Archangel
2009-03-03 22:36:46 UTC
Democrats show little appetite for gun control
By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer Jim Abrams, Associated Press
Writer 59 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The National Rifle Association warned in a campaign ad that
if Barack Obama were elected president he would try to take away
hunters' guns and ammo. But with pro-gun Democrats a powerful force in
Congress, it's already pretty clear there will be no messing with
Americans' right to bear arms.
Twenty-two Democrats, including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada,
joined Republicans last week in a Senate vote to negate the District of
Columbia's tough gun registration requirements and overturn its ban on
rapid-fire semiautomatic weapons. More than 80 House Democrats voted for
a similar measure last year.
"It was a pleasant surprise, but it's not a huge surprise that elected
officials are listening to their constituents," said Chris W. Cox, the
NRA's chief lobbyist.
It's not certain that the gun measure, attached to a bill on D.C. voting
rights, will be a part of the final version of that bill. But with six
of 11 Democratic Senate freshmen — from pro-gun states such as Alaska,
Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia — voting for the proposal, it was a
clear sign of where Congress is heading on gun issues.
"There has been a shift in thinking among Democrats in the last six to
eight years, away from old ideas about gun control and limiting access
to guns and toward ideas about how you actually reduce gun crime," said
Matt Bennett of Third Way, a group of moderate Democrats active on gun
control issues.
That shift has been frustrating for lawmakers who have long decried the
NRA's ability to block gun control legislation.
"We do not debate guns around here much anymore," said the Senate's no.
2 Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, during debate on the D.C. gun
amendment. "Basically, we reached a point where there are not many
people who will stick their political necks out to vote for sensible gun
control — too big a hassle."
A case in point is new Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand, a steadfast gun
rights advocate when she represented a pro-gun, Republican-leaning
district in upstate New York. Her appointment to succeed Hillary Clinton
as New York's junior senator drew protests from gun-control Democrats,
but after she voted against the D.C. gun amendment Republicans accused
her of abandoning her principles for political expediency.
Gillibrand's spokesman, Matt Canter, said the senator supports Second
Amendment rights. But she also believes that local governments have the
right to put legitimate limits on firearms and that law enforcement must
have the tools to protect the public from gun violence, he said.
A major turning point came last June, when the Supreme Court, in a 5-4
vote overturning D.C.'s ban on handgun possession, confirmed that the
Second Amendment gives private citizens the right to bear arms.
Gun control advocates were consoled that the decision also specifies
that gun rights are not open-ended, that government can impose some
restrictions in the public interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090303/ap_on_go_co/gun_rights/print
Archangel.
Change you can believe in.
Clinton vows to work for creation of Palestinian state
by Sylvie Lanteaume Sylvie Lanteaume 1 hr 40 mins ago
JERUSALEM (AFP) – US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed her
"aggressive" Middle East diplomacy on Tuesday, sending two envoys to
Syria and vowing to work towards the creation of a Palestinian state.
On her first visit to the region since being appointed by US President
Barack Obama, Clinton said she would pursue a comprehensive peace plan
while stressing that Israel could count on continued support from it
staunchest ally.
She announced she was sending two members of her delegation to Syria, a
longtime foe of the Jewish state with whom US relations have been
strained for years.
"There are a number of issues we have between Syria and the United
States as well as the larger regional concerns that Syria obviously
poses," she said after talks with outgoing Israeli Foreign Minister
Tzipi Livni,
Clinton also stressed the US commitment to the creation of a viable
Palestinian state living peacefully alongside Israel, a concept at the
heart of efforts to end the decades-old Middle East conflict.
"It is our assessment ... that eventually, the inevitability of working
toward a two-state solution is inescapable."
"The first step right now ... is a durable ceasefire," Clinton said.
"But that can only be achieved if Hamas ceases the rocket attacks."
Hamas, the Islamist rulers of Gaza, lashed out at the comments.
"The government considers the statements from Hillary Clinton to be the
height of bias towards the Israeli occupation," Hamas government
spokesman Taher al-Nunu said in a statement.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090303/wl_afp/mideastdiplomacyus_20090303191203/print
Archangel.
Change you can believe in.
In twist, GOP likes Obama's Iraq plan, Democrats don't
By Mark Johnson, Ryan Teague Beckwith and Steven Thomma, McClatchy
Newspapers Mark Johnson, Ryan Teague Beckwith And Steven Thomma,
Mcclatchy Newspapers Fri Feb 27, 5:15 pm ET
CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. — President Barack Obama announced here Friday that
he'll withdraw U.S. combat troops from Iraq by Aug. 31, 2010 , but his
plans to leave as many as 50,000 U.S. troops there through 2011 made
many Democrats in Congress angry, while Republicans cheered.
