E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNew York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has a promise -- or a threat -- for congressional candidates: In advocating more gun control, he'll put his money where his mouth is.
Just ask the House hopeful who faced over $2.2 million Bloomberg-funded ads -- or talk to the Democrats charged with trying to take back the House majority in 2014.
The billionaire mayor spent the money attacking former Rep. Debbie Halvorson, a Democrat who had been favored to win a Chicago-area House seat, over her "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. On Tuesday, 75 days after 20 children and 6 adults were massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, she lost decisively to former state Rep. Robin Kelly in the Democratic primary for disgraced Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.'s seat in Illinois' second congressional district.
"This is an important victory for common sense leadership on gun violence, a problem that plagues the whole nation,” Bloomberg said in a Tuesday night statement -- commenting on a special election primary in a district nearly 800 miles from his home. As she conceded, Halvorson blamed Bloomberg's money for her failed campaign.
Her loss is one of the first real data points to dot the political landscape facing President Barack Obama -- and the Democrats he'll need to stand with him -- as he pushes a package of new gun control laws in the wake of the Newtown shootings. The president wants to ban assault weapons like the gun used at Newtown, limit the number of rounds of ammunition in magazines, require universal background checks for gun buyers and make gun trafficking a federal crime.
It would be all but impossible for an assault weapons ban to pass the Senate — and prospects for any new laws are even dimmer in the GOP-controlled House. But lawmakers from both parties say could support requiring anyone who buys a gun to get a criminal background check. Under current law, people who buy guns from private sellers aren't required to get that check.
So why does Halvorson's race matter to the legislative and political fights? After all, skeptics note, gun control isn't a controversial issue in urban Chicago, a city plagued by gun violence and a high murder rate. Bloomberg's tactics would likely be much less effective in a rural swing district with an ingrained hunting culture.
But going after every pro-gun Democrat isn't quite the point, advocates say. Instead, it's a way of reassuring lawmakers -- particularly in swing suburban areas -- that someone will have their back if they support new gun restrictions.
And it's also about telling Republicans in similar situations -- like those who hail from suburban Philadelphia, New York and Denver -- that there's a new threat.
"The NRA has been the only game in town. That's not going to be the way it is anymore, and races like Halvorson's...are intended to send that message," said Mark Glaze, executive director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the advocacy group that Bloomberg co-chairs.
In the past, the NRA has aggressively targeted lawmakers who back new gun laws. After a Democratic Congress passed an assault weapons ban in 1994, Republicans swept back to power in the House. The ban was allowed to expire in 2004. This time around, the NRA is opposing universal background checks.
Now, though, Democrats insist Bloomberg's millions amplify a new reality: changing public attitudes in the wake of Newtown. Polls show support for new gun restrictions is higher than it's been in more than a decade. And gun control advocates have retooled their message, focusing on reducing gun violence instead of trying to litigate Second Amendment rights. It's a distinction some Democrats believe will help turn the tide on an issue they've historically struggled with -- one strategist compared it to focusing on raising taxes on the rich during the 2012 campaign, helping their party win on the broader tax issue, where Republicans had previously claimed the upper hand.
There's already evidence that suburban Republicans are staking out support for some new gun laws -- a reality that GOP strategists were eager to point out.
"I think the idea of background checks across the board, I'm not opposed to them," Rep. Joe Heck, R-Nev., told the Las Vegas Review Journal's editorial board. "I disagree with people who say that this is going to be the first step to gun registration, which leads to gun confiscation."
"I agree with the president that we can and should strengthen the nation's background-check system," Rep. Pat Meehan, R-Pa., said in January. Also supporting stronger checks is fellow Philadelphia-area Republican Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick.
After Newtown, polls show support for stricter gun laws is increasing even among Republicans. A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll out Tuesday showed 61 percent of Americans think gun laws should be more strict, the highest percentage since 2000, after the Columbine shootings months earlier. That's up from 51 percent in January of 2011, the last time the poll question was asked prior to Newtown. The shift is largely due to Obama's coalition of Democrats, African Americans and Hispanics. But among Republicans, 37 percent now say gun laws should be stricter. Just 24 percent of Republicans said so in January 2011.
Obama and Democrats want to act fast on gun measures to maintain that momentum. In the Senate, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy wants to start the process of writing new gun laws on Thursday. Republicans could push that another week.
