Thursday, August 31, 2006

Great King Video on Youtube

From thegayexpat...

To see it full size, visit

A note on one of Kings comments. King says "Chris, I think the administration acted entirely appropriately. The 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case gives them, to me, the absolute right to do this. They’re in full compliance with all statutes."

We pointed out that King ought to check the congressional record and look up the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 before he spouts off about the 1976 Supreme Court ruling.The long and short of it is that a Warrant or a Subpeona is needed to access financial records.The Bush administration just like the wire-tap case ignored the law and did what it wanted to do.King as usual backs Bush and the law-breaking.Its funny how King throws in former Times reporter Jason Blair to attack the paper. Blair got in trouble for making things up in his stories. Is king saying the Times is making things up in this story? If so, how can they be charged with espionage if what they say isn't true?King is all over the place in his attempt to defend this program and every route he takes shows how little he really knows.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Dave Mejias re: Profiling has a Diary on DailyKos

NY-03: Peter King - Knee-jerk reactionary
by Dave Mejias for Congress [Subscribe]
Mon Aug 28, 2006 at 08:54:30 AM PDT
In a recent
Newsday article, Peter King endorsed a proposal to base our airport security on a full-scale racial profiling program. This is a cheap election year stunt aimed at motivating King's ultra-conservative base, NOT at increasing security. The security of our country is a serious problem that requires significant thought and practical answers. King has repeatedly shown that he cares little for coming up with a real solution.

Then, Peter King (probably stung by the
criticism he received) dramatically reversed himself. During an appearance on Fox News Sunday, King's new opinion was that airport screeners should merely take into account a person's ethnicity as part of the threat equation in combination with displayed behavioral characteristics. His initial position followed by his subsequent flip-flop further proves that King, the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has no serious solutions for our nation's flawed security procedures.
A blanket policy to require all people of Middle Eastern and South Asian descent to undergo additional security checks at our nation's airports is ineffective, senseless and counter productive to the war on terror. National and local law enforcement officials agree that targeting people for increased scrutiny only because of their race, ethnicity, national origin or religion is ineffective policing, negligent and dangerous.
Let me put that more clearly: Peter King wants to implement an
idea that just doesn't work.
Ray Kelly, the current NY Police Department Commissioner who eliminated a similar racial profiling program, put forth a successful security-screening practice that focuses on specific behavioral patterns to trigger increased scrutiny. Kelly's program resulted in fewer searches and more effective results. I support Kelly's policy and believe it should be used as the benchmark for our nation's security efforts because racial profiling is a mediocre tool that hinders law enforcement.
Despite his rhetoric, Peter King has only delivered security failures and disappointments to the residents of New York. In addition to his support for racial profiling, funding for New York's security and anti terrorism efforts have been cut by 40% under King's watch and he failed to get the Republican Congress to support a budget increase of formula-based anti-terrorism grants for high threat and high density areas. All of these failures prove that Peter King is ineffective, irrelevant or asleep at the switch in Congress.
Peter King has said he is planning to run his campaign on his homeland security credentials. He may want to reconsider.

Dave Mejias
Democrat for Congress, NY-03

Monday, August 28, 2006

A Matter of Trade-Offs

What could the 3rd Congressional District trade for the Millionaire Tax Cut King voted for?

The National Priorities Project crunches the numbers...

"$56.5 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% this year could be spent on the people of Congressional District 3 (King) instead. If that money were used to support state and local programs, the residents of Congressional District 3 (King) could have $219.5 million, which could provide:
25,666 People with Health Care or
2,625 Elementary School Teachers or
24,966 Head Start Places for Children or
94,401 Children with Health Care or
1,775 Affordable Housing Units or
20 New Elementary Schools or
37,488 Scholarships for University Students or
2,943 Music and Arts Teachers or
4,448 Public Safety Officers or
720,256 Homes with Renewable Electricity or
3,439 Port Container Inspectors"

And what if we spent the money from the Bush-Iraq War here instead of there???

"Taxpayers in Congressional District 3 (King) will pay $1.5 billion for the cost of war in Iraq. For the same amount of money, the following could have been provided:
179,048 People with Health Care or
18,312 Elementary School Teachers or
174,165 Head Start Places for Children or
658,557 Children with Health Care or
12,380 Affordable Housing Units or
141 New Elementary Schools or
261,518 Scholarships for University Students or
20,528 Music and Arts Teachers or
31,030 Public Safety Officers or
5,024,603 Homes with Renewable Electricity or
23,989 Port Container Inspectors"

So, 31,030 police and 23,000+ Port Container Inspectors......
Wouldn't the "homeland" be more secure with that?

Peter King and Katrina

Here are some posts from last year...

