Lampson and the law of unintended consequences

What happens when you have an over eager liberal dem politician (Nick Lampson) desparately trying to fool conservative voters in his district (CD22) that he's really a moderate "good guy." What to do? What to do? Ah ha!!

Let's do something "for the children." Has a nice ring to it. Who could possibly be against something for the children? But what? What's the most emotionally charged and least controversial thing I could do "for the children"? Ding!!

Got it. Protect them from perverts and sex offenders on the internet. Everyone wants to do that... especially those protective suburban parents in my mainly Republican district. Great plan, Nick.

Except in your typical liberal way, you screwed up. (And now you are in the unenviable position of having to put forth some really weak justifications..)

The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved a bill sponsored and pushed by Lampson called the Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online Act, or SAFE Act.

Declan McCullagh has the best write up on the unintended? consequences of this poorly thought out and hastily pushed through mess of a bill that Lampson is running around proudly getting "good press" for.

The bill says that anyone offering an open Wi-Fi connection to the public must report illegal images including "obscene" cartoons and drawings--or face fines of up to $300,000.

That broad definition would cover individuals, coffee shops, libraries, hotels, and even some government agencies that provide Wi-Fi. It also sweeps in social-networking sites, domain name registrars, Internet service providers, and e-mail service providers such as Hotmail and Gmail, and it may require that the complete contents of the user's account be retained for subsequent police inspection. (Can you say Big Brother?)

The SAFE Act represents the latest in Congress' efforts--some of which have raised free speech and privacy concerns--to crack down on sex offenders and internet predators. One bill introduced a year ago was even broader and would have forced Web sites and blogs to report illegal images. Another would require sex offenders to supply e-mail addresses and instant messaging user names.

Wednesday's vote caught Internet companies by surprise: the Democratic leadership rushed the SAFE Act to the floor under a procedure that's supposed to be reserved for noncontroversial legislation. It was introduced October 10, but has never received even one hearing or committee vote. In addition, the legislation
approved this week has changed substantially since the earlier version and was not available for public review.

Not one Democrat opposed the SAFE Act. Two Republicans did: Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning presidential candidate from Texas, and Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia.

Frankly, we can't see how this will even be enforceable! Will Starbucks have to hire Wi-Fi snoops to prowl their shops looking over the shoulders of unsuspecting customers? Let's just hope the Senate will wake up and clean up Nick's little dog pile before this sees the light of day as actual law. How soon till we can vote this guy out of office?

Blog for Shelley?

Someone named Joel Hoshkins (no idea who this is) has started a blog for Shelley Sekula (no hyphen) Gibbs. It's called Carpetbagger Blog. At first we thought it was really a "bash Gibbs" site (take a look at some of the initial posts). Lately, however, we're wondering if Joel is for real... but maybe only about 10 years old?

Take a look and let us know what you think...

Wallace appears to be backing Manlove

It's not an official endorsement yet, but it looks like Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace will be backing his singing buddy, former Pasadena Mayor John Manlove in the CD22 race.

Wallace is forwarding around an invitation to a Manlove fundraiser in Sugar Land being hosted next week by Dr. V.N. Vijayvergiya and J.R. Redding.

Vijayvergiya is the owner of Geotest Engineering, Inc. a geotechnical engineering and materials testing company that serves private sector clients and government agencies. Redding is President & CEO of S&B Infrastructure. Both companies compete for local government contracts on a regular basis.

Wallace, in his capacity as real estate developer, was trying to get a town square project (similar to Sugar Land's and the one he's trying to get going in Waco.) off the ground in Pasadena while Manlove was still mayor there. Latest word on that is that it won't happen. But it seems Wallace is still humming with Manlove.

Wallace's seeming (if unofficial) endorsement of Manlove is interesting in that speculation had been strong that Wallace would back Pete Olson who moved to Sugar Land a few months ago from Washington specifically to run for the CD22 spot. Olson is closely aligned with many DeeCee insiders and most folks 'round here know Wallace has aspirations of a higher government appointment of some kind.

