This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on March 13, 2013 10:45 AM. The previous post in this blog was Weekly rags don't get it. The next post in this blog is Save the envelope legend. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Ginny Burdick, victim

The gun nuts are giving Oregon legislators Ginny Burdick and Mitch Greenlick the business. When Burdick cancelled a town hall on guns because she was supposedly too busy, the gun lovers video'ed her at home taking our her garbage that night. And Greenlick got so much hate e-mail that he deleted a bunch of it (which probably violates some public records law or other).

Okay, so they stand up for gun control, and they take the heat like professional politicians -- right? Well, not exactly. The New York Times ran an op-ed Monday where the two of them act as if their lives have been threatened. Next thing you know, Burdick's on cable TV with Al Sharpton looking like she's being stalked by Jack Nicholson in "The Shining." And of course, the bleating blue sheep chime right in.

The gun debate in America is one ugly scene. And as we've said here a few times, it's particularly unpleasant given that nothing meaningful is going to be done in our lifetimes. "Universal background checks"? Whatever. We hope Burdick's bills pass, but they don't really matter much. And she and Greenlick are way overplaying the martyr bit. Al Sharpton? Wow. Just wow.

Comments (27)

Yes, and those waging war at the National level will seize on every opportunity to propagandize any small battle when it serves their purpose. When you allow yourself to become the pawn in that effort you become the issue rather than illuminating the issue you care about.

I'd bet the real reason she canceled her "town hall" was to avoid having to hear any views that contradict her's. She comes across in interviews as a zealot on a mission from her god.

The pawn here is the moron doing the stalking and videotaping, though in the parlance of the au currant, the term is actually "tool."

Nevertheless, the hatemongering paid off. Per Steve Duin's column on Sunday, Greenlick has withdrawn his support for Burdick's proposal.

As politicans, one is supposed to follow the will of the people you represent

When the will of the pople doesn't match the politicians agenda, suddenly they're "under attack"

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Way out

Burdick is a clown. The fact the represents my area makes me question the mental capacity of my neighbors.

Considering Greenlick's HB 3200 would violate not only the Second, but also the Fourth and Fifth amendments of the Constitution, you have to wonder how anything he comes up with can be taken seriously.

One of his other other rocket-scientist ideas was requiring a doctor's prescription to buy tobacco, which Duin thought was courageous. He is very concerned about other people's health, but evidently doesn't look in a mirror very often.

Burdick is a one-trick pony whose only legislative accomplishment, after all her years in Salem, was background checks at gunshows (with which I agree). She wants to relive her glory days and gun control is her only avenue.

Burdick was also the one who ran against Erik Sten for Portland city council in 2006, because her boss, Brian Gard, told her to. Sten had gotten on Gard's wrong side. When she ran she didn't know that it was a non-partisan race and she didn't know how many bureaus there were in the city of Portland. But Brian Gard told her to jump so she just said "how high?".

Maybe if we started paying our state legislators a decent wage, some decent people would run.

Would it be stalking to now refer to her as, "Tawana Burdick"?

I worked on more than two dozen political races over the past two decades and know many of the leaders in our region. Some politicians run for office to satisfy their need for power or fame. Others focus on making a difference for our state. I served some extraordinary people in public life. I also worked with leaders whose self-importance or incompetence cut short their time on the public stage. Character rarely reveals itself overnight, but sooner or later you can identify the leaders who are sincere and capable. For every David Wu there is a Ginny Burdick. She is the conscience of the Oregon Senate Her integrity is beyond reproach and she consciously works to improve the lives of Oregonians. She is a brilliant woman whose advocacy increased support for higher education, created jobs, protected school funding and improved public safety. She is someone I admire and support. The decision to cancel her Town Hall was based on common sense. Gun extremists were inclined to disrupt the event and there were legitimate safety concerns. Senator Burdick acted sensibly as confirmed by the recent and unsettling violation of her privacy. Representative Mitch Greenlick endured antisemitic slurs and threats for his initial support for gun legislation. Burdick is not taking the path of least resistance. She is fighting to protect our families by promoting background checks and reasonable restrictions on advanced weaponry. She is a moderate on this issue and her courage should be applauded.

