Comments on: Bob Marshall’s Opening Salvo

By: Harry

Harry — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:29:17 +0000

Bob is his own worst enemy in the House. He leads the House nearly every year in the number of bills introduced, I think he introduced around 75 last year, if each Delegate introduced as many bills as Bob,t he number would be 7500 to be considered in the 30 days before cross over. Howell’s rule was originally 10 bills but the rule was changed in the last few days of the seesion to 15. If you look at the 75 +/- bills Bob introduced, many were nonsense by anyones objective analysis. Bob has no credibility with his own members due to his many irrational moments on the House floor. The Democrats just sit and laugh while Bob’s own party colleagues eviserate him. Bob is one of the smartest members in the House, he is also one of the most eccentric, leading to a nearly total lack of credibility by the other members of the House.

By: w e stewart

w e stewart — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:55:42 +0000

Anchor Baby.
Very, very good. Soon we will be so labored by our labor, of laboring for the fed, we will be skinny, shrunken and depleted of all energy. This is a tactic of the left, pile it on, pile it on, and then pile some more on under the guise that it’s legal to do so. The citizens are laboring under political overload, also re to as, BS! One must understand one thing re the electorate. The only thing they do is vote, and most are voting the way their masters order them to. They really don’t ask, they tell these idiots, and they do it, thinking it is the answer to all problems. One thing liberals are good at; they first create a non-problem, then they want gov’t to be the hero, and solve it.

By: Anchor Baby

Anchor Baby — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:12:19 +0000

Petition to STOP RealID from being put into effect in Virginia.

http://www.gopetition.com/online/23752.html

Whereas, The national ID card called for in Dangerous ID, the so-called Real ID Act of 2005, is repressive, invasive, and unconstitutionally violating the fourth amendment right of the people to be secure; and

Whereas, The dangerous implications of this federal mandate include privacy concerns, expensive compliance costs for states and federal meddling in states’ rights; and,

Whereas, “Dangerous ID” has been unadvisedly promoted as a deterrent to terrorism and illegal immigration, but would not resolve either of those problems as evidenced by the fact that several of the September 11th hijackers used legitimate driver’s licenses; and

Whereas, If “Dangerous ID” is placed in force, illegal aliens would potentially have a national database from which to buy and sell illegal identification; and

Whereas, The “Dangerous ID” requires a digital photo and biometric identifiers on each license, and potentially include an RFID chip storing that information to a federal database to be shared with all 50 states, thereby turning “Dangerous ID” into a gold mine for identity thieves; and

Whereas, This $11 billion endeavor could limit law-abiding citizens the uncompromised freedom to travel, open a bank account, secure employment or purchase a firearm; and

Whereas, the Commonwealth of Virginia is already straining under the weight of federal bureaucratic compliance costs would be further burdened by additional expense; and

Whereas, the Commonwealth of Virginia will experience difficulty paying for massive computer systems to hook up to a federal database and complying by the December 2009 deadline; and

Whereas, the Virginia Liberty Defense has formed a coalition of groups calling for House and Senate bills to be enacted to prohibit the implementation of the “Dangerous ID” in the Commonwealth of Virginia; and

Whereas, Public outcry against the scheme has resulted in 21 states in an all-out revolt against “Dangerous ID” with bills or resolutions already passed against this unconstitutional federal mandate; and

Whereas, U.S. Citizens in such states could be denied access to federal buildings, bank accounts or boarding commercial airplanes; and

Whereas, American citizens should not be required to carry identification papers or have their personal information stored in a database by the federal government; therefore be it

The citizens of Virginia and the coalition of eight separate organizations in Virginia strongly urge freedom-loving Americans to demand that our Commonwealth of Virginia legislators support and sponsor Delegate Bob Marshall and Senator Ken Cuccinelli’s House and Senate bills to stop the implementation of Dangerous ID in Virginia.

We, the undersigned, call on the government of the State of Virginia to refuse compliance with the dangerous, so-called Real ID Act and any other national ID legislation that may or may not arise.

By: Timothy Watson

Timothy Watson — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:15:47 +0000

@Flavius Maximus

I think that’s one reason that Marshall created a leadership PAC after the Senate nomination was concluded to spread some money around during state and local elections.

By: w e stewart

w e stewart — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:44:38 +0000

The last time I checked. One doesn’t ‘check at the door of any public house’ ones Constitutional and God given rights. All this marlarkey re this law, and that law is just BS. The Constitution is superior over all other laws inacted. The only legal recorse any jurisdiction has, ‘ is to add’ to a constitutional right, not take away from it!
We would all do ourselves a great justice favor, if we would stop this useless bickering re our rights and demand, knowing that the jury of the public, came back and the judge asked that the finding be read. This public jury ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment, oh, back around the late seventeen hundreds, that my friends made it the law of the land. Not just in a few designated places either.
The concept of violence and the remedy is, one: Is there a ‘threat’ to your health, and welfare, or the public at large? two: Are the ‘means’ present to carry out that threat? three: Does the ‘opportuntiy’ exist to carry out the threat with the means available to accomplish same?
If the answer is in the positive for these three stipulations, the remedy is?
Now ask a liberal word smith, if he can envision a situation where by the above, is moot, and your life may not be at risk. Believe me he/she will be able to structure a group of words to BS his/her way, where you, and others will/shall believe it.
Remember, ‘Threat, Means and Opportunity’ These are the key steps for you to be able to react to save, your life, even the life of liberal, though I’m not sure I would. But I would have a group of words to justify, not doing it.
This in no way should be construed as legal advice, it’s what my Grandfather taught all his children, he learned from his father and his father learned from Tom Jefferson.

By: Flavius Maximus

Flavius Maximus — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:32:09 +0000

There’s one thing that Howell has that Marshall doesn’t, which could stop a challenge for Speaker: Money. Howell has a PAC, that spreads lots of money around during the state elections. Those who have benefitted from cash injections that helped get them elected, would be loyal to Howell. I’m talking about some very principled delegates who would be forced to chose. I am not saying that none wouldn’t back Marshall, but I fear enough would back Howell that Bob would come close, but not close enough.

However, many have made the mistake of underestimating Bob Marshall in the past. I am one of them. I like Bob, and the principles for which he stands are solid. I voted for him at the senate convention in Richmond. He came close, but not close enough to take out the establishment candidate, Gilmore. Maybe this time.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:29:50 +0000

If a conservative dem ran against howell i would support them

By: Timothy Watson

Timothy Watson — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:06:36 +0000

Video of part of Marshall’s and Gilbert’s press conference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgJgV1um1b0