Skip to comments.Kaloogian and Morrow Have Perfect Pro-Gun Voting Records in Sacramento
Posted on 04/05/2006 5:14:57 PM PDT by NordP
Important Information for the Special Congressional Election on April 11 4/5/06 2:02 PM NRA-ILA
This Tuesday, April 11th, there is a special election to nominate candidates to succeed former Representative Duke Cunningham in the 50th congressional district of California. We have been receiving inquiries about the position on gun control by candidates in this open seat race. As you consider which candidate to support in this special election on April 11, we hope that this information about some of the candidates will be timely and helpful to your decision and voting.
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION
While the National Rifle Association has not endorsed a candidate in this special election, we wish to provide you with some important information about some of the candidates.
Former state Assemblyman Howard Kaloogian and current state Senator Bill Morrow have perfect pro-gun voting records in Sacramento.
By contrast, during his three-term tenure in Congress, Brian Bilbray voted against the NRA position ten different times on various bills and amendments, including against repealing the Clinton gun ban on semi-automatic firearms and for legislation to end gun shows as we know them. As he did in 1994, Bilbray has again this year provided pro-gun responses to our federal candidate questionnaire.
Based on his voting record in Congress, Bilbray was rated a "F" by the NRA in 2000, 1998 and 1996. In addition, along with several anti-gun Members of Congress including Senator Dianne Feinstein, Bilbray attended a White House Rose Garden rally on March 16, 2000 at which Bill Clinton pushed for federal legislation to regulate gun shows out of existence. Bilbray was quoted as saying that "reasonable gun control is not a threat to our constitutional rights."
I didn't insult you. I just strongly disagreed with you.
So don't insult me.
Also, can you provide another example of an allegedly made-up endorsement? If it was only one, and not nearly the most important one, I think I'll give him a pass.
(Did you ever make one or two mistakes in a year?)
What I meant, it should have been obvious, was that polarizing Republicans versus Democrats is part of the job.
Many of the current problems in Washington are due precisely to the compulsion of many Republicans to work "across the aisle." There has been too much of that, and not enough polarization. The Democrats don't deserve to be worked with, and when we do work with them on major issues, three things happen. One, the general public gets confused. Two, real Republicans get demoralized. Three, we make a deal that favors the Democrats and which they dishonorably break anyway.
Wake up and smell the coffee.
Whatever you meant to say, Kaloogian and Bilbray are both passe, ineffective public servants. Morrow has been and still is in the trenches WINNING battles instead of WHINING like Kaloogian and Bilbray on why anyone should trust their "form" of leadership.
Morrow doesn't "cut deals" across the aisle... you need to brew a fresh pot of coffee and look at the real records of each of these candidates... a casual inquiry and search would tell you who the superior candidate is: BILL MORROW wins hands down.
Why do you think smarmy little sneaks from other campaigns have stolen most all of Morrow's campaign signs? Every other candidate's signs are left standing. It's because the other candidates know and fear Morrow's stellar record and high name recognition in the 50th and they are trying to harm his campaign by this illegal activity of sign-stealing. BTW: campaign signs energize volunteers but only bring between 1% to 2% of the vote. Morrow is known as the only one who truly has a chance of taking Busby out.
Are you brewing that fresh pot of coffee yet?
The difference is Howard has an A rating, Bill Morrow an A+ rating, the difference being that Morrow actually carried legislation for them. Howard neveer got any legislation passed the entire time he was in the Assembly. Morrow did. The difference was one of temperment. Howard likes to throw bombs and the limelite. Bill Morrow just quietly works to get the job done and doesn't care who gets the credit. An example would be the aerial tankers we now have stationed in San Diego 12 months a year. Bill Morrow asked the CDF not to moth ball them up north during the off season but to keep them here. They didn't want to so he "proposed" legislation to bring it about. They gave in because they didn't want a legislated mandate. Bill didn't do a press conference. He didn't run around looking for a camera to get in front of. He just did the right thing. Bill Morrow has held fast to his principals without wavering. His character and integrity are beyond reproach (as is the way he has run his campaign Howard), and his temperment makes him much better suited to be a representative than a grass roots activist.
Do you want to be excited or do you want a proven record with character and integrity. Morrow is not out there looking for the limelite, just to serve. That is called being a statesman.
What do you want results or resentment?