From 9/04/05: King and Katrina
King just doesn't get it. He wants to be Homeland Security Committee Chairman and he is completely clueless.King was on
WABC Radio's John Gambling show and said "The main problem in obstructing the relief operation - it's almost like a Mogadishu-like gang situation that's prevailing in New Orleans," This is of course more water-carrying for the complete failure of the Bush Administration, FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security. How many more excuses can Bush supporters make? According to the New Orleans Time Picayune "Bienville built New Orleans where he built it for one main reason: It's accessible. The city between the Mississippi River and Lake Pontchartrain was easy to reach in 1718.
How much easier it is to access in 2005 now that there are interstates and bridges, airports and helipads, cruise ships, barges, buses and diesel-powered trucks.
Despite the city's multiple points of entry, our nation's bureaucrats spent days after last week's hurricane wringing their hands, lamenting the fact that they could neither rescue the city's stranded victims nor bring them food, water and medical supplies.Meanwhile there were journalists, including some who work for The Times-Picayune, going in and out of the city via the Crescent City Connection. On Thursday morning, that crew saw a caravan of 13 Wal-Mart tractor trailers headed into town to bring food, water and supplies to a dying city.Television reporters were doing live reports from downtown New Orleans streets. Harry Connick Jr. brought in some aid Thursday, and his efforts were the focus of a "Today" show story Friday morning.
Yet, the people trained to protect our nation, the people whose job it is to quickly bring in aid were absent. Those who should have been deploying troops were singing a sad song about how our city was impossible to reach.
So how full of Bull---- is King?
Really very full.
According to Newsday, Gary Flowers of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition denounced King's comments. "It is un-American to blame the victim. It was the citizens who were abandoned by the United States government," And King compares New Orleans to Mogadishu? Interesting that he picks a city in Somalia, East Africa to make his point.
To go further with his analogy, let's examine what happend in Mogadishu; there was no help from the countries government to quell the violence. I am glad King sees Bush as ineffective as the leaders of
Somalia which is to say there are no real leaders in Somalia. King continues his uninformed comments with "It's hard to get federal troops in to bring about order when the local police have broken down," The local police are stretched to the limit evacuating citizens, trying to keep order, and trying to get relief to those left in the city. How much does King expect a force of 2000 or so to do?
The fact is, federal troops would have had no problem getting into the city and helping in the relief efforts simply because journalists and relief aganecies were already getting in without a problem.king caps off his jibber-jabber with this gem; "I just think the situation would have gone a lot better if there were a Rudy Giuliani down there - someone who could have set a firm tone from day one."
Yeah, right. You can't compare 9/11 with this new disaster. They are not the same. The incredible loss of life might be the same but the situations are very different. 80% of New York City was not devestated on 9/11. If that had happend and most of Manhattan, Queens, and Staten Island had been wiped out, we would have seen much the same situation as we do now in New Orleans. Unless adequete food, water, shelter and medical services reach the affected people, there will be huge problems.
King wants to be Homeland Security Commiteee Chairman. This committee overseas the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA. If King is so ignorant as he has proven with these few sentences, imagine the mess he'll make as chairman. He is making excuses for a complete break-down in emergency federal disaster response. We can't have an oversight committee chairman who will just make excuses to protect Bush.

From 9/16/06: What the FEMA is up with Peter King?
We've been going over King wanting to be the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee during the past few weeks here at King Watch Central and with each passing day, more questions arise about his qualification. Right now, he is Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Science, and Technology.
Notice the words "Emergency Preparedness."
What just recently occured that showed us we are NOT prepared? A devasting hurricane.
Before we go any further though, we have to throw some history in here...
Back in the day - before Bush - FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency was made a Cabinet level position by President Clinton. Clinton appointed James Lee Witt, a man with a decade of Emergency Management experience, as head of FEMA.
After 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security was created and Bush drop-kicked FEMA out of the Cabinet and into DHS. Bush then took a man with no emergency management experience and put him on charge of FEMA. Director Micheal Brown is a political hack with a patronage job
Back to today... DHS and FEMA are answerable to congress. The Homeland Security Committee has oversight of the department. FEMA is now deep in the bowels of a department created to protect us from terrorism.
Do you see the emerging problem?
FEMA which deals with all sorts of crisis from natural to man-made disasters is placed under the control of a department charged dealing with only man-made disasters.
So where are we going with this and what does King have it do with it?
King's sub-commitee over-sees "Emergency Preparedness."
BUT the problem seems to be the focus is only on terrorism. From the sub-commitees website:"Preparedness for and collective response to terrorism, including federal support to first responders; terrorism-related incident management and response; consequence mitigation; Department of Homeland Security-administered homeland security grants to first responders; conduct and coordination of exercises and training relating to mitigating the effects of and responding to terrorist attacks (including nuclear, biological, radiological, and chemical attacks on civilian populations); federal government coordination of terrorism-related emergency preparedness and response with and among state and local governments, the private sector, and the public; research, development and deployment of technology for combating terrorism; adaptation of existing technologies to homeland security prevention priorities; coordination and enhancement of Department of Homeland Security interaction on science and technology matters with the private sector, federally funded research and development centers, educational institutions, the National Laboratories, and other scientific resources; Department of Homeland Security-based science and technology entities and initiatives; conducting relevant oversight; and other matters referred to the Subcommittee by the Chairman."
See the many uses of the words "terrorism" and nothing about "natural disasters?"
That is a big issue.What is the sub-commitees role in over-seeing FEMA and natural disaster preparedness?
Go through the full commitee website and the stated mission for each sub-commitee is all about "terrorism."
Now King's sub-commitee should be dealing with the over-sight of FEMA disaster plans right?What exactly was the sub-commitee's role in making sure FEMA natural disaster planes were up to snuff?
If King wants to be chairman of the full Homeland Security Commitee he needs to show he was an effective sub-commitee chairman.

