Not that our adversaries will take a deep breath and do a bit of thinking . The most usual of suspects, Carolyn McCarthy, is on the home stretch to orgasm with her new opportunity to decide what sorts of rights should be sacrificed in the wake of the Tucson madness. Right now.
Good politics, there, Congresswoman. Your plan to get your new bill filed today or tomorrow represents a sterling example of trying to draft carefully thought-out legislation.
And then, in the same Politico report, there's:
Pennsylvania Rep. Robert Brady, a Democrat from Philadelphia, told CNN that he also plans to take legislative action. He will introduce a bill that would make it a crime for anyone to use language or symbols that could be seen as threatening or violent against a federal official, including a member of Congress.
Which is ill-advised unless we decide we must indict a certain high federal official for promulgating a symbol of death -- officially defined as such by federal authorities -- from and in the White House.
Photo credit:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/craxxi/3287463155/
2 comments:
That article is fraught with Fail.
“I’ve seen no evidence that he falls into those categories. It’s the same thing as this guy at Virginia Tech,” said Horwitz. “We can do a much better job checking people’s mental health background.”
No, it's not the same thing. Dude at VA Tech had been adjudicated nutty. The guy in AZ, as far as I've seen in the reports, was just private sector nutty. No judges involved.
Then there's the part about the magazine that, according to the article, is only for hunting people. When did it become okay to regulate based on need?
*sigh*
I kinda figured the antis would use this to springboard their legislative agenda, but I had no idea they'd have the audacity to move in while the bodies were still warm.
tweaker
>>private sector nutty<<
:) :)
Post a Comment