs. The economic pie grew.

But what about the burdens immigrants place on local government services? Torras and Skinner estimated that Latinos directly or indirectly generated $925 million in revenue for local governments in 2004, while costing Long Island localities $723 million. That comes out to a net positive contribution to local government of $614 per Latino resident."

Elana from DMI has more at Albany Project.

Hi Peter, Welcome to May 2007

In a story today in Newsday about the Bush-Iraq War and poll numbers, King is quoted as saying "If the war doesn't begin to turn around, Republicans will have problems."
Now if this were May 2006, I could see Kings ramblings being prescient but this is 7 months after an election that put King into the MINORITY in congress.
Democrats won both houses of congress and Bush has a lower approval rating than Jimmy Carter on his worst day.
The republicans already have a heck of alot of problems. King can't see that?
Is he that detached from reality?

I'd also like to know how King believes that this Bush-Iraq War can "turn around."
Will all the warring factions give a big group hug and declare bygones?

Dave Mejias on MassapequaNews.com

Here's an item I forgot to post.. Dave Mejias on the massapequanews.com weekly webcast.
Thanks to Nasty Letters for not missing it.

King Votes Against Hate Crime Legislation

After a debate this morning, HR1592: To provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes AKA Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 passed the House 237-180.
Peter King decided it was best he vote against it.
What a sad little man.

King Stands by Bush Who Doesn't Know What He Stands For

On the Iraq withdrawal timetable King tells Newsday "King said he stood by Bush and is not in favor of placing a timetable on troop withdrawal. "Congress cannot be micromanaging the war ... I can see sending a signal to the Iraqis, but not cutoff dates," he said."

Back in 1999, Bush had a different idea... (h/t Think Progess)

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”

George W. Bush, 4/9/99, Houston Chronicle

“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”

George W. Bush, 6/5/99, Scripps Howard/Seattle Post-Intelligencer

King Votes NO on Troop Funding

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)

National Journal Picks up Newsday Article about This Blog

April 24, 2007
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

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)

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"

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.

(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);'.

Why are King and most all of the republicans opposed to DC having real representation?

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."

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."

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.”

King on Giuliani

King is turning out to be a big backer for Rudy's run for president.
Turns out King falls on his face with this one too.
King tells AP "Rudy is a tough guy. Nobody has ever said he was Mr. Congeniality. It's not always pretty to look at, but he got the job done,"
Really?
He got the job done?
What job would that be?
The education system in NYC was a mess under Guiliani and he left it a mess when he left office.
The NYC Office of Emergency Management was built under his direction at 7 WTC over many objections. Guess what happend on 9/11? The one place that could coordinate city services was knocked out. Guiliani was told 7 WTC was the wrong place and the command center should be built far away from any potential targets but he fought for it and got it.
How about the FDNY getting better communication equiptment? That didn't happen even though the FDNY was saying they needed it.
Is that "getting the job done?"
Let's look at something even more recent. Guiliani and his company Guiliani Partners were hired with much fanfare by Mexico City to help lower the crime rate. Guess what? I'll let the NY Sun tell you the rest.
"When this crime-ridden capital city announced it was bringing in Mayor Giuliani and his private consulting firm to advise its police, it was big news not only in New York and Mexico but all over the world. "Giuliani to the rescue" was the headline in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Followed by legions of cameras, Mr. Giuliani spent a day-and-a-half in January 2003 touring Mexico City's danger and tourist zones, protected by a motorcade of a dozen bulletproof sport utility vehicles, 400 officers, and a helicopter. "He was mobbed and cheered and was a tremendous hero," Michael Hess, a top Giuliani aide, told The New York Sun.
Two years later, the cheering has stopped. In January 2005, Mexico City's new police chief, Joel Ortega, told local reporters, "I am no fan of Giuliani." Far from the 67% drop in homicides achieved during Mr. Giuliani's mayoralty in New York, which was touted in a Giuliani Partners press release announcing its Mexico City contract, the homicide rate in Mexico's capital slipped less than 1% in 2004. Kidnappings in which the victim is driven from ATM to ATM to withdraw money are on the rise, with some security firms saying Mexico is now rivaling Colombia as kidnapping capital of the world."
"They were not prepared, not at all," said another former Mexico City police official who worked closely with the Giuliani team, Antonio Rendon. "They weren't consultants, they were retired policemen. And they were trying to organize another police force, but not with a methodology or a clear idea."
"The Giuliani plan did not have any effect. It was money in the trash, really," said a police officer patrolling the central square here earlier this month, Nicocio Acosto Leon. "Better to buy arms, uniforms, to fix our vehicles because we have to do that ourselves."
Another uniformed officer on patrol, Gabriel Milan, was skeptical that Mr. Giuliani's efforts had achieved any results. "They say crime has gone down 10% but it's a lie. It's gone up. Daily kidnappings, rapes, car robberies." He said the bulletproof vest he was wearing was so old that it was no longer effective."

