Peterson Averts Ritual Suicide; DFLers Outraged

Dave Mindeman seems flabbergasted that elected officials must be in tune with their voters on even the most flamingly, sirens-blazingly obvious issues:

Rep. Colin Peterson has confirmed that there is one thing more important than being a Democrat….one thing more important than principle….one thing more important than the truth.

That would be: The NRA

Well, let’s be honest here; it’s not “being a Democrat” that’s been keeping Peterson in office in his fairly conservative district – which, once Peterson retires, will likely become a hard-red district.  It’s reflecting his constituents.

And I’m curious what “principle” Mindeman thought Peterson was breaking; to most Americans, keeping government in line – say, when it uses the power of government to try to slander the law-abiding gun owner, or especially when they try to cover up and stonewall the facts of a case that’s led directly to the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans and at least one, and now possibly two federal agents – is the height of principle.

This travesty of a contempt vote, being brought against Attorney General Eric Holder, that the House has insisted upon because the NRA is pulling the puppet strings, has 4 Democrats signing on to it. And one of those four is Colin Peterson.

And this blog salutes their courage, in bucking the Democrats’ naked power-mongering to stand up for the rule of law.

The whole issue is a joke. The Fast and Furious policy was a dumb thing to do but to move this whole thing into a contempt vote is even dumber.

I think Brian Terry’s family might agree it was a “dumb” thing to do – and would think getting answers from our “public servants” isn’t so dumb at all.

I doubt Peterson would be giving it one minute of thought except for the fact that the NRA is going so “score” the vote. Scoring a contempt vote? How crazy is that?

Keeping score on a vote on an issue involving the “Justice” department using government time, resources and power primariliy to slander the NRA’s five million constituents?

Crazy like a fox – in that “I’d like to get re-elected” sense of the term.

But this has been crazy from the beginning. Just to gain some political points and satisfy the fantasy world of the NRA’s fear of the “secret Obama war on guns”, they are counting noses for this vote.

Dave Mindeman, like many Democrats, believes that Voter ID suppresses legal voting, but can’t believe an administration headed by a President who used to be bankrolled by an anti-gun foundation, and who depends disproportionally

Peterson plans to join in on the sham. And why not? It gets him NRA bonus points while sticking it to the administration – the one he is running away from.

Even a second amendment supporter like Peterson must know this whole thing is a joke….but then there has never been anything funny about the NRA.

But there is plenty funny about the way urban DFLers demonize it.  The NRA is perhaps one of the grass-rootsiest lobbying organizations there is.  It has five million paying members – unlike the typical big-money group supporting the DFL (say, “Alliance for a Better Minnesota”, which has one).

And besides most Republicans, they have plenty of traction among Democrat voters outside the 494-694 circle, who may vote all wrong, but certainly understand that the Second Amendment is a civil right.

A right that Barack Obama and his administration have been trying – on  “principle” – to chip away at the best they could since before they were elected.

A rare kudo to Colin Peterson.  You finally got one right.

But feel free to desert him for this one, Democrats.

BONUS QUESTION: Why doesn’t Mindeman have similar harsh words for CD1’s Tim Walz, who also voted to hold Holder accountable for his coverup?   Closing ranks and ignoring it because the CD1 race might be closer, perhaps?  Do Dems only criticize the  Democrats they think they can afford to?

18 thoughts on “Peterson Averts Ritual Suicide; DFLers Outraged

  1. Yesterday Lanny Davis, President Billy Jeff Clinton’s designated spear catcher, appeared on Michael Medved’s show on 1280 The Patriot. He was amazed at how hard Holder’s DOJ was digging in on this as Issa’s committee – OVERSIGHT& Government Reform – has every right to receive these documents and stonewalling merely gives off the stench of guilt. Given that DOJ has twice rescinded testimony given before the Committee, one would think good government betters like Dave Mindeman would be applauding a Congressional Oversight effort that was trying to learn the truth about an operation that was involved in the deaths of a US government law enforcement agent and more than 200 Mexican citizens. But then, as we learned yesterday, misdeeds with deadly outcomes – like 5-4 SCOTUS decisions – are acceptable when they benefit Democratic Administrations to smart people like Mr Mindeman.
    PS: To quote Paul at Powerline – “There must be some dynamite in those documents, eh?”

  2. Mindeman is just another left wing twit! I wonder how these self righteous, anti gun libturds would feel if Brian Terry was one of their brothers, sons or husbands? It’s easy to point fingers, even when there are three of them pointing back!

  3. Tim Walz decided to vote yes on the contempt vote after I wrote that post. And yes, I think he is wrong as well – another CYA vote by a Democrat. As a point of information, what has the Obama administration done that has, in any way, hindered gun rights? And as another point of information, you do know that “fast and furious” was instigated by the Bush administration….is the NRA noting that as well?