From 9/19/06: King Takes Charge
Boy, King sure hit the ground running. King tells the
NYPost "It's a great opportunity and a great challenge."
King continues "By being chairman, I have the opportunity to do what millions of Americans want to do, and that is fight terrorism and rebuild the Gulf Coast."
King will rebuild the Gulf Coast and fight terrorism?
Is he Superman? Nah, it's all just hyperbole.
King is doing a victory lap and was gushing like a school girl after her first kiss. He tells the
NYDaily News "I feel good. It's a great country."
"If someone told me on Sept. 12, 2001, that I'd be chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security four years later, I'd consider it a gift,"
Who is he, Sally Field at the Oscars?
"You like me, you really like me."
In his first official act as Chairman, King took flight down to New Orleans. He wante dto see first hand what inept oversight sows.We once again remind our dear readers that King was Chairman of the Emergency Preparadness Sub-Committee.King tells the
NYPost "I want to see how the relief efforts are going, and I want to see what went wrong"
What went wrong???
There was no EMERGENCY PREPERADNESS.According to the Post, "King has vowed to overhaul the beleaguered Federal Emergency Management Agency's operations."What was King doing with his sub-committee?In
Newsday, King says "We're a lot more ready than we were before Sept. 11. ... But we're not ready enough... Seventy-two hours is way too long. What we have to do is really re-evaluate the whole concept of a national response."
What sub-committee is tasked with oversight of Emergency Prepaeradness?
Why, it was King's sub-commitee. Where was he on all the plans for national emergencies?
If he couldn't handle the sub-commitee, how can he head an entire committee.
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert tells Newsday "Thoughtful, detailed leadership is critical right now."
Where was the "detailed leadership" on the sub-committee?
And "thoughtful?" King is the least thoughtful congressman up for the job. This is a guy who
didn't know France had an aircraft carrier or that it was assisting the US in the war in Afghanistan.
King also excuses treason and would have the media shot for exposing the treason.
New York State Sen. Mike Balboni tells
Newsday "I think this is going to be very good for New York and very good for Peter personally because he's invested some time and passion on this subject." Yup, he invested 30 odd-years supporting the terrrorism of the IRA. He certainly was passionate in his support of killers.
More on King's victory lap, his appearance on WNBC's News Forum with Gabe Pressman and why King is opposed to an independent investigation into Katrina relief effort failures like he was opposed to the 9/11 commission tomorrow....

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Daily Dave

Fixer over at has a feature called "Daily Dave" following the Mejias v. King race too.

King on the 2004 Election

Here is a snippet of video where King seems to be saying that the 2004 election is in the bag for Bush because they (the republicans) will be doing the counting. This video was made a month before the election.
Didn't look like he was joking either.

Let's keep real Democracy alive.
Contribute to Dave Mejias today
via Act Blue.

Thursday, August 17, 2006

Kings Ethnic Profiling Reactions Around the Web

"Peter King's Profile Must Go
Newsday reports today:
House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King has endorsed requiring people of "Middle Eastern and South Asian" descent to undergo additional security checks because of their ethnicity and religion.
NY NAACP president Hazel Dukes calls it right:
"We are all concerned about safety but to target any group for nationality or religion is unconstitutional. African-Americans understand racial profiling. We won't support any targeting of a group. The practice is just un-American."
It's time for Congressman King to go.

Long Islanders have a choice. His name is Dave Mejias. "
More at WFP blog...