Oh yeah, and talk about who is still in the trenches fighting for our American sovereignty... I just got hold of this news release from Morrow:
For Immediate Release
Contact: Rhianna Bauer
Date: April 7, 2006
Phone: (209) 743-8130
Morrow Demands Attorney General Respond to Allegations About Subversive Campaign to Annex California Back to Mexico
Carlsbad - Senator Bill Morrow (R-Carlsbad) today announced he has requested State Attorney General Bill Lockyer to provide a formal Attorney Generals Opinion on matters relating to mounting concerns over a growing sedition movement and the related illegal use of public property for illegal immigration rallies.
Morrow said, During my lifetime, it seemed the United States was always abroad, as we are today in Iraq and Afghanistan, defending the sovereignty and rights of other peoples. It never dawned on me that in my own lifetime Id have to help defend my own state and nations sovereignty here at home. But now, for the first time, I sense a real concern about that.
We recently witnessed hundreds of thousands of people, many of them American citizens, marching in support of illegal behavior and advocating anarchy, said Morrow. Im gravely concerned that our great state of California and nation are nearing the edge of an abyss we really dont want to approach.
Morrow concluded, But one thing I learned as a Marine is that you never stop fighting, not ever, no matter what the cost. And this letter to the Attorney General is just the start.
Ive asked the Attorney General to look into some very serious matters regarding the sovereignty and safety of our states people and lands, and adherence to our laws, said Morrow. Im making the letter available to the public and will let it speak for itself.
# # #
As we speak, howard has just sent out an e mail poliical hit piece stating Howard Kaloogian Supported by Conservative Leaders with a picture and quote of Tom Mc Clintock saying
"Howard Kaloogian has distinguished
himself as one of the most principled, courageous and steadfast conservative leaders in California."
Senator Tom McClintock
Mc Clintock has asked that his photograph be taken off Howard's web site because it was an implied endorsment. Now he is at it again using a false endorsement to garner votes. The guy has no shame!
The other side resents us anyway. They would have more respect (in the sense of healthy fear) toward us if we showed more guts.
As for resentment on our side, that exists already. Confrontation is one constructive means, and sometimes an absolutely necessary means, of channeling that resentment into something constructive -- and of giving our people hope. Without hope, constructive results are hard to achieve.
Spirited confrontation helps on all levels. Of course, it must be done properly.
Those issues about Kaloogian do bother me.
It was down to the two of them and now it look like my husband and I are voting Morrow.
I am not dissing Morrow. I have been impressed by Kaloogian, but admittedly, less so now after reading some of the stuff on this thread.
I don't think Kaloogian can be held responsible for sign-stealing even if it's his supporters doing it. However, I find it as outrageous as you do, especially if the signs are placed on private property. I saw much stealing of Bush signs from private yards in '04, and it always angered me. Even stealing of Kerry signs would have angered me. It's just out of bounds.
Howard can be held responsible for the tenor of the campaign. If we feel that character and integrity and holding to your principles is the most distinguishing thing that defines a statesman and representative, then look at Howard's campaign (and endorsements..and I don't mean the many that Howard has had to retract) as opposed to Morrow's. Howard is shooting himself in the foot if he ever decides to run for another public office. His spots can change, but not in this race.
Replies to a couple of your posts.
1. Howard is the real back-stabber. He has publicly stated that "God has anointed him for this seat and that it's his turn." He has been approached by several conservative leaders in the County to denounce nasty lies against his "friend" Morrow - who mentored Howard years ago and helped him win his first term in the Assembly - Howard refused to denounce the lies because it was found that he was the perpetrator and distributor of many of them. If he's "anointed by God" he wouldn't have to use dirty campaign tactics to try to win.
2. I certainly never intended to insult you. Sorry for that. That is not my style nor intent. I just truly want you to know Morrow - the man, the former Marine, the registered Minuteman, the life-long hunter, fisherman, outdoorsman who has stated that if they ever come for his guns, they will have to pry them from his "cold dead fingers"; the man to whom the NRA and CRPA go to for floor drills to defeat looney gun control legislation and whom the CRPA has strongly endorsed... Kaloogian's brief elected stint in the state legislature was not distinguished as he was marginalized for being too controversial to get anything constructive done.
