Quote of the Day

“Why do we have a Second Amendment? It’s not to shoot deer. It’s to shoot at the government when it becomes tyrannical!”  — Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), on Twitter, June 23, 2016.

President Obama's Weekly Address 1/1/16: Making America Safer for Our Children

WASHINGTON, DC — In this week's address, the President reflected on the progress of the past year, and looked forward to working on unfinished business in the coming year, particularly when it comes to the epidemic of gun violence. As he has many times before, the President reminded us that Congress has repeatedly failed to take action and pass laws that would reduce gun violence. That’s why the President a few months ago tasked his White House team with identifying new actions he can take to help reduce gun violence, and on Monday will meet with the Attorney General to discuss the options. In his address, the President called on everyone to join him in the fight to reduce gun violence, because it’s going to take all of us to make America safer for our children.

...The Daily News published another controversial cover, sarcastically declaring, "Everything is awesome!" in response to those, like members of the National Rifle Association, who refuse to consider stricter gun control measures to combat gun violence....

Hat Tip Yahoo

President Obama's Weekly Address 12/5/15: We Will Not Be Terrorized

WASHINGTON, DC — In this week's address, the President offered his condolences to the families and community of the victims of the San Bernardino shooting. He recognized the possibility that the two attackers may have been radicalized, a reminder to all of us that we need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to attempts by extremist organizations to encourage violence. The President called on Congress to close the loophole that allows people on the No-Fly list to purchase guns, a simple and logical step that would make it harder for potential terrorists to acquire weapons. And he reminded us that we cannot accept mass shootings like this one as routine in our country, and emphasized that above all else, his priority is the safety and security of the American people.




"... right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. That is insane. If you’re too dangerous to board a plane, you’re too dangerous, by definition, to buy a gun..." - President Obama

Pallone on Sensible Gun Reform: “It is not enough to call for action, we must enact change”

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06) made the following statement on the need for federal reforms for gun safety.

“My thoughts and prayers are with the victims of the Roseburg tragedy, their families and their community. As the President said, however, our thoughts and prayers are not enough. As a nation, repeated mass shooting tragedies and the gun violence that plagues our communities every day cannot wither the resolve to demand action. As Members of Congress, it is not enough to call for action, we must enact change. We have reached a point as lawmakers and as Americans where we have a question to answer: Can we stand up to special interests and enact the sensible, bipartisan gun reforms that the country wants?

“Of course no one piece of legislation will stop every shooting, but it can help. We have a duty to protect all Americans and to do everything within our power to reduce gun violence and the chance of another mass tragedy like Roseburg, Sandy Hook, or the at least 53 other mass shootings we have witnessed in between. If we can ensure people who want to do harm unto others cannot get their hands on guns, it will be a start. If we ban high capacity magazines, it will be a start. If we can reduce the number of guns in our communities that were built to kill people, it will be a start. If we can close the gun show loophole, it will be a start. If we can verify the identity of those purchasing ammunition online, it will be a start. There is legislation to bring about these simple and common-sense changes. Just this week I – along with 146 of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle – called on the Speaker to enact common-sense gun safety legislation. Now, Republican leadership must have the courage to get started.”

APP LETTER: Gun background checks: Where is Smith’s support?

If you haven't seen it the following letter to the editor appeared yesterday in the Asbury Park Press. It raises a serious question about Middletown's other congressman, Chris Smith:


After hearing about the alarmingly high number of school shootings, 74 in 2014 alone, I decided to write a letter to my congressman, Chris Smith.

Smith has refused to co-sponsor a federal bill, H.R. 1565, for expanded background checks on firearms. This bill would help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, and I wanted to know why he hasn’t supported it publicly.

Smith’s office responded to my inquiry with an explanation, which included that he supported the Brady Handgun Bill in 1993. Thank you, Congressman, for supporting common sense in 1993, but what about now?

Due to NRA-influenced politicians, much of the Brady Bill has become irrelevant. So, by stating two decades-old support of the Brady bill, Smith’s response is also irrelevant.

What is relevant is that America leads developed nations in homicide by gun, suicide by gun, mass shootings, accidental death of children by gun, school shootings, and women shot by domestic abusers. Where is Smith’s current support for gun sense?

New Jersey gun laws are strong, but our neighboring states have weak laws and criminals go to those states to acquire weapons. New Jersey is the No. 1 importer of illegal guns in the nation.

These illegal guns ravage our cities, endanger our police, and are used to kill our civilians, as evidenced in recent events, including in Jersey City and West Orange this summer, as well as the Short Hills Mall shooting last holiday season. Federal law is important for New Jersey.

Smith should stop hiding behind what he did in 1993 because it has no impact on today.

Congressman Smith’s constituents overwhelmingly support expanded background checks on firearms. He should too.

Francee Tendler

Manalapan

10 ways Chris Christie's White House ambition hurts Jersey

If you haven't read the front page of today's Newark Star-Ledger you should. Tom Moran, the Ledger's Editorial Board Editor has a good take on how Chris Christie has hurt New Jersey due to his personal ambitions for a much higher office. 

By Tom Moran/ Star-Ledger

Gov. Chris Christie last week rejected the notion that his ambitions for the White House are driving his behavior as governor.

"Regular people don’t see it that way," he told reporters. "You all have been asking me about running for president since 2010, so is every action I’ve taken since 2010 been through the prism of the presidency? I don’t think so and I don’t even think you all can make that argument."

Granted, no one can peer into the man’s heart. We’d need his diary to divine his true motives.
And no sane person would argue that Christie’s "every action" has been dictated by the need to seduce the Republican base. He did concede the science on climate change, a move that will alienate the flat-Earth crowd in the Republican base, no small loss. He appointed a Muslim judge and called conservative critics of the move "crazies."

Worst of all, he hugged that usurper, President Obama, in the heat of the 2012 presidential race.

But enough nuance. Time to accept the governor’s challenge and make the case that he’s running this state with one eye on the White House, that he is putting New Jersey second, behind GOP primary voters.

The list below offers 10 cases in point.

1. Birth control

In his first budget, Christie cut $7.4 million in funding for family planning, giving up a potential 9-1 match in federal dollars as well. The money was not used for abortions, but for birth control, cancer screenings and other services for low-income women without insurance.
Six Planned Parenthood clinics were forced to close as a result, and others cut back their hours.

Christie claimed his only motive was to save money. But giving up that 9-1 federal match is irrational budgeting. And this program was tiny, amounting to less than 0.03 percent of the state’s $31 billion budget.