It was an ironic reception for a new commander-in-chief whose
presidential campaign was built initially on his early opposition to the
Iraq war and his promise to end it if elected.
"I am deeply troubled by the suggestion that a force of 50,000 troops
could remain in Iraq ," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey , D- Calif. "This is
unacceptable."
"I question whether such a large force is needed to combat any al Qaida
affiliates in Iraq or whether it will contribute to stability in the
region," said Sen. Russ Feingold , D- Wis.
"You cannot leave combat troops in a foreign country to conduct combat
operations and call it the end of the war. You can't be in and out at
the same time," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich , D- Ohio . "We must bring a
conclusion to this sorry chapter in American history."
The Republican Obama defeated in November for the presidency, Sen. John
McCain of Arizona , lauded the plan.
"We have spent enormous amounts of American blood in treasure in Iraq ,"
McCain said. "We are finally on a path to success. Let us have no crisis
of confidence now."
McCain said he agrees with Obama that the U.S. should keep 50,000 troops
in Iraq after the combat troops leave, following the recommendation of
U.S. military commander. He worries, however, about pressure on Obama
from Democrats urging a faster withdrawal.
"I worry . . . about statements made by a number of our colleagues
indicating that, for reasons wholly apart from the requirement to secure
our aims in Iraq , we should aim at a troop presence much lower," McCain
said. "The administration should . . . not succumb to pressures,
political or otherwise, to make deeper or faster cuts in our force levels."
The Republican leaders of the Senate and House of Representatives — Sen.
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Rep. John Boehner of Ohio — also issued
statements praising Obama's Iraq policy.
Obama traveled to Camp Lejeune to announce his Iraq policy — which had
leaked several days earlier — to a gym full of 2,700 Marines in
camouflage uniforms. Some 8,000 Marines at this base near Jacksonville,
N.C. , will ship out this spring to Afghanistan , where Obama is
escalating the U.S. presence.
The president said that, after nearly six years, it's time to end the
Iraq war.
"We cannot sustain indefinitely a commitment that has put a strain on
our military, and will cost the American people nearly a trillion
dollars," he said.
"America's men and women in uniform have fought block by block, province
by province, year after year, to give the Iraqis this chance to choose a
better future. Now, we must ask the Iraqi people to seize it."
He said he'd withdraw combat troops over the next 18 months — a bit
longer than his campaign promise to get out within 16 months. He said he
took the advice of military commanders on extending the timetable.
The pace of the drawdown will be left to the commanders and determined
by events on the ground as well as politics in Washington . Commanders
will be watching to ensure that they have enough troops there to
maintain the gains they've made and to safeguard national elections in
December.
Although U.S. and Iraqi casualties have dropped sharply, and recent
provincial elections were held without major incidents, it's not clear
whether Iraq's rival factions and their militias have abandoned violence
or are merely biding their time. Another factor that could disrupt
Obama's timetable will be the speed with which Iraqi military and
security forces gain the ability to maintain order without American help.
En route to Camp Lejeune , Obama called Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al
Maliki and then former President George W. Bush to tell each personally
about his timetable.
The controversy centers on his decision to leave a force of between
35,000 and 50,000 U.S. troops to train, equip and advise Iraqi forces,
help protect withdrawing forces and work on counterterrorism. They'd
remain until Dec. 31, 2011 , the date the Bush administration agreed to
withdraw all troops under a pact with Iraq .
That timetable too, could depend on conditions in Iraq and on the need
for additional U.S. troops in Afghanistan , where the Taliban has made
significant gains, and where national elections also are scheduled.
Democratic leaders in Congress were less overtly hostile to the residual
U.S. force than some of their members, but they, too, seemed to suggest
that they'd press Obama in months ahead to leave a smaller force behind
in Iraq than he announced.
"We must responsibly end the war in Iraq to make America more secure,
and must keep in Iraq only those forces necessary for the security of
our remaining troops and the Iraqi people," said Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid , D- Nev.
"I look forward to further discussing this plan with the president and
working with him to ensure we are doing what is best for America's
security interests and ensuring our military remains the strongest
fighting force in history."
A day earlier, he told reporters that he didn't like the idea of keeping
that many troops in Iraq . "That's a little higher number than I had
anticipated," he said on Thursday.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D- Calif. , left open the door to getting
more troops out of Iraq faster.
"As President Obama's Iraq policy is implemented, the remaining missions
given to our remaining forces must be clearly defined and narrowly
focused so that the number of troops needed to perform them is as small
as possible," she said.
Other prominent Democrats were more welcoming of Obama's plan.
Sen. John Kerry , D- Mass. , the chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee , called it a "responsible drawdown of the great
majority of American forces." He said that Obama "is correct to leave in
place a sufficient residual force to complete the training of Iraqi
security forces, protect our personnel, and conduct counterterrorism
missions."
