With the announcement that Beau Biden will not seek the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by his father, Vice President Joe Biden, that seat is seemingly ripe for the taking by Representative Mike Castle (R-DE).
Biden’s decision dealt a serious blow to Democratic hopes of retaining the seat and puts the party at a decided disadvantage against Republican Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), the popular former governor and veteran congressman who has comfortably won reelection since first winning his House seat in 1992.
Joe Biden has been a longtime advocate advocate of such "gun control" measures as bans of so-called "assault weapons," laws to close the mythical "gun show loophole," etc., and there is little reason to believe that his son has fallen far from that diseased tree.
"Well," one might think; "any Republican ought to be better than that--the party platform explicitly endorses the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental right of the individual to keep and bear arms."
Unfortunately, Congressman Castle seems not to have read that part of the platform. He is, in fact, the primary sponsor of H.R. 2324, to ban private sales at gun shows, and his legislative history shows nothing to separate him from Joe Biden. He is also a co-sponsor to Representative Peter King's (R-NY) H.R. 2159, which would empower the Attorney General to unilaterally declare anyone he wishes a "suspected terrorist," and deny him the ability to purchase firearms.
In Illinois, Republican Congressman Mark Kirk seems poised to win the Republican primary for President Obama's old Senate seat (feckless Roland Burriss is not seeking reelection), and has Democrats worried. Like Castle, Kirk is an avowed gun-hater, having introduced an "assault weapon" ban bill of his own in 2008, and is very much onboard with with NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg's anti-gun agenda. He is also a co-sponsor of the above anti-gun bills.
Frankly, without even knowing the "gun control" positions of any Democrats either Kirk or Castle might face in a general election, I submit that no Democrat could do any more damage to gun rights than either of them. I would, in fact, take that further, and argue that Democrat victories for those seats, no matter how extreme their anti-gun positions might be, would be preferrable to expanding the ranks of anti-gun extremist Republicans in the U.S. Senate. The Republican Party, currently at least pays lip service to respecting gun rights--rewarding the anti-gun Quislings would serve only to send the message to the GOP that gun rights can be safely ignored, or even trampled.
For any Republican whose loyalty is to liberty and the Constitution, rather than to party affiliation, working for the defeat of those two Senate candidates is not "cutting off your nose to spite your face"--it's excising a cancer.
Atlanta: Ed Stone | Austin: Howard Nemerov | Boston: Ron Bokleman | Charlotte: Paul Valone | Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn | Cleveland: Daniel White | DC: Mike Stollenwerk | Denver: Dan Bidstrup | Fort Smith: Steve D. Jones | Grand Rapids: Skip Coryel | Knoxville: Liston Matthews | Los Angeles: John Longenecker | Minneapolis: John Pierce | National: David Codrea | Phoenix: Douglas Little | Seattle: Dave Workman | St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann | Wisconsin: Gene German
Comments
Here in Ohio, we have a similar problem. Gov. Strickland (a democrat)tends to support gun rights, while his challenger, republican Kasich, doesn't. For the first time in over a decade, I'm going to vote for a democrat. Who'd a thunk it?
dumpdc.wordpress.com has some pressing arguments regarding gun rights and freedom.
Voting for either a Democrat or Republican is throwing away your vote. In fact, you are better off to keep your vote in your pocket and never spend it at all. It's the only way to avoid wasting it.
Rinos must go in the next election also.
R
Thanks again Kurt Hofmann for yet another excellent article.
Delaware Constitution--“A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreational use.”
Illinois Constitution--”Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Since the RotptKABA has been so regulated that even in the least-regulated areas of the Nation ’the people’ are only ’allowed’, their ‘Right’ to Keep and Bear certain types of firearms and only in places not PROHIBITED BY LAW…
Worth at least a casual mention that any ‘representative’ from any State to the Federal Congress that has a ’Right’ to Keep and Bear Arms provision in their respective State Constitution, and proposes any ‘Rights’-infringing legislation from the Federal level, is in violation of laws written to prohibit exactly such acts in TWO Constitutions.
Their own State AND the U.S. Constitution.
Kent McManigal says: “Voting for either a Democrat or Republican is throwing away your vote. In fact, you are better off to keep your vote in your pocket and never spend it at all. It's the only way to avoid wasting it.”
The Fed. Gov’t under the Dep’t of Treasonry by coercion, threat, fear of incarceration and actual use of force by armed government minions, steals money from the personal incomes of those still foolish enough to work for a living and forces compliance to file personal tax forms without any constitutional authority to do so or any written law stating this requirement. The Federal Reserve isn’t a ‘reserve’ and isn’t ‘federal’. It’s a privately owned bank that loans money to gov’t at interest and most all taxes illegally and unconstitutionally collected from personal incomes is consumed as interest debt and doesn’t pay for a single gov't-provided service.
As such, I pay dearly for the right to vote for whoever best represents me to the mobocracy of organized thieves.
Everyman- No one can "represent" another person any more than they can eat, breathe, or reproduce for another person. Only YOU are fit to represent yourself. It is your human right. Grab hold of it and don't let go.
Trying to look at the glass being half full - if an anti-gun Democrat is replaced by an anti-gun Republican, that would still help Republicans getting back to controlling the senate. As long as the Republican leaders don't allow anti-gun bills to come up for a vote, I still see that as an improvement.
Choose the pro-gun candidates when you can, but think about what I said. Democrats have not been able to bring up anti-gun measures because enough conservative democrats were elected that helped them get their majority.
I think Rob in Ohio is correct. I always vote for the pro gun candidate with a *proven* Second Amendment record. Some republicans like Kirk and Castle are RINO's and not conservatives. We don't need people in office that don't know and support the 1st 10 amendments to our constitution.
I will vote 3rd party long before I vote for another RINO. Don't tell me about how it is voting for "the other guy" or it's "a wasted vote". Anyone who says these things doesn't understand the true meaning of voting or democracy.
"Vote your conscience, though you may vote alone, you will cherish the sweet reflection that your vote is never lost." --Patrick Henry
"For the first time in my life, I voted FOR something instead of AGAINST something." -- Radnex
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!