Gov. Pinocchio had political motive for this one. Funding Planned Parenthood clinics would have been tough to justify on the trail.

2. Gun control

Christie vetoed four gun control bills, including one that would ban .50-caliber sniper rifles, and another this month that would limit ammunition magazines to 10 bullets.

On this issue, he is an incoherent mess. He proposed a ban on .50-caliber rifles himself last April, then vetoed the ban that reached his desk. And he’s offered no rational reason why New Jersey gun owners could possibly need more than 10 rounds in a magazine.

"The last thing he wants is the right mad at him for being a gun control advocate," said Julian Zelizer, a political science professor at Princeton University. "He’s now entering the Republican primaries as a fragile candidate. He can’t have any more enemies."

3. Climate change

Yes, the governor conceded the science. But he’s following the GOP playbook when it comes to policy.

He pulled New Jersey out of the regional agreement to reduce emissions from power plants. He diverted roughly $1 billion from the state’s Clean Energy Fund for unrelated purposes. He withdrew from a bipartisan lawsuit aimed at reducing emissions from Midwest coal plants. And in the Hurricane Sandy recovery, he has set requirements for building heights that are 1 foot lower than in surrounding states.

So if he gets grief for his rational talk about the science, he can defend himself by showing that his policies are perfectly aligned with the dictates of the Koch brothers, the billionaire kingmakers who earned their fortune on fossil fuels. Even the flat-Earth crowd in the party’s grass roots might forgive him when they take a second look.

4. The gas tax

The condition of New Jersey’s roadways ranks 46th in the nation, according to a study by Reason Foundation. Nearly 10 percent of our bridges are structurally deficient, and another 26 percent are functionally obsolete, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers.
But the trust fund for transit projects is broke. Worse, Christie broke the piggy bank and spent nearly $3 billion that had been set aside for the Hudson River tunnel. And he’s borrowed billions more to squeak by, breaking a promise and adding to the state’s crushing debt load.
The math is unforgiving: We need to raise the state’s gas tax, the third lowest in the nation. Privately, most Republicans concede this.

But raising any tax could be toxic on the trail. So count this as another mess Christie is leaving behind to protect his presidential ambitions.

5. Bridgegate

Christie was not content to just win last year’s election. He wanted a gigantic victory with bipartisan support to show that he could win a national election. That’s why his staff was pressing Democratic mayors such as Fort Lee’s Mark Sokolich for endorsements, even when it was clear Christie was coasting to victory.

In the end, the governor won re-election in a 22-point landslide, and the story line seemed solid.

Bridgegate wrecked that. Aside from exposing the ugly underbelly of the Christie administration, it has been an expensive distraction for the state government. The governor’s whitewash by attorney Randy Mastro is expected to cost taxpayers at least $3 million. On top of that, taxpayers are paying the legal bills for most of the key players, and for the Democrats, which are unknown at this time.

Continue reading

Our hearts have ached for far too long

The following is from Congressman Rush Holt's newsletter:



One year ago, a murderer walked into an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut and killed 20 elementary school children and six adults – a massacre made possible only by the rapid-fire arms he carried with him.

In the days afterward, many expressed resolve to change our laws to prevent such tragedies from ever happening again. And then nothing happened. A very modest gun safety bill was blocked by a Republican filibuster in the Senate. The Republican leadership in the House refused to allow even a single vote on gun safety legislation.

The horrific news of a school shooting today in Colorado reminds us of just how little progress we have made.

In the days after the Sandy Hook tragedy, I wrote, “We can’t just keep saying, ‘Our hearts ache for the victims and their families.’ We have to bring gun violence under control.”

In the year since then, about 30,000 more people have died by gunfire in homicides, suicides, and accidents. And so I say again: Our hearts have ached for far too long. We have to bring gun violence under control.

This Budget Was a Bad Deal

Yesterday the House passed, over my objections, a so-called budget compromise that sets funding levels for federal programs for next two years.

It was a compromise in a narrow, Washington kind of sense: It got some votes from Democrats and some votes from Republicans. But in a truer sense, it was no compromise at all. It was based on the framework of “sequestration” – the harsh, unthinking spending cuts demanded by the Tea Party in 2011, when they held hostage America’s credit rating by threatening to default on our debts.

No real compromise was possible in those 2011 negotiations because they were conducted in the midst of a hostage crisis. And no compromise is possible today because we are still operating within the framework created by that hostage crisis. To unwind a small portion of draconian cuts that were illegitimately imposed is hardly a compromise at all.

Sequestration has cut research, education, infrastructure, Medicare, and a number of other critical investments that are vital to a growing economy. It is robbing America of the opportunity to rise from the Great Recession as a stronger, more vibrant nation.

The question we should ask ourselves is, "Where are we trying to go as a country?" We should be striving toward an optimistic future – one where we invest in research, education, infrastructure, and more. By that measure, this budget was a bad deal....



