Florida's Katherine Harris for U.S. Senate

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hikingman

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
615
Location
Alabama
Okay, so people like to slam candidates of the other party, or everyone on some of the nearly 500,000 blogs on the web.

U.S. Repr. Katherine Harris (Florida) will have opponents, too. She's catching it this week. It's related to a story about an NRA class she attended, recently, on the checklist to get her CCW ticket punched. That would be a .38 Spl. revolver, also criticized by guess who - some bloggers, and pundits.

Rated A by the NRA: U.S. Repr. Katherine Harris - for U.S. Senate.
 
She's a Republican.

The Republicans have been in charge for 6 years, and what do we have?

Campaign Finance Reform
Patriot Act
Larger bureacracy
Larger federal spending
More intrusion into our private lives
Medicare Reform (ie, larger welfare state)
An unsecure southern border
A never ending war on terror

Why do I want to continue to keep that party in power?
 
Why do I want to continue to keep that party in power?
Unfortunately, it is because the only other available alternative is exponentially worse. Perhaps citizens and pols would learn a lesson from us allowing that alternative to gain control. Perhaps not. Can we afford to have the lesson? Could we ever recover from the damage inflicted by the lesson? Perhaps not.
 
Unfortunately, it is because the only other available alternative is exponentially worse. Perhaps citizens and pols would learn a lesson from us allowing that alternative to gain control. Perhaps not. Can we afford to have the lesson? Could we ever recover from the damage inflicted by the lesson? Perhaps not.

Look how long it took Germany to recover from the good people allowing the misguided to elect the wrong candidate.
 
She's around 27pts behind gun-grabber, AWB-loving Nelson (S) s for socialist.


I doubt she can win. Although, appealing to the gun owners is a good thing. This is a gun related forum, so you'd think that people would be concerned about candidates and their Second Amendment stance the most...guess not.


I was hoping Jeb would run. He'd oust Nelson no problem. I was hoping that Florida could have 2 pro-gun Senate votes, but I doubt it will happen now. At least we managed to prevent the gun grabbers from having both seats.


Because this is a midterm election, it will be brutal on the GOP. With the low numbers they have now, it is going to have an impact on totally unrelated politics like the RKBA. We've done very well here in Florida. If we end up with a Democrat governor, it would lead to the shutdown of many pro-gun bills to veto's. All because NATIONAL politics are horrible, and the "base" is pissy over immigration/Iraq/ and other issues to vote for anything else.
 
This is a gun related forum, so you'd think that people would be concerned about candidates and their Second Amendment stance the most...guess not.
She's no better than the Dems. Unprincipled, like most Republicans. I'm voting third party.
 
She's my Congress Critter. Very nice person.
a RINO.
Jeb has told her not to run.
The Republican Party has asked her not to run.
I've asked her not to run.

There you go.

AFS
 
Hmm. You're probably right, but from a 1-issue perspective (RKBA), there's absolutely no doubt she'll be far and above better than a Democrat. Even if it isn't her thing (to support the RKBA), she'll probably do it to win her seat and try and stay there. Hell, Gore is a huge gun grabber, but he played ball while being Senator of Tennessee.

Martinez has not been anti-gun, but Nelson has been. Martinez (so far) has been an ally. While not an A+ pro-gun supporter, he isn't an anti. Good enough for me.

While I hate the Republican party for their politics, I remain a 1-issue voter, and on the RKBA, the GOP, even with their faults, are far superior to the nazi-gun-grabbing Democrats.

I don't want to turn this into a 3rd party voting debate, but Florida politics when it comes to the RKBA aren't that bad. Republicans in our state are pretty solid supporters on that issue. 3rd party voting in Florida is a vote for the gungrabbers.
 
3rd party voting in Florida is a vote for the gungrabbers.
So, you'll retain the liberty to request government permission to exercise your right to keep and bear arms while the country is transformed into a police state where everyone is a criminal and subject to being searched, arrested, tortured and monitored at any and all times without due process. Sounds wonderful. Sign me up. :scrutiny:
 
President Bush is in his last term.

I don't understand why those supporting the 2nd Ammendment would want to see the Democrats in charge.:what:

The liberals want you to not have some of the rights you now enjoy. Do you not remember the Clinton years?:banghead:

Katherine Harris is better than wasting a vote for a Third Party. She at least is running as a Republican. Which is better than her Democrat opponent.:neener:
 
Great responses! Yes, often votes go to those viewed as the lesser of two evils. While some registered voters aren't going to swing the lever at the polls, the statement: 'it's our responsibility' does have meaning to some of us.
 
Just mention Katherine Harris and we get pages of republican bashing. People post very little about the candidate, just gotta lash out at Bush. Personally, I don't think she will win. Why? If republicans that know nothing about her can bash her this bad, wait until the Democrats revive "Cruella DeVille".