  4. http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=28638

    “Dave Mindeman is one of the small group of Twin Cities leftybloggers who doesn’t deserve to be under police surveillance.”

    Are you sure about that? This post is just as full of the false, slanderous, radically partisan vapors, as most of what comes out of the rest of the local fever swamp.

    Sorry Dave, he IS putting truth, principle, and representing his constituency ahead of one thing, the most precious thing to you and your bobbleheaded lefty crowd: Toeing the rabid, uncompromising, anti-gun, fear-mongering, leftist ideological line – the ultimate goal of which is to turn our free society into a mob ruled by criminals, under the crushing thumb of the state.

    It looks like Peterson has “left the anti-gun plantation”. Good for him.

  5. What started under Bush in 2005 was “Operation Wide Receiver”. Differences:

    (1) First and foremost, operation Wide Receiver did not result in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol agent or an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer. Fast and Furious did. The guns that ultimately killed Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE officer Jamie Zapata were traced back to straw purchasers related to Fast and Furious

    (2) Second, Wide Receiver, though flawed, was more of a gun-tracing operation than a gun-walking program. Gun-tracing involves putting specific safeguards in place to track firearms, such as RFID chips perhaps with video or aerial surveillance. Gun-walking is what happened in Fast and Furious, where ATF agents sold thousands of guns without a reliable way to recover them, apparently just hoping for the best.

    (3) Third, one must take into account the size and scope of the operations.

    Speaking to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month, Holder said that “three hundred guns” were allowed to “walk” (although note the difference between “tracing” and “walking” above) in Wide Receiver. While there is no evidence that suggests otherwise, the figure is dwarfed by the approximately 2,000 firearms that walked in Fast and Furious. Roughly 1,400 guns were lost and about 700 have been recovered in Mexico and at crime scenes like the sites of Terry and Zapata’s murders.

    (4) Perhaps the most convincing piece of evidence proving the two operations are separate from each other is the fact that Wide Receiver was shut down in 2007 shortly after it was clear the program was a failure. This was before Obama was even in office and nearly two years before Fast and Furious began.

    (5) Finally, unlike Fast and Furious, officials involved in Wide Receiver were reportedly in close contact with Mexican authorities during the operation, though how involved Mexican officials were is not entirely known.

    So yes, there were similar operations under the two administrations, but WR was far more careful about things and shut down when it was deemed a failure. FnF didn’t stop until the whistleblowing started. Strawman.

  6. Gee whiz. It would seem that Holder has provided a lot of information which allows you to make all these comparisons. Just what is it that he is being held in contempt for? Oh yeah…he is supposed to divulge some super secret plot that will expose to the world how the Obama admin has a plan to bring the entire nation into an uproar which will demand that all guns be confiscated and rigid, lock down gun laws will ensue. LaPierre and his delusions…..let’s waste Congressional time on that.

  7. Congress didn’t ask Holder to divulge the secret plot. We know about that already. Congress asked Holder to hand over documents related to changed testimony concerning Fast and Furious, which were generated between two dates in 2011. It’s a narrow, specific, limited, legitimate request that the Obama Administration is defying.

    Since the Legislative and Executive branches can’t agree whether Holder should produce the documents, the matter will be refered to the Judicial branch. But the Judicial branch only rules on actual cases and controversies, not hypothetical questions, so to open the door of the court Congress must slam the door on Holder’s jail cell with a Contempt citation.

    Holder holds the keys to his own jail cell: he can hand over the documents and walk away at any time. If nobody did anything wrong, what’s the problem? Dump the documents and walk away laughing.

    Unless there’s something to hide, some smoking gun . . . .

  8. Anyone know if some left anti-gun wingnut will try to primary Peterson now?

  9. “As a point of information, what has the Obama administration done that has, in any way, hindered gun rights?”

    Nothing yet, but he and his stooges are working real hard on it. Hilary Clinton is pushing the UN Small Arms Treaty. I suggest that you read up on that.

    I’ve got a challenge for you Davey boy. Why don’t you go over to a construction site where some of your fellow drooling sycophants are working and preach your anti gun crap? See what kind of a reaction you get there!

    Unlike you and many of your libturd friends, Messrs. Peterson and Walz realize a. that many of their constituents are hunters and b. how important sportsman of all kinds are to our state’s economy.

    But then, to you goons, as long as your job is safe, you really could care less about anyone else.

  10. Dave Mindeman said:

    “It would seem that Holder has provided a lot of information which allows you to make all these comparisons”

    Dave keeps posting and commenting, and we get more and more information … on how entirely ignorant he is about operation “Fast and Furious” and the resulting investigation.

