So question, what is more danger9us, the bullet or the ballot. I contend the latter. Mrs. Pelosi seems to think the opposite. Mrs. Pelosi was set to give District of Columbia residents representation in the House, albeit simply unconstitutional. Chad Pergram and Mosheh Oinounou, Fox New [1] :
The House Democratic leadership Tuesday decided to delay a plan to grant a seat in the House to the District of Columbia. Since it is not a state, Washington, D.C., does not get a vote in Congress.
The Senate approved a similar bill to give the District voting representation. And approval in the House seemed all but assured. But an amendment attached to the Senate version of the legislation by Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., created problems in the House.
Mrs. Pelosi contends that giving D.C. residents voting representation in Congress is imporant, enough so to violate the Constitution. Yet denying D.C. residents their Second Amendment rights is more important to Mrs. Pelosi that their voting rates. Some strange woman.
D. C. Delegate D.C. Eleanor Holmes-Norton seemed to forget who was supposed to represent:
“There is no choice between a vote for American citizens and a completely unrelated and reckless gun bill. That is a non-choice,” Norton said during an emotional impromptu press conference following the Democratic caucus meeting Tuesday afternoon. “That’s not a fair exchange. That’s not even an unfair exchange. That is an absurd exchange that no one would accept.”
Holmes-Norton would trust constituents with ballots but not bullets. How sad.
Hat tip and more: Ed Morrissey, Hot Air: [2]
As it turns out, those Blue Dog Democrats that Nancy Pelosi was so pleased to get in 2006 have pretty strong views on gun ownership and want to end the practice of disarming law-abiding citizens in DC. In order to get the bill to the floor, the bill has to clear a procedural vote on “rules”, and a significant number of House Democrats refuse to vote for the rules if the Ensign Amendment is not included in the House bill.
Instead of allowing that amendment to remain on the bill, Steny Hoyer and Nancy Pelosi tabled it.
I don’t have much faith in the blue dogs. But they do seem to offer some limited ability to rein in Mrs. Pelosi’s radical agenda.