If you do want to know about her, she wrote a book a few years ago. It called Center of the Storm. Get some actual information about someone before you crucify them.
 
I don't understand why those supporting the 2nd Ammendment would want to see the Democrats in charge.
well, when the republicans in power are doing everything they possibly can to remind us of why we have a second amendment in the first place...
 
Just mention Katherine Harris and we get pages of republican bashing. People post very little about the candidate, just gotta lash out at Bush. Personally, I don't think she will win. Why? If republicans that know nothing about her can bash her this bad, wait until the Democrats revive "Cruella DeVille".

If you do want to know about her, she wrote a book a few years ago. It called Center of the Storm. Get some actual information about someone before you crucify them.
United States of North America, The New American
by Steven Yates
May 1, 2006

Elitists in the United States, Mexico, and Canada are plotting to merge these three nations into a single regional government similar to the European Union.

Representative Katherine Harris (R-Fla.), a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a close political ally of President Bush, has introduced a bill into the U.S. Congress called the North American Cooperative Security Act. This bill would begin a process of integrating Canadian and Mexican defense institutions with those of the United States, expanding "consultations on defense issues," and "exploring the formation of law enforcement teams that include personnel from the United States and Mexico."

Repeating in places, almost word for word, the security strategy of the SPP, that measure is clearly intended to begin the process of bringing the military and security institutions of the three nations under a central authority, with a single chain of command. The implications of that merger are profoundly troubling, to say the least.

Mexico is ruled by a political establishment intimately connected to that nation's narco-terrorist syndicates. A 2004 United Press International investigative report into the estimated 3,000 kidnappings in Mexico each year noted: "Mexico has a history of complicity between law enforcement and actual kidnappers."

In a March 31 Houston Chronicle op-ed column, Judge Michael McSpadden of Texas' 209 District Court described some things he learned five years ago while he served "as part of a contingent of Texas judges [who met] with then President-elect Vicente Fox's transition team in Mexico City to discuss possible changes in Mexico's justice system."

"Jury trials were not allowed, even though guaranteed by Mexico's Constitution," wrote Judge McSpadden. "There was no live confrontation of witnesses — the judge decided the case upon the written 'declarations' of witnesses. No bonds were allowed in cases considered serious — such as a false report to a public official."

While Canada's law enforcement system is cleaner and more competent than Mexico's, that country presents a different set of potential security risks. Thanks largely to that country's devotion to multiculturalism and political correctness, Canada is becoming a haven for Muslim refugees, a growing population in which terrorists can take cover.
 
She's worse than a RINO. She has no care at all for the law, only for power. During the 2000 election dispute, in her official capacity as Secretary of State, she took not one measure to enforce the provisions of the Florida constitution. Nor did she take any steps to see that Florida law was enforced, or investigate any of the plethora of reported "voting irregularities".

If she doesn't give a whit for the Florida constitution, why should I think she cares for the Constitution of the United States?
 
United States of North America, The New American
by Steven Yates
May 1, 2006

Elitists in the United States, Mexico, and Canada are plotting to merge these three nations into a single regional government similar to the European Union.


Oooooh. Sounds baaaaaaad. Mexican cops on the streets of NY.....

Not exactly what the bill proposes, however. BTW, it was submitted over a year ago. Old news. Might be time to replace the tin foil.

Harris Calls For Enhanced Border Security

The full text of Harris’s testimony follows.

Testimony of U.S. Representative Katherine Harris
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Hearing: “North American Cooperation On The Border”
Tuesday, July 12, 2005


Efforts to fortify the nation’s borders should be balanced with a commitment to open trade and commerce between North American countries, U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris said today in testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Harris, a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, testified about “The North American Cooperative Security Act” (NACSA), legislation that she has introduced in the House to enhance management, communication and coordination on border issues between the governments and law enforcement communities of the United States and Canada.

The hearing, titled “North American Cooperation on the Border,” brought together a bipartisan contingent of members of Congerss, along with officials from the executive branch, for a closer look at border security issues. Also testifying on Harris’s panel were U.S. Senators John McCain of Arizona, Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts and John Cornyn of Texas.

The full text of Harris’s testimony follows.

Testimony of U.S. Representative Katherine Harris
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Hearing: “North American Cooperation On The Border”
Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Biden, and esteemed Members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify before you today about the critical need for border security.

As you are well aware, the security of our borders is one of our most pressing homeland security concerns. Whether we are speaking of the our northern and southern land borders, our coastal borders, or the “interior borders” at air points of entry, much remains to be done, even today, to ensure that those who would do us harm do not exploit these vulnerable points to threaten our nation or the American people.

We must ensure that every threat to our nation – whether it is a terrorist, a shipment of narcotics, or a human trafficking network smuggling criminals or illegal immigrants – is identified and stopped before crossing those borders.

At the same time, we must balance this demand for security against the need for a free flow of commerce and trade. We want and need secure borders, but not at the heavy cost of hindering goods, services, and legal immigrants who contribute to the strength of our nation’s economy and to the richness of our culture.