Wallace, of course, tried unsuccessfully in 2004 to get the GOP nomination to fill Tom DeLay's seat-- but was rebuffed by the party faithful. He decided not to join the crowded GOP field this year and many speculate some skeletons in his closet that have come to light as well as some ethics concerns is the main reason why. Wallace has announced he will not seek reelection as Sugar Land mayor.

Shelley Ranks in CQ Top 10

This is a little dated, but we just noticed it on Shelley's website and thought we'd pass it along.

The “incumbents’ advantage” in fundraising is a source of common complaints from those who believe the escalating amount of money needed to run a serious congressional campaign inhibits competition. In the vast majority of House contests in each election cycle, the incumbents use their established campaign organizations to outraise their opponents, often by overwhelming margins. But not always.

A CQ Politics survey of campaign finance reports for activity through Sept. 30, filed with the Federal Election Commission in mid-October by House candidates for 2008 races, found a number of challengers who entered the final quarter of 2007 with sizable campaign treasuries — including a few who even raised more money than the incumbents for the year so far.

Shelley doesn't have more than Slick Nick. She'd raised $607,000 raised with $465,000 cash on hand; Nickster had raised $833,000 with $679,000 cash on hand. That made her #8 on CQ's list.

The article continues:

But she has plenty of opposition in the field for the March 4 Republican primary, including Pete Olson, a former chief of staff to Texas Sen. John Cornyn ($218,000 raised, $181,000 cash on hand); Dean Hrbacek, a former mayor of Sugar Land, the largest city wholly within the district ($159,000 raised, $120,000 cash on hand); state Rep. Robert Talton ($35,000 raised, $28,000 cash on hand); and Jim Squier, a former family district court judge ($13,400 raised, $13,400 cash on hand). John Manlove — the former mayor of Pasadena, which is partly in the 22nd — just filed a statement of candidacy with
the Federal Election Commission.

Global Warming madness... where will it stop?

The Global Warming nutzo's are at it again: a group of Israeli environmentalists is encouraging Jews around the world to light at least one less candle this Hanukka to help the environment. Really. We can't make this stuff up. But it helps to illustrate how completely craazzzzy the enviro whackos and their willing political dupes (socialists) are.

This just as the U.S. Senate is poised for "an historic vote" this week:

On the Federal level, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Wednesday is expected to debate amendments to a bill proposed by Sens. Lieberman of Connecticut and Warner of Virginia that would create a "cap and trade" system designed to cut total U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions. These systems require industries to pay fees when they emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouses gases above a set limit, with the money going to reward cleaner businesses.

Note to Congress... this has been tried and failed.

Europe tried a pollution credit trading system to curb carbon dioxide emissions after it passed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, and power companies worked the system to make billions in profits. Electricity customers paid higher bills, thinking they were contributing to a cooler planet. But their money just went into the pockets of the electric companies, which didn't end up actually cutting down on their carbon dioxide emissions.

Maybe the fees paid could go to the same company Algore (whom our Congressman Nick Lamspon adores on this issue) pays his carbon offsets to... himself. Global warming scam artists unite.

Reality Check here.

How much is a carbon offset for Divorce?

Really funnnny story today: Divorce bad for the Earth, study says...Splits may lead to greater energy, water consumption.

So how long do you think it will take Nick Lampson and his good buddy Algore and his liberal running buddies in Congress to propose some sort of special tax for this?

Is the surge in Iraq working or not, Nick?

Question we'd like to see temporary Congressman Nick Lampson answer today:

Which of your craaazzzzzy liberal compadres do you agree with this week? Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one of your party's most rabid war critics... that is until he actually WENT THERE. Came back and declared, "The Surge is working." Amazing what a little first hand religion does for the soul dontchaknow?

Or, will you side with Senate Majority Leader Dingy Harry Reid who is among the few staunch dem rats refusing to abandon your party's sad "Defeat for America" ship.

