To quote the Spartans: If. “Gun owners will have to carry liability insurance if a bill introduced Friday by New York House Democrat Rep. Carolyn Maloney successfully makes its way through Congress.” And I could be the next High King of Ireland, if the government there switched to a monarchy and decided that I was the true heir to the O’Connor. …Which I could be. You don’t actually know that I’m not, right?
Via Instapundit, which rightly notes that this is all about progressive Democrats signalling what they lust for. In this particular case, they really and truly still want to keep people from owning guns. Never trust them on this. Never trust them on this.
[UPDATE]: Welcome, Instapundit readers.
If, like Dan Riehl, you were curious at Joe Trippi’s sudden announcement that he had to take responsibility for other people’s sock-puppetry:
First, that no matter how long my association with the blogging community in fact because of that long association – it is even more important that I disclose any professional relationship with any candidate or issue I blog about or comment on.
[snip – and I’m including the previous paragraph because it’ll be important later]
But once I did it became clear to me that interns and a few staff who are my responsibility did create seven DailyKos accounts – two of which were never used but five of which were used to comment and post diaries here for the same candidates I was working for, sockpuppeting the same things I was saying here and elsewhere. This is so unacceptable that I cannot believe it happened – but it did.
…well, it’s because Trippi violated professional ethics by lying about his paid relationship with Rep Carolyn Maloney (D, NY); he had claimed to not be working for her campaign on June 10th, and it turns out that his firm had started getting paid on June 5th (H/T: dKos, who was quite surly about it, too). Hence the sudden concern over ‘sock puppets’ (individuals whose job it is to fake agreement and excitement at websites via posting under multiple usernames; see Greenwald, Glenn) and ‘astroturfing’ (creating a false impression of grassroots support for an issue via a coordinated campaign; see Journolist). Trippi’s been caught out on the second, and there’s probably evidence coming up that will show that his staff were heavily involved in the first on Congresswoman Maloney’s behalf; hence, the ‘acceptance of responsibility’ by blaming anonymous staffers. Continue reading Joe Trippi confesses sock-puppetry, but not astroturfing for Carolyn Maloney.
It’ll clearly happen after a dramatic breaking with the administration this fall over foreign policy.
Bill Clinton to raise money for NY Dem challenger
WASHINGTON – In a slap at President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton will headline a fundraiser for a New York congresswoman challenging White House-backed Sen. Kristen Gillibrand in the state’s Democratic primary.
Clinton has not endorsed in the race, but his efforts to help Rep. Carolyn Maloney could be seen as a snub to Gillibrand and the Obama White House. Matt McKenna, a spokesman for Clinton, said he will be attending a July 20 fundraiser in New York.
(H/T: Hot Air)
Hey, it’s as good an answer as any other, right? Personally, I’d consider Clinton a trade-up, myself.
Crossposted to RedState.
This is funny for two reasons:
Three Potential Challengers Jointly Rap Gillibrand on Guns
The three House Democrats who are talking openly of challenging Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) next year joined together Wednesday to tout gun control legislation that they said highlights the appointed Senator’s shaky record on the issue.
Reps. Carolyn McCarthy, Carolyn Maloney and Steve Israel teamed up for a Capitol Hill news conference on the No Fly, No Buy Act, which would bar people from buying guns if their names are on the Transportation Security Administration’s “no fly list” of suspected terrorists.
While none would confirm that they are running for Senate, their willingness to appear together and tweak Gillibrand suggested that they could put together a potent coalition if one decides to run against her and the others endorse the challenger.
The first reason is, Gillibrand’s getting a really quick lesson in the field of Just How Much Heresy Is Acceptable For A Democratic Senator. Answer? Not all that much. Certainly not when it comes to the field of gun rights, which should be a comfort to whichever GOP candidates we run next year*. As for the second reason… imagine how these three particular Musketeers are going to act towards each other next year if it ends up that Gillibrand is as vulnerable as Murtha or Dodd. They’ll make Kilkenny Cats look like symbiotes.
That’d be dumb of them? So would accidentally sending your primary opponent an inadvertent notification that you’re going to be an obstructionist. So what’s your point?
*Two Senate elections in NY, thanks to the replacement. I can’t imagine that the NRA’s going to be so chintzy as give to one and not the other. Even if the other is facing “Do what you have to do” Schumer.
Crossposted to RedState.