Draft Suozzi Gets a Website

Today a new website sprang up which has nothing to do with the blog. www.draftsuozzi.blogspot.com is online.
Seems there are more people who really want to see this happen.
We wish the best of luck to the new blog and its writers.

UPDATE 3/14/06:
The website www.draftsuozzi.com is registered through a third party.
Registrant:
Domains by Proxy, Inc.

DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: DRAFTSUOZZI.COM
Created on: 13-May-06
Expires on: 13-May-07
Last Updated on: 13-May-06

More Talk of Suozzi Entering Race

But the people talking aren't him or his campaign. Yet.
There seems to be a growing number of Democrats across the 3rd CD who believe Suozzi should make the run.
What do you think? Comments section is open.

Just Saying

With a $4million warchest ready to go and alot of popularity in the district, the congressional race would be a no-brainer.
Draft Suozzi?

Despite Setbacks, Fundraising Starts

Denenberg might be out because of health reasons but we will have a candidate. Through Act Blue, we will start grass-roots fundraising for the general election.

NY-03 General Election Fund	$

Denenberg is OUT

For reasons yet to be explained, Denenberg is dropping out of the race.

Going Postal

The Hill Newspaper asked House and Senate members "What is the most embarrassing job you’ve ever had?"

Sen. Isakson (R-Ga.) said “There’s no such thing as an embarrassing job. Work is a responsible, good thing to do. I’ve worked in real estate, construction. I’ve waited tables. I’m proud of all the jobs I’ve had.”

Rep. Green (D-Texas) said “I’ve never had an embarrassing job. All work is good work. The best job is always the one that you’re still looking for.”

And Peter King says "I worked in the post office, seasonal work."

So working in a Post Office is embarrassing?
Tell that to the men and women who get our mail delivered.

King Gets a Republican Opponent

And this year it's not Robert Previdi.
Since 1996, King has had to fend off a primary challenge from Manhasset resident and fellow republican Robert Previdi.
The primary is a mere formality for King but with such a low turnout, it's possible that a motivated candidate with money to spend can upset King. It would take alot for that to happen though. King got his highest numbers in the 2002 primary which of course was the first national election after 9/11. It was also the highest numbers Previdi got. The numbers are at the end of this post.
We don't know if Previdi is stepping into the breach once again this year but there is a Rocco Calise from West Babylon who has filed papers with the FEC to run as a republican. His first filing listed Independence Party as affiliation which was changed to Republican in an amendment. We don't know much about Calise yet except that his campaign treasurer is Rose Calise.
Can Rocco Calise do what Robert Previdi could not? Will Previdi also run to make it a three-way primary?
It;s only May and things are getting interesting. Let's see where Calise for Congress is going.

King vs. Previdi Primary Numbers
1996
King 7,345
Previdi 979
1998
King 6,521
Previdi 1,819
2000
King - 8,651
Previdi - 2,495
2002
King - 22,696
Previdi - 6,442
2004
King - 6,642
Previdi - 918

Photos From Dave Denenbergs Announcement

Dave Denenberg had a good day sunday when he declared his run for congress. The race is on and it's time to get a real representative for the 3rd Congressional District.

Photos by Joel Peskoff....
More to come

Peter King is Just a Liar

In today's Newsday in the story about Dave Denenbergs announcement that he is running for congress, there was this gem "Before he goes to sleep every night, Peter King thanks God that George Bush is president," Denenberg said, referring to a sentence King wrote in a recent letter. "Ask him if he thanks God when he fills up his gas tank."
In an interview, King, a Republican, said his letter -- sent to a Democratic constituent who had criticized the congressman's support of Bush -- merely quoted former Democratic New York City Mayor Ed Koch's words to the same effect. In 2003, King attributed the same statement to Koch during an episode of the MSNBC talk show "Scarborough Country."

So, King "merely quoted" Koch?
No, he didn't just "merely quote," he agreed with Koch.
First, a Newsday article goes unchallenged on Kings own website "...and even once declared in a letter to a constituent: "I thank God every night that George Bush is our President. You should do the same."
And the FULL quote from the letter King sent is "Like Ed Koch I thank God every night that he is our President. You should do the same."

King isn't just quoting Koch, he agrees Kochs' thanks to god for Bush.
Why is King running away from his own words?
What is he afraid of?
King is tied to Bush no matter how he spins it.

King went on to say in the article "I've supported strongly on the war against terrorism, but I've disagreed with him on issues like the Dubai ports and immigration... The voters know I'm independent and they'll elect me on my record."

Will a rooster crow if King denies Bush one more time?

Dave Denenberg is IN

As of this afternoon, Nassau County Legislator David Denenberg is in the race for congress.

Abusing 9/11

The tragedy of 9/11 lives in all NYers. You can probably ask any stranger on the street and they could tell you they knew someone who died in the attacks. That's why when someone like Peter King uses 9/11 to give himself some cover it is just that more disgusting.
We have been talking about port security here and how nothing has been done in the 5 years since 9/11 and how the new proposed legislation isn't enough.
King very readily envokes 9/11 and he is doing it again. In the immigration debate, King brings up 9/11 and how terrorists can cross the "southern border" (no mention of northern border) and kill us.
The fact is, the terrorists who carried out the attacks didn't enter via Mexico swimming across the Rio Grande, they flew in legally. Will building a wall across the US-Mexico border stop terrorists from entering the country? Not at all. As long as the terrorist entering via airliners have a clean record to get a visa, they are in.
Look at the "shoe bomber" Richard Reid. He was flying to the US and no red flags were raised when he boarded the plane in England.
When it comes to apprehension of non-Mexicans entering the US, "the Border Patrol reported capturing a total of 946 persons from the seven nations attempting to enter illegally. However, only 320 of those were caught at the Mexican border, where the ad's sponsors want to build a fence. Nearly twice as many were caught coming in from Canada and other points. In all, 472 were apprehended at the Canadian border, and 154 were apprehended in the Miami, New Orleans and Puerto Rico regions of the Border Patrol."
So the northern border is more dangerous than the southern border. Where is the call for a wall to protect us from Canada?
We need real debate on immigration reform and border security without the cheap abuse of the 9/11 tragedy. King hopes that no one remembers that our border with Mexico and illegal immigration had nothing to do with 9/11.

Happy Cinco de Mayo Peter King

err... Happy Fifth of May.
Sorry Peter.

Who Needs Reminders?

King says one thing and then says another to suit the situation. We've pointed that out quite a few times already and here is just one more example.
During todays debate on the port security legislation, Rep. Markey from Boston held up a cargo container lock to illustrate why the legislation does not go far enough to check every container. King in his usual bluster said that his district lost 150 people on 9/11 and "I don't need visual aids to remind me what happened on Sept. 11.''
King plastered 9/11 photos all over the commitee offices and told The Hill "The photos are there so that every day, every staff person knows that the only reason this committee exists is because almost 3,000 Americans were killed on September 11th,”
What makes King so special?