"If We Have Ethnic Profiling at Airports, Can I Cheat?
I read with a thrill that House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King has endorsed requiring people of "Middle Eastern and South Asian" descent to undergo additional security checks because of their ethnicity and religion.
The question is, will you need special ID to get selected as a special ethnic or religious type.
Frankly most of the flights I get on are loaded with typical Americans. There are some blacks, some Latin looking people, but they’re clearly Americans. I don’t think I get on one flight in ten where there’s a guy in a white robe with three to four women in burkas behind him."
More at Huffington Post


"I have been thinking about this idea for a week now (even before King spoke out) and I fully support it. I think we should single out all arabs, middle eastern looking people, and South Asians. This doesn’t have to be a bad thing and if we play our cards right we can greatly benefit from it. The “Macaca line,” as it were, might actually move faster and more efficiently than the “American line” since brownish looking people are still a small minority in America (unless you count the Mexicans too). We could even lobby for a door to door airport shuttle that was guaranteed to be explosives free and would have dogs on board that we could pet and play with on the way to the airport (once they were done sniffing us). All of our tickets would be stamped with SSSS to ensure 4S service (“S” is like the new “Star”). We would have curbside check-in and our bags would all go through more advanced machinery (the kind airports can only afford one of). So that we wouldn’t get germs from the other passengers, our security screening area could be completely walled off. It seems that every time I travel I catch a cold, and so this would definitely be a perk. The other people would never even have to see us.

I already know what some of you are going to say to all of this (haters):

“You can’t tell a Muslim by the color of their skin or their appearance. There are black muslims, Asian muslims, and white muslims. How are we going to figure out who is Muslim so that we can give them this VIP treatment if they don’t want their identities revealed?”

Here are some concrete steps that I think all airports can take in order to make sure that no one slips by these more rigorous security checkpoints:

1) All TSA employees must be female virgins and there must be at least 50 of them at each TSA security line. Everyone knows that terrorists always wage their terror in order to be with virgins in the afterlife. This will draw them out of the general populace like flies toward warm sweet honey."
More at Sepia Mutiny.....


"OK, Mr. King, let's take that to its logical outcome, shall we?

Mr. King...that's an...Irish name, is it not? OK, Mr. King, the Irish Republican Army is a terrorist group. It has bombed in London, just like Al Qaeda operatives and sympathizers did.

So by your logic, all Irishmen, including yourself, should be singled out for additional security checks. I can't wait to see the looks you'll get from Ted Kennedy at Dulles as his fleshy mounds are poked and prodded and wanded."

More at Simply Left Behind...

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Earthquake in Political Landscape

The first tremor in the 3rd congressional district occured when Dave Mejias, a well-known and experienced Nassau County Legislator decided to run for Peter Kings job. King hasn't faced an opponenet quite like Mejias - a candidate who can beat him.
The second tremor occured when Mejias raised just over $200,000 in five weeks.
The force in the race started to build even more when justa week ago, Charlie Cook moved the race from the Solid Republican column. That was somewhat of a big move considering the district is supposed to be "safe."
Mejias is also making an impact with the progressive online community, appearing in a live chat on, contributing on Daily Kos and gaining more and more attention of the same people who are driving the national progressive message.
Pressure started to build when just yesterday, the AFL-CIO gave Dave Mejias its endorsement.
This wasn't just a simple move, because King has always enjoyed strong union support despite the fact that his voting record for workers is very poor.
Now, the endorsement move is a bigger shake-up because the executive board had voted for a "no endorsement" in the race but the members voted to give the endorsement to Mejias. The rank and file have left Peter King. He cannot claim the blue collar bonafides he has in the past.
And now today comes the quake that will rock the race even more, Chuck Todd over at the National Journal has posted an updated House Race Ranking.
Todd writes "Our rankings continue to reflect a shift toward the Democrats, and even more significantly, a shift toward the Democrats in the Northeast. As the Lamont-Lieberman race demonstrated, there is apparently such a thing as an "angry suburbanite," and that could spell big trouble for Republican incumbents in the entire region."
For the first time, Kings district is listed.
Of all the House races, Kings is ranked as #45 for the likelihood to switch.
A formerly "safe" republican seat in an increasingly Democratic Long Island, is starting to tilt towards the Democrats.
King hasn't really campaigned for the past few election cycles, and it looks like that will have to change now. Mejias is making a real impact in a race that was long-thought to be a losing one for any Democrat.
There has been more movement in this race in the past two months than at any time for past races.
All this bad news for King will send him even further over the edge.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