King Opponent Corrigans Open Letter to Democrats

From Massapequanews.com...

Subject: An Open Letter to Democratic Party Members
Author: Bill Corrigan for Congress
Date: 3/26/2007 3:59 pm EDT
My fellow Democratic constituents of the third district,

I am writing to you today to ask you to consider voting for me on Election Day 2008. I am running to represent New York's Third District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Since 1992, in seven different elections, you have casted over 600,000 for your candidates. Over 600,000 pulls of the level. Over 600,000 voices gone unheard. Each time beaten by a powerful incumbent in a heavily Republican district.

So I ask you, in 2008, don't throw your vote away yet again.

A vote for Bill Corrigan is a vote for YOU, each and every time a bill reaches the house floor YOU will get to vote YOUR way, again and again and again.

And I guarantee this...your voice will be heard, each and every time.

Bill Corrigan for Congress

Kings 2008 Campaign Site is Golden - Senior Citizen Version

Yup, a golden opportunity for this site.
Here is King on Seniors...

PROTECTING AMERICA’S SENIOR CITIZENS
Congressman King is a strong supporter of preserving Social Security and providing expanded prescription drug coverage for senior citizens.

King voted for a presciption drug bill that has created more problems for seniors.
King had the chance to vote to close the coverage gap the drug bill created but he voted against it.
King once again had an opportunity to stand up for his constituents but voted with his pharmacutical company contributors.

The bill 'H. R. 4: To amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower covered part D drug prices on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries.' pretty much explains itself in the title.The point is to work out a price plan with pharmacutical companies to help people especially seniors afford thier medication. Or as the bill puts it "(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices (including discounts, rebates, and other price concessions) that may be charged to PDP sponsors and MA organizations for covered part D drugs for part D eligible individuals who are enrolled under a prescription drug plan or under an MA-PD plan."
Right now there is a huge hole in the Part D coverage that gives many beneficiaries the choice of vital medication or food. Not both.
Peter King voted "NO" on this bill.
Here is some background via CBS News on the current problems with Part D coverage that King wants to keep intact.
"For all patients, Medicare covers 75 percent of the first $2,250 worth of drugs. But after that, coverage drops to zero — and doesn't resume until the patient hits $5,100 in expenses. Then Medicare kicks in again, paying 95 percent of costs. But it's this gap — of almost $3,000 — that many sick and disabled seniors call unaffordable."
For Paul Jutras, who takes 14 medicines every day, the Medicare drug benefit seemed to stop as soon as it began. "Asticol was $253.30," he says. "They paid nothing. And I paid 253.30." The problem is that he's fallen into a gap in coverage called the "doughnut hole" — in which seniors pay for all of their drugs themselves. On Jutras' low income, and with this many prescriptions, he's trying to decide which drug not to take. "I've had congestive heart failure," he says, "so giving up one of those prescriptions can really be fatal for me."
Why doesn't King care about people like Paul Jutras?