We'll have more on the port security bill coming up.....

What a Pleasant Person to Work For

From The Hill newspaper

Homeland Security’s hallway of photos: Any nightmares yet?
To keep them focused on the job at hand, staffers at the House Homeland Security Committee coming into work each day see large, searing images of melting towers and an aerial view of the Pentagon on fire.
The new photographs, which were the idea of committee Chairman Peter King (R-N.Y.), are part of their new digs in the Ford Office Building — they moved there a few weeks ago — that include new carpets and furniture.
The photographs are part of a timeline along the main hallway, two from when the tragedy first happened and 10 of the recovery effort. However unpleasant the images are, King says he believes they need to be there as a reminder.
“The photos are there so that every day, every staff person knows that the only reason this committee exists is because almost 3,000 Americans were killed on September 11th,” King said. “It is our job to prevent another attack from happening.”
By press time, the cost of the photographs was not provided.

Having Solved All of the Nations Problems, King Moves on to the National Anthem

I am reassured that since the federal deficit has been turned into a surplus, inflation is under control, our ports are fully secure, we have an energy policy in place that frees us from fossil fuels and all our other problems have been solved, King can set his sights on making sure the national anthem is sung only in english.
Rep. Jim Ryun (R-KS) has introduced H.RES.793 Affirming that statements of national unity, including the National Anthem, should be recited or sung in English. King is a co-sponsor and tells Newsday "Throughout our history, the English language has been the glue that binds us together as Americans. It is only proper that the National Anthem be sung in our common language, English."
This whole thing comes as a knee-jerk reaction to a recent recording of the national anthem is spanish and the faux-outrage it created. This is nothing more than another "Freedom Fries" moment for congress.
Is this really necessary? The funny part is that the Think Progess website reports that in 1919 the United States Government commissioned a spanish version of the anthem and the US government website currently has the national anthem in spanish.

Do we need this kind of legislation when there are so many more important things we have to deal with? What will the penalties be if the anthem is sung in a different language?
One has to wonder if this would have come up if the anthem had been done in German or Italian or Celtic.

Dave Denenberg to Announce Sunday May 7th

D a v e D e n e n b e r g

cordially invites you to join him for

an “Afternoon with Family and Friends”

On Sunday, May 7, 2006

At 3:30 p.m. at

TACKAPAUSHA PARK
At the Tackapausha Museum

In Seaford

for an important

* * * A N N O U N C E M E N T * * *

Directions: Seaford Oyster Bay Expressway to Exit 1E Merrick Road. Go east on Merrick Road to Washington Avenue and take a left on Washington. Takapausha Museum/Preserve will be on your right.

RAIN OR SHINE

KingPac Gets a New Name

An Amendment was filed with the FEC adding to the name of the PAC. It's now "Know-How and Integrity for Our National Government"
Get it?
Know-how
and
Integrity
for our
National
Government

KING PAC

How cute is that?
How many man-hours were spent working that out?

The PAC has a new treasurer Christopher Ward from Political Compliance Services Inc.

The next scheduled FEC filing is May 1st.

Quote UnQuote - Port Security

"... the Democrats' plan is politically motivated.."
Peter King, 4/25/06 Newsday


''Any implication that anyone on either side of the aisle is not concerned about homeland security, is not concerned about the loss of human life, it demeans and cheapens the debate,''
Peter King, 4/26/06 New York Times

Indeed.

Port Security - Still Not Good Enough.

The Port of Hong Kong as we pointed out a couple of days ago inspects 100% of cargo.
A reader points out that King has port security legislation coming up. Too bad its not true.
There is a Port Security legislation proposal being heard in Kings Homeland Security Commitee H.R.4954 Security and Accountability For Every (SAFE) Port Act sponsored by California Rep. Dan Lungren, introduced on 3/14/2006 and co-sponsered by 63 House Members. None of them being Peter King.
What does King say about the need to check all cargo containers?
He tells Newsday "... the Democrats' plan is politically motivated and would slow port operations."
How is protecting our ports by checking ALL containers "politically motivated?" It's just common sense.
King didn't think that the questioning of the DP World deal was politically motivated. He jumped into that with both feet with Sen. Schumer.
The Port of Hong Kong has been checking all containers since 2004 and they are arguably one of the busiest ports in Asia and ranks as one of the busiest in the world. If they can do it, we can do it.
Sen. Schumer who exposed and led the fight for an investigation into the Dubai Ports World deal testified after a recent trip to Hong Kong "Hong Kong is more advanced than any American port I've seen, and we should be ashamed they inspect every container and we don't... The greatest danger is someone shipping a nuclear weapon in one of these containers and what are we doing about it? Why are we waiting?"

Indeed, why are we waiting?
A year ago H.R.478 United States Seaport Multiyear Security Enhancement Act was introduced and went no where. This year, HR 4954 was introduced and the issue of Port Security is now being taken seriously.

The Ports Deal Opposition Did Not Immunize King

Much has been made of King "breaking" with Bush over the Dubai ports deal earlier this year. King is supposed to be some sort of "hero" for speaking out. King stood up with Senator Schumer to demand an investigation into the deal and got praise for that.
Does this make him more appealing to democrats or people who are concerned about port security? Some say yes, but the answer should be NO.
King recently voted against increased funding for port security which mirrored his vote back in 2003 when he voted against an amendment for more money.

The fact is, even without the Dubai Ports World deal, our port security is still miserably bad. Back during the 2004 election, Sen. Kerry brought up the fact that only 5% of incoming cargo is checked "....95 percent of the containers that come into the ports, right here in Florida, are not inspected. Civilians get onto aircraft, and their luggage is X-rayed, but the cargo hold is not X- rayed."
Bush countered "I don't think we want to get to how he's going to pay for all these promises. It's like a huge tax gap. Anyway, that's for another debate."

Has our port security gotten better since 2004?
Not at all.
King says its better but still only 5% of incoming cargo is checked. "Well, they are safer than at 9/11. You know, they say that only 5 percent is actually tested. But a good number of the cargo -- a very high percentage of the cargo is actually screened overseas, and it's monitored. So, it -- listen, we have a long way to go. But it is far better than some of the critics say."