If Morrow is a member of the Minutemen, that's impressive. The other things you cite in his background (ex-Marine, hunter) are unimportant in terms of choosing a congressman. While it's great that he's a staunch opponent of gun control, frankly there isn't much danger of more federal gun control legislation being enacted in the near-future. Can you tell me if Morrow is articulate on issues other than guns, and if he's willing to slam the Democrats publicly, as most Republican officeholders aren't?
I'd still give Kaloogian points, whatever his faults may be, for speaking out against the Democrats. We need much, much more of that, now. Not every congressman has to be effective in the conventional sense.
Glad our discussion has become more civil.
Re: Morrow demands to Lockyer,
Great stuff. Thanks for posting.
"Morrow is not out there looking for the limelight, just to serve. That is called being a statesman."
I can't agree with this. "Just to serve" is exactly what the first President Bush did. If I remember right, he used these terms "serve" and "service" all the time in reference to his motivations. It isn't good enough. "Serving" is passive and it begs the question: "WHAT are you serving, and how well?"
Looking for the limelight does sound bad. But sometimes egotism is the motivation that gets politicians onto real issues and makes them articulate and aggressive about them. People who don't want any credit can get a lot done in non-confrontational environments like business, or a church, or a community project. In confrontational environments like Sacramento and Washington, modesty of this passive kind is a ticket to oblivion. While the modest guy can be effective at getting roads paved or something like that, the public official's, and especially the "statesman's" responsibilities are much higher than that.
It takes a lot of spirit and anger to challenge the Democratic tyranny in any serious way. Much of that comes from ambition. Ambition sometimes brings with it an unseemly pushiness for the limelight. But that in and of itself isn't a major sin. The question is whether it is ALSO sincere, whether the person seeking the limelight brings good publicity to our cause, makes citizens think if they're not already with us, and encourages and motivates those people who are already with us.
Real statesman are people who see farther than other people and who take risks in order to create change or to preserve things that wouldn't otherwise be preserved. They are rare, and they are often egotistical.
Re: not wanting credit being coupled with ineffectiveness in partisan environments, Ronald Reagan may have been a partial exception, but he was exceptional in several other ways, too.
Let me add this to my last post:
I do not mean to say that Morrow is ineffective, lacking in spirit or anything like that. He may be excellent in every way. But I hope he isn't the too-quiet, "just to serve" type who Gary is implying.
I'm saying that looking for the limelight can be a very good thing, if you're also looking for results. And results doesn't necessarily mean a bill being passed. It might mean strengthening morale on your side, and educating your side, things we Republicans badly need.
I'm also saying that the guy or gal who "just wants to serve" is not a statesman and does not belong in difficult environments. He/she belongs on a city council in a town that doesn't have any real problems. Or on a church board, or a playground committee or something.
The big leagues are another story and call for something more complicated and less homey.
Howard got nothing done during his stint in the Assembly. A grassroots bomb thrower can do a lot of good at the right time as in getting people fired up and involved, but there has to be the right temperment. You need the respect of your peers, even when they disagree with your positions. We do need representatives in Washington with integrity and character. If we don't know them personally, we only can go by their actions, and the way Howard has run his campaign does not represent the qualities of character we need in Washington.
We have to go by their overall record in public life, not just by one campaign. I give Kaloogian a lot of credit for his leadership role in the recall. Most Republican "leaders" were on the sidelines until it was obvious that the recall would qualify for the ballot. I also like Kaloogian's leadership in the support-our-troops group -- its name escapes me at the moment.
I agree that character is important, but am not persuaded that Kaloogian's is bad. I'd need to hear that from more objective sources. In the Republican party, aggressive people who slam the Democrats are often disliked because many establishment Republicans really don't like combat.
I disagree with your comment that a good leader must have the respect of his peers. There is too much pettiness, jealousy, weakness and blindness in politics to make consensus judgments of "peers" a reliable guide to a person's character. In addition, for the kind of politics I'm talking about, the ability to get voters' attention, encourage them, etc., is more important than being liked by other politicians.
I also want to dispute your comment about "at the right time."
EVERY time is "the right time" for "getting people fired up and involved," since we always need this and never have enough of it on our side.
One reason the Democrats run this state with an iron hand, and have far more power in the nation than most people think, is that their people are always "fired up and involved," not just at what are obviously the "right times," but always.
Politics is a 365-day-a-year game. Completely normal people probably don't do well in it.