Hat Meet Ring

Do you know me?
I'm like Karl Malden in the American Express commercials.
I've run this website for a few years now and have had alot to say. I've been quoted and linked to in newspapers and other websites but my name, John Rennhack isn't very well-known.
My positions on the major issues of the day aren't that well-known either but I will be changing that as I provide more in-depth posts on my views in contrast to Peter Kings.

Personally I think the 2008 election season is starting way too early. It's great that there are candidates stepping up to run but the campaigning on the Presidential level this early will wear the electorate thin.
That being said, I always believed in putting my money where my mouth is.
Yes, November 2008 is awhile away but now is the time to review options and take the first steps.
Who knows what the next 12 months will bring, but we need a better representative for the 3rd congressional district.
This website will continue to provide information on Peter King and expose his actions.

Here are a few things that I believe.
I believe in the Constitution of the United States.
I believe that the US Government can wiretap suspects as long as the proper warrants are obtained.
I believe that citizens have a right to know what thier government is doing and have easy access to that information.
I believe in a strong and secure United States with the best trained and smartly funded military.
I believe we owe veterans a healthcare system that will meet thier needs and reflect the sacrifice they have made.
I believe we need to increase cargo shipment inspections into the US to 100%.
I believe in a woman's right to choose.
I believe in open, free and fair elections using the most reliable and secure voting machines available.
I believe in public education and the need to strengthen the education system.
I believe in universal healthcare.
I believe in cutting waste (pork) from the budget and redirecting those savings towards education and healthcare.
I believe in a workers right to organize a union.
I believe in protecting workers rights.
I believe Social Security is a compact made between generations and the need to sustain the system without endangering future benefits.
I believe we can do better.
I know we need to do better.
I know I can do better than the representative we have now.

Peter ...err... PETE King has a 2008 Camapaign Website

Thanks to the reader who e-mailed me the address.
Seems King figured after losing 16% from his last off-year (non-presidential) election, King wants to be ahead of the game and create a web presence. We're going to be going through the site and posting about what he has up there over the next few days.
King chose peteking.us instead of the usual .com because a cyber-squatter popped in and registered the name and has it for sale and peterking.com is owned by a consulting company in Canada. The bad thing for King is that the .us domain is less known and I'm pretty sure the two .com sites will get alot of visits by people looking for Kings .us site.
In the meanwhile, here are the specifics on the site...

www.peteking.us
Domain Name: PETEKING.US
Domain ID: D11517574-US
Sponsoring Registrar: WILD WEST DOMAINS, INC
Domain Registration Date: Tue Dec 12 21:11:19 GMT 2006
Domain Expiration Date: Thu Dec 11 23:59:59 GMT 2008
Domain Last Updated Date: Mon Feb 26 16:21:48 GMT 2007
Technical Contact Name: Anne Rosenfeld
Technical Contact Organization: Pete King for Congress
Technical Contact Address1: Post Office Box 1428
Technical Contact City: Seaford
Technical Contact State/Province: New York
Technical Contact Postal Code: 11783
Technical Contact Country: United States
Technical Contact Country Code: US
Technical Contact Phone Number: +1.5164595007
Technical Contact Email: petekingforcongress@yahoo.com

Peter King is Afraid of YOU, Votes Against the Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 2007

Congress passed HR1309, the Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 2007 without Peter Kings vote. The vote was 308 - 177.
He voted NAY on a bill that would expand YOUR rights to access government information.
Isn't it sad that YOUR representative doesn't want YOU to be able to find out what he has been up to?
"H.R.1309
Title: To promote openness in Government by strengthening section 552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Freedom of Information Act), and for other purposes. "

Sounds pretty good to me. Why not Peter King?
Maybe King didn't like the fact that a little blogger like me has more access now...

Section 552(a)(4)(A)(ii) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`In making a determination of a representative of the news media under subclause (II), an agency may not deny that status solely on the basis of the absence of institutional associations of the requester, but shall consider the prior publication history of the requester. Prior publication history shall include books, magazine and newspaper articles, newsletters, television and radio broadcasts, and Internet publications. If the requestor has no prior publication history or current affiliation, the agency shall consider the requestor's stated intent at the time the request is made to distribute information to a reasonably broad audience.'."