Greenlick is squealing like a baby bunny and Duin is holding the megaphone. Greenlick wants to put me in prison for 10 years and fine me $250,000 for not doing anything different than I have done for the past 20 years. Who is bullying who?

Burdick is a clown.

But, to expect her to follow the 'will of the people' when all she has to judge that will is a bunch of screwloose whackjobs who know how to scream and posture...no.

Don't you know that the voters selected HER to represent THEM because they knew she would know all the right things to do. They selected her because they knew that they could depend upon her to reasonably reflect their desires. They elected her, didn't they?

Blame the voters. They not only elected her, they re-elected her. And, if she can't stand the heat, she should get the hell out of the kitchen. Soon.

Burdick was recorded laughing with glee about some poor guy who accidentally shot himself while carrying concealed.
If you think that makes her a moderate on this issue (her only issue) you are smoking something.

Members of her own party, Betsy Johnson for one, think Burdick and Greenlick are beyond the pale on this issue. I have Johnson's e mail to prove it.

I emailed my rep twice regarding HB 3200. Frustrating to get no response because I disagree with her, but have them happily add my email to the regular updates that are sent out. I'm waiting for the snail mail porn to arrive since I also write a letter.

One can sort of see from the comments here why many would be cautious about interacting with pro-gun types: name-calling, irascibility, aggression -- and, they are undoubtedly armed! Intimidation and gratuitous rudeness are not part of the bedrock of our political system. But they may seem necessary to embattled gun nuts.

We have emailed our State Senator Burdick and State Rep. Doherty for help regarding the corruption of this neighborhood's homeowner association (lots of missing money as the HOA refuses to hold an audit and never has in more than 12 years.). Burdick who purports to BE our state senator didn't bother to respond to us lowly citizens. She's an Elitist as evidenced by her conduct.

Now, Doherty is also ignoring us.

They are NOT doing the JOBS FOR US; are NOT representing us; and have earned the enmity of our neighbors. It is no wonder that Oregonians hold Burdick, Doherty and the state government in such low regard. It is an EARNED reputation. That's what happens in a one-party controlled state government: Elitism for the Plutocrats at the expense of the citizenry.

No more Burdick.
No more Doherty.

They cannot be trusted.

Allan L:

I would say the phrase "embattled gun nuts" is a pretty good example of gratuitous rudeness.

I'll bet you like to say "teabagger" too.

This is what "common sense" gun laws look like. Warrantless searches of citizens' homes by the state police. Setting aside the constitution for a moment, did they even consider the economic impact? We don’t have enough Troopers to do the job.

I emailed every legislator on HB 3200. I specifically emailed Greenlick and asked him if he had even read the bill (which I believe originated from Ceasefire Oregon). I got no reply.

A similar bill in Washington got an immediate negative and appropriate response from civil libertarians. The sponsor there admitted he did not read the bill.

The irony is that in the same paper as Duin's whiney column about citizen involvement, the Oregonian had an ad for the Oregonlive website being such a great tool for citizens to engage in the process, follow bills and contact their representatives. Maybe that only works for bills they agree with?


Of course he didn't read it. He didn't read it until enough heat came down for him to have to read it, at which time he decided he couldn't support it.

There is a fundamental difference between evaluating reasonable gun legislation and promoting hysteria. If I had a doubt that Burdick is more the latter, this doubt was erased with the manner in which she cancelled her town hall conversation.

That Chris Vetter and Allan L parrot the fallacy that vocal gun rights supporters are somehow more prone to acts of violence by the mere fact they own a gun demonstrates that Burdick's hysteria resonates, especially with people who I presume have not grown up around guns, used guns, or lived in communities where gun ownership is strongly embraced.

What Burdick, Allan L and Chris Vetter fail to understand is that while we may disagree with the reasonableness of strict 2nd Amendment supporters, the members of this community are responsible gun owners, strict adherents of gun safety, and zealously preach proper gun use. The statistically insignificant minority prone to gun violence are not showing up at meetings or writing letters to their representatives.