How is the same number as two years ago better?
Isn't it contradictory for King to be against Dubai Ports World managing our domestic ports but as he says "a very high percentage of the cargo is actually screened overseas"?
He is still accepting the fact that foreign security is checking US-bound cargo. What about the foreign ports controlled by DP World?
Does King find it acceptable that US-bound cargo is "screened" at those ports?
How is it better than DP World managing US ports?
It isn't.
While King makes noise about the deal, he also lays cover for Bush.
The DP World deal is only a small part of the over-all problem with port security and King has been MIA on the larger issue of checking cargo.
On Meet the Press King offered some weird convoluted explainations for the weak port security "
"MR. RUSSERT: I--gentlemen, the Democrats have--are saying very loudly that they have tried repeatedly to put more money into port security. Benny Thompson, Democrat on your committee, Congressman, he tried to increase spending by a billion dollars, he wanted to double the number of oversea port inspectors, he wanted to put radiation portal monitors. And every time, the Republicans said no, you voted no. Do you regret now opposing some of those measures to improve port security?

REP. KING: Tim, we have voted to increase port security dramatically, it’s gone up almost $2 billion since four years ago. Almost 100 percent is screened, it’s not actually examined. But even, you know—people use a number that only 5 percent of the cargo is actually examined. Even Senator Clinton the other day, said 15 is maximum. So it’s between 5 and 15, we do have to do more. I support doing more. In fact, my committee is holding hearings next month, Congressman Lundgren, Congresswoman Harman are holding hearings on the issue of port security. More does have to be done, but a lot has been done also.

MR. RUSSERT: So the Democrats were right?

REP. KING: No, we—no, a lot more has to be done. The fact is you don’t just throw money at it, you do it in a way that works. Well, half this technology the people are talking about doesn’t work that well, and the idea is how do you do it? You can’t be examining every piece of cargo that comes in, it’s to do it effectively and also to do it in a way that doesn’t stop world commerce. Having said that, we realize more has to be done. But their idea, in all due respect, often is throw money into it. And you—again, the idea is to do it in an effective, smart way. I think more should be done, and I’ve said that all along."

More has to be done but the Democrats aren't right according to King. And in doublespeak King says "almost 100 percent is screened" but then "it's not actually examined."
King has opposed increased funding for port security and makes cheap excuses. He argues that funding has "gone up almost $2 billion since four years ago" yet he is opposed to "just throw money at it."
Where did that $2 billion go? That's only $500million to cover all our ports from New York to Miami to New Orelans to San Diego and more plus airports. That's just a drop in the bucket and in four years, nothing has changed with cargo.

How is it that we are not checking all cargo coming into this country? Hong Kong checks 100% of cargo containers and HK is a huge pacific port. And they use US made machines "Since 2004, the Hong Kong Terminal Operators Association, which includes both public and private shipping companies, has screened 100 percent of containers using two huge American-built scanners. Trucks carrying containers drive through the machines, which screen for radiological material or high-density metals that could be used to shield a nuclear or "dirty" bomb."

Almost five years after 9/11, multiple attempts by Democrats to get more port security money voted down by King and the republicans, and the uproar over DP World the pace of securing our ports is still stagnant.

Why are Unions Giving King Cash?

Looking at last quarters FEC filings, the sad thing is he is still getting union money even though he votes against their interests. King has a 37% lifetime voting record with the AFL-CIO.
King got
$1000 from Local 138, 138A and 138B Internationa Union of Operating Engineers, Farmingdale, NY;
$4000 from the International Union of Operating Engineers PAC, Washington DC
$1000 from the Transport Workers Union Political Contribution Committee, NY, NY;
$1000 from the Amalgamated Transit Union - COPE, Washington DC;
$5000 from the Carpenters Legislative Improvement Committee, Washington DC;
$1000 from the International Association of Firefighters PAC, Washington DC;
$6000 from the Service Employees International Union PAC, Washington DC;
$1000 from the Sheet Metal and Air Conditoning Contractors PAC,
$5000 from the Airline Pilots Association PAC, Washington DC;
$1000 from the Transportation Trades Dept. AFL-CIO PAC, Washington DC;
and sadly many more.

King's Kampaign Kash - April Filings

The last quarters FEC filings are in and King has added $290,832 to his war-chest. King has a total cash on hand of $1,175,761.18.
Kings "operating expenses" for the last quarter $75,352.76.
King doesn't spend alot of money for his campaigns. Filings from the last election show very little in the way of campaign literature, ads or other pure campaign spending.
That doesn't mean Kings presumptive opponent Dave Denenberg doesn't need the money.
To defeat King, the truth about his record has to get out. The most current contribution info can be found here.

From our Friends Over at The Community Alliance

A little levity from The Community Alliance....

KingDome, USA

Special to The Community Alliance (via Aljezzera). Mohammed Saeed Al-Sahaf (formerly known as "Baghdad Bob") and Mike Deery (Director of Communications and Public Affairs for the Town of Hempstead) contributed to this story

Washington, DC. -- Today, Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Peter T. King (R-NY) introduced a failsafe Immigration Reform Bill in the House of Representatives, designed to end the stalemate between Congressional Republicans and Democrats that has stalled efforts to "keep America American."

"There is no question that foreigners, who invade our shores without documentation, are ruining this country," said an emphatic King. "They're taking away decent jobs from regular Americans, like dishwashers, gardeners, and grape-pickers, and they pose an imminent threat to our nation's security. It is simply unAmerican to have huddled masses yearning to be free foisted upon our homeland while no born and bred American enjoys true freedom here at home. The time has come to close the golden door -- no one gets in, no one gets out!"

King's plan, already endorsed by the American Family Association and Bill O'Reilly, calls for the construction not of a steel wall along the border with Mexico, but rather, the building of walls around the entire perimeter of the United States, with a retractable dome atop.

"I call it the 'KingDome,'" said the smug representative from New York's 3rd Congressional District. "We secure our borders by having every person who enters or leaves our country pass through metal detectors at impenetrable gates, and then we can open the roof for pre-screened air traffic. No more of these 'homeless, tempest-tost' for this great nation."

"There is precedent for a domed stadium," clucked King. "The Astrodome. The Skydome. Enron Field, ah, er, I mean, Minute Maid Park. They're all secure environments. Americans, Si. Immigrants, No!"

When asked about the Louisiana Superdome, which failed to stand up to the wrath of Hurricane Katrina, King opined: "Those crawfish-eating, cotton-picking, bourbon-drinking sons of illegal immigrant slaves got what they deserved. All the REAL Americans got out of New Orleans safely!"

As Pete King draped himself in the American flag -- wielding documents that he claims evidence his ancestors' arrival on the Mayflower -- immigrants, civil rights activists, and folks who have actually visited the Statue of Liberty gathered around the nation -- in numbers not seen since the Vietnam era -- to protest Congressional efforts to tighten our borders and put the squeeze on undocumented workers.