The long and short of it is that King opposes YOUR right to know.

Check out http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=120 for some interesting background on the bill.
"File Not Found: Agencies Violate Law on Online Information
National Security Archive report - March 12, 2007

Ten years after Congress enacted the Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments (E-FOIA), only one in five federal agencies actually complies with the law, according to a new survey released today during Sunshine Week by the National Security Archive.

Passed in 1996 and effective in 1997, E-FOIA ordered federal agencies to post key records online, provide citizens with detailed guidance on making information requests, and use new information technology to publish information proactively. The act’s intent: Expand public access and reduce the burden of FOIA requests.

But most federal agencies do not follow the law, according to the National Security Archive’s government-wide audit, “File Not Found,” conducted with support from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The Knight Open Government Survey systematically reviewed agency Web sites to cover all 91 federal agencies that have Chief FOIA Officers and the additional 58 agency components each of which handles more than 500 FOIA requests a year."

"Bush Administration FOIA Report Card Hits New Low
Mark Fitzgerald, Editor & Publisher - February 27, 2007

Back in December of 2005 with the White House coming under increasing criticism for its secrecy, President George W. Bush ordered federal agencies to speed up their responses to requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

A new FOIA report card by a coalition of journalists groups makes it clear that Bush’s directive did not produce a “surge” in the response rate by the agencies.

The study by the Coalition of Journalists for Open Government concludes the Bush directive did nothing to speed up responses by agencies that have been systematically cutting back the personnel assigned to FOIA work, even as backlogs of requests grow and the cost of fulfilling requests increases.

“Requests remain heavily backlogged,” the study says. “Requesters still have long wait times for a response from many agencies. And people seeking records and information remain less likely to get the information they seek than in the past.”

The coalition assembled the FOIA performance reports from 15 Cabinet-level departments and 15 agencies dating back to 1998, when agency reporting was first required. The 13 agencies that had reported 2006 performance by Feb. 9 were also included in the study.

Overall, the groups said, FOIA performance remains at the lowest point since 1998."

Peter King Supports Treason

We'll have a wrap-up of former CIA agent Valerie Plame's testimoony later,but for now here is King saying it is okay to commit treason...

"SCARBOROUGH: The last thing you want to do at a time of war is reveal the identity of undercover CIA agents.

KING: No. Joe Wilson, she recommended—his wife recommended him for this. He said the vice president recommended him. To me, she took it off the table. Once she allowed him to go ahead and say that, write his op-ed in “The New York Times,” to have Tim Russert give him a full hour on “Meet the Press,” saying that he was sent there as a representative of the vice president, when she knew, she knew herself that she was the one that recommended him for it, she allowed that lie to go forward involving the vice president of the United States, the president of the United States, then to me she should be the last one in the world who has any right to complain."

Peter King Updates His Website... Finally.

I guess the post here two days ago about the old information on Kings house.gov page lit a fire under him and his staff.
The bio page has now been updated to reflect his loss of the Chairmanship.
I'm gald to see his office continues to visit this website.

Here is the old page..


And here is the new page...
"Rep. King is Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Committee and also serves on the Financial Services Committee."

Bill Corrigan = Slick

I gotta say, two thumbs up for Corrigan's quick thinking.
Corrigan used some stratigic vision and took corriganwatch.blogspot.com and billcorriganwatch.blogspot.com off the market.
Covering his blog bases was smart.

Bill Corrigan to Run Against King in 2008

He's making it official...