In advance of the hearings, Democrats are scrambling to hash out a deal with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla, on a background check bill. Coburn has been negotiating with Democrats for weeks, but talks have stalled in recent days over how to keep track of private gun sales so police can later track guns used in crimes. Democrats and gun control advocates say gun sellers need to keep a record or the law will be toothless, while Republicans argue that could lead to the federal government tracking gun owners.
"There absolutely will not be record keeping on legitimate, law-abiding gun owners in this country," Coburn said on "Fox News Sunday."
The slowed negotiations with Coburn have prompted Democrats, led by West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, to ratchet up what's been ongoing outreach to other moderate Republicans who might be willing to sign on. Sen. John McCain said Wednesday that he's been involved in working on legislation.
Leahy's committee is also going to take up the likely doomed assault weapons ban, which California Sen. Dianne Feinstein is sponsoring. Democratic leaders have pledged a floor vote on the measure -- a move Obama urged at his State of the Union address, when supporters in the chamber erupted into chants of, "vote, vote, vote."
Holding the vote is a significant part of the political calculus: It would allow Democrats in red states or swing districts to say they've opposed Obama's plan to ban weapons while still giving them an opportunity to tout support for other measures to reduce gun violence.
"I want it on the floor," Feinstein told NBC News on Tuesday.
NBC's Domenico Montanaro and Carrie Dann contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
Libs scream the loudest at big PAC money when their candidates lose but fervently support it when it helps their schleps win. Only in the world of lib lunacy does so many contradictory positions make perfect sense.
The "Balanced Approach".
If ya can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Thank you, Mr. Bloomberg. It's about time someone with real resources and clout took on the NRA and the gun nutz over the sick gun culture in this country. The conservatives are all upset and whining over this, because they never like the taste of their own medicine. They have spent huge amounts of money over the years attacking anyone and everyone, including legitimate war heroes.
Yes indeed...Mr Bloomberg will now spend his fortune working against the rights of others. I suspect you wouldnt be as happy about it if it was against blacks being free or women voting.
He is not working against the rights of others. Why can't you fathom what the article said. Is it because you have been brainwashed by the NRA, Ted Nugent, and Fox News. NO ONE is trying to take away the right to own guns. Why do you think it is necessary to be better armed than the US military. Own your shotgun, your deer rifle, your pistol. It is the military style weapons and huge magazines that are totally unnecessary. No hunter would use an AK-47 to hunt with. There would be nothing left of the deer but a few pieces of hair. A true sportsman would only need three shells at the most.
Grow a pair and quit being led by the nose by Lobbyist whose only purpose is to sell guns and warp your minds. They are also reading these posts and laughing their heads off at what you radical "revolutionaries" are posting. Develop your brain into something besides hog slop.
Teacher....you dont get to tell me what I can and cant own. I have a RIGHT to own them.
I am perfectly able to think for myself. I have been "brainwashed" as you put it by the written words of our forefathers, no one else.
Take your hate and your anti-American views and move to a place that better suites you.
What a surprise, some overly wealthy idiot thinking he needs to tell everyone else how to live their lives according to his skewed principles. Bung hole. Further proof of why I cannot stomach NYC.
You probably love the Koch brothers. At least Bloomberg tells you where he is at.
Ghult, you are right, he does indeed tell us where he is at. Makes him much easier to call out as the traitor he is.
Congrats Bloomberg. Celebrate dividing the Democratic party more than Carl Rove would have dreamed of.
I'm sure every rural & suburban Democrat longs for New York City type regulation to be pushed nationwide (sarcasm, if you couldn't tell).
If I was Republican (which I'm not), I would have cause to celebrate along with you.
How many billions and billions and billions has New York taken from the rest of us since 9/11? All these issues have to do with New York and Chicago and San Francisco. We should send them a bill. 9/11 would not have happened if the pilots were armed.
tryng to buy an election or get legislation to pass didnt the koch bro's try to do that too? didnt work out too well for them
bloomberg needs to understand that chicago is not the entire state of illinois and hold on to your hat NYC is not the only city in new york state
The city mentality assumes that the rural areas all want to change to that model and that is a glaring mistake. Rural people choose that way of life for a reason and pushing your agenda on them, liberal or otherwise, isnt a winning proposition.
Talk about slip shot reporting. She didn't win because of "guns." She won because of the demographics.
There is not going to be a revolt... there is going to be a putting down of tyranny...