Our ace reporter, Eastbrook Van Westbrook, interviewed one such protestor, speaking on condition of anonymity and identified only as Jose Flores Sandoval Rodriguez Juarez Bolivar Goldberg of 123 Main Street, Apartment 3B, Farmingville, outside of King's District Office on Long Island.

Westbrook: What do you think of the proposal to criminalize those who render aid of any kind to immigrants?
Goldberg: It's an affront to the dignity of every hardworking immigrant who has ever come to America to build a better life for himself and his family. We are all the children and grandchildren of immigrants. We are a nation of immigrants -- and of terrorist cells, who enter this country with complete documentation and the full knowledge and consent of the American government.
Westbrook: With all the talk of building a wall along the southern border of the United States, it must be particularly hard on you as a Mexican.
Goldberg: Mexican? Who's Mexican? I'm Puerto Rican!

Meanwhile, in related news, Native Americans representing 132 tribes gathered at their annual convention in Cleveland, where plans were underway to take back Manhattan Island from "those fakactah illegal immigrants who stole Manhattan in the first place."

"Forget reparations," Chief Patsh-In-Tuches of the Iroquois Tribe told fellow redskins of the Five Nations as gathered at Jacobs Field. "Anyone not recognized as 'Native American' -- on college applications, and otherwise -- is in OUR nation unlawfully. They get out. We get Manhattan -- and fifty Indian-run casinos in locations to be named later (so take that, Sheldon Silver)!"

As the debate on the immigration law rages on, here's what you missed if you haven't been reading The Community Alliance blog:

Don't Spend The Whole Rebate In One Place!

Governor As Chief Cook And Bottle Washer

A Radical In The White House

A Passover Story

In Search Of The Holy Grail

NEXT UP: JUDAS AND JC CONSPIRE AT THE DINNER TABLE: Newly Discovered Gospel Shrouds Easter Traditions.

"It all started when John ate the last piece of gefilte fish." -- The Gospel According to Peter, Paul and Mary

"It wasn't the crime. It was the 2000 year cover-up!" -- Bob Woodward, Washington Post

From Penthouse: Ex-lover disputes "second coming." [WHAT? It's our fault you have a dirty mind?]

As Paul wrote in his second letter to the Corinthians: "Having a wonderful time. Wish you were here!"

Happy Easter, and for those still celebrating Matzo Meal Mania, consider this: The leader of the Passover Seder is called a "Sadist;" His followers? "Matzochists," of course!

No Christians were harmed or fed to the lions in the testing, development and/or deployment of this e-mail.

If we haven't offended you in this e-mail, take heart -- there's always next week. [The way we figure it, where the government lies to you, and Corporate America screws you left and right, and you just sit back and take it, what's a little blasphemy?] Remember, you can find The Community Alliance in the Yellow Pages under "Community Advocacy" and "Abuse."

In case of emergency, call Supervisor Kate Murray's Helpline at 516-489-6000. Tell them the Anti-Christ sent you!

King of the Deficits

Keep in mind that King has voted for every spending measure...

From AP:
Government Spending Hits Record in March

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
WASHINGTON - Government spending hit an all-time high for a single month in March, pushing the budget deficit up significantly from the red-ink level of a year ago.

In its monthly accounting of the government's books, the Treasury Department reported Wednesday that federal spending totaled $250 billion last month, up 13.7 percent from March 2005.

Government receipts also were up, rising 10.6 percent from a year ago, to $164.6 billion. That left a deficit for the month of $85.5 billion, a record imbalance for March.

Treasury Department officials said that half of the growth in outlays for March represented a $15 billion shift in payments for certain government benefit programs, including Medicare, into March rather than April. The benefit payments were made early because April 1 fell on a Saturday....

Even though the deficit was a record for March, it was below the all-time monthly high of $119.2 billion, which was set in February.

So far through the first six months of this budget year, which began in October, the deficit totals $303 billion, an increase of 2.8 percent over the deficit in the first six months of the 2005 budget year.

The administration is forecasting that the deficit for this budget year, which will end Sept. 30, will hit a record $423 billion, surpassing the old mark in dollar terms of $413 billion set in 2004. The administration says the costs of the war in Iraq and reconstruction spending from the Gulf Coast hurricanes will drive the deficit higher..... "

KingWatch Index - Don't Know Much About.......

There is alot King doesn't know much about. To be fair he could be feigning ignorance so that he can more forcefully push his lies.
King's lack of knowledge is a broad matter and here are some examples from the past 2 years of King Watch.

When the unpopular government of Spanish President Aznar who supported Bush's Iraq adventure lost in the 2004 elections, King called the Spanish "appeasers" to terrorists. Too bad King didn't get that it was far more complex than that... Don't Know Much About Spain

King was a big supporter of of the whole Iraq-WMD scam and attacked Hans Blix when he said that Iraq did not have WMD's and that evidence was falsified to justify a war. Since then we do know that evidence was manipulated... Don't Know Much About WMD's

King said Bush was complying with the 9/11 Commisson. The facts were quite different... Don't Know Much About the 9/11 Commission

King was saying that unemployment is lower under Bush than under Clinton.. Don't Know Much About Unemployment Numbers

King rattles off countries that support the Bush-Iraq War and mentions "Bavaria." Don't Know Much About Geography

King goes on the BBC to attack the "old Europe" that doesn't support the Bush-Iraq War. In his zeal to attack France as a "second rate nation," he says France doesn't even have an aircraft carrier... Don't Know Much About France

King spent some time defending Bush's weak response to Katrina... Don't Know Much About New Orleans

King chimed in about the 2005 Nassau County elections.. Don't Know Much About Election Results

King says a majority of americans support Bush... Don't Know Much About Poll Numbers

KingWatch Index - King vs. Constituents

For new readers of KingWatch, we are creating index posts of similar topics that are in sprea out in our archives.
Today's index is of King and his interactions with constituents.
King has a problem with people who do not agree with him and he tends to lash out.
Here are a series of letters to and from King - King vs. Constituents Pt. 1
Note that in his first response he outright lies to his constituent about what President Clinton said.
The next is a letter exchange between another constituent - King vs. Constituents Pt. 2
And the next is an incident at his Washington DC office - King vs. Constituents Pt. 3
In 2005, King avoided a Social Security town hall meeting and attacked those that attended - King vs. Constituents Pt. 4
In another Social Security issue, King goes after religious leaders who disagree with what Bush's plans for Social Security - King vs. Constituents Pt. 5

For such a wanna-be tough guy, King is pretty thin-skinned.

Newsday Letter Writer Makes a Connection

Church, Bush: commonalities
I read your story "LI Congressman: A controversial stance" [News, April 2], regarding the immigration issues we face and Rep. Peter King's (R-Seaford) comments that the Catholic Church is guilty of a "continuum of arrogance . . . an overbearing and oppressive sense that everything they do is right." It made me think that these same words could very well describe the Bush administration.
John Diaz
Middle Island

He shoots, he scores.