The challenge of that balancing act has been a priority for me throughout my career in public service. With nearly 1,800 miles of coastline and 14 deep water seaports, Florida is a critical link in the global supply chain that brings goods to and from the United States.

As a member of the Florida State Senate; as Secretary of State; and now as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Committees on Homeland Security, Financial Services, and International Relations, I have been deeply involved with efforts to ensure that my state maintains this vital flow of trade, commerce, and migration while seeking new solutions to ensure border security.

One lesson I have learned from this experience is that a comprehensive border security solution – focusing on both the Mexican and Canadian borders as well as our sea borders – is absolutely essential.

Recently, I introduced legislation in the House that could provide the first stage of that comprehensive solution -- the North American Cooperative Security Act, or NACSA (H.R. 2672).

I am pleased to report that I was joined by several of my House colleagues in introducing this legislation, which closely mirrors Chairman Lugar’s legislation in the Senate (S.853).

NACSA seeks to enhance the common security and safety of the United States, Canada, and Mexico by providing a shared framework for management, communication, and coordination on border issues between all three North American governments.

At the same time, NACSA would help to facilitate trade and commerce between the North American countries, and help to expedite trade in “low-risk” goods.

How would this bill strengthen the security of our borders while enhancing commerce between North American trading partners?

Through five basic avenues:

First, NACSA would provide a systematic framework for information-sharing on border security issues, including sharing up-to-date information on criminal gangs and drug smugglers.

Second, NACSA would ensure aggressive and consistent enforcement of the law at the borders, coordinating law enforcement efforts of the three governments to target terrorists, organized crime, and the illicit trafficking of weapons, nuclear materials, drugs, and people.

Furthermore, it would enhance the government’s ability to deport those who are in the country illegally -- especially those with criminal backgrounds.

Third, NACSA would leverage the power of technology to support border security efforts – including creating an electronic database to track criminal gang activity and fostering the effort to develop biometric standards for documents.

With biometric technology, we can be certain that people are who they claim to be, and we can reduce the incidence of fraudulent documentation facilitating illegal entries into our country. The goal is to ensure that high-risk individuals who attempt to enter North America are identified and stopped at the border.

Fourth, NACSA would strengthen trade relationships by reducing wait times for freight and people; investing in improved border infrastructure; determining the feasibility of a common external tariff for all of North America; and establishing a cooperative energy policy to ensure reliable energy supplies for the entire continent.

Finally, NACSA would fortify our security relationship with our critical ally to the south by including Mexico in a number of security programs currently in place throughout the rest of the North America, such as the Joint Interagency Task Force and North American Aerospace Defense Command.

In addition, it would strengthen communication and intelligence between the governments and law enforcement agencies in the United States and Mexico, enhancing cooperation to target the criminal networks and terrorists who would exploit vulnerable points in our border for their own dangerous ends.

With NACSA, we will start by ensuring that our critical land borders with Canada and Mexico are secured, and that the flow of trade, commerce, and people that supports the North American economy is allowed to continue and thrive. I look forward to working with you to ensure that we meet our goal of balancing our needs for security with support for commerce. Thank you very much.

http://harris.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=30445


H.R.2672




During the 2000 election dispute, in her official capacity as Secretary of State, she took not one measure to enforce the provisions of the Florida constitution. Nor did she take any steps to see that Florida law was enforced, or investigate any of the plethora of reported "voting irregularities".

Hate to break the news, but she followed Florida's constitution to the letter in the fiasco following the 2000 election. The subsequent investigations into the "voting irregularites" were debunked by many sources. Pure BS.
 
I used to live in FL, and met Comrade Nelson. What a slippery piece of communist excrement!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No matter what Harris has against her, it is light years away from a person who could pull his fake face off and there would be Marx. He has been pushing gun bans for at least the last 15 years.
 
Hate to break the news, but she followed Florida's constitution to the letter in the fiasco following the 2000 election. The subsequent investigations into the "voting irregularites" were debunked by many sources. Pure BS.
Absolutely. Cannot fault her here. She simply applied the law in this case.
 
Her campaign has been a disaster from the beginning. It's not the Liberals hiding under the bed or the Nanny Staters or the Gun Grabbers. Katherine Harris has screwed the pooch and thereby earned her defeat.
 
Isn't it kind of poor timing on her part to run now?

She's actually been running for about a year now. She just cannot get any publicity. I don't think she stands a chance against Nelson.

On the other hand, I'd rather have Nelson in the US Senate than in the Governor's Mansion. He has been defeated several times for governor, but stands a good chance of making it with Jeb not being able to be re-elected. Nelson actually ran for governor with a gun control campaign, so he isn't shy about his views on that subject.
 
Don't bring the facts about Ms Harris into this thread!

That's not Highroadish
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top