With all due respect Chris when I hear her deliberately lie about firearms in her radio interviews I have a hard time believing Ms Burdick has any principles at all.

Chris Vetter wrote: For every David Wu there is a Ginny Burdick.

It's so true: Politicians often come in pairs! But seriously, She has nothing to worry about. 2A defenders go to public meetings because they believe in using the political process. If you think this is false, then explain how you reached this conclusion.

Does Burdick believe in this same political process? Or does she cynically exploit it?

I find the 2A advocates to be, on the whole, more polite and politically knowledgeable than a random sampling. Maybe if she talked with them -- her constituents, whom she claims to represent -- she would quickly discover this for herself.

Then again, perhaps this is what she truly fears -- that they are indeed knowledgeable, and know their rights well enough to be immune to the usual clownshow.

I agree with Godfrey. Burdick is a clown.

She canceled her town hall event because she feared it would be "disrupted" by the presence of citizens who wouldn't settle for the nonsense she likes to ladle out on the topic of guns and gun laws. The only "safety concerns" involved was her ability to feel safe in spreading lies or misinformation (depending on whether she believes her own nonsense) without being contradicted.

It’s obvious that our legislators are bad at math, but seriously do the math on the HB 3200 inspections.

1,509,554 households in OR (2011 census) (about 13% of total US households)
4,000,000 estimate of AR type rifles currently in US
520,000 AR’s in Oregon if using 13% of 4,000,000 total

Now we know that people who collect guns, like to have more than one, but let’s assume 200,000 households (coincidently 13% of total households in OR) own an AR. The bill covers many more types of firearms in addition to AR’s but in the interest of simplicity, let’s stick to that.

That would be 548 warrantless searches per day in Oregon, 365 days per year.

Even if only 2% of total households owned the banned weapons, that would require nearly 100 warantless searches per day, 365 days per year.

We only have approximately 650 sworn troopers. This includes the Fish and Wildlife division and other functions in addition to patrol.

How many additional troopers would need to be hired to carry out these inspections and where would the money come from? If they were able to average 5 inspections per day, that would take about 100 extra troopers working 365 days. Probably double the estimate for realistic numbers.

I somewhat wish the bill lives long enough for a fiscal impact to be conducted.

Did our legislators forget that OSP can’t even keep troops on the road 24/7. Last year more than 7% of EMERGENCY calls were unanswered due to no trooper on duty.


Any thinking person’s response to such stupidity from Rep. Greenlick and Sen. Burdick should, at a minimum, be to send them correspondence. Propose ridiculous bills, get lots of angry mail. Sorta like if you do the crime, you do the time.

Here's another example of Burdick's foolishness. One of the local TV network affiliates did a follow up on her initial thoughts on banning weapons and showed the rush of sales going on at the local gun stores. The reporter asked Burdick what she thought about that.

"It's really sad," she replied, "because (many or most, I can't remember) of those weapons will actually be used to hurt people in the owner's household."

Whether she said "many" or "most" is inconsequential. The fact she said it at all speaks volumes.

The question in my mind is does she really believe this tripe or is she such a spinmeister that she can say it with a straight face?

As I said above, I sent emails to every legislator about this. I have received responses only from the opponents, no proponent has explained their support. Just today I received two more responses from the opponents. Every reply I have received from the office of a Senator or Representative have encouraged that I contact the sponsors. I wish at least one of the sponsors would explain: (1) how this bill has any hope of being found constitutional; (2) the financial questions I expressed above; and (3) why they sponsored a bill that is clearly unconstitutional, costly, and has no hope of passage.

This really is just designed as a poke in the eye to the people the legislators don't like. Which side is being the bully?

It is amusing to replace GUN NUT and replace it with FREE SPEECH NUT. Of course, those that support both Constitutional provisions, arms and speech, generally find opposition from those that are NUTS on the other side. Political correctness in speech can be as destructive as any gun grab. Fire away, 'progressive' loons.

Ms. Burdick, is not respectful of probably half of her constituency. I hope they work very hard to not allow her any more time in office. And now, while she remains, be watchful, vigilant, and communicative.

Clicky Web Analytics