Standing up for rights is not wrong - it is expected, just read Thomas Jefferson
This absolutely makes the case for campaign finance reform. Washington DC is up to the highest bidders. Your laws are made not with your interest in mind but by those of lobbyists and rich individuals. Our constitution appears to be piece-by-piece being sold.
Agreed.
Bloomberg's not the first fascist to rise in America but he may be the most powerful one.
Just because someone espouses a position like this does not make them a fascist. He might be wrong or over reaching but hardly a fascist.
Sorry to point this out but, this was not a big test. This primary was in a heavily Democratic district and as such the person carrying a more Liberal stance (especially on Gun control) was going to win.
The real test will be in a somewhat Democratic district in some place in like say Arkansas. If a proponent of even modest gun control wins, then you know the tide has turned.
People seem to think the Government is after their guns.
Obama and company are only doing what voting moms want them to do.
Fear the moms if you want to keep your guns. It's easy to blame Obama. You know his name. The people seriously pushing for and demanding gun legislation are moms. Angry moms are to be feared.
No, the people pushing this are politicians.
Paulb you have summed it up perfectly, this is no longer a bunch of anti-gun nuts vs. pro-gun nuts it's mom and dad vs. the NRA. And I think the NRA is going to loose.
Angry Moms...lol... Angry misinformed Moms maybe... Angry, Libera,l rights hating, I am scared of guns, and think I need to have the government take care of me moms---for sure
How about supporting a women's right to own a gun....???
I thought women had a right to choose....I guess that doesnt apply to deciding if THEY live or die.
You certainly don't speak for all voting moms. The one's that I personally know all understand and appreciate the ability of a firearm to protect their loved ones. Low information mom's like Oprah's legions may be brainwashed enough to buy into the MSM conditioning but those who actually have critical thinking skills aren't. They are to be feared because the operate on fact and reason, not media induced hysteria.
And let's be honest Paul, Obama, Feinstein, Holder, Shumer, Bloomberg, etc. all have a common goal of radically reducing the number of arms owned by the law abiding citizens of this country. You are either gravely naive or part of the "Trust us*wink, wink*" agenda. Many who are regurgitating the "No one is coming to take your guns away" lie would be 100% fine with a ban and subsequent confiscation. Now admitting this is a whole different matter.
Your personal knowledge is irrelevant. The Statistical truth is not. Personally I don't care if you a a matching pair of PAK 38's on your front lawn. It also doesn't matter if they are brainwashed or not, it matters what the overall populace thinks. I don't fear Bloomberg or anybody like him taking my gun as much as I fear public sentiment motivated by people like you who can't come up with a cogent argument for a citizen's right to own a gun or to make sensible compromises where necessary based on factual evidence.
I don't understand why the NRA is not worried about people getting killed in the USA especially children I guess the true fact is they don't care and their greed for money is blinding their common sense. This is one bunch of sick individuals
Of course they care...BUT the biggest issue is that guns are used many many many times for self defense. Taking away a persons weapons means that the criminals are going to have an advantage.
remember - when seconds count, the police will be there in about 20 minutes
Most colleges are GUN FREE zones.. look how many rapes happen there... ask the college women that have been raped if they could go back and own a or have a weapon on campus and see what they say
Everyone is concerned about children dying. We just arent willing to compromise the foundation of our nation and our rights to take foolish actions that wont stop the problem. Propose something useful that doesnt infringe on our rights and trust me, we will be right there with you.
Every day, two children drown, when it could've been prevented:
It is because of these "sick individuals" that the majority of common sense thinking people want some kind of control so that they can live their lives without worrying about the Waynes, the Teds, the idiots screaming that they are going to start a revolution, a civil war, or just kill anyone that they think may be planning to regulate their gun ownership. The right to bear arms does not give brain warped slop heads the right to make decent citizens live in fear.
Ignorance = fear.
The "sick individuals" you reference are better Americans than you. They are fighting for your rights, not against them like you are.
I guess if he had won in a state that had less restrictive laws and Shall Issue permits it would really mean something.
To win in your 'home court' (meaning left leaning, liberal/progressive state), only means you were afraid to lose home court advantage. I am glad there are more actual conservative states out there that would never allow his kind to influence their elections.
You and he may have won what you already had in the first place, but the losers are the innocent law abiding citizens of the state that you are constantly allowing to get raped, murdered, and robbed because you are too afraid on addressing the problem of street gangs and drug cartels that are killing your people and children at the rate of 500 to 600 per year.