AFL-CIO Endorses Mejias


U.S. Congress
1. Tim Bishop (D); 2. Steve J. Israel (D,I,WF); 3. Dave Mejias (D/WF); 4. Carolyn McCarthy (D); 5. Gary L. Ackerman (D); 6. No Endorsement; 7. Joseph Crowley (D); 8. Jerrold Nadler (D); 9. Anthony Weiner (D); 10. No Endorsement 11. Carl Andrews (D); 12. Nydia M. Velazquez (D); 13. Stephen Harrison (D); 14. Carolyn B. Maloney (D); 15. Charles B. Rangel (D); 16. Jose E. Serrano (D); 17. Eliot L. Engel (D, L, WF); 18. Nita M. Lowey (D); 19. John Hall (D); 20. Kirsten Gillibrand (D/I/WF); 21. Michael R. McNulty (D); 22. Maurice Hinchey (D,I,WF); 23. John McHugh (R); 24. Mike Arcuri (D/I/WF); 25. Dan Maffei (D/WF); 26. Jack Davis, Jr. (D/I/WF); 27. Brian M. Higgins (D); 28. Louise M. Slaughter (D); 29. Eric Massa (D/WF)

Outrage Over Kings "Bigot" Remark

From the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC)

Crazy Rhetoric From Peter King... and the RJC

Peter King (RI -- Long Island)
says, "King said the Connecticut primary has no bearing on his re-election race because "fortunately, the Third District is not composed of the left-wing bigots who went after Joe Lieberman.'"
Peter King is being ridiculous. One can vote against a Jewish candidate and not be a bigot, just as those who voted for
Jewish candidate Steve Cohen (a Tennessee Democrat who won a primary last week in a majority-minority Memphis district) were not racists for preferring him over his African-American opponents.
Republican response to the Connecticut primary has been nearly as reprehensible as it has been hypocritical -- and let's keep in mind, that's saying a lot, as the hypocrisy is of epic proportions.
Let's consider the horrifying ad the Republican Jewish Coalition will be flooding the country with next week, about which NJDC issued
this statement:
National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) Executive Director Ira Forman issued the following statement in response to the Republican Jewish Coalition's (RJC) announced ad campaign suggesting that Senator Joe Lieberman's loss in the Connecticut Senate primary election is an indication that Democrats are soft on Israel.
"I'm absolutely astonished by the RJC ad campaign. American Jews need to know that the Republican Jewish Coalition is no friend of Joe Lieberman, and it certainly isn't an advocate for the issues of importance to the mainstream of the Jewish community.
"For years, the RJC has criticized Joe Lieberman. Now they want to use his good name for their own political purposes. These guys have no shame.
"The Connecticut Senate primary was not about Israel or the Jewish community. Joe Lieberman's record on Israel is impeccable. Ned Lamont's pro-Israel position is commendable. Connecticut will have a pro-Israel senator if either Democrat is elected. Any suggestion otherwise is a distortion of the truth."

Sunday, August 13, 2006

King, Torture, Imprisonment Without Trial and the Innocent

When Peter King had the opportunity to vote with John McCain and against the use of torture, he chose to vote with 121 other republicans for the use of torture.
We covered this when it first happend this last December.
In regards to people being held without trial or charges and the propposed changes to give the detainees thier day in court, King has an interesting take "Some lawmakers have already indicated that they believe the court-martial process is too lenient for terrorism suspects. "We can't be turning over evidence and discovery and giving, you know, the benefit of the doubt to terrorists in these cases," Rep. Peter King, a Republican of Long Island, said Sunday on CNN's "Late Edition." "This is different from other wars. This is not like capturing uniformed soldiers in World War II or the Korean War or even Vietnam."
There is a little sticking point on a moral level but that doesn't get in King's way.
Maybe he should meet Benemar "Ben" Benatta.
"The date was Sept. 12, 2001, but Benemar "Ben" Benatta was clueless about the death and destruction one day earlier.
About a week before, Canadian officials had stopped Benatta as he entered the country from Buffalo to seek political asylum. On that Sept. 11, he was quietly transferred to a U.S. immigration lockup where a day passed before sullen FBI agents told him what the rest of the world already knew: terrorists had attacked the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

"It slowly dawned on Benatta that his pedigree - a Muslim man with a military background - made him a target in the frenzied national dragnet that soon followed. The FBI didn't accuse him of being a terrorist, at least not outright. But agents kept asking if he could fly an airplane.
He told them he couldn't. It made no difference.
They gave me a feeling that I was Suspect No. 1," he said in a recent interview.
The veiled accusations and vehement denials would continue for nearly five years - despite official findings in 2001 that he had no terrorist links and in 2003 that authorities had violated his rights by colluding to keep him in custody.
Of the estimated 1,200 mostly Arab and Muslim men detained nationwide as potential suspects or witnesses in the Sept. 11 investigation, Benatta would earn a dubious distinction: Human rights groups say the former Algerian air force lieutenant was locked up the longest.