"And so, my fellow Americans:..."
"...ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country."My fellow citizens of the third district,With the words of John F. Kennedy echoing in my thoughts I read over reams of data that I have collected over the past several months. Surveys and polls, emails and letters flood my office. As I aggregate your voices I hear desperation, anger and distrust...but all with a dint of optimism.
Too many of you feel the "weight of an enormous government", an "unsteady world" and "fear of more of the same". You feel limited in options and crestfallen in being able to do anything about it. You feel your voices are "drowned out".And so much frustration is caused because you know that so much good is possible, but you feel so much is "lost in waste." You see the good people do outside of the political arena. The good people who volunteer, those who run spontaneous charity drives in times of need, the business owner who donates to the community. You want somebody who embodies those attributes". You want someone who can "articulate your desires", "lift your spirits" and "amplify your voices in Washington" and around the world. You want a "strong leader", "a smart, level-headed thinker" who is "one of you"! You want someone to point at and say to your child "there goes an honest man." Someone you can be proud to say represents you.You want someone who can "get things done", who will "contribute to the betterment of the district" and who will "serve with integrity."
I come to you, hat in hand, to humbly request that you allow me to be that servant.As such, today, March 14, 2007, I announce my candidacy to represent you in the U.S. House of Representatives for the Third District of New York."

Read the rest here.

Denial Ain't Just a River in Egypt

It's March. Time for King to update his congressional website.
He's no longer Chairman and he should get used to it.

As of 3/13/07...
"Rep. King is Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee and also serves on the International Relations Committee."

Does King Care That Injured Soldiers are being Sent Back??

He should be very vocal about this.... but he's not.
THIS is what is hurting our armed forces, not a call to leave Iraq.

From Crooks and Liars...

"Army Ordering Injured Troops To Go To Iraq
By: Nicole Belle on Monday, March 12th, 2007 at 10:01 AM - PDT

Mike included this in his round up, but it was just so outrageous that I thought it needed to be highlighted further. Just when you thought that the travesty at Walter Reed was about as low as this administration could go, they dredge yet more depths from the swamp.

Salon (Watch a short ad for day pass–h/t Cliff SchecterBlog)

As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body armor, according to medical records.

On Feb. 15, Master Sgt. Jenkins and 74 other soldiers with medical conditions from the 3rd Division's 3rd Brigade were summoned to a meeting with the division surgeon and brigade surgeon. These are the men responsible for handling each soldier's "physical profile," an Army document that lists for commanders an injured soldier's physical limitations because of medical problems — from being unable to fire a weapon to the inability to move and dive in three-to-five-second increments to avoid enemy fire. Jenkins and other soldiers claim that the division and brigade surgeons summarily downgraded soldiers' profiles, without even a medical exam, in order to deploy them to Iraq. It is a claim division officials deny.[..]"

King Falls Far in Congressional Rankings

I guess titles do mean something.
Kings new ranking is #24 out of 29 NY State Representives.
In the Congress, King is 293 out of 439.
Last year, Kings congressional ranking from congress.org was #123 out of 439 and #8 out of 29 in NY State.

It would have been better if we had elected Democrat Dave Mejias.

Peter King Agrees on Trampling Your Rights and It's Happening

Peter King is a staunch defender of the so-called "Patriot Act." He and has-been former democrat Ed Koch even wrote an op-ed defending the legislation that allows for the abuse of our most sacred rights as US citizens.
King and Koch wrote "Gore accused the president and his attorney general of "constant violations of civil liberties," "putting our country in grave and unnecessary danger" and "using the war against terrorism for partisan advantage." His attacks centered on three parts of the Patriot Act: Sec. 214, which allows federal agents to delay giving suspects notice after a search has been carried out; Sec. 215, which allows searches of medical, business and library records of suspected terrorists; and Sec. 218, which allows surveillance of cell phones and Internet communications.
Before addressing these specifics, let's put Gore's case in its proper perspective by citing Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, who recently said she hadn't found a "single abuse of the Patriot Act" - and when she asked the ACLU for any instance of abuse, was told, "they had none." Similarly, Sen. Joe Biden, D-DE, said criticism of the Patriot Act "is both misinformed and overblown" and the Justice Department has "done a pretty good job in terms of implementing" the law.

"* The delayed notification in Sec. 213 was already the law in cases involving organized crime, narcotics and pornography. It makes common sense because it would be absurd to inform a suspected mobster or a terrorist during the course of an investigation that a listening device had been installed in his home or office.

