Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Knollenberg receives Primary Challenger from left

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060125/NEWS06/601250383/1008

"""County Republicans to go head to head
Godchaux wants seat in U.S. House

January 25, 2006

BY KATHLEEN GRAY

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Former state Rep. Patricia (Pan) Godchaux, a moderate Republican from Birmingham, said Tuesday that she'll make a long-shot bid to take on incumbent U.S. Rep. Joe Knollenberg, a Bloomfield Hills Republican, in the GOP's August primary.

"The numbers in the district are showing us that the district is more moderate than he is, and I'm more moderate than he is," Godchaux, 59, said Tuesday"""


This is not good news for Knollenberg. He's won tough races by easy margins before, but this is another matter.

The district is completely in Oakland County, and is a 51/49 Bush district.

12 comments:

Paleoconservative said...

I never realized it was even possible to challenge Joe from the left.

Keith Richards said...

I've not seen anything which would give me reason to believe that Godchaux has any hope at all of defeating Knollenberg. Maybe she has something up her sleeves?

Republican Michigander said...

Well, Pan took a $200 donation from gun grabbers MPPGV back in her 2000 state rep race.

She voted against conceal carry. She even was the only Republican who voted against the non-controversial Vear Bill that passed 80-25 and the senate unanimously.

Not even Joe Schwarz can claim that one.

Keith Richards said...

Yeah, a known anti-2nd amendment Republican has about as much chance of getting elected as an anti-welfare Democrat does.

Kevins said...

God forbid we should ever elect a moderate republican who may work with the other side and address some of the problems of this country.

It amazes me how anyone who even proposes even a few basic, common sense restrictions on guns is called a “gun grabber” or anti-second amendment. Give me a break.
There are restrictions on the first amendment, by far the most important right in this country, and first for a reason. The Second Amendment doesn’t mean the same thing in 1791 as it does today. They didn’t have high-caliber automatic assault rifles, nor did they have a standing army ready to deploy in a moments notice.

Republican Michigander said...

We already have a moderate republican in that district. His name is Joe Knollenberg. Some like JM, even considers him liberal.

"""The Second Amendment doesn’t mean the same thing in 1791 as it does today."""

BULL. It means the same thing since it hasn't been AMENDED.

""It amazes me how anyone who even proposes even a few basic, common sense restrictions on guns is called a “gun grabber” """

You gun-grabbers are either ignorant or misleading when it comes to this issue. I suspect misleading. Guns are one of the most regulated items in this country, and there's an entire agency dedicated to firearms regulations - in violation of the 10th amendment if I may add. That's in addition to all the state laws on firearms. Guns are regulated from beginning to end in their manufacture to sale.

The gun grabbers at MPPGV (Created and funded by the big money Joyce Foundation of Chicago and Tsunami Fund of San Francisco), which donated to Mrs. Godchaux, defines so called "common sense gun regulations" as banning even pump action shotguns. That was their stance as shown by a August 8, 2002 Free Press column by its founder, Carolynne Jarvis. I know the exact date, because I wrote and still have an issue advocacy ad citing that article.

Ted Kennedy called banning .30-30 ammunition "common sense". That's the most basic of all hunting rounds. Real hunting, not the craw on your belly John Kerry style of hunting which must be unique to the Beacon Hill section of Boston.

"Assault Rifles" "Common Sense" "Basic restrictions" These are all buzzwords used by the anti-2nd amendment, gun grabbing lobby and their media lackeys. That's it. Buzzwords that sound scary or mainstream - used to hide a real turkey. All of us who follow 2nd Amendment issues know this. The NRA in Washington finally caught on to this as well. These scams by the gun grabbers do not sell with mainstream America. It may sell in Ann Arbor, but not in Livingston County.

There's a reason the NRA wins elections. VOTES.

Keith Richards said...

When somebody starts talking about being a "moderate" I have to wonder what that means. I know what a conservative is. I know what a liberal is. But what the heck is a "moderate"? Is this someone like President Clinton, who stuck his finger into the air to see which way the wind was blowing before making up his mind about an issue?

Kevins said...

Wow, I sure struck a nerve. Very sensitive when it comes to guns, I wonder what you’re compensating for?