And King Says He Can Do More for NY.......

From his perch high above the Homeland Security Committee pile, King has done little for New York money-wise.

From the NYPost

ALASKA GETS TERROR CAMS WHILE N.Y. BEGS
WASHINGTON - Tiny Alaska fishing towns got the feds to splurge on state-of-the-art camera equipment to monitor icy harbors - even though New York City is still far short of the cameras that cops need to nab terrorists, The Post has learned.

The Big Apple is the nation's top terror target, but has to shell out millions of its own dollars to put thousands of cameras on rooftops and in subway stations.......

The NYPD has about 3,000 surveillance cameras, mostly around public housing projects. The MTA has another 2,328 on the subway, and recently inked a $212 million contract to add 1,000 more.

That may sound like a lot, but it's nothing compared to the brand-new equipment that the sleepy fishing village of Dillingham, Alaska, got - all at federal expense.

Dillingham got a $202,000 homeland-security grant, which it used to install 80 German-made Mobotix AG surveillance cameras to spy on its fleet of salmon and halibut fishing boats.

With a population of only 2,400, that comes out to one camera for every 30 people - at a cost of $84 per person.

New York City is budgeted to get $46 million from the feds to buy security cameras, which comes out to a paltry $6 for each resident......

And how important is Dillingham a target for terrorists?

Jamie Littrell, a spokesman for Alaska's homeland-security agency said, "Dillingham is a very active port, especially during the height of the fishing season." He said terrorists could use the town's airport to fly to Anchorage. "You can basically be anywhere in the United States in six to 12 hours," he said.

Newsday gets Letters

One letter writer points out Kings ludicrous evasion tactic..

It was only once, Rep. King

Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) attended Catholic schools 19 years and was slapped in the face once ["LI Congressman: a controversial stance," News, April 2]. Apparently, he is still traumatized. Get over it, Congressman. There are more important things you should be concerned about.

The fact is what the nuns and priests did for Catholic kids like you and me is give us a good education fixed in moral principles, which, had you listened, would have given you pause to engage in defending your position on immigration reform.

Robert Patrick Grant
Huntington


And another gives him a lesson in humility..

You reported that Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) said, "It's quite possible this could end up helping me politically. Maybe it shows that God's on my side." The congressman would do well to remember Lincoln's view that the important question is not whether God is on your side, but whether you are on God's side.

Juan Carlos Alicea
Medford

KingPAC

King started a new Political Action Committee called KingPAC the first week of february. The FEC committe ID# is C00419432
The tresurer for the commitee is one Kevin Fogerty who lives in Arlington, VA.
According to the Statement of Organization page 2, the commitee "Supports/Opposes more than one Federal candidate, and is not a seperate segregated fund or party committee."

There haven't been any further FEC filings listing contributions yet.

Dave Denenberg

We haven't mentioned Kings presumptive opponent in some time so we're going to provide more info on Nassau County Legislator Dave Denenberg...
Campaign contribution info can be found here and we'll be adding more in the future.

From Daves webiste bio -

Dave Denenberg (D-Merrick) is serving his fourth term as a Nassau County Legislator following a long history of community involvement. He represents the 19th Legislative District, which includes the communities of Bellmore, North Bellmore, Merrick, North Merrick, and parts of Freeport and Wantagh.....
With a rare combination of degrees – in chemical engineering from Cooper Union and in law from Brooklyn Law School – Denenberg is uniquely qualified in the environmental and high tech fields. As Chairman of the legislature’s Planning, Development and Environment Committee, Legislator Denenberg conducted hearings on the Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum, open space, smart growth, Nassau’s master plan, and annual energy summits. The hearings led to the successful sale of the Islanders, development of an open space program that includes funding for the purchase of parcels of land throughout the county, smart growth initiatives, updates to the master plan and a LIPA/Nassau energy initiative....
Legislator Denenberg is a partner in the New York Law firm of Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger and Veccione, where he specializes in intellectual property and environmental law. He represents private individuals in lawsuits concerning environmental contamination. He also represents high tech companies and investors in complex patent and trademark matters.....
Legislator Denenberg has an extensive list of community activities that include serving on the boards of SPLASH (Stop Polluting and Littering and Save Our Harbors), and the Merrick Kiwanis Club. He is a member of the Bellmore Kiwanis, Wantagh Preservation Society; Freeport and Seaford Historical Societies, and the Central Bellmore, Central Merrick, Guy Lombardo on the Water, Merrick Estates, Merrick Gables, Merrick Park, Old Lindenmere, Seaford, Smith’s Pond and Wantagh Seaford Civic/Homeowner’s Associations. He is also immediate past president of Congregation Ohav Shalom in Merrick and a trustee of the Conference of Jewish Organizations of Nassau County.
Legislator Denenberg serves as chairperson of the Planning, Development and the Environment Committee; vice chairperson of the Public Works Committee; and a member of the Economic and Community Development and Labor, Government Services and Operations, Health and Social Services, Judiciary, and Rules committees.
Legislator Denenberg and his wife, Cara, have three children: Amanda, 16; Danielle, 13; and Aron, 12.

Pugilist - Politician - Prophet?

Peter King gets on his high horse over the immigration bill and does his usual bob and weave while throwing wild punches. He can't deal with the issue at hand so he lashes out. The recent attacks on the catholic church and the bishops opposed to a provision in the bill are just a smoke-screen for someone who cannot face opposition.
King does nothing without making sure he can make out somehow, King weighs in in Newsday that "I consider myself a blue-collar Catholic, and we're kind of a silent majority." King pulls the blue-collar, working-class card as he always does. He doesn't expalin what a "blue-collar catholic" means.
King continues "It's quite possible this could end up helping me politically."
And how is that? King will of course get the anti-catholic vote (which I'm not sure he really wants) and he'll get the vote of people who think his tough talk really amounts to anything.
And the prophet emerges "Maybe it shows that God's on my side."
Yes, god is on the side of the intolerant and slanderers... and the outragously arrogant.

Kings buddy, former NYFD union boss Jimmy Doyle chimes in trying to help "Pete doesn't mean the church any harm, but he's definitely fed up with them getting on their high horse and distorting his positions....Peter gets very sensitive about this stuff because he feels the church should be more understanding of him, given his opposition to abortion and his support of basic Catholic tenets."