Sincerely,

Rush Holt
Member of Congress

Buono Campaign: Christie Out-of-Touch with New Jersey Values

New Brunswick, NJ - Buono for Governor Communications Director David Turner released the following statement in response to Governor Christie's new television advertisement: "On any number of issues important to New Jerseyans, Governor Christie has been out of step with the majority of the state. From opposing a woman's right to choose to vetoing marriage equality to siding with the gun lobby, Chris Christie has consistently taken right-wing positions that put his presidential prospects ahead of what's right for New Jersey." CHRISTIE'S BIPARTISANSHIP IS MORE ABOUT STYLE THAN SUBSTANCE John Nichols Of The Nation: Christie's "Bipartisan" Effort Were Often Gestures "About Style, Not Policy," And Contradicted By His Claim As A "Damn Good Republican And Good Conservative Republican." "WHEN Governor Christie was asked in mid-May about his political bona fides, he replied, 'I'm a damn good Republican and a good conservative Republican.' Believe what he says — especially the 'conservative' part. Sure, Christie goes out of his way to say nice things about President Obama, who worked closely with the governor to provide immediate and essential support to New Jersey communities battered by superstorm Sandy. And yes, Christie's been willing to call out some of the most absurd excesses of his fellow Republicans. But these gestures are about style, not policy. The first-term governor has been meticulous about positioning his fall reelection campaign as a "bipartisan" effort.." [Op-Ed John Nichols, Bergen Record, 5/20/13] CHRISTIE ADMINISTRATION HAS REPEATEDLY BLOCKED IMPLEMENTATION OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DESPITE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, AND EVEN PRESSURED MEMBERS OF HIS OWN PARTY TO REJECT Bergen Record Editorial: "From Maine To The District Of Columbia, New Jersey Is The Only Northeast Coastal State Refusing To Recognize Marriage Equality." [Editorial, Bergen Record, 5/9/13] 2/18/13: Christie Vetoed Same-Sex Marriage Legislation Six Hours After Passage. "Gov. Chris Christie Friday made good on his vow to swiftly veto a gay marriage bill that passed the Legislature this week, saying he'd only agree to a measure that would strengthen New Jersey's civil union law. Christie, a Republican, issued his conditional veto of the bill (S1) six hours after it reached his desk, and a day after the Assembly gave it final legislative approval. In a six-page statement, Christie said there is no fundamental constitutional right to same-sex marriage, but gay couples in New Jersey have all the rights and benefits of married couples through civil unions." [Star Ledger, 2/18/12] Christie's Administration Filed A Brief Defending State's Civil Union Act Called "The Most Incoherent Defense Of Heterosexual Supremacy Yet." "New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's administration filed a brief last week defending the state's 2006 Civil Union Act, which grants gay couples all the benefits of marriage yet bars them from actually getting married. The brief is Christie's first official legal statement on same-sex marriage. Given his apparent aspiration to be the next Republican nominee for president, it is especially too bad that the brief also may be the most incoherent defense of heterosexual supremacy yet." [Slate, 8/5/13] New York Times: Republicans Confessed They Fear Overriding On Marriage Equality. "Democrats need three more votes to override Mr. Christie's veto, which means they need cooperation from Republican lawmakers. But several Republicans have said privately that while they support same-sex marriage, they fear voting against the governor, who is famous for enforcing party discipline." [New York Times, 7/2/13] CHRISTIE VETOED VIOLENCE PREVENTION LEGISLATION THAT HAD WIDE SUPPORT IN NEW JERSEY AFTER BEING LOBBIED BY A NEW HAMPSHIRE PRO-GUN GROUP Star-Ledger Headline: "Poll: 3 Gun Bills Vetoed By Christie Have Wide Support In N.J." "New Jersey residents overwhelmingly support three gun control bills that Gov. Chris Christie last month either vetoed or refused to sign without significant changes, according to a new poll. The Rutgers-Eagleton poll of 925 New Jerseyans found that 65 percent either "strongly support" or "somewhat support" a bill to ban the .50 caliber Barrett rifle – which Christie proposed in April but vetoed when the Legislature sent a version to his desk. Support for the two bills Christie conditionally vetoed – meaning he recommended changes and sent them back to the Legislature – is stronger. Eighty-two percent support Senate President Stephen Sweeney's (D-Gloucester) "centerpiece" bill that would encode firearms purchase permits either on driver's licenses or a separate photo ID card, require gun buyers complete safety training to buy a firearm and expand background checks. Christie gutted that bill, removing its biggest provisions, and Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) said Wednesday that he did not plan to concur with Christie's veto. Eighty-five percent said they support another bill Christie conditionally vetoed that would require the state report information on lost, stolen and lost and discarded guns to federal databases (A3797). [Star-Ledger, 9/19/13] Asbury Park Press Editorial: Christie Vetoed Three Gun Control Pieces After Being Lobbied By Gun-Rights Group In NH Against New Laws, And A Former NJ Republican Governor Who Were Supportive, "Demonstrating Once Again He Is More Interested In Angling For The 2016 Republican Nomination For President Than In Keeping The Residents Of New Jersey Safe." "On Friday, Gov. Chris Christie vetoed three of four pieces of gun control legislation, demonstrating once again he is more interested in angling for the 2016 Republican nomination for president than in keeping the residents of New Jersey safe, including those in the capital. The vetoes came after a gun-rights group in the presidential primary state of New Hampshire had warned Christie that signing the bills passed by the New Jersey Legislature could have negative consequences if he runs for president in 2016. At the same time, Christie ignored the advice of two former Republican New Jersey governors to sign all four gun bills. His vetoes and the stated reasons behind them are based on faulty reasoning and the hope that the right wing of the Republican Party will accept his prior apostasy on guns." [Editorial, Asbury Park Press, 8/19/13] MSNBC: "The National Rifle Association Quickly Took Credit For Gov. Christie's Decision." "The National Rifle Association quickly took credit for Gov. Christie's decision. 'NRA members did a tremendous job contacting state legislators and the Governor,' reads a statement posted Friday on the website of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action. 'Although anti-gun lawmakers ignored constituent messages and in some cases severely restricted public testimony, gun owners prevailed today as the Governor made the right decision on the three most consequential bills.'" [MSNBC, 8/18/13] CHRISTIE HAS CUT SUPPORT FOR WOMEN'S HEALTH DESPITE NEW JERSEY BEING A PRO-CHOICE STATE Christie Vetoed $7.5 Million In Family-Planning Services Funds, His 5th Rejection Altogether That Removed Services For Over 31,000 Female Patients. "That contrasts with what happened three days later, when Christie's office issued a Friday news release to announce that he had quietly vetoed nearly $7.5 million in funding for family-planning services. It was his fifth rejection of such funds during his term, which abortion-rights advocates say has resulted in the closure of six family-planning operations, including two sites in Burlington County and a Planned Parenthood office in Cherry Hill. Because of Christie, they say, the facilities now serve 31,000 fewer female patients statewide." [Philadelphia Inquirer, 7/14/13] Star-Ledger Editorial: Christie De-Funded $7.5 M From Family Planning Clinics, And Vetoed 5 Attempts To Refund It, That Led To A 24% Drop In Patients Since 2009, Six Clinics Closing While Others Cut Back Hours, And 30 Percent Less Criminal Breast Exams. "A group of female legislators is again asking Gov. Chris Christie to restore $7.5 million for women's health that he cut from the state budget. Perfect timing. If the governor vetoes this funding — for the fifth time — what will his argument be now? … As a result, family planning clinics saw at least 33,000 fewer patients last year than in 2009 — a 24 percent drop. The number of clinical breast exams fell more than 30 percent. Six clinics closed, and others had to cut back on hours or increase waiting periods. Fewer regular checkups mean higher health care costs in the future." [Editorial, The Star-Ledger, 6/18/13] Star-Ledger Editorial: A Christie Argument The State Cannot Afford A Program Was Hypocritical After Christie's Decision To "Blow" Millions For "Utterly Selfish Reasons" "On The Special Election — Just Three Weeks Before His General Election." The Star-Ledger wrote about Christie's $7.5 million in cuts to women's health. "We can't afford it? Please. Nobody can forget the millions more he just decided to blow on the special election — just three weeks before his general election — to fill the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg's seat. Christie doesn't want to share the same ballot as Democratic favorite Cory Booker, the Newark mayor who could increase his party's turnout, because Christie wants to win by an even bigger margin to enhance his image for the 2016 presidential campaign. So he's spending $12 million for utterly selfish reasons." [Editorial, The Star-Ledger, 6/18/13] 2011: Two Republicans Said They Would Join Democrats In Reinstating Funding For Women's Health. "State Sen. Jennifer Beck (R-12) said this afternoon that she intends to vote in favor of restoring $7.5 million in women's healthcare funding. Beck also urged her colleagues to vote in favor of the funding championed by state Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-37) over repeated vetoes by Gov. Chris Christie. State Sen. Diane Allen (R-7) also said she intends to break in favor of the women's health bill." [PolitickerNJ, 5/23/11] Poll: Overwhelming Number Of New Jerseyans Support Pro-Choice Practices. "A new poll finds opinions on abortion have not changed much in recent years in New Jersey. Gov. Chris Christie brought the issue to the forefront when he spoke at an anti-abortion rally in Trenton in January. A Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released Tuesday shows 10 percent of New Jerseyans surveyed believe abortion should be illegal. Half support keeping abortion legal with restrictions and 37 percent believe abortions should be allowed in all cases. More than half of those polled said Christie's speech didn't affect their opinion of him." [CBS News, 3/15/11] CHRISTIE BRAGGED HE NEVER HAD A VETO OVERRIDE BECAUSE OF THE REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE Christie Stated He Has Never "Had One Veto Overridden In Three And A Half Years" Because "Of The Strength Of The Republicans I Have In The Legislature." "You know, we haven't had one veto overridden in three and a half years—not one. And that's because of the strength of the Republicans I have in the legislature." [Christie Campaign HQ, 04/27/13] Christie Played Up "The Strength Of The Republicans I Have In The Legislature," As A Result Of The Party's "United Way Because We Believe In The Same Core Principles," Despite Disagreements. At the opening of his Campaign HQ, Christie said: "we have our disagreements between each other. We talk them through it and we come to compromises together. But then when we walk out—when we walk out to the business of the state done, we go out in a united way because we believe in the same core principles. We believe in a smaller government, and lower taxes. We believe in less regulation on business and empowering individuals in this state to reach their full potential, whether that's through a great education or getting the hell out of there way and let them run their businesses the way they want to run them, not [through] the government." [Christie Campaign HQ, 04/27/13] Christie: "Actually I Have to Amend That Last Statement: After June 30th, I Don't Care If They Get Off Their Rear Ends And Do Their Job Anymore. You Know What I Want? I Want A Republican Legislature." [Christie Campaign HQ, 04/27/13] CHRISTIE BROKE TRADITION BY REFUSING TO REAPPOINT A MODERATE JUDGE, IN ORDER TO NOMINATE A CONSERVATIVE JUDGE New York Times Editorial: Christie's Refusal To Renominate Judge John Wallace Was A "Case Of Political Overreach," And Was The First Time Since 1947 When A Judge Seeking Reappointment Was Not Renominated, "No Matter If They Were First Chosen By A Governor Of The Other Party. "When Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey chose not to renominate Justice John Wallace Jr. to the State Supreme Court in May, it was a case of political overreach. The situation is now a national disgrace, thanks to the governor, the State Senate president, Stephen Sweeney, and Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto. The integrity and independence of the court depend on a nonpartisan process for picking justices. From 1947, when the state Constitution was adopted, until this May, every governor has renominated every justice seeking reappointment, no matter if they were first chosen by a governor of the other party. The court is one of the most respected state appeals courts in the country. Governor Christie began a very different chapter when he chose not to renominate Justice Wallace, a sound jurist and political moderate who was the court's only African-American." [Editorial, New York Times, 12/15/10] Christie Bemoaned The "Historically Liberal Court As "Out Of Control" Over The Last Three Decades, Usurping The Roles Of The Governor And The Legislature In Setting Social And Tax Policies." "Speaking to reporters in Trenton, Mr. Christie had only kind words for Justice Wallace, but he described the historically liberal court as "out of control" over the last three decades, usurping the roles of the governor and the Legislature in setting social and tax policies." [New York Times, 5/3/10] New York Times Editorial: "Without Any Basis, The Governor Said That The Justice Had Contributed To "Out Of Control" Activism On The Court." [Editorial, New York Times, 12/15/10]  Associated Press: Justice John Wallace Was A "Moderate Justice." "New Jersey Democrats, furious with Gov. Chris Christie over his decision to replace a moderate justice on the state Supreme Court, vowed Tuesday to not even consider the Republican governor's nominee. Christie created a political firestorm Monday by failing to reappoint Justice John Wallace, the court's only African-American, and nominating Anne Patterson, a white private practice lawyer and fellow Mendham Township resident, as a replacement." [Associated Press, 5/5/10]