Archangel.
Change you can believe in.
By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer Jim Abrams, Associated Press
Writer 59 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The National Rifle Association warned in a campaign ad that
if Barack Obama were elected president he would try to take away
hunters' guns and ammo. But with pro-gun Democrats a powerful force in
Congress, it's already pretty clear there will be no messing with
Americans' right to bear arms.
Twenty-two Democrats, including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada,
joined Republicans last week in a Senate vote to negate the District of
Columbia's tough gun registration requirements and overturn its ban on
rapid-fire semiautomatic weapons. More than 80 House Democrats voted for
a similar measure last year.
"It was a pleasant surprise, but it's not a huge surprise that elected
officials are listening to their constituents," said Chris W. Cox, the
NRA's chief lobbyist.
It's not certain that the gun measure, attached to a bill on D.C. voting
rights, will be a part of the final version of that bill. But with six
of 11 Democratic Senate freshmen — from pro-gun states such as Alaska,
Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia — voting for the proposal, it was a
clear sign of where Congress is heading on gun issues.
"There has been a shift in thinking among Democrats in the last six to
eight years, away from old ideas about gun control and limiting access
to guns and toward ideas about how you actually reduce gun crime," said
Matt Bennett of Third Way, a group of moderate Democrats active on gun
control issues.
That shift has been frustrating for lawmakers who have long decried the
NRA's ability to block gun control legislation.
"We do not debate guns around here much anymore," said the Senate's no.
2 Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, during debate on the D.C. gun
amendment. "Basically, we reached a point where there are not many
people who will stick their political necks out to vote for sensible gun
control — too big a hassle."
A case in point is new Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand, a steadfast gun
rights advocate when she represented a pro-gun, Republican-leaning
district in upstate New York. Her appointment to succeed Hillary Clinton
as New York's junior senator drew protests from gun-control Democrats,
but after she voted against the D.C. gun amendment Republicans accused
her of abandoning her principles for political expediency.
Gillibrand's spokesman, Matt Canter, said the senator supports Second
Amendment rights. But she also believes that local governments have the
right to put legitimate limits on firearms and that law enforcement must
have the tools to protect the public from gun violence, he said.
A major turning point came last June, when the Supreme Court, in a 5-4
vote overturning D.C.'s ban on handgun possession, confirmed that the
Second Amendment gives private citizens the right to bear arms.
Gun control advocates were consoled that the decision also specifies
that gun rights are not open-ended, that government can impose some
restrictions in the public interest.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090303/ap_on_go_co/gun_rights/print
Archangel.
Change you can believe in.
Clinton vows to work for creation of Palestinian state
by Sylvie Lanteaume Sylvie Lanteaume 1 hr 40 mins ago
JERUSALEM (AFP) – US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed her
"aggressive" Middle East diplomacy on Tuesday, sending two envoys to
Syria and vowing to work towards the creation of a Palestinian state.
On her first visit to the region since being appointed by US President
Barack Obama, Clinton said she would pursue a comprehensive peace plan
while stressing that Israel could count on continued support from it
staunchest ally.
She announced she was sending two members of her delegation to Syria, a
longtime foe of the Jewish state with whom US relations have been
strained for years.
"There are a number of issues we have between Syria and the United
States as well as the larger regional concerns that Syria obviously
poses," she said after talks with outgoing Israeli Foreign Minister
Tzipi Livni,
Clinton also stressed the US commitment to the creation of a viable
Palestinian state living peacefully alongside Israel, a concept at the
heart of efforts to end the decades-old Middle East conflict.
"It is our assessment ... that eventually, the inevitability of working
toward a two-state solution is inescapable."
"The first step right now ... is a durable ceasefire," Clinton said.
"But that can only be achieved if Hamas ceases the rocket attacks."
Hamas, the Islamist rulers of Gaza, lashed out at the comments.
"The government considers the statements from Hillary Clinton to be the
height of bias towards the Israeli occupation," Hamas government
spokesman Taher al-Nunu said in a statement.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090303/wl_afp/mideastdiplomacyus_20090303191203/print
Archangel.
Change you can believe in.
In twist, GOP likes Obama's Iraq plan, Democrats don't
By Mark Johnson, Ryan Teague Beckwith and Steven Thomma, McClatchy
Newspapers Mark Johnson, Ryan Teague Beckwith And Steven Thomma,
Mcclatchy Newspapers Fri Feb 27, 5:15 pm ET
CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C. — President Barack Obama announced here Friday that
he'll withdraw U.S. combat troops from Iraq by Aug. 31, 2010 , but his
plans to leave as many as 50,000 U.S. troops there through 2011 made
many Democrats in Congress angry, while Republicans cheered.
It was an ironic reception for a new commander-in-chief whose
presidential campaign was built initially on his early opposition to the
Iraq war and his promise to end it if elected.
