
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the D.C. Handgun ban case, District of Columbia v. Heller, this week.
A decision isn't expected until the end of the Court's term in June. Will we get a definitive statement on the meaning of the Second Amendment?
Via Instapundit, here's a recent poll from USA Today on where Americans stand on the issue:
Nearly three out of four Americans — 73% — believe the Second Amendment spells out an individual right to own a firearm, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll of 1,016 adults taken Feb. 8-10. Yet for decades, federal judges have seen the Constitution differently, allowing a range of gun-control measures imposed by governments seeking to curb gun violence."
TalkLeft is a strong supporter of the belief that the Second Amendment conveys an individual right to bear arms.
(36 comments) Permalink :: Comments
For the past week, I've refused to allow comments about Rev. Jeremiah Wright because the comments section became filled with accusations about racism and this site doesn't allow such accusations, name-calling or personal attacks. I just didn't want to spend the time monitoring comments when I could be spending that time blogging or on other activities. I still don't.
But, I'm hoping the emotionalism has died down and I'm now willing to give readers a chance to express their views, so long as they don't call people racists or engage in personal attacks on each other or public figures.
This is an experiment. It's an open thread where all topics are welcome. Let's see what happens. I hope it stays civil.
Update: Comments well over 200, our usual limit. Time to close the thread. Thanks everyone.
(239 comments) Permalink :: Comments

Attorney General Michael Mukasey was in London speaking to a group at the London School of Economics. After his speech, and speaking for himself only, he said he he personally opposed the death penalty for the 9/11 detainees at Guantanamo. He gave an analogy.
"I kind of hope they don't get it," Mukasey said after a speech at the London School of Economics. "Because many of them want to be martyrs, and it's kind of like the conversation … between the sadist and the masochist.""The masochist says hit me and the sadist says no, so I am kind of hoping they don't get it," he said.
Mukasey noted that the military commission trials at Gitmo are being conducted by the Defense Department, not the Justice Department, although DOJ is cooperating with them.
Law professor Doug Berman at Sentencing Law and Policy is outraged at Mukasey's comments. I'm not. [More...]
(12 comments, 836 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
By Big Tent Democrat
About mail in primaries, David Axelrod said:
[O]bviously there are concerns about a mail-in vote. I mean, there are concerns about eligibility, ballot security[.](Emphasis mine.) Never mind that Barack Obama is a proponent of mail in balloting. It gets funny when Hillary Clinton is concerned about voter eligibility and signature verification. This top rated DKos diary claims attempted disenfranchisement by Clinton. Citing the Dallas Morning News:
(96 comments, 194 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
By Big Tent Democrat
Speaking for me only.
Nancy Pelosi argues for thwarting the will of the people:
Political prognosticators give Clinton more of a chance of catching, or even surpassing, Obama in the national popular vote but Pelosi argued that super delegates should follow the pledged-delegate, not the popular-vote, leader.
"But what if one candidate has won the popular vote and the other candidate has won the delegates?" asked Stephanopoulos. "But it's a delegate race," Pelosi replied. "The way the system works is that the delegates choose the nominee."
(Emphasis supplied.) It is a delegate race. Neither candidate will have won enough selected delegates to secure the nomination. The super delegates will decide this nomination. Pelosi argues that considering the will of the people is illegitimate. In my opinion, Nancy Pelosi has declared herself illegitimate as an honest broker in this race. She clearly is an Obama supporter. Everyone knows this. And her arguments go beyond anything I have heard from Obama or any of his surrogates. She has been awful. She is no elder statesman. She is a hack. And not a particularly good one.
(162 comments) Permalink :: Comments
An astonishing 9 million people voted in California's Feb. 5 primary.
Late Saturday, the state Democratic Party announced the final votes had been tabulated. Results:
Hillary Rodham Clinton won 204 delegates and Barack Obama won 166 delegates.
In the popular vote, Clinton beat Obama by 8 points. She received 51.5 percent to his 43.2 percent.
9 million total voters, 4.7 or more million of them Dems , 8% more of whom voted for Hillary ...that's a lot of votes.
(68 comments) Permalink :: Comments
Today's Iowa county assembly results side by side with caucus results are here (pdf).
Since the MSM seems only to report how Obama did, I'll take a look at how Hillary did.
In the January caucus results, Hillary had 29.47% of the vote. Today she got 32.08%
Out of 99 counties, Hillary gained in almost all of them. She lost more than one delegate in only these 4 counties:
- Woodbury (lost 4)
- Scott (lost 8)
- Marshall (lost 1.5)
- Cerro Gordo (lost 2)
Hillary gained more than 4 delegates over her January numbers in these counties (there are too many counties to list where she won between a fraction of 1 and 3 more delegates):
- Dubuque (won 11)
- Polk (won 6 1/2)
- Webster (won 4 1/2)
More...
(38 comments, 266 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
Remember Dems for a Day? Here's the new ad that went up on Barack Obama's website yesterday, telling voters if they are Indpendents or Republicans they must register as Dems by March 24.
Salon has more on the Obama's very orchestrated and intentional campaign to have Republicans and Indpendents register as Dems so he can be our party's nominee. [More...]
(145 comments, 460 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
By Big Tent Democrat
Adam Nagourney writes:
While many superdelegates said they intended to keep their options open as the race continued to play out over the next three months, the interviews suggested that the playing field was tilting slightly toward Mr. Obama in one potentially vital respect. Many of them said that in deciding whom to support, they would adopt what Mr. Obama’s campaign has advocated as the essential principle: reflecting the will of the voters.
(Emphasis supplied.) Ah, the question is begged - what do we mean by the "will of the voters?" Obama means the selected delegate count. Most normal people say the popular vote.
More . . .
(121 comments, 188 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
By Big Tent Democrat
Democrat Barack Obama expanded his fragile lead in delegates over rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday, picking up at least seven delegates as Iowa activists took the next step in picking delegates to the national convention. Half the 14 delegates allocated to John Edwards on the basis of caucus night projections switched Saturday and Obama got most, if not all, of them.
I can only laugh at this caucus system. I understand Clinton picked up delegates this way in Colorado. The whole system is a travesty.
(135 comments) Permalink :: Comments
By Big Tent Democrat
It is still more than a month until the Pennsylvania primary, but what the heck, let's look at the demographics of Pennsylvania as compared to who voted in Ohio and other states.
More . . .
(122 comments, 493 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
By Big Tent Democrat
Obama is not a part of any progressive fights, so there's no independent organizing going on on his behalf from people who actually understand the right-wing media and how it operates. He's decided he's a post-partisan politician, and when a politician makes that choice, it's not just a disincentive for partisans to fight for that person. It becomes structurally impossible to fight for him because the incentives get all out of whack.
I wonder if that will be true? I have my doubts. It is an untested thesis to be sure since Obama is a Media Darling with his very own cable network to support him, not to mention 99% of the progressive blogosphere. There has been no need to defend him. Heck, Obama has had no need to go really negative, as the Media and the Left blogs have done it for him when it comes to Clinton.
But if Obama is the nominee, do we believe Obama won't be defended by the Left blogs? I find that hard to believe. Heck, I know I will.
(162 comments) Permalink :: Comments
| << Previous 12 | Next 12 >> |