"I say to myself from time to time, maybe what happened ... it was some kind of dream," he said. "I never believed things like that could happen in the United States."
In a nation reeling from unthinkable horrors inflicted by an unconventional enemy, it could. And did.

"Prison guards, he said, dispensed humiliation in steady doses - rapping on his cell door every half hour to interrupt his sleep, stepping on his leg shackles hard enough to scar his ankles, locking him in an outdoor exercise cage despite freezing temperatures, conducting arbitrary strip searches."

Ben Benatta didn't get the "benefit of the doubt" as King would say and it cost him 5 years of his life with no apologies.
We cannot be as bad or worse than the regimes we seek to topple or the people we defend our freedoms against. When our policies match those of Saddam or Castro or Iran and North Korea, we have lost the moral high ground.

King Should Thank the NYTimes for Bush's Re-election

Via Huffington Post:
"On December 16, 2005, the New York Times revealed that the Bush administration had been eavesdropping on telephone calls without a warrant in an in-depth investigative report by Eric Lichtblau and James Risen. Controversially, it was also revealed that the NYT had "delayed publication for a year." Questions arose as to whether the NYT had had evidence of the program prior to the 2004 election and had kept mum. Today, NYT Public Editor Barney Calame has the definitive answer:
"I have now learned from Bill Keller, the executive editor, that The Times delayed publication of drafts of the eavesdropping article before the 2004 election."
Calame traces the language of the delay from "a year" to "more than a year" in subsequent references made in print and by executive editor Bill Keller. Calame writes that his attention was caught by Keller's "Talk to the Newsroom" web-only column in April wherein he was challenged for holding the story and thus influencing the outcome of the election — and he did not correct the timing.
Keller told Calame that drafts of the article had been around for "weeks" before the election, and that "the climactic discussion about whether to publish was right on the eve of the election." WOW. Keller dismisses this as "old business" to Calame; I'd say this is a fairly new and significant bombshell. (One which will, at least, momentarily shut up Peter King, Melanie Morgan, and the rest of the conservative Times bashers.)"

Click Here for more...

So if this story had been published prior to the election, the outcome would have been much different.
Maybe King should give the NYTimes the same medal he wanted to give Karl Rove.

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Dave Mejias in His Own Words

From Daily Kos:

My name is Dave Mejias and I am the Democratic candidate for New York's 3rd Congressional District against Republican incumbent Peter King. I wanted to introduce myself, tell you why I am running for Congress, and why Peter King no longer deserves to represent the people of the 3rd District. I also want to ask for the support of this online community, as I see blogging to be the future of grassroots politics. I look forward to using the amazing opportunity provided by this site to speak with individuals concerning the important issues facing our country today.

As a member of the Nassau County Legislature on Long Island, New York, I am proud to serve as the elected representative of over 75,000 residents in Nassau's 14th Legislative District. I made history in 2003 by becoming the first Latino ever elected to Nassau County government, and my re-election in 2005 was due largely to the close connection with the community I have developed throughout my life. I was born and raised in the district I now represent, and I know firsthand the problems that my constituents face on an everyday basis because my family and I have lived under the same burdens that Peter King has failed to address.

I am a first-generation American, and the first member of my family born in the US. My father came to this country as a political refugee from Cuba, where he spent 4 years in jail as a political dissident. He watched as his brother was tortured and murdered in front of him for promoting democracy and fighting against Castro in the early 1960s. My mother fled economic strife in Ecuador during the `60s. They first met in an English class for adults here on Long Island. My father passed away when I was very young, and my mother raised me and my siblings as a single parent. I can never thank her enough for her courage and devotion to her family when we needed her the most. With her love and support, I attended State University of New York at Albany, and received my Juris Doctor from Fordham Law. I opened my own law firm at the age of 26 and have been active participant in politics ever since.

Like most Long Islanders, I have watched with dismay over the past six years as this administration, backed by the Republican Congress, has squandered the largest surplus in our nation's history and created an even larger deficit. Under the watch of the George Bush and Peter King, our middle class continues to be squeezed more and more each day. The Bush Administration, with the blank-check support of their lapdogs in Congress, led us into a misguided war without an end in sight. The Republicans continue to dismantle the social safety net, drastically under-fund public education, push for the privatization of Social Security, and ignore the desperate need for health care reform, leaving 45 million Americans with no insurance.

We suffer from record high gasoline prices and MTBE-contaminated drinking water, while oil companies stuff their pockets with our hard-earned cash. Their record windfall profits are ensured by Republican Congressmen like my opponent, Peter King, who voted against laws to combat price gouging or hold companies accountable for poisoning our natural resources. At every opportunity over the last six years, Republicans have steered this nation towards fear, war, and intolerance. I want to change that trend.