Buono Slams Christie for Vetoing Legislation to Reduce Gun Violence

New Brunswick, NJ - Democratic gubernatorial candidate and State Senator Barbara Buono released the following statement:

"It is absolutely astounding that Governor Christie has ignored the will of his constituents and vetoed legislation that is supported by an overwhelming number of New Jerseyans. With today's vetoes, he has made his priorities clear - the wishes of right-wing, fringe Republicans in Iowa and New Hampshire are more important than protecting children and families in the Garden State. His cynical decision is even more astounding when you consider that he called for banning .50 caliber rifles in April.

"He assumes that he will be leaving New Jersey for Washington, D.C. and is therefore willing to let citizens, law enforcement and legislators in the streets of Newark, Trenton and Camden deal with the consequences of today's decision. We deserve better than broken promises and empty rhetoric that is out-of-touch with the vast majority of the state. Moreover, New Jersey has previously been a national leader on gun safety legislation. Today's decision means that we will continue to fall behind our neighbors, who have already taken steps to eradicate gun violence.

"I will continue to fight for everyday New Jerseyans across the state and, as Governor, I promise to enact this commonsense legislation to reduce gun violence."

Governor Christie Vetoes Commonsense Gun Legislation

This is one of those posts I was mentioning yesterday, it came in a few days ago and I haven't had time to post it. I'm doing so now because Senator Buono released a statement afterwards criticizing the hypocrisy of Chris Christie's gun veto. It also goes well with one of my next post  about the anti-gun rally that Congressman Pallone attended earlier today.