The Senate re-opened for business on Monday after a two-week Thanksgiving break, during which key Democrats traveled to Iraq and declared that the surge is working, at least from a security and military perspective. Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), one the top war critics, stunned fellow Democrats late last week with his statement that "the surge is working," even though he added that political reconciliation has been lagging. Murtha's view was backed by Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), who also said the surge worked after he returned from Iraq.

But Reid, in a Monday press conference, ceded no ground.
"The surge hasn't accomplished its goals," Reid said. "... We're involved, still, in an intractable civil war."

Back in February, Slick Nick Lampson joined the liberal, anti-war crowd in Congress by voting FOR a resolution rebuking President Bush over his plan to add 20,000 more combat troops in Iraq (the Surge). What did Nick want to do? In a carefully worded statement he called for:

“strategic change of course in Iraq – one including diplomacy, education, and an honest reconstruction effort,” adding that he is “not here today to criticize the President, or to engage in partisan grandstanding.”

So what say you now, Mr. Lampson? Are you for the troops or against them? Don't bother answering. Your record speaks for itself. Shame on you.

Lampson: Blue Dog, Yellow Dog or just a Lap Dog?

Just what kind of dog is Nick Lampson?

Lampson was a Democratic member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Texas's 9th congressional district from 1997 to 2005. After redistricting, he was the unsuccessful Democratic candidate for Texas's 2nd congressional district in 2004. Since he couldn't get elected there, he figured he'd move over to Stafford in CD 22 (well, at least he has an address here) where he got lucky in 2006 because... well, you know the story.

Now, all those years he was a Congressman in the 9th Nick never really cared about what kind of dog he was. Didn't need to. Before he redistricting took place, the 9th was a pretty safe Democrat bet. He could vote just like the liberal hound dog he is and get away with it.

But CD22 is a whole different kennel. In 2004 Bush whooped up on John Kerry by a margin of 64% t0 36%.

So what does Lampson try to do when he gets to DeeCee? He decides he better start running with a new pack of pooches. The so-called "Blue Dog" Democrats. As you may or may not know, self-proclaimed “Blue Dog Democrats” are a coalition of Democrat legislators who claim to adhere to the principles of fiscal conservatism and balanced budgets.

But they don't. As the Wall Street Journal has pointed out:

Voting records from recent years confirm that the blue dogs are less than consistent spending hawks. The National Taxpayers Union did some checking and found that the blue dogs had an average fiscal score of 24 out of 100, earning them a grade of D as a group. It also found that last year the blue dogs sponsored $145 of new spending for every dollar of budget reductions, for a net spending increase per member of more than $140 billion. The blue dogs are consistent on one fiscal issue: stopping tax cuts.

In reality, what the Blue Dog Democrats are is a cover group intended to help liberal politicians from red states, like Slick Nick Lampson, try to convince their constituents that they aren’t like the big-government, tax-and-spend types from California or Massachusetts. It lets them pay lip service to the principles of fiscal restraint and low taxes and campaign on those things without actually having to support them.

Thanks to Project Vote Smart, however, Ol' Nick can't hide from his liberal big-spending record. Check him out:

• 2003-2004 Representative Lampson supported the interests of the National Tax Limitation Committee only 3 percent of the time.


• He supported the interests of the Americans for Tax Reform only 20 percent of the time.


• And, he voted with the National Taxpayers Union only 21 percent of the time.
  

Nick Lampson. Just a really scary dog of any color.

What the Democrats don't want you to know

The next time a Democrat starts blabbing on about how weak America is, blah, blah, blah... show them this.

Upcoming CD22 Candidate Events

FORT BEND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CANDIDATE
Friday, December 7
11:30a.m to 1:30p.m.
Marriott Sugar Land Town Square
16090 City Walk, Sugar Land

ROSENBERG-RICHMOND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CANDIDATE FORUM
Monday, January 7
6:00 to 8:00p.m.
The Rosenberg Civic & Convention Center
Highway 36, 2 blocks South of US 59