"I am deeply troubled by the suggestion that a force of 50,000 troops
could remain in Iraq ," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey , D- Calif. "This is
unacceptable."
"I question whether such a large force is needed to combat any al Qaida
affiliates in Iraq or whether it will contribute to stability in the
region," said Sen. Russ Feingold , D- Wis.
"You cannot leave combat troops in a foreign country to conduct combat
operations and call it the end of the war. You can't be in and out at
the same time," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich , D- Ohio . "We must bring a
conclusion to this sorry chapter in American history."
The Republican Obama defeated in November for the presidency, Sen. John
McCain of Arizona , lauded the plan.
"We have spent enormous amounts of American blood in treasure in Iraq ,"
McCain said. "We are finally on a path to success. Let us have no crisis
of confidence now."
McCain said he agrees with Obama that the U.S. should keep 50,000 troops
in Iraq after the combat troops leave, following the recommendation of
U.S. military commander. He worries, however, about pressure on Obama
from Democrats urging a faster withdrawal.
"I worry . . . about statements made by a number of our colleagues
indicating that, for reasons wholly apart from the requirement to secure
our aims in Iraq , we should aim at a troop presence much lower," McCain
said. "The administration should . . . not succumb to pressures,
political or otherwise, to make deeper or faster cuts in our force levels."
The Republican leaders of the Senate and House of Representatives — Sen.
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Rep. John Boehner of Ohio — also issued
statements praising Obama's Iraq policy.
Obama traveled to Camp Lejeune to announce his Iraq policy — which had
leaked several days earlier — to a gym full of 2,700 Marines in
camouflage uniforms. Some 8,000 Marines at this base near Jacksonville,
N.C. , will ship out this spring to Afghanistan , where Obama is
escalating the U.S. presence.
The president said that, after nearly six years, it's time to end the
Iraq war.
"We cannot sustain indefinitely a commitment that has put a strain on
our military, and will cost the American people nearly a trillion
dollars," he said.
"America's men and women in uniform have fought block by block, province
by province, year after year, to give the Iraqis this chance to choose a
better future. Now, we must ask the Iraqi people to seize it."
He said he'd withdraw combat troops over the next 18 months — a bit
longer than his campaign promise to get out within 16 months. He said he
took the advice of military commanders on extending the timetable.
The pace of the drawdown will be left to the commanders and determined
by events on the ground as well as politics in Washington . Commanders
will be watching to ensure that they have enough troops there to
maintain the gains they've made and to safeguard national elections in
December.
Although U.S. and Iraqi casualties have dropped sharply, and recent
provincial elections were held without major incidents, it's not clear
whether Iraq's rival factions and their militias have abandoned violence
or are merely biding their time. Another factor that could disrupt
Obama's timetable will be the speed with which Iraqi military and
security forces gain the ability to maintain order without American help.
En route to Camp Lejeune , Obama called Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al
Maliki and then former President George W. Bush to tell each personally
about his timetable.
The controversy centers on his decision to leave a force of between
35,000 and 50,000 U.S. troops to train, equip and advise Iraqi forces,
help protect withdrawing forces and work on counterterrorism. They'd
remain until Dec. 31, 2011 , the date the Bush administration agreed to
withdraw all troops under a pact with Iraq .
That timetable too, could depend on conditions in Iraq and on the need
for additional U.S. troops in Afghanistan , where the Taliban has made
significant gains, and where national elections also are scheduled.
Democratic leaders in Congress were less overtly hostile to the residual
U.S. force than some of their members, but they, too, seemed to suggest
that they'd press Obama in months ahead to leave a smaller force behind
in Iraq than he announced.
"We must responsibly end the war in Iraq to make America more secure,
and must keep in Iraq only those forces necessary for the security of
our remaining troops and the Iraqi people," said Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid , D- Nev.
"I look forward to further discussing this plan with the president and
working with him to ensure we are doing what is best for America's
security interests and ensuring our military remains the strongest
fighting force in history."
A day earlier, he told reporters that he didn't like the idea of keeping
that many troops in Iraq . "That's a little higher number than I had
anticipated," he said on Thursday.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D- Calif. , left open the door to getting
more troops out of Iraq faster.
"As President Obama's Iraq policy is implemented, the remaining missions
given to our remaining forces must be clearly defined and narrowly
focused so that the number of troops needed to perform them is as small
as possible," she said.
Other prominent Democrats were more welcoming of Obama's plan.
Sen. John Kerry , D- Mass. , the chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee , called it a "responsible drawdown of the great
majority of American forces." He said that Obama "is correct to leave in
place a sufficient residual force to complete the training of Iraqi
security forces, protect our personnel, and conduct counterterrorism
missions."
Archangel.
Change you can believe in.