Yes, darn them for getting on their "high horse" and standing by thier "basic catholic tenets" of taking care of the less fortunate and those in need.
The church should cut King some slack because he opposes abortion. Why is that when he won't cut the church some slack about the immigration bill?
King proves himself a hypocrite in the Newsday article "And despite his anger at Catholic leaders who attack his immigration bill, King doesn't mind every church foray into politics. He supports the right of priests to deny communion to elected officials favoring abortion rights."
So if it hurts a pro-choice Dem, its okay for the catholic church to speak out and act but when it affects him, they should shut up.
What a hypocrite.

King trotted out the abuse scandal when the church spoke out against the torture at Abu Gharib prision in Iraq. He just can't help himself.
Now where was King when his best friend former Nassau District Attorney Dennis Dillon did his best to cover for that same heirarchy?
Dillon was very slow in rooting out the crimes and even "suggested the focus on the Church for pedophilia may not be warranted"

Here is the best reason why Kings attacks are just a smoke screen. The catholic church isn't the only denomination opposed to the provision. Methodist, Episcopalian, and Jewish groups are among the cross-section of religious groups speaking out.
What does King have to say about them?
Nothing.
And that shows he is ignoring the other religious opposition and focusing his attacks on the catholic church because they do have the stain if the abuse scandal on them and that gives him his smoke screen.

The long and short of it is not about the church abuse scandal which should be dealt with in a serious manner and not used for political stunts but its about Peter King not being able to deal with an issue like an adult.

In the end, Kings bill is DOA and a compromise bill from the Senate will do away with the provision that the religious leaders opposed. Now more people are seeing King for what he is; a person unsuited for congress.
This could have all been a non-issue but the increasingly unstable congressman picked a fight when there shouldn't have been one.

Throwing His Friends Under a Bus

King is nothing but an opportunist in every way. He is willing to turn on people or organizations when it suits him.
King is always touting his "close friendship" with President Clinton to innoculate himself against attacks from Dems but then turns around and blames Clinton for 9/11 "... and 'cause Bill Clinton put it off for eight years, and that's why we had the twin towers on 9/11."
Recently the "devout catholic" who expects support from catholics and the church because he is "anti-abortion" went on a tirade against the church because they dared criticize his new legislation.
Even NYC isn't immune. When then White House Budget Director Randy Daniels said "New Yorkers treat [post-9/11 reconstruction funding] as a little money-grubbing game" just five months after 9/11 and it looked like the new Bush budget wasn't going to live up to its promise of $20billion in aid to the city, King wrote to Newsday to defend Daniels and Bush decrying the paper as being "partisan." No defense of the money for NYC. Daniels apologized and days later, Bush made sure the $20billion was in the budget.
Right after 9/11, King stopped going to Ireland and started condemning the IRA which he supported whole-heartledly for decades. And he has even thrown the whole of Ireland under the bus so he can make excuses for Bush.
When Bush was met with thousands of protestors in Belfast in 2003 and when he went to Dublin in 2004 and 10,000 protesters showed up, King said of the Irish "I don't buy that it's just anti-Bush. There's a certain unpleasant trait that the Irish have, and it's begrudgery ... and resentment towards the Americans,"
Really?
'Cause when President Clinton went to Ireland, he was greeted by tens of thousands of cheering Irish. There's even "The William Jefferson Clinton International Peace Centre."
And it's not a Democrat-Republican thing because Reagan was similarly welcomed.
The Irish have always welcomed Americans with open arms and have a high regard for this country. Irish-US relations have always been strong.
Why did King have to malign the people he supposedly champions?
Because he needed to help Bush.

The lesson here is 'never trust Peter King.'

King Having Nun of That

Sundays Newsday article is quite possibly the best insight into Kings on-going instability and shows that the emotional and psychological issues reach back into his childhood.
Those of us who attended parochial school and were under the tutelage of a nun would agree with King that some of them (not all) could be overbearing and abusive. Most of us have been able to move on with our lives. King can't.
King is blaming his recent outbursts against the catholic church on bad experiences with Nuns.
When he was a child.
50 years ago.
"I saw the nun standing behind her grab her by the hair and smash her face into the blackboard. Her nose was bleeding and the nun started talking about the family's tragedy, belittling her, telling the kid, 'Is that the best you can do? Is that the best you can do?'"
King, who co-sponsored the hard-edged border protection bill that passed the House in December, uses such stories to express his long-simmering anger at the church - and to explain why he's so disgusted with Catholic clerics who have condemned his immigration plan as inhumane."

"King says the "hundreds" of violent incidents he witnessed as a student are never far from his mind when discussing the church, even when he's talking about the seemingly disconnected topic of immigration reform.
There was the incident when King, then 12, said he watched a nun slam a yardstick across the face of a friend because the boy had a speech impediment that reduced most of his sentences to what King calls "baby talk." A few years later, King himself was slapped in the face by a nun for what he says was no apparent reason as he walked the hallway of St. Paschal High School in St. Albans.
He connects those bitter school experiences with the condemnation of his immigration stance, saying they are part of a continuum of church "arrogance ... an overbearing and oppressive sense that everything they do is right."

King is as we have been saying increasingly unstable and this little peek into his psyche just validates what we've been saying.

In his attack on the church leaders, King is using the word "arrogance." Funny that in the same article King says "Maybe it shows that God's on my side" and in a previous article King said "Stopping alien smuggling gangs is doing God's work."
This isn't arrogant?

King-Sized Tantrum

This guy shows us every day why he should not be in congress. After his immigration bill gets knocked around by Bishops, Cardinals, Ministers, and Rabbis from across the religious spectrum, he lashes out at the catholic church for being "left-wing liberals" and making a phony issue out of a provision in the bill that would make helping an illegal immigrant a felony. The bill as written makes no distinctions about humanitarian aid so religious leaders and social services groups rightly saw the bill passed by the House as a threat to the work they do.
King of course would have none of that and went out of his way to castigate and slander anyone who opposed him particularly the catholic church. King built a straw man saying those opposed to his bill supported illegal immigration and likened his bill to "gods work". Cardinal Mahony made very clear in his NYTimes op-ed piece "That does not mean that the Catholic Church encourages or supports illegal immigration. Every day in our parishes, social service programs, hospitals and schools, we witness the baleful consequences of illegal immigration. Families are separated, workers are exploited and migrants are left by smugglers to die in the desert. Illegal immigration serves neither the migrant nor the common good."

Newsday reports "King said he would fight to soften the provision against those who help illegal immigrants in a final version."

So what's the big deal? King is agreeing with the need to change the bill with an amendment but still goes on the offensive.
But what exactly is the amendment for? King keeps insisting that the attack on the bill is a phony charge.
King says in his best petulant child voice "I support the amendment because it takes away the phony issue the Catholic bishops created... Even without this amendment, no priest or nun would have been prosecuted. But if this makes them happy, fine."