* Sec. 215 - the much-feared "assault against librarians" - has not been used even once. Nonetheless, we strongly believe this is a weapon that must remain in the prosecutor's arsenal. There could well be cases, for instance, when it would be critical to learn whether a suspected terrorist is reading books on explosives or the structural design of office buildings, landmark sites, bridges or tunnels. It should also be noted that library records were instrumental in tracking down such murderers as the Zodiac killer and the Unabomber.

* Sec. 218 merely gives federal agents authority to conduct surveillance of cell phones and the Internet to the same extent they can surveil rotary phones. It would be foolhardy to let terrorists use the technology of modern telecommunications without fear of being detected.

The bottom line is that the criticisms by Gore and the other critics are shameful and irresponsible. Of course we gave our government added power in the aftermath of 9/11. These powers are essential to confront a new and deadly threat.

We are also well aware that all police powers are susceptible to abuse. That risk exists, however, every time we give a law-enforcement office a loaded weapon. It is the job of the legislatures and the courts to guard against such abuses. Responsible criticism is essential to safeguarding our citizens against governmental abuse."

So where is King now that ABC is reporting that there has been wide-spread abuse of the "Patriot Act."

" The FBI repeatedly failed to follow the strict guidelines of the Patriot Act when its agents took advantage of a new provision allowing the FBI to obtain phone and financial records without a court order, according to a report to be made public Friday by the Justice Department's Inspector General.
The report, in classified and unclassified versions, remains closely held, but Washington officials who have seen it tell ABC News it documents "numerous lapses" and describe it as "scathing" and "not a pretty picture for the FBI.

"The officials say the inspector general found the FBI underreported by at least 20 percent the use of the controversial provision, known as National Security Letters, NSLs, in required disclosures to Congress.
The Patriot Act gave FBI agents the ability to demand telephone, bank, credit card and library records by issuing an administrative letter, bypassing the need to seek a warrant from a federal judge.
In a report last year, the Justice Department said there were 9,254 NSL requests on 3,501 persons in the calendar year 2005.
Some officials say the actual number is substantially higher.
The inspector general's report reportedly found "systemic" failures in the issuance, tracking and accountability of the controversial NSLs, although a Justice Department official said there was no finding of "willful or criminal misconduct."

But wait, King's hero gave the FBI an out (h/t Crook and Liars)

"Lest we forget President Bush issued one of those infamous signing statements back in February 2006 when he signed the Patriot Act reauthorization, effectively nullifying the provisions Congress agreed upon so that these kinds of abuses wouldn't occur. Will that be their legal defense? I think so.

When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers."

Will King stand up for your rights or continue to defend Bush and his corrupt administration?

You can bet it's gonna be Bush.

Peter King the Puppet

From our friends over at Nasty Letters...

'Q&A: New homeland security chairman gets tough with Bush administration
Q. Will you expect the committee to be more active than it was under your predecessor, New York Republican Rep. Peter King?
A. Absolutely. I think that what I saw former chairman King subjected to was a micro-managed chairmanship by the Republican leadership. He couldn’t really bring any legislation forward without being told, chapter and verse, what it had to include.'

New Homeland Security Committee Chair Bennie Thompson makes public something we've all suspected for some time: for all his rhetoric about being an independent-minded Congressman, when push comes to shove, Peter King takes his marching orders from George W. Bush and Co. When Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer came to campaign for Dave Mejias last fall, he claimed that as Homeland Chair, a Democrat from Mississipi (Thompson) would do a better job protecting New York than Peter King:

read more at www.nastyletters.blogspot.com

This still does not excuse Kings complete lack over oversight as Chairman.

Does Newsday Read This Site?

We took a small break and came back to an e-mail from a good friend of this blog saying Rick Brand on Newsday's SpinCycle blog on the 22nd reported about a possible early opponent to King.
Funny thing is we did the story 3 weeks ago and that has been the top post here while we've been away.
Here is Newsday's post..
"Blog-o-crat?

A North Massapeaqua business consultant has formed an exploratory committee to run against Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford).