 From Josh Levitt
Buono for Governor

What They Are Saying:

The Star-Ledger Headline: “Gov. Christie refuses to sign 3 gun bills, including one he called for” (Matt Friedman, “Gov. Christie refuses to sign 3 gun bills, including one he called for”, The Star-Ledger, 8/16/2013)

The Star-Ledger: “…But the governor completely axed a bill that would ban the Barrett .50 caliber rifle (A3659), which is the most powerful weapon commonly available to civilians. Christie had called for a ban on future sales of the weapon in his own package of violent prevention measures outlined in April.” (Matt Friedman, “Gov. Christie refuses to sign 3 gun bills, including one he called for”, The Star-Ledger, 8/16/2013)

Philadelphia Inquirer: “…Despite proposing a ban on purchases of the Barrett .50-caliber gun and similar weapons in April, Christie vetoed a bill that would have done just that.” (Matt Katz, “Christie vetoes 3 gun-control bills, including 1 he proposed,” Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/16/2013)

Philadelphia Inquirer: “…The Republican governor acted on the bills at what is considered a dead time for media coverage - Friday night - which furthered the view among political observers that he sought to appeal to national Republicans down the road while avoiding much immediate publicity for the vetoes within the state.” (Matt Katz, “Christie vetoes 3 gun-control bills, including 1 he proposed,” Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/16/2013)

Philadelphia Inquirer: “…Moments after Christie's vetoes came down, Monmouth University pollster Patrick Murray tweeted: "Which governor 'announced' today that he's running for the GOP nomination in 2016? [Gov. Christie], of course!" (Matt Katz, “Christie vetoes 3 gun-control bills, including 1 he proposed,” Philadelphia Inquirer, 8/16/2013)

Huffington Post: “New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) vetoed legislation on Friday that would have banned .50-caliber rifles from the state, despite backing the same proposal just months ago.” (Paige Lavender, “Chris Christie Vetoes Proposed .50 Caliber Rifle Ban He Once Supported,” Huffington Post, 8/17/2013)

Huffington Post: “…In April 2013, Christie recommended banning the sale of Barrett .50-caliber semi-automatic sniper rifles as part of a group of proposals to curb gun violence. On Friday, Christie said the ban wouldn't make the Garden State any more safe, according to Reuters.” (Paige Lavender, “Chris Christie Vetoes Proposed .50 Caliber Rifle Ban He Once Supported,” Huffington Post, 8/17/2013)

MSNBC Maddow Blog: “…a .50 caliber shell is basically the size of a "carrot," which serves "an effective military weapon against even some armored vehicles. A few years back, 60 Minutes showed .50 caliber rifles making short work of steel plate armor at several hundred yards." It also has the capacity to shoot down an airplane. Under current law in New Jersey, any adult can legally purchase this weapon. The state legislature decided that's no longer a good idea, and today, Chris Christie vetoed the ban.” (Steve Benen, “Christie vetoes measures on gun violence,” MSNBC Maddow Blog, 8/16/2013)

Mediaite: “If there was any doubt that Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ) was planning a presidential run for 2016, he may have erased it late Friday with an end-of-news-cycle veto of a ban on .50 caliber firearms, whose manufacturer used to brag was “capable of destroying multi-million dollar aircraft with a single hit delivered to a vital area.” (Tommy Christopher, “Chris Christie Pulls Left Cheek Sneak Veto Of .50 Caliber Firearms Ban,”Mediaite, 8/16/2013)

Mediaite: “…As governor of a state with some of the strongest gun control laws in the country, the .50 cal ban gave Christie a rare chance to let the NRA know he’s got their back.” (Tommy Christopher, “Chris Christie Pulls Left Cheek Sneak Veto Of .50 Caliber Firearms Ban,” Mediaite, 8/16/2013)

Bryan Miller, Heeding God’s Call: “…Chris Christie clearly is courageous for his place in the Republican Party, but not for the residents of New Jersey.” (Matt Friedman, “Gov. Christie refuses to sign 3 gun bills, including one he called for”, The Star-Ledger, 8/16/2013)

Bryan Miller, Heeding God’s Call: "He’s more interested in running for president and making the extreme right wing feel good than he is in protecting the safety of the residents of New Jersey.” (Matt Friedman, “Gov. Christie refuses to sign 3 gun bills, including one he called for”, The Star-Ledger, 8/16/2013)

Holt Video - I'm With Rush

Just before the holiday weekend I received and email from the Rush Holt for Senate campaign that contained a link to the video below.

 In the video Holt's background as a scientist/teacher and his progressive stands and voting record in Congress are highlighted by a number of people both young and old that rattle off a list of issues that are near and dear to them.

The video also takes a passive aggressive, subtle swipe at one of Holt's U.S. Senate challengers, front runner Cory Booker. The swipe happens when a young African-American supporter states, " I like Cory Booker but for Senate, I'm with Rush".

Overall I like the video, it's effective, concise and charmingly quirky, playing off the "Big Bang Theory" geekiness of Holt's background and supporters.  



Rush is a teacher, scientist and a true progressive. No one will fight harder for progressive policies in the US Senate.

Rush has taken on the Republicans in Congress - voting against the war in Iraq, to repeal the PATRIOT Act, against warrantless surveillance of Americans, and against Republican cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

In the Senate, Rush will be a leader on progressive issues, like increasing education funding, expanding background checks to ALL gun sales and building a smart national energy grid.

President Obama's Weekly Address 4/13/13: Sandy Hook Victim's Mother Calls for Commonsense Gun Responsibility Reforms

This week’s address is delivered by Francine Wheeler, whose six year old son, Ben, was murdered alongside nineteen other children and six educators in Newtown, Connecticut, four months ago. Now, Francine – joined by her husband David – is asking the American people to help prevent this type of tragedy from happening to more families like hers. Since that terrible day in December, thousands more Americans have died, and thousands more families have suffered the pain of losing a loved one to violence. Now that the Senate has agreed that commonsense gun safety reforms deserve a vote, they must finish the job and pass those reforms to protect our children and our communities. Now is the time for all Americans to help make this a moment of real change.

President Obama's Weekly Address 3/23/13: Helping Protect Our Kids by Reducing Gun Violence

Three months after the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, President Obama says that the Senate has taken important steps forward to help protect our kids by reducing gun violence. The American people made their voices heard, and the Senate made progress to make it harder for criminals and people with serious mental illnesses to get guns, to crack down on anyone trying to funnel guns to criminals, and to reinstate and strengthen a ban on the sale of military-style assault weapons. Each of these ideas deserves a vote.