Sorry, the meaning of the Second Amendment sure as hell has changed since it was adopted in 1791. How do you amend an amendment? By your warped logic, the Third Amendment is as relative today as it was in 1791. Not. Gee, when was the last time a controversy arose over a solider being quartered in a home without the consent of the owner?
Calling me a gun grabber is ridiculous. I don’t want your gun. I haven’t carried a handgun since I was in the military, but you wouldn’t know anything about that. Saying guns are “…one of the most regulated items in this country” is simply not true, but there are few things in this world more dangerous or caused more death and destruction and abused more, and they should be regulated. What agency is “entirely” dedicated to gun control? And in “violation of the 10th amendment.” Your logic makes me laugh, but the sad part is you really believe your own BS.
As for the rest of your paranoid post, frankly I’m just a little stunned at the BS you spout so feely. I don’t get the reference to the “John Kerry” style of hurting. He, unlike you, carried a weapon in combat. Is that what you mean?

Talk about buzzwords, you mean like “Media Lackeys,” or “Gun grabbers?” Those are buzzwords the NRA uses to scare paranoid, one issue idiots like you to fork over more cash and obedience.

A moderate is someone who can comprise to get things accomplished.

Republican Michigander said...

I'm compensating so my kids and grandkids down the road can enjoy the freedoms I have. The second amendment protects the others from anti-freedom politicians.

""How do you amend an amendment?"""

By another constitutional amendment. If something in the constitution is outdated, that's the way to change it, not by some revisionism popular by left wing activist judges like Stephen Reinhardt.

"""Saying guns are “…one of the most regulated items in this country” is simply not true,"""

I got a good laugh about that.

I can only buy a pistol in my state. I can not have one shipped to my home, nor can I buy one in Indiana and carry it home - even with the purchase permit. I have to be 21 to own a pistol. There are records kept of every firearm purchase by law. Michigan has registration. Importation of guns can be banned simply by the BATF. There are over 800 pages of safety regulations for domestic manufacturers. That's not counting all the state laws banning guns that "look scary".

"""I don’t get the reference to the “John Kerry” style of hurting."""

John Kerry lied (again) when he says he was a deer hunter. He told a Wisconsin newspaper that he crawed on his belly to hunt deer. Deer hunters don't do that.

And no, the NRA doesn't give me "talking points". In fact, I find out most of the gun grab attemps two weeks before the NRA's magazine reaches my door. I don't remember the NRA using the term gun grabbers either. They use "Gun ban lobby" and "anti-gun" instead.

And it's not a coincidince that most of those who oppose the 2nd amendment, also oppose the first amendment. McCain/Feingold.

Kevins said...

“…kids and grandkids down the road can enjoy the freedoms I have.” That so ironic for you to say that when King George is eroding our personal freedoms every single day all in the name of this so-called security. He’s trashing the Constitution and thumbing his nose on the Fourth Amendment by spying on Americans, snatching people off the street and holding them in secret and torturing people all in the name of this undeclared war on terror. If this continues the terrorists have won. Why you not up in arms over those personal freedoms under assault?

Of course there are things more regulated than guns, such as nuclear energy, but I’m sure guns have destroyed more lives than nuclear energy. You never answered my question about what agency is “entirely” dedicated to gun control, but from your last rant I deducted it was the BATF. If that’s the case, maybe they should drop the A and the T?
You can’t hunt deer or fire at a deer on your stomach? What? That’s perhaps the most ridiculous thing you have ever said ion this propaganda blog, and there have been plenty of ridiculous rants from you. It has been a few years since I have been hunting, but it seems to me any method that helps you not announces your presence to a deer seems like the way to go. That’s just more of the nitpicking attacks on Kerry.

You don’t get your talking points from the NRA. Right.

“And it's not a coincidince that most of those who oppose the 2nd amendment, also oppose the first amendment. McCain/Feingold.” Wow, your logic is unbelievable. I strongly support the First Amendment, but I am also not against the Second Amendment. The NRA has so brainwashed you that anyone who doesn’t want people to be able to simply walk into the local 7-11 and pick-up a handgun along with their slurpee are anti-Second Amendment. Supporting gun control is not being anti-Second Amendment anymore than supporting libel and slander laws is being anti-First Amendment. I also don’t understand how a hard fought attempt at trying to curb the corrosive influence of money in the Democratic process is anti-First Amendment. It’s not a good law, but under the circumstances, it was the best compromise and bi-partisan start. Events today have only shown how money in politics corrupts with the republican Abramahoff scandal.

Keith Richards said...

Kevins - So you are saying that we need more Democrat moderates in order that we can get more things done.

Thanks for the clarification.

Kevins said...

No. How the heck did you reach that conclusion? With the republicans in control of everything, compromise and bi-partisanship is a dirty word, and they have changed the tone in Washington like they promised. The only problem is the tone is now ugly, nasty, arrogant and corrupt.