OMG! A Pro-Gun Dem! Running for Congress! OMG!

Politics is the art of the possible and this is one possibility the President and his supporters just can’t let happen. Debbie Halvorson’s a Dem and avid past Obama supporter running for Jessie Jackson, Jr.’s House seat in the gun-free utopia of Chicago (500+ murders in 2012).  She’s a former state senator and was a congresscritter for Illinois’ 11th from ’09 to ’11. But despite her past support for the President, there’s a fly in this Mrs. Smith Goes Back to Washington story. Halvorson’s pro-2A and carries an NRA A rating. And she’s said in no uncertain terms that she opposes an assault weapons ban and magazine capacity limits because they won’t do a damed thing to reduce crime. So in a crowded primary field, it was an easy decision for the Civilian Disarmer-in-Chief to toss her under the wheels of the Presidential bus in favor of another, more compliant candidate . . .

And BHO’s pulling out all the stops to keep make sure the left side of the House doesn’t get another pro-gun rights vote. In addition to Michael Bloomberg and MAIG attacking Halvorson and pouring money into the race to oppose her, anyone who’s anyone in Illinois Dem politics has the long knives out for her and is supporting Cook County Administrator Robin Kelly instead.

As thehill.com reports, people like one-time Halvorson supporter and contributor Rep. Jan Schakowsky are piling on:

“After the State of the Union address (on Tuesday) it’s hard to say gun violence prevention isn’t a top priority for our country, and certainly for the president, who’s engaged in this issue,” Schakowsky said. “Robin Kelly has been a leader on this issue from day one.”

Schakowsky stressed that she was speaking for herself, not for Obama or the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

“This is something I’ve done on my own. But it is true at the same time that Robin Kelly and Barack Obama are on the same page when it comes to ending gun violence,” Schakowsky said.

Of course Schakowsky’s acting strictly on her own in opposing Halvorson. The fact that Dicky Durban, David Axelrod and the Godfather are also either attacking or conspicuously sitting this one out is just a happy coincidence.

With a large field of candidates, though, not everyone’s counting Halvorson out.

“If all the candidates stay in that are in, Halvorson still has a shot because the African-American vote is going to be split, to be blunt, and there will be higher turnout in the suburbs,” said Roosevelt University Professor Paul Green, a former Chicago alderman.

All of which may be true, but this is Chicago. Where the fix is always in. Halvorson, the one-time frontrunner for the nomination (and thus, the seat) may be fighting on gamely, but the powers that be have decided Kelly’s the anointed one. Halvorson has as much chance of winning that election as we have of seeing a photo of President Obama shooting a gun. Oh. Wait.

23 Responses to OMG! A Pro-Gun Dem! Running for Congress! OMG!

  1. avatargloomhound says:

    Flip flop Joe ran for office on his “NRA A rating” and you see what that got the people of WV.

  2. Be careful here guys. While she is very much pro 2A, she’s also very pro-Obama-Pelosi-Ried on just about everything else.

    That said, she is the only choice on the D side of the ballot. Almost all of the others on the D side are either borderline insane statist nutjobs or Machine pols.

    Illustrating Chicagoland Idiocy, Mayhem and Stupidity at heyjackass.com

  3. avataramagi says:

    She’s pro gun in the sense that she is opposed to an AWB…but…she is also for the following according to her website…

    -Stiff penalties for Straw Buyers

    -Universal Background Checks and registration of all firearms

    -Making sure that background checks work so people do not fall through the cracks in the National Data Base.

    -Ending the Gun Show loophole.

    HOWEVER…when life gives you a lemon, don’t just sit there and wish they were oranges.

    • avatarSakiri says:

      Straw buyers need the crap beat out of them anyways. That’s the one thing I agree with. We have laws already on the books to keep certain people from getting guns, those certain persons get guns, then do stupid things with them and the rest of us look bad. Buying a gun for someone that can’t get one themselves for any reason other than “I’m not legally old enough to buy one so Mom and Dad are getting it for me as a gift” is asinine and needs stomped out.

      Just my opinion of course.

  4. avatarMichael B. says:

    AlphaGeek, are you going to be sending her a check?

  5. avatarSammy says:

    Yea pro gun until she has a “change of heart”. I live in PA and just learned my lesson with the Bob Casey, Jr flip.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      He’s always been a bit of an opportunist, and a freshly re-elected one at that. So, while his current stance isn’t in character in one sense, it somewhat is in a broader sense.

      That being said, any (admittedly microscopic) chance that I would ever vote for him is completely shot. He probably thinks five years until the next election will protect him. What sucks is that he could be right.

  6. avatarIng says:

    I like that last line. Good stuff.

    Here’s hoping that we start seeing more Democratic candidates like her nationwide. I guess it’s possible she could decide to just fall in line on the wrong side with everyone else when the chips are down…but get enough Democrats to challenge the orthodoxy, and it just might change. Maybe.

  7. avatarLance says:

    Prove the gun grabber are losing the argument when Nanny state Bloomburg throws million dollars at her yet she is doing well and if she win become a BIG counter weight to the Obama minded politicians who think its different from November 1994.

    If I where unfortunate enough to live in Illinois id vote for her.

  8. avatarpk in AZ says:

    Here’s a clip of her…

    She has “common sense”!

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/2165372019001/?playlist_id=928378949001

  9. avatarLeo338 says:

    If Bloomberg or BHO don’t want someone that is reason enough to vote for them.

  10. avatarBuell301 says:

    I’d rather have a pro-2A person than a anti-2A person any day of the week. Even if I don’t agree with the rest of her causes, the 2A is my defining issue.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      Not an unreasonable position right now. If the Progressives win big on 2A, it might well greatly accelerate progress on the rest of their agenda. I wonder if we can make requests when it comes to our assigned re-education camp?

      • avatarBuell301 says:

        I’ll save you some Victory Gin comrade!!

        I figured in IL a Dem is gonna win. Given that, we’d be better off with a pro-2A Dem than an anti Dem. Especially if they’re essentially the same on all the other issues.

        Remember friend, we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

  11. avatarPhil says:

    They’re running attack ads against her on TV nearly around the clock. The ads are of course completely biased and misleading, and focused entirely on her pro-2A stance and NRA rating.

    She was my congressman back from 2009 to 2011 and I voted for her twice. The guy we had before (Jerry Weller, a Republican) did pretty much nothing in his last two terms except to collect a paycheck, so she was a welcome replacement. She did some good work during her term, but was voted out in 2010.

    I’m glad to see she’s running for office again.

  12. avatarNazgul says:

    A pro 2nd amendment democrat is better than an anti 2nd amendment republican.

  13. avatarJozan says:

    I seen one of those bizarre attack ads against her late one night. It said in a scary voiceover “She even voted to allow criminals to carry conceled weapons across state lines” which must be some very creative interpretation.

  14. avatarBobtrumpet says:

    Well, no so much, according to this article in today’s National Review Online:

    “Halvorson calls the ads “over the top” and “deplorable,” in part because she has systematically disavowed the positions that earned her that “A” rating. With the exception of an assault-weapons ban, she backs all of the proposals set forth by the president and Democrats in Congress. “I have always said, since running in this primary, that we need universal background checks, we need to end the gun-show loophole,” she tells National Review Online.”

    Complete article here:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/340762/evolving-gun-control-chicago-eliana-johnson

  15. avatarDaveL says:

    After the State of the Union address (on Tuesday) it’s hard to say gun violence prevention isn’t a top priority for our country

    I see no sign that “gun violence” prevention is a top priority in this country. The War on Drugs continues apace, as does the militarization of the police. What I see instead is a bizarre obsession with making arbitrary rules concerning cosmetic features and magazine round-count.

  16. avatarBryan says:

    While off topic to this thread, I just heard back from a Dem., unfortunately mine, that you might be familiar with. I knew it wouldn’t do any good but contacted her anyway, and here’s her response.
    ……………………………………………………………………………………….
    Dianne Feinstein
    United States Senator for California

    Dear Bryan:

    Thank you for contacting me to share your opposition to assault weapons legislation. I respect your opinion on this important issue and welcome the opportunity to provide my point of view.

    Mass shootings are a serious problem in our country, and I have watched this problem get worse and worse over the 40 years I have been in public life. From the 1966 shooting rampage at the University of Texas that killed 14 people and wounded 32 others, to the Newtown massacre that killed 20 children and 6 school teachers and faculty, I have seen more and more of these killings. I have had families tell me that they no longer feel safe in a mall, in a movie theater, in their business, and in other public places, because these deadly weapons are so readily available. These assault weapons too often fall into the hands of grievance killers, juveniles, gangs, and the deranged.

    I recognize that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to bear arms, but I do not believe that right is unlimited or that it precludes taking action to prevent mass shootings. Indeed, in the same Supreme Court decision that recognized the individual right to bear arms, District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court also held that this right, like other constitutional rights, is not unlimited. That is why assault weapons bans have consistently been upheld in the courts, both before and after the Heller decision. I believe regulation of these weapons is appropriate.

    Once again, thank you for your letter. Although we may disagree, I appreciate hearing from you and will be mindful of your thoughts as the debate on this issue continues. If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.

    Sincerely yours,

    Dianne Feinstein
    United States Senator

    Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the nation are available at my website, Feinstein.senate.gov. You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list. Click here to sign up. And please visit my YouTube, Facebook and Twitter for more ways to communicate with me.

    ……………………………………………………………………………………….
    So if you have any questions or comments (and I’ll bet you do) you now have her contact info.

  17. avatardaveR says:

    I am convinced that there is nothing within the docritine of “liberalism” that excludes one also being “Pro-2A”. In fact, I think it makes MORE sense then being Anti-2A. Problem is that our two party systems guarantees that only one party can be “pro”

  18. avatarSD3 says:

    “…avid past Obama supporter running for Jessie Jackson, Jr.’s House seat in the gun-free utopia of Chicago (500+ murders in 2012).”

    Replace one criminal democrat with another?
    Sure, why not?

  19. avatarGov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    There is no room in the Democratic party for anyone who is pro-2nd amendment, pro-life, or pro-business. If they tell you they are any of the three they are probably lying and if they’re not they’ll be drummed out of the party.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.