President Obama's Weekly Address 1/19/13: Now Is The Time to Take Action Against Gun Violence

President Obama reiterates his commitment to do everything in his power to implement a series of common sense measures that would reduce gun violence in America. The President started off that effort with 23 concrete actions his Administration is taking immediately under its existing legal authority. But to have a lasting impact, Congress must join the administration by passing common sense laws like requiring a universal background check for anyone trying to buy a gun, and restoring a ban on military-style assault weapons and a 10-round limit for magazines. If they do that, we can respect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while helping to keep the irresponsible few from causing massive harm.

$50.4 billion

The following is from Congressman Rush Holt's newsletter:

On Tuesday evening, the House finally passed a $50.4 billion disaster relief bill that will help New Jersey and other states rebuild after Hurricane Sandy.

Congressman Rush Holt

That’s the good news – and it is, to be sure, very good news. For the tens of thousands of New Jerseyans still working hard to recover from the storm, this bill will make a real difference. It provides significant emergency support to FEMA and the Small Business Administration, and it invests wisely in preventing future disasters.

But the vote also reflects a deeply troubling trend in our politics. It is troubling that Congress would hesitate and debate for months whether we would rebuild after a hurricane. It is alarming that, when Congress finally decided to act, the bill passed mostly along party lines, with small Republican support and that small Republican support coming almost entirely from northeastern states or from states usually affected by hurricanes.

Does this mean disaster relief has become a partisan or regional issue, rather than a shared commitment to aid our fellow citizens who fall victim to nature’s wrath? Congress seems to be losing its belief in a great America, a country that doesn't for a moment think that natural disaster or hardship will set us back.

Not Just Tears. Action.

President Obama this week unveiled a wide-ranging set of proposals to rein in gun violence, drawing on the recommendations of a task force led by Vice President Biden. Already the President has taken meaningful steps to help track the flow of firearms and to support research into gun deaths, but as he was quick to point out, real progress will require Congress to act.

And act we must. For decades, too many in Washington have stood passively by as our schoolchildren and moviegoers and worshippers and police officers and so many others have been gunned down. This shameful inaction must end.

First and foremost, we must enact a permanent ban on military-style assault weapons. Of course, Congress will protect the right of law-abiding Americans to own firearms that are useful for sport or self-defense. But semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines have no legitimate use whatsoever outside of police and military forces. These military-style assault weapons are useful only to criminals who wish to commit mass murder, and they should be banned once and for all.

We must also make sensible investments in strengthening mental health care. To be clear, the NRA lobbyists who claim that this step alone is sufficient to rein in gun violence are self-serving and wrong-headed. Better access to mental health care will likely play only a modest role in preventing gun murders – but it could play a critical role in preventing gun suicides, which represent the majority of all gun deaths. Moreover, better mental health care in America is an end worth pursuing in itself.

Finally, we must recognize the crucial role of law enforcement in preventing gun violence. In particular, the President is right to emphasize the value of school resource officers: specially trained law enforcement officers who work in schools every day. These resource officers do much more than just staff metal detectors or respond to violent crises. They work within schools day in and day out to build trust, create a culture of nonviolence, and strengthen respect for the law. We should invest in placing trained school resource officers in every school in America, and I plan to introduce legislation in the weeks ahead to help make that possible.

To hear the stories of the little children and the teachers murdered in Newtown makes you want to cry. But even more than that, it should make us want to act.

Forty Years of Scientists on Capitol Hill

So many of the challenging issues that Congress deals with every day, from climate change to internet security to national defense to space exploration, demand expert-level knowledge of science and technology. Yet most members of Congress do not have a scientific background, and even those of us who are trained as scientists cannot possibly hope to be an expert in every field. Where can we turn for much-needed expertise?

For the past four decades, the American Association for the Advance of Science (AAAS) has helped to answer that question through its Science & Technology Policy Fellowships program. In 1973, AAAS societies selected seven scientists and engineers to work for a year in a Congressional office, providing their expertise to Congress and learning about the political process. In the decades since, the program has expanded, and its alumni have brought their experiences to high-level positions throughout the government and the private sector.

I owe a great debt to the AAAS Fellows program: I was a AAAS fellow in 1982, and I have been honored in my time as a member of Congress to host many fellows in my office. To celebrate the program’s 40th anniversary, I recently joined several other past fellows to contribute to a short documentary about the program’s impact. The result, an engaging 16-minute video, is now available online.

Sincerely,

Rush Holt
Member of Congress

NRA Shuts Down It's Facebook Page and Twitter Accounts

It seems that the NRA would rather hide than defend their position on gun control regulations in the wake of the Sandy Hook School shootings, now that they are faced by a public that has become outraged over the senseless gun violence that is becoming more and more common.

 AdWeek- The National Rifle Association shut down a key Twitter account last summer in the aftermath of the Aurora, Colo. theater shootings. On Saturday, one day after the unthinkable shootings at a Newtown, Conn. elementary school, the NRA took a more drastic measure by deactivating its Facebook page after celebrating getting to 1.7 million fans on the social site earlier in the week.

While the group has not commented since Friday's tragedy, it appears to have staked out a strategy to take its brand out of the social media picture in the wake of a mass-shooting news event. Given its guns-rights cause, the social media buzz after such events seems to be an unenviable conversation for the org to partake in. The NRA's chief Twitter account, which has doubled in followers to 63,000 since the Aurora shootings, has been silent since tweeting out a holidays giveaway contest early Friday.

Meanwhile, Facebook news feeds and Twitter streams have been inundated with debate about whether the nation's politicians should enact federal gun-control legislation in reaction to the recent string of mass shootings. The conversation has ranged from typically political to thoughtful to downright ugly.

Scarborough's Morning Joe Commentary On The Sandy Hook School Shootings

I was up early this morning and when I turned on the Morning Joe show on MSNBC, I was pleasantly surprised to see show host Joe Scarborough open his show with a strong monologue pertaining to Friday's Sandy Hook School shooting.  Scarborough made a heartfelt, commonsense plea for some type of gun regulations that will end the senseless violence that has become far more common in recent years than anyone would like.

When in Congress, Scarborough was one of the most conservative and partisan members of the Republican Party, who during his 4 terms as a congressman, received the NRA's highest endorsement. So for him and for people like him, to have a change of heart on the issue gun control in the aftermath the Sandy Hook shootings is commendable.

It's extremely unfortunate however that this change of heart on his and their parts has come only after 28 people,  20 of whom were innocent 6 & 7 year old children lost their lives before they had really every begun.