So he is supporting an amendment to fix something he says doesn't need fixing because it is a "phony issue."
Is he supporting the amendment just to get the bishops to shut up? If King had any principles, he would oppose the amendment because he insists there is nothing that needs to be changed.
If it is such a "phony issue" why not continue the fight?
Maybe because King is losing the media battle. His outlandish remarks are getting alot of attention and more and more people are seeing how unstable he really is.
The best is his "But if this makes them happy, fine."
I can see him saying that with a child-like sour puss, arms crossed in defiance. King just doesn't like to be criticized and is very thin-skinned.

Somebody call him a WHAA-mbulance.

Newsday Editorial - Overheated Rhetoric

Rep. King and the church exchange blows over the immigration bill
March 28, 2006
As thousands march in the streets against an immigration bill that Rep. Peter King co-sponsored, the Seaford Republican has this frustrating sensation: "I feel like I'm shadow-boxing." King, who boxes for real, is also throwing some wild punches in this debate. What is needed on both sides is a calm dialogue and significant improvement in a bad bill.The bill is the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. Among its many features is a 700-mile fence on the border with Mexico. That idea arose on the House floor, King says, but he acknowledges that he voted for it. So did Rep. Steve Israel, a Huntington Democrat, King points out. That just makes the fence a bipartisan bad idea - an expensive one, too. King says it could cost $3 billion.
King would like some points for being a humanitarian, because hundreds of people have died trying to cross this stretch of border. Nice try, Pete, but it's hard to imagine a fence keeping out those who are desperate to get in. As one immigrant advocate put it, "Fences encourage tunnels." Desperate immigrants digging tunnels won't exactly be safer. But the fence isn't even the prime cause of the ruckus. Mostly, the fuss is about the bill's elevation of immigration violations to felonies. King says he voted to downgrade that to misdemeanors, but Democrats and right-wing Republicans voted to keep the felony language. That's ugly politics.
Beyond that, the protests focus on the addition of the word "assist" to the definition of prohibitive actions abetting illegal immigrants. King says it's aimed at fake-identification providers. But church leaders say it could criminalize their daily acts of charity. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles said that, if it becomes law, Catholics should disobey it. Swinging back wildly, King threw an over-the-top haymaker about pedophile priests - a punch he should have pulled. The bill's biggest defect is that it doesn't provide any kind of guest worker program to take account of the deep economic need for these workers. King is leaving it to the Senate to fix that. The Senate Judiciary Committee took the first steps yesterday. But much remains to be done.

King hates Newsday anyway. He'll just write a letter blasting the left-wing liberal slant of Newsday and say that they don't know what they are talking about. He won't deal with the issue, he'll just attack.

King in the Land of Make-Believe

George W. Bush was a lame-duck, destined to be one-term president right at the start of his first term. Then 19 hijackers and Osama bin Laden gave him a second chance. A 90% approval rating for just being there when we were attacked was perplexing.
Since before the election of 2004, Bushs poll number have been under 50%. Bush ecked out the smallest win in US history and got a chance to send this country further down the spiral.
In the past few months, Bush has been a steady in the mid 30's in most polls and the polls that had him higher have since fell into line.
In a NY Daily News article, Peter King divorces himself from reality and is quoted as saying "The President's view still represents 51% of the country... If we get some stability in Iraq, he can definitely come back."

51%? Really? Bush hasn't seen the number 51 in a very long time. Here are some recent "Job Approval" numbers.....

Newsweek: 3/16-17/06 Approve 36 Disapprove 58 Unsure 6
Gallup: 3/13-16/06 Approve 37 Disapprove 59 Unsure 5
FOX/Opinion Dynamics RV: 3/14-15/06 Approve 39 Disapprove 51 Unsure 11
NPR LV: 3/12-14/06 - Approve 39 Disapprove 58 Unsure 3
NBC/Wall Street Journal: 3/10-13/06 - Approve 37 Disapprove 58 Unsure 5
CNN/USA Today/Gallup: 3/10-12/06 - Approve 36 Disapprove 60 Unsure 4
CBS :3/9-12/06 - Approve 34 Disapprove 57 Unsure 9
Pew :3/8-12/06 - Approve 33 Disapprove 57 Unsure 10
AP-Ipsos: 3/6-8/06 - Approve 37 Disapprove 60
ABC/Washington Post: 3/2-5/06 - Approve 41 Disapprove 58 Unsure 1

When it comes to Iraq, Bush's approval numbers are in the 30's or worse and on the terrorism issue, Bush is sliding into the low 40's. On energy policy he's in the 20's. And when asked about the direction of the country, it's overwhelmingly bad for Bush.

It's not just Iraq that is pulling Bush down, but every aspect of the horrible job he is doing. And does King really see a turn-around in Iraq coming any time soon? Take a look at the former Yugoslavia and what happend after Titos death. Yugoslavia was composed of different ethnic groups that were barely held together by a strongman. The Yugoslav Presidency Council which was comprised of the different regional/ethnic factions began to disintergrate, Milošević started exerting Serbian nationalism and the country fell apart under the weight of ethnic wars.
Iraq is not one country. It is a land with different religious and ethnic factions like the Sunni, the Shi'a and the Kurds. Don't expect them to get along nicely too soon. The Kurds suffered under Saddams Sunni rule. Civil war in Iraq is a reality.

Sadly the brave men and women of our armed forces are stuck in the middle of this.

King vs. Catholics

Looks like King is escalating the war of words against the catholic church over his immigration bill. Now keep in mind that bi-polar Pete has said he will work to change the law to strike the felony for aid groups like the catholic for helping illegal immigrants.
King is trying to counter Sen. Clinton invoking chistian doctrine by saying catholic bishops "should spend more time protecting little boys from pedophile priests." and "Stopping alien smuggling gangs is doing God's work. These people who are supposed to be speaking for God, saying this [the bill] is a sin, and they should go to confession,"
The fact is the complaints about the bill aren't about "smuggling gangs." King knows this but is trying to distract from the real issue.
Bishop Thomas Wenski, of Orlando, Fla is rightly offended that Kings only retort to his critics is to bring up the child molestation probelms in the catholic church. While that certainly is an issue to be dealt with, invoking it in this debate is as Bishop Wenski says "To content himself at taking cheap shots at the bishops shows that he is unable to engage us on the issues - because his position defies logic and certainly does not represent the 'compassionate conservatism' of his party's leader,"

Roger Cardinal Mahony of Los Angeles and Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio have both said they would not "obey any laws that criminalize illegal aliens or the social service providers who help them."