How is that working for you? Oppressing a people will always lead to their demise. Ask the Jews still alive that went through the Holocaust. I feel sorry for the innocent victims Bloomberg and the rest of the Lib's are going to be creating. That's right, their blood is on those hands not the law abiding.
The last time I checked, Bloomberg was an independent.
I am getting so sick and tired of idiots saying that the NRA is protecting our Second Amendment Rights. That's total bull! The NRA is just traffickers and salesmen for gun manufacturers. How many guns has the NRA sold to drug runners, robbers, murderers, mass killers, and the like. No one knows because the NRA doesn't believe in gun registration or background checks. A 9mm with the serial number 675768395 is involved in a murder. Who owns the gun? Who knows? A 2012 red Chevy Volt with the license number 123456AA is involved in a pedestrian hit and run. The victim died. Who owns the car and is probably the driver or knows who is. Do a license check. NRA says criminals won't register their guns. If they won't submit to a background check, they can't buy the gun. It's that simple.
And as far as I know, no one has said anything about repealing the Second Amendment, so why does the NRA need to protect it. It is radicals like LaPierre, Ted Nugent, and announcers like Hannity who make up stories and then Republican congressmen believe it that we need protected from, because there are always uneducated nut jobs who believe them.
That's my Susie Soros..
always Blowing..the Big Balloonies..In The Marxist Martyrs day Parade
Teacher...you are way off base. The NRA is indeed representing their members and working to protect the 2nd Amendment. If you dont see that its likely because you place no value on the 2nd Amendment and would be just as happy with it being gone.
The cars vs guns argument is a straw man. You have no right to a car, you do to a gun.
What's to stop them from stealing the Gun or a Car used in your earlier example. Again, you are using the Leftist approaching to blaming someone else for your problems, but the one you are taking the rights from are the law abiding citizen. I don't like the fact that my Car Insurance is so high because deralicts who are causing the accidents and crimes are affecting my premium. Personally, I think if you get more than two speeding tickets or accidents you should ride the bus for a year. But then common sense is not going to be the highlight of being a Demoncrat.
Actually, Ms. Soros, it's the President Stinky (bo) administration with Eric Holder that have been selling guns to drug dealers.....One of those guns was used to murder Agent Brian Terry, who had information about Stinky and Eric's gun running program. (Stinky made some nice commissions on those sales). These are FACTS. Ambassador Steven's was murdered by friends of the administration as well, and for pretty much the same reasons. He knew that Stinky was sending weapons to his pals in Al's-queers, and earning some mighty nice commissions in the process.
Stinky's BIGGEST supporters believe the same as you. Once the law abiding are stripped of their ability to defend themselves, they'll be in a better position to attack with impunity. It's tough being a thug, when there's a chance that you'll be fired upon by some moron wanting to stay alive. Stinky knows this, and has dropped prosecution of his base of supporters that find themselves in dutch with the law.
Are you a "Chicago" teacher???
Um, is that what you're going with?
Bloomberg is a dyed-in-the-wool liberal.
The NRA isn't in business selling guns.
Obama, on the other hand, allowed 2,500 guns to go to the Mexican drug cartels.
OBERSTURMFURER BLOOMBERG..
arrived back to JFK..today..flying in on HIS OWN...EGO..
It was a Bumpy Ride...Yet...He Vowed to get right on the task..
Of Outlawing CHARMIN..and any package that Contains more than 6 CLIP ROLLS ..of Comfort Paper..
"We need to Keep a Lid ...on this..before it gets .out of our hands.." He was quoted as saying..
Meanwhile Cuomo was attending a banquet ..at the HOWARD DEAN School of Oratory...
Both will Star in the New ..."MARX BROTHERS" Movie with Cuomo Playing..zaney.....Lenin
WERE
IT
NOT
FOR
THE
2ND, AMMENDMENT
NOW...
OBAMA
WOULD
HAVE
DESTROYED
THE FIRST..
AND
MANY
OF THE REST...
BY
NOW...
How do you know this? If you are going to make a statement like this, you should support it with facts and cite your sources.
I think it is a safe bet that he is right based on the statements the administration has made.
The fourth estate has been sold at auction, and should now be called the Whore's Estate.
How about keeping editorial on the editorial "page" and reporting the news OBJECTIVELY?
That a NY billionaire should insinuate himself into the local politics of another region is unsettling, at the very least.
But it is ok for Karl Rove to spend $10,000 on an ad to make Ashley Judd look bad in Kentucky and she hasn't even said she was running for anything. Where does Rove live?