  11. DM- “Let’s waste Congressional time on that.” Dave, here’s a little test. See if you can pick the correct answer. “Which action would waste more Congressional time?” A) Holder turning over the documents-in-question however many months ago when first asked (he’s got nothing to hide, right?) or B) continue the stalling he’s done to this point as the matter winds it’s way through the courts.

  12. Look. If you people ever read penigma’s blog, you’d know that only the right has litmus tests for loyalty.

  13. Dave,

    Tim Walz decided to vote yes on the contempt vote after I wrote that post. And yes, I think he is wrong as well – another CYA vote by a Democrat.

    You say that like it’s a bad thing. Both of them represent districts full of people who may vote Democrat enough to keep them in office, but are otherwise Real Americans, esp. as re gun rights.

    As a point of information, what has the Obama administration done that has, in any way, hindered gun rights?

    In terms of concrete, substantive policy? Not much. They’re smart enough to know the gun lobby is pretty powerful – largely because it represents so very, very many people, who are so very, very politically active.

    What we’ve seen this term is Obama’s administration laying a rhetorical groundwork for future attacks. He was doing it before he was even elected – remember “bitter, gun-clinging Jebus freaks?” He did it from the first days of his administration, having Janet Napolitano put gun owners and Second Amendment activists on her watch lists. Creating a patina of criminality around gun owners is the first step to dehumanizing them enough to make them a rhetorical political villain again. And Fast and Furious was a key part of that.

    “Fast and Furious” was an attempt at a “sting”, all right – a sting of the law-abiding gun owner. It was an attempt to give anti-gun politicians a rhetorical hammer – “your “gun rights” are what’s responsible for all this violence in Mexico, and we have the evidence!” – to use in future elections, to try to undercut the moral authority of the gun movement.

    And we know this how? Because Democrat were already using the chanting point, starting with Hillary Clinton herself.

    And as another point of information, you do know that “fast and furious” was instigated by the Bush administration….is the NRA noting that as well?

    Sorry, Dave. The main flaw in your argument is that you get your information – any of it – from lefty sources.

    Bush’s AG started an operation. Then abandoned it, because the information it was gathering was so legally useless. Holder re-opened it, and – we believe – repurposed it.

    Dave, ask yourself this: Issa has asked for a fairly targeted set of documents. Not semi trailers full of stuff – a fairly finite set of things.

    Why do you suppose that is?

    Holder won’t even provide a privilege log explaining for what files he’s claiming privilege – which is a legal requirement of even legitimate privilege claims.

    Again – why do you think he’s doing that?

    Before you answer that (assuming you do), please take off the partisan blinders for just a moment, purely for arguments sake.

  14. Dave, again:

    Gee whiz. It would seem that Holder has provided a lot of information which allows you to make all these comparisons.

    Well, he hasn’t “provided” much, but Issa’s committee has certainly obtained plenty. Take a look at the two questions I asked you in my previous comment. Think hard.

    Just what is it that he is being held in contempt for?

    Not providing information to Congress (which has legal oversight power), on information provided to it by multiple whistleblowers, on a program which seems to have been politically motivated, and did directly and materially contribute to the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans and one, and possibly two, Federal agents, regarding which there are many glaring inconsistencies in testimony to Congress (remember – legitimate oversight!), the worst interpretation of which is that many highly placed officials in the Administration (up to Holder, and perhaps, ahem, higher) knew about the motivations and disastrous consequences. The contradictions might be considered a cover-up – indeed, had this happened under Bush, certainly would have.

    Oh yeah…he is supposed to divulge some super secret plot that will expose to the world how the Obama admin has a plan to bring the entire nation into an uproar which will demand that all guns be confiscated and rigid, lock down gun laws will ensue. LaPierre and his delusionsj

    The success of Jon Stewart seems to have convinced liberals that derisive snark is the answer to every debate.

    …..let’s waste Congressional time on that.

    Oversight of federal agencies is as legitimate as any of Congress’ “wastes of time”.

  15. It probably doesn’t matter because everyone has moved on to newer posts, but I just want to say that I find the whole “Bush did it too” argument – for any criticism of King Putt – to be both lame and irrelevant.

    In this case, if Operation Wide Receiver, under the auspices of Bush’s administration, did anything illegal, stupid, untoward, or just plain creepy, they deserve to be roasted for it, and, if necessary or possible, prosecuted.

    Now can we get on with uncovering the shenanigans in F&F without anymore stupid distractions? Or is it always going to be politics, all the time, just politics? From the most transparent administration in history.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.