Nonetheless, I commend Joe Scarborough's change of heart and thinking on this issue. This is a very complicated issue that can't be legislated in one swipe of the pen. As Scarborough states in his commentary, much more needs to be done to recognize people with mental health issue and to see that they received treatment. And to make sure that guns aren't getting into the hands of unstable people.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Gun Control Legislation: Frank Lautenberg Readies Bill In Wake Of Aurora Shooting

by Sam Stein - Huffington Post

WASHINGTON -- In the immediate aftermath of the shooting in Aurora, the debate over gun control policy has more or less centered on whether it's an appropriate time to even have a debate.

Senator Frank Lautenberg

But several lawmakers have demanded that the government not shy about tackling the legislative issue. Mayor Michael Bloomberg set the tone when he urged the two presidential candidates to outline their policies with respect to federal gun laws. And now, Sen. Frank Lautenberg's (D-N.J.) office is saying that he plans to reintroduce legislation that would curtail the ability of a shooter to fire at length without reloading.

"If reports are correct and a high-capacity gun magazine was used to commit these awful murders, Senator Lautenberg will absolutely renew his effort to limit the availability of this dangerous firearm attachment," Lautenberg's communications director Caley Gray told The Huffington Post.

Lautenberg, one of the most vocal gun control advocates in the Senate, introduced a bill to limit high-capacity magazines following the shooting of former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The shooter in that instance fired his gun more than 30 times without having to reload. The bill went nowhere.

Early reports have suggested that the accused shooter in Aurora, James Holmes, also used a high-capacity magazine on his assault rifle. And that alone could breathe new political life into the New Jersey Democrat's legislative hopes.

Don’t get spun by Internet rumors

I happen to work with a couple of people that believe just about everything they read on the Internet. The more outlandish the story or unbelievable the conspiracy theory, the more it must be true in their eyes. So when another friend forwarded me an email from another friend titled "Don't get spun by Internet rumors" I couldn't resist posting. 

The original issuer of the email (whoever he is) gave the following wise advice to its recipients:

Use this as a quick check before forwarding these seemingly endless viral emails. Be aware that by circulating many of these mails, you are making yourself a victim of email harvesters and possibly a virus. Hackers know that these hot spot issues will cause an email forwarding frenzy and sit back and wait for their cookies to do their work. By forwarding their junk, you are helping them generate more junk. If you want to dig deeper into these issues; factcheck.org has the details.

Here's the body of the email:

Just because you read it on somebody’s blog or in an email from a friend or relative doesn’t mean it’s true. It’s probably not, as we advised in our special report “Is this chain e-mail true?” back on March 18, 2008. On this page we feature a list of the false or misleading viral rumors we’re asked about most often, and a brief summary of the facts. But click on the links to read the full articles. There is a lot more detail in each answer.

Does the Obama administration intend to “force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for U.S. citizens” through a United Nations treaty?
No. The administration plans to negotiate a treaty to regulate the international export and import of weapons. It says that it won’t support any treaty that regulates the domestic transfer or ownership of weapons, or that infringes on the Second Amendment.

June 27, 2012

Did Barack and Michelle Obama “surrender” their law licenses to avoid ethics charges?
No. A court official confirms that no public disciplinary proceeding has ever been brought against either of them, contrary to a false Internet rumor. By voluntarily inactivating their licenses, they avoid a requirement to take continuing education classes and pay hundreds of dollars in annual fees. Both could practice law again if they chose to do so.

June 14, 2012

Is General Motors becoming ‘China Motors’ using taxpayer dollars?
No. The restructured GM is still based in Detroit and is still one-third owned by the U.S. government. But it sells nearly as many cars in China as in theU.S. and has continued expanding operations there.

June 8, 2012

Did President Obama secretly sign a law that makes it a crime to protest against him or ask him a question he doesn’t like?

No. He openly announced the signing of a bill overwhelmingly passed by Congress that slightly revises a 1971 law against trespassing into areas under Secret Service protection.

May 7, 2012

Is the National Association of Realtors lobbying to repeal a 3.8 percent “sales tax” on homes before it takes effect in 2013?
No. There’s no such “sales tax” in the new health care law. And Medicare premiums aren’t going to $247 either. But these virulent falsehoods keep going around.

April 30, 2012

Does the new health care law impose a 3.8 percent tax on profits from selling your home?
No, with very few exceptions. The first $250,000 in profit from the sale of a personal residence won’t be taxed, or the first $500,000 in the case of a married couple. The tax falls on relatively few — those with high incomes from other sources.

April 22, 2010

Will the new health care law raise Medicare’s basic monthly premium to $247 in 2014, as a viral message claims?
No, Medicare officials project the basic premium will be less than half that. But the law will eventually cause 14 percent of seniors with incomes over $85,000 a year ($170,000 for couples) to pay higher “income-related” premiums, up from 5 percent currently.

April 1, 2011

Is “Obama’s finance team” recommending a 1 percent tax on all bank transactions, as a chain e-mail claims?
No. This idea was first floated in 2004 by one House member, who says it would replace the federal income tax and eliminate the national debt. So far it has gone nowhere.

Sept. 8, 2010; Updated: June 5, 2012

Are three former Fannie Mae executives “economic advisers” to Obama?
No, claims made in a chain e-mail are false. Jim Johnson advised on non-economic matters but quit after a week. Franklin Raines says he took a “couple of calls” but was never an adviser. We find no evidence Tim Howard ever had a connection to the Obama campaign.

Oct. 9, 2008

Will Muslim Americans be exempt from the mandate to have health insurance? 
The Muslim faith does not forbid purchasing health insurance, and no Muslim group has ever been considered exempt under the definitions used in the health care law.

May 20, 2010

Is President Obama giving away several Alaskan islands to Russia?
No. The U.S. has never claimed ownership of the islands identified in viral emails and websites. They lie far closer to the coast of Siberia than to Alaska.

March 27, 2012

Is President Obama responsible for Chinese companies building U.S. bridges with stimulus money, as reported by ABC News?
No. A viral email distorts an ABC News report. California officials hired a Chinese contractor and rejected federal money to avoid federal “Buy American” laws.

Feb. 17, 2012

How much has the federal debt gone up under Obama?
During his first three years in office, it rose $4.7 trillion, an increase of 45 percent. Partisan graphics circulating via email and Facebook are both incorrect.

Feb. 2, 2012

Did Obama issue a policy that “no U.S. serviceman can speak at any faith-based public event”?
This claim in a chain e-mail is false. Army officials say there has been no change in policy regarding “faith-based” events. And the event the e-mail refers to wasn’t a “faith-based” one.

June 10, 2009

Does Obama plan to deny emergency brain surgery for patients over 70?
No. A man claiming on a radio talk show to be a brain surgeon lied about that, and about a meeting of two associations of neurological surgeons, those associations say.