So will her first task be to protect Chicago from large sodas? We can all see how great of a job she is doing getting guns off the streets of Chicago!
So Rep. Robin Kelly thinks that the problems in the 2nd Congressional District are because the NRA is holding them hostage. Well, maybe she should just talk to her constituents and ask them to disarm the Gang Bangers and tear up their NRA membership cards if the NRA is the source of the problem. I'm sure this will certainly end the crime in her district. Typical Mindless Politics in Chicago: put the criminal in charge!
Last I checked the NRA wasnt there raping, robbing, and pillaging the people of Chicago. Failure to see the problem does nothing but ensure that the citizens will continue to be victims.
On April 27, 1995, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) spoke at the US Senate hearing on terrorism shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing.
During the hearing, she referenced her concealed carry permit and how she carried a gun with her in the 1970's, citing the urge to arm yourself for protection- in her case from threats.
She states:
"I know the sense of helplessness that people feel. I know the urge to arm yourself because that's what I did. I was trained in firearms. I walked to the hospital when my husband was sick. I carried a concealed weapon and I made the determination if somebody was going to try and take me out, I was going to take them with me."
And now she advocates everyone being a victim.
As a law abiding and FOID holder in the state of Illinois, I urge you to pass a clean and burdensome Constitutional Carry bill in this state. The concept of a semi auto 'assault weapon' ban is a waste of resources and funds as there has been little to no violence ever reported in this state linked to a so called "assault weapon". The largest majority of crimes committed in this state come from Chicago and have been committed with an illegal handgun. One of the most publicized cases recently was the murder of Hadiya Pendelton. One of the accused, Michael Ward was already on parole for a previous gun violation -- unlawful use of a firearm -- when he shot Pendleton, Why was this person still on the streets and not behind bars? The rest of Illinois does not need to pay for the cities problems. There are approximately over 1 million FOID holders in Illinois. The hunting and firearm industry brings millions of tax dollars to the state. There are also countless firearm institutions such as the Illinois Rifle Association that teaches safe and responsible gun ownership.
Nana Bloomie, what would we do without you telling us what we should and shouldn't have, eat, drink, protect ourselves with, and on and on? I have but one question for you Nana. Boxers or briefs? We'll await your rules.
Michael Bloomberg, another wanna be dictator. I guess he can tell his subjects in NYC what they can and cannot eat or drink but when this exempt- from- persecution rich democrat starts buying elections in parts of the country where no one has ever voted for him he is going to damn far.
40% of guns sold do not have background checks performed on the buyer. These are acquired illegally through online gun sales, gun shows, etc.
Not in Illinois.
Pat you are still propigating lies. You cannot purchase a gun on the Internet without having it sent to a licensed FFL holder that is required by law to perform a background check before you can pick it up.
40% is an arbitrary percentage used by the anti-gunners and not one that can be verified. It is a known fact and one you can research easily that most sales at gun shows are done by licensed FFL dealers and are also subject to checks as stated before they can release any weapon.
The only sales not required for background checks are between private individuals and account for far less than the 40% of all gun sales. Also, nost of those are done by law abiding citizens to others they know. Most law abiding gun owners do not sell to people they don't know.
Get the real facts and don't just spout rhetoric. That is what is wrong with Obama and his minions. They get you sheeple to beleive something just because they say it weather it is true or not.
Pat -
I voted for Obama, Cuomo and other Democrats but man did I make one of the biggest mistakes of my life. Why you may ask.....because of people like you, extreme liberals liars and if you really believe the things you are saying then it is obvious you lack a brain.
Bloomberg, Obama, Cuomo, Biden, Fientein are supposedly intelligent people but believing that less guns makes us safer is a myth so either they are liars or not [pandering to people like you] very are not very smart at all.
My sincere apology to all gun owners in America.
Pat, it's truely a sad situation when someone comes on a public forum like yourself and makes it obvious they don't know what they are talking about.
First, 40% is some number the anti 2nd Amendment crowd pulled out of the air that has no basis in fact.
Second, there is nothing "illegal" about 2 parties involved in a private sale. I have every right to sell my hunting buddy my firearm if I want to.
Unsubstantiated drivel.
.
Pat, that is a total lie. That number is repeated over and over...the only problem is it is not true.
Maybe Pat should tell us about the guns he brought over the internet with no background check.
What was the name of that company,again?
Dont exist,just like Pat's "facts".