Bill Corrigan, 36, has filed papers with the Federal Elections Commission. He's looking to run, not as a Republican or a Democrat, but as an independent candidate who would allow voters to decide how he should vote -- by computer referendum, on his Web site.

Corrigan describes himself as a moderate who was raised Democrat but now leans more Republican, saying, “It kind of puts me all over the map.” He said he computer program which will list pending bills to be public reaction “could be the beginning of a political renaissance.”

Rick Brand"

And here is the link to the King Watch post 3 weeks ago.
" King Gets First '08 Challenger

No, it's not one of the Daves. Massapequa resident Bill Corrigan is looking to throw his hat into the ring for '08.
Corrigan has a blog and made an announcement there and at MassapequaNews.com that he has formed an exploratory committee for a third party or independent run.

The first blog post says "The Bill Corrigan Congressional Exploratory Committee organized in accordance with the Federal Election Commission's Guidelines.
We will be conducting much more research and are looking for smart, honest folks who want to join the committee.
We will be focusing intently on economics, polling and surveys, quantitative analysis and marketing. We are hoping to also develop a systems design team and welcome college and gradute students!"

I haven't found any committee listing with the FEC but we'll have the info when it comes available."

Where did Brand find out about Corrigans run?
I credited MassapeuaNews.com because that is where I heard about it.

King Gets First '08 Challenger

No, it's not one of the Daves. Massapequa resident Bill Corrigan is looking to throw his hat into the ring for '08.
Corrigan has a blog and made an announcement there and at MassapequaNews.com that he has formed an exploratory committee for a third party or independent run.

The first blog post says "The Bill Corrigan Congressional Exploratory Committee organized in accordance with the Federal Election Commission's Guidelines.
We will be conducting much more research and are looking for smart, honest folks who want to join the committee.
We will be focusing intently on economics, polling and surveys, quantitative analysis and marketing. We are hoping to also develop a systems design team and welcome college and gradute students!"

I haven't found any committee listing with the FEC but we'll have the info when it comes available.

Corrigan's second blog post was the press release about his intentions. Corrigan writes "We’re in a fact finding stage. We are testing the waters for a new process that will allow for a more accurate representation of our district’s wishes.” said Corrigan.

The committee is seeking feedback as to whether constituents would be more likely to favor a third party candidate that will utilize this new technology to allow voters to vote their conscience on specific topics. “In serving the community it is essential to make their voices heard in congress. Before that happens their representative needs to hear their voice first. He needs to hear it accurately and from a broad range of constituents, not just the most powerful.”

An admirable undertaking. Getting more people involved and making their voices heard by elected officials is important. We already know how King has problems with constituent opinions (See here, here, here and here.)

Corrigan explains his system "Essentially the patent pending system will allow a representative to publish to constituents what bills are in committee, what their impact will be to the district and how the representative would vote and why. The voters will then have the option to tell the representative to vote as he would, vote as Republicans would, as Democrats would, or how they wish to vote specifically. Voters will also be able to weigh a topic as to how important it is to them. This way if there are two conflicting bills the representative will vote for the higher weighted issue. Voters will get real-time results of how the district is leaning and can therefore go out and encourage more participation by their fellow constituents."

Is he suggesting that the representative (maybe himself) would vote for a bill because constituents voted American Idol-style? I think that needs a little more clarification.
Corrigan does seem to be saying what I think he is saying "It keeps the representative and the district honest by increasing accountability. It lessens the influence of powerful special interests and allows the representative to truly represent his district by voting how they want.”
Why not do away with the representative and just go to a government by referendum? That is what it looks like Corrigan wants to happen except that we will have one person push the 'yea' or 'nay' button after the votes are tallyed.

And apparantly there was a survey in the disrict that emboldens Corrigan "An overwhelming majority of survey takers in the third district have suggested that Corrigan himself run. “True, my background, successes and recognition would make me a strong third party candidate, but I’m not at that stage of determination yet.”

When, where and how was this survey conducted?
I'm not trying to knock Corrigan down but he does need to address many tough questions if he is going to run.
I'll keep updating on Corrigan '08 as info becomes available.