In the New York Daily News, King escalates his rhetoric by saying "The Catholic Church is being totally fraudulent on this. If Cardinal Mahony spent as much time turning over information on pedophile priests as telling priests to violate the law on this, California would be a lot better than it is today.....They're being totally un-Christian because they're talking about this being an evil bill, a meanspirited bill, that we're doing all this as subterfuge to lock them up.... Now, we could lock them up for other reasons - with what they did with pedophilia and what they did to abuse kids in Catholic schools, we could have locked them up years ago."
Is King making vague threats about locking the Bishop and cardinal up? Is he trying to shut them up on this issue?

Cardinal Mahony in a NY Times op-ed stated the issue pretty clearly which is why King is so afraid and can only go on the attack. Mahony writes "Some supporters of the bill have even accused the church of encouraging illegal immigration and meddling in politics. But I stand by my statement. Part of the mission of the Roman Catholic Church is to help people in need. It is our Gospel mandate, in which Christ instructs us to clothe the naked, feed the poor and welcome the stranger. Indeed, the Catholic Church, through Catholic Charities agencies around the country, is one of the largest nonprofit providers of social services in the nation, serving both citizens and immigrants.

Providing humanitarian assistance to those in need should not be made a crime, as the House bill decrees. As written, the proposed law is so broad that it would criminalize even minor acts of mercy like offering a meal or administering first aid.

Current law does not require social service agencies to obtain evidence of legal status before rendering aid, nor should it. Denying aid to a fellow human being violates a law with a higher authority than Congress — the law of God.

That does not mean that the Catholic Church encourages or supports illegal immigration. Every day in our parishes, social service programs, hospitals and schools, we witness the baleful consequences of illegal immigration. Families are separated, workers are exploited and migrants are left by smugglers to die in the desert. Illegal immigration serves neither the migrant nor the common good."

So when King invokes "Gods work" as something the bill does, he is just trying to change the subject. King can't debate the issue so he goes on the attack.

This isn't the first time he has attacked religious people because they disagree with him. During the Social Security debate he said of an an inter-faith group of religous leaders that opposed privitization "God forgive them for they know not what they do. I base my decision on facts, reason and informed social conscious and not left-wing pseudo-theology."

King has a history of going on the attack when cornered by his own ignorance. The self-styled pugilist likes a fight. The problem for himn is that he keeps landing blows on himself.

Increasingly Unstable

King is up to his old antics again, charging full on attacking like a whirling dervish.
There has been opposition to Kings proposed anti-immigration bill most recently from Senator Hillary Clinton who said yesterday "It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures, This bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself."
The problem Senator Clinton and many in the religious community see is that under the proposed law, anyone assisting an illegal alien would be subject to criminal charges. A soup kitchen or outreach program would be in trouble if they help someone here illegally.
This is not about the illegal immigrant issue but about helping those that are here.

King in his usual bluster, sounding as unstable as ever responded "I hope Hillary's a better senator than a theologian. She's facilitating clerics who have a martyrdom complex and slandering good people such as myself. She's actually an accessory to a slander and a calumny."

Wow. Even a basic understanding of christian doctrine would be enough to know that helping the poor and less fortunate is a basic tenent.
King lashes out at members of the clergy who are doing good deeds. Instead of debating on the issue, King says catholic leaders "should spend more time protecting little boys from pedophile priests."
He tells the NYTimes "This is the left wing of the Catholic Church — these are the frustrated social workers," said Mr. King, who described himself as a practicing Catholic. "They're giving an incentive for more illegals to come here. I don't think it's right."
King is a "practicing catholic?" If he were a "practicing catholic" and knew anything about the church, other than opposition to abortion and gay marriage, the catholic church tenents are unabashedly socially liberal. Kings attacks on Clinton about theology shows he hasn't the first clue about the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels and his disciples in the New Testament.

King pulled the same thing when the catholic church came out in opposition of the Bush-Iraq War and spoke out about torture and abuse at Abu Gharib prison "If there's anyone in the world who has no right to speak on sexual abuse, it's the Vatican. This is the height of hypocrisy." Exactly how is that an excuse for what happened at the prison?

King complains of being slandered but has no problem doing it unto others. What was that in Luke about doing unto others again? Perhaps the theologian, practicing catholic King knows.
He also uses the $2 word "calumny." Does he know what that means? King said "slander and a calumny." Just for the record, "calumny" is just another word for slander. King just wants to sound like he knows big words.

The funny part of this whole thing is that King supported an amendment that would have gotten rid of the felony provision but then turned around and voted for the legislation after the amendment failed.

Port Insecurity: King Fails Us Again

King came out swinging on the perfect election-year issue... Port Security. King opposed the Dubai World deal to take over administration of major U.S. ports. King publically broke with the Bush administration and sided with ultra-lefty, pinko commie Chuck Schumer of the "I hate America" Democratic party.
Sense any sarcasm there?
Chuck Schumer has been on the fore-front of the port security issue for years now and has been pointing out that funding is woefully inadequte. Only 5% of all incoming containers are inspected.
A few years ago, Schumer was pushing for more funding and candidate Kerry brought the issue up during the 2004 election. What was Bush's reaction back then? He said "How are we going to pay for it?" Great answer, right?
While busting the U.S. treasury for his misadventures in Iraq, Bush ignores security here at home.
King was chairman of the Emergency Preperadeness sub-commitee (see how well we were prepared or Katrina) and is now chairman of the full Homeland Security committee but had been silent on the ports issue.
We are entering the 2006 mid-term election season and King knows he is vulnerable to a strong opponent. What resonates better with voters than "security" issues?
King hopes to ride the wave of his undeserved "maverick" reputation to re-election. Too bad he votes 92% of the time with Tom Delay.
What a "maverick."
We all saw the public outcry over the Dubai World deal but what has passed into the night without press coverage is the vote on Thursday, March 16th against increasing funds for PORT SECURITY.
Take a wild guess who voted against the amendment?
That's right, Rep. Peter T. King.
The amendment proposed by Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN) included (hat tip to Think Progress)
" $300 million to enable U.S. customs agents to inspect high-risk containers at all 140 overseas ports that ship directly to the United States. Current funding only allows U.S. customs agents to operate at 43 of these ports.

– $400 million to place radiation monitors at all U.S. ports of entry. Currently, less than half of U.S. ports have radiation monitors.

– $300 million to provide backup emergency communications equipment for the Gulf Coast."

The amendment was defeated in an almost party-line vote 210-208. A few republicans agreed that we do need more money for port security. King didn't
The amendment H.AMDT.733 (A033) was for HR4939 - Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery, 2006.
The amendment clearly falls under both "Defense" and "War on Terror" but Peter King just doesn't care.
King's vote against Port Security can be found here, Roll Call Vote #56. There are no other plans to increase funding for Port Security.
King (NY) - NO

Housekeeping note: We've been a little busy and took some time off to recharge our batteries.
More info on Kings 2003 vote against Port Security is coming up.