Jan. 5, 2012

Is it true that members of Congress, their staffers and their family members do not have to pay back their student loans?
Not true. Some congressional employees are eligible to have up to $60,000 of student loans repaid after several years — just like other federal workers. But that’s not the case for members of Congress or their families.

Jan. 6, 2011

Did Obama order the military to drop the words “on behalf of the president of the United States” when presenting the flag to the next of kin at funerals?
A chain email that makes that claim is wrong. Spokespersons for the Defense Department and the armed forces say that no change was ordered.

Oct. 10, 2011

Is President Obama honoring Jane Fonda as one of the women of the century?
No. That was done 11 years ago by Barbara Walters of ABC News.

Nov. 22, 2010

Did President Obama have his dog, Bo, flown to Maine in his own private jet for the family vacation?
No. The family and staff took two small jets because the airport couldn’t accommodate the usual presidential plane. Bo flew with several staffers.

Sept. 16, 2010

Is it true that nobody remembers Obama attending Columbia University?
At least one of his classmates remembers him well, and the university proudly claims Obama.

Feb. 16, 2010

Does George Soros own the company buying many firms that make guns and ammunition?
No. Contrary to a fanciful claim made in a viral email, the Freedom Group is not linked to the liberal billionaire. The National Rifle Association says the real owners are “strong supporters” of gun rights.

Oct. 21, 2011

Was President Obama’s tour bus made in Canada?
The shell of the $1.1 million bus came from Canada, but it was converted for the Secret Service by a company in Tennessee.

Aug. 25, 2011

Is a chart claiming to show the “top 20 raises” to White House staffers accurate?
It’s misleading. The salary increases for 19 of the 21 employees listed resulted from promotions. Average pay for White House staff actually declined.

Aug. 4, 2011

Is President Obama flying on Air Force One more than other presidents did? Is he being accompanied by more people on international trips?
Two chain e-mails suggesting that the president’s travel habits are more excessive than his predecessors are off base.

July 8, 2011

Is it true that boycotting companies that import foreign oil will “avoid putting more money into the coffers” of foreign countries?
No. There is no way to know for sure whether your local station is selling gasoline from imported or domestic oil. Besides, U.S. oil demand is twice its domestic supply.

March 25, 2011

What about the “Congressional Reform Act of 2011″?
A viral e-mail calls for fixing some abuses and excesses that don’t exist, repeating misinformed claims that we’ve addressed before.

March 18, 2011

Is President Obama using tax dollars to rebuild mosques around the world?
Yes — and to rebuild historic churches and temples as well. The State Department’s program to preserve overseas cultural landmarks started under President Bush in 2001.

March 10, 2011

Do statistics in a chain e-mail give an accurate “report card” of President Obama’s first two years?
Not exactly. The author made many minor mistakes and some major omissions in describing the terrible economic conditions he attributes to the president.

Feb. 25, 2011

Does Illinois pay a grandmother $1,500 per month per child to be the foster parent to her eight grandchildren?
No. State officials have no record of such a case, and state law would not allow it. This second-hand story spread by a Danville urologist isn’t true.

Dec. 10, 2010

Has President Obama canceled the May 6 National Day of Prayer?
No. This widely circulated falsehood echoes similar claims made last year when the president issued a pro-prayer-day proclamation but didn’t hold White House services as President Bush had done.

April 29, 2010

Was Michelle Obama’s brother’s job saved with money from the stimulus act?
This chain email is a hoax. It makes a ridiculously false claim about Craig Robinson, who is the head coach of Oregon State University’s men’s basketball team and the first lady’s older brother

.
March 22, 2010

Did Congress raise its own pay for 2010 while voting to deny an increase for Social Security recipients?
No. A chain e-mail calling for “retribution” in the fall elections makes false claims and uses fabricated figures.

Jan. 8, 2010

Did Obama loan $2 billion to Brazil’s oil company to benefit China and George Soros?
The president had nothing to do with the loan, which the Export-Import Bank approved for Brazil to buy U.S.-made equipment and services.

Sept. 18, 2009

Is there any truth in the e-mail claiming to give “a few highlights from the first 500 pages of the Healthcare bill”?
Barely. We examined all 48 claims, finding 26 of them to be false and 18 to be misleading, only partly true or half true. Only four are accurate.

Aug. 28, 2009

Is the ACLU suing to have cross-shaped headstones removed from military cemeteries?
The ACLU has filed no such suit, and it hasn’t sued to “end prayer from the military” either.

July 5, 2009

Did Obama accuse veterans of “selfishness” and whining? Would he have forced them to “pay for their war injuries”?
This chain e-mail contains fabricated quotes and misrepresents a budget idea that the White House scrapped.

May 12, 2009

Has a “smoking gun” been found to prove Obama was not born a U.S. citizen? Did he attend Occidental College on a scholarship for foreign students?
This chain e-mail is a transparent April Fools’ Day hoax. It fabricates an AP news story about an nonexistent group, and makes false claims about Obama and the Fulbright program.

May 7, 2009

Is Congress about to give Social Security to illegal immigrants?
No. Congress hasn’t voted on any measure to pay benefits to illegal immigrants, and has no plans for any such vote.

March 1, 2009
(This long-standing falsehood was bandied about back in 2006 and again during the 2008 presidential election.)

What’s the deal with Prof. Joseph Olson’s “unreported stats” from the 2008 election?
This chain e-mail is a hoax. The “statistics” are grossly incorrect, and Olson says he didn’t write it.

Jan. 5, 2009

Was Obama born in the U.S.A.?
Yes. We give you the truth about Obama’s birth certificate.

Aug. 21, 2008
Updated Nov. 1, 2008

Is there a connection between FactCheck.org and Barack Obama or Bill Ayers?

None, aside from benefiting at different times from the charity of the late publisher Walter Annenberg. We are a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and get funding from the Annenberg Foundation, created by Walter Annenberg in 1989. Ayers was one of threeChicago educators who applied for a grant from the Annenberg Foundation in 1995, which was one of 5,200 grants the foundation made during its first 15 years. That $49 million grant, plus additional funds raised locally, funded the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which sought to improve Chicago public schools. Obama was selected by Chicago officials (not Ayers) to chair the board set up to administer Annenberg Challenge funds, and he headed it until 1999. FactCheck.org came into being in late 2003. For other details see our Oct. 10, 2008, article about Obama and Ayers, which includes a sidebar: “FactCheck.org and the ‘Annenberg Challenge.’ “