Over the next few months I will use this forum to present my positions and agenda on how to right the course of this great nation. I will discuss issues that affect Americans everyday: healthcare, education, the economy, national security. I will hold this administration and Peter King accountable for their countless failures, and present my own plan for America.

I need your help to get my message out to a larger audience. By spreading the word, we can challenge Peter King to answer for his failures on the issues that are most important to us. I look forward to hearing your comments and sharing my ideas with you. Together we can take back America and return accountability to Congress.

Thank you,
David L. Mejias

Nassau County Legislator, 14th LD
Democratic Candidate for Congress, NY-3

Update: Dave Mejias in Live Web Chat Right Now

From 2pm to 4pm EST at

With Howie Klein of Down With Tyranny
and John Rennhack from Peter King Watch

And in the King Watch Store:
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Friday, August 11, 2006

Dave Mejias Internet Blog Apearance on Saturday

Democratic candidate Dave Mejias will be on progressive website this saturday at 2pm.
Every Saturday at 2PM Down With Tyranny, Music For American, Crooks and Liars and Firedoglake community members get together and spend 2 hours (from 2 to 4PM) blogging with a progressive candidate.
Go to and then participate in the comments section of the "Blue America" post.

And don't forget, you can contribute to the Mejias campaign through the link on the right of this post.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

King's Seat Not Solid Republican Anymore

According to Charlie Cook at the Cook Political Report, King has moved from the "Solid Republican" column to "Likely Republican." (opens a .pdf).
"Likely Republican: is defined by Cook as "

Sure, it's a small move but a significant one that shows King is vulnerable in a district dominated by republicans. For a race King has walked away with in recent years, things are tightening up.
Mejias is doing an outstanding job even with his late start.

King Hearts Lieberman, Calls Dem Voters "Bigots"

King had an interesting take on the Connecticut Democratic primary last night. When Mejias brings up the fact that King is as much a Bush-Iraq supporter as Lieberman is, King tells Newsday "fortunately, the Third District is not composed of the left-wing bigots who went after Joe Lieberman."
Hmm.. "left-wing bigots."
What exactly is King implying here?
Of course the Democratic voters in a Democratic primary would be pretty much "left-wing" but what is with the "BIGOTS"???
Is King suggesting that Lieberman lost was because he is jewish?
In the 3rd CD which voted overwhelmingly for Bill Clinton and Al Gore, King had best be careful. The scare tactics of 9/11 won't work anymore.
King tries to use it in the Newsday article by saying "Unlike the left wing of his party, Joe Lieberman stands for a strong national defense. The attacks against him have been disgraceful."
Isn't it the "left-wing" of the party that pushed for more homeland security money and King voted against the increase.
Maybe by "strong national defense," King means the Bush-Iraq War. He won't say it of course.
On Long Island, in the 3rd Congressional District just like all across the nation, the American people are opposed to Bushs misadventure in Iraq.
King has tied his horse to Bush with Iraq and should expect to feel the consequences. Mainstream america opposes Bush and his policies. King supports them.

King is getting his marching orders/talking points from GOP head Ken Mehlman
"Ken Mehlman, the Republican National Committee chairman, is planning to give a speech in Columbus, Ohio this morning in which he will use Mr. Lamont’s victory to portray Democrats as a party weak on national defense, and his affiliation with blogs to present the Democrats as captive to the extreme wing of the party, Republican aides said.

Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Where is Free Speech Going?

The new Oliver Stone film World Trade Center is set to be released this week. Film critic Peter King got an advance viewing.
LA Time reports "It wasn't a new White House initiative or pending bill that preoccupied Rep. Peter T. King one day this spring.It was Oliver Stone.The director's political, conspiracy-tinged movies such as "JFK" and "Salvador" had made him a scourge of conservatives. King was concerned that Stone's upcoming film, "World Trade Center," would take a provocative look at the 9/11 terrorist attacks."

Does Kings "concern" mean he gets to review a movie before it comes out?

"King, whose Long Island district was home to scores of 9/11 victims, peppered Paramount Pictures representatives with questions as they showed him the trailer in his Capitol Hill office in May."I asked them several times: Are there any Oliver Stone conspiracies in there?" King recalled. "Is it going to be, 'Bush really did it? Clinton really did? Lyndon Johnson really did it?' I was concerned this would be like a 9/11 version of 'JFK.' "

So King gets to see the movie in his office and ask studio executives about it?
Funny that he would want to know if the film says "Clinton really did it" when King himself has placed blame for 9/11 squarely on Clintons shoulders ".. and 'cause Bill Clinton put it off for eight years, and that's why we had the twin towers on 9/11."

