Some people in politics just can’t take the message from voters. Failed U.S. Senate candidate and failed Democratic presidential candidate Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke is sitting at 0-2 down in the count and announced a 2022 gubernatorial campaign.
O’Rourke doubled down on his infamous “Hell Yeah!” call for gun confiscation of the most popular semiautomatic rifle in America. Reaction was swift and that’s not a recipe for success in Texas.
A Losing Playbook
Former Democratic U.S. Rep. O’Rourke lost a Senate campaign in Texas in 2018 to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. Following that debacle, he failed up and launched a presidential campaign in 2019, only to drop out after seven months.
His major platform pillar was a promise to ban and cofiscate modern sporting rifles (MSRs) or so-called “assault weapons” as O’Rourke and gun control advocates love to label them. In a 2019 presidential debate, O’Rourke was asked about his gun confiscation plans and famously answered, “Hell yes, we’re taking your AR-15, your AK-47!”
His campaign flamed out a short time later.
As a consolation prize, President Joe Biden threw him a bone. During a Texas rally where O’Rourke endorsed President Biden, he assured the crowd, “I’m going to guarantee you this is not the last you’ve seen of him. You’re going to take care of the gun problem with me. You’re going to be the one who leads this effort…I’m counting on you.”
But O’Rourke’s phone never rang. The Biden administration didn’t recruit him for any White House role. That includes during the high-profile flame-out of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) director nominee David Chipman, who couldn’t even earn confirmation support of all the Democratic senators, partly due to his support for a ban on AR-15-style rifles (MSRs).
Failure to Launch
Losing twice hasn’t deterred Robert Francis. O’Rourke has launched a campaign for Texas governor to challenge two-term incumbent Republican Gov. Greg Abbott. Firearms and the Second Amendment will play a large role in the campaign and Gov. Abbott is just coming off a Texas state legislative session where lawmakers overwhelmingly passed and Gov. Abbott signed several pro-firearm laws, including firearm industry nondiscrimination (FIND Act) and “constitutional carry,” allowing Texans to carry handguns without needing a permit.
O’Rourke was asked about the relevance of the gun rights debate, the strong beliefs of Texans in the Second Amendment and his past and current support for a ban and confiscation on popular MSRs. The two-time election loser doubled down on his gun ban – and confiscation – plan.
Texas Tribune political correspondent Patrick Svitek reported, “‘O’Rourke says he won’t back away from mandatory assault weapons buyback in gov race. ‘I think most Texans can agree…that we should not see our friends, our family…our neighbors, shot up w/ weapons that were originally designed for use on a battlefield.’”
O’Rourke says he won’t back away from mandatory assault weapons buyback in gov race. “I think most Texans can agree…that we should not see our friends, our family…our neighbors, shot up w/ weapons that were originally designed for use on a battlefield” https://t.co/x6Wc59WCGN
— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) November 15, 2021
Most Texans don’t agree, they’ve said so already and reactions to O’Rourke’s comments were swift.
Fox News contributor and Second Amendment stalwart Katie Pavlich deadpanned of the comment, “Well this is fantastic.”
This is fantastic https://t.co/sAiopt9uWo
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) November 15, 2021
Other commenters reacted, saying, “Well that candidacy didn’t last long,” and also, “What losing a race the moment you announce looks like.”
Even Vox media, a bastion of anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment reporting, recognized the lunacy of O’Rourke’s remark. “This is the fastest anyone has ever lost a gubernatorial election, right?”
This is the fastest anyone has ever lost a gubernatorial election, right? https://t.co/alt62ZTYkd
— German Lopez (@germanrlopez) November 15, 2021