Exactly why did King get a viewing anyway?

"The meeting was part of a quiet, preemptive effort by Paramount and parent Viacom Inc. to head off any political backlash to Stone's movie...
"People were beginning to form ideas about what the movie might be about," said DeDe Lea, Viacom's senior vice president for government relations. "And rather than wait for those ideas to be formed, we thought, 'Let's get in there early and explain what the movie is about.'

"Viacom's effort to reassure lawmakers underscores how important having smooth relations in Washington is to the media giant, which has at stake such issues as indecency and cable-TV regulations. Viacom this week showed lawmakers the movie, which opens Aug. 9 and tells the story of two Port Authority police officers trapped in the rubble of the twin towers."

So the studio is afraid that if the republican campaign theme of 9/11 isn't portrayed correctly in the film, the republican-led congress will seek retribution.
Isn't that a frightening prospect?

"Viacom and Paramount sensed higher hurdles for "World Trade Center," given its bigger scale, a well-known cast that includes Nicolas Cage and its polarizing filmmaker. Adding to the tensions are upcoming elections in which the congressional balance of power could be at stake.
For many Republicans, Stone falls just below "Fahrenheit 9/11" documentarian Michael Moore on their enemies list of Hollywood filmmakers."

Viacom, former parent company of Showtime Networks didn't seek approval of the historical revisionist version of 9/11 in "DC 9/11: Time of Crisis," This movie or rather a hagiography of Bush on 9/11 was written and produced by a Bush supporter.
No concern for that film from King or his cohorts in congress.

"King said his meeting with the studio representatives had allayed his concerns. He's even looking forward to watching the movie.
"I think it's important for the country to see it," King said."

Thank you Peter for your stamp of approval.
One that was not needed at all.

Are media outlets now scared of releasing their products because the republican congress will go after them if they don't like the product?

We saw how easily King throws around the word "treason" and goes after media he doesn't like. Even the simple french fry suffered under the republican congress.

What would have happend if King didn't like what the movie said?

How close are we to Chairman McCarthy..... er Chairman King heading the House Un-American Activities Committee?
Are King and his ilk by virtue of their control of congress pushing media into self-censorship?

It would have been better for freedom of speech at least to let King pay his $8.50 and see the movie... or not.

If he wants to spout off about Oliver Stone without seeing the movie first, then that is his problem and it would simply make him look stupid.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Peter Gets a Primary

Perennial republican King opponent Robert Previdi is once again giving King a primary.
Previdi only has a few thousands dollars but David only had a rock and a sling-shot.

Previdi for Congress FEC filings.

New Peter King Merchendise

Available in bumper stickers, mugs, and shirts....
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Consumer Group Blasts Congressman King for Vote That Gives More Tax Cuts to the Wealthiest

Citizen Action of New York

For Immediate Release August 1, 2006

Contact: Joy Gould
518-465-4600 x 101

Consumer Group Blasts Congressman King for Vote That Gives More Tax Cuts to the Wealthiest

New report on cost of tax cuts to the wealthy tied to minimum wage hike

A new report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, House Estate Tax Proposal Has Essentially the Same Large Long-Term Cost as Earlier Version, states that a bill passed by the US House of Representatives would cost $753 billion ($599 billion plus interest costs on the debt) over the first 10 years. The study concluded that the estate tax reduction would benefit the wealthiest of the wealthy while forcing lower spending for Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Veterans benefits, unemployment insurance and other programs that benefit low and middle income workers.

"Call it hostage-taking, blackmail, or hypocrisy on parade," said Richard Kirsch, Executive Director of Citizen Action of New York. "Just before taking off for his 5-week recess, Congressman King voted in the middle-of-the-night for a bill the US House leadership put together to tie a long overdue minimum wage increase to hundreds of billions of tax cuts for multi-millionaires."

CBPP reports that millions of Americans will be harmed from the House bill because the $733 billion hit to the federal budget will result in cuts in programs like college tuition assistance and an increase in the federal budget deficit.

"Since Congressman King voted to raise his own pay on a stand-alone up or down vote, surely minimum wage earners deserve the same. It's political blackmail to claim the only way that minimum wage workers can get a raise is to give tax giveaways to the richest of the rich."

Now this cynical ploy is headed to the Senate - where a vote is expected to occur before the Senate is scheduled to recess at the end of this week.

E. Joyce Gould, RN, MSN
Health Care Project Director
Citizen Action of New York
Public Policy and Education Fund of New York
94 Central Avenue
Albany, NY 12206
518-465-4600 x 101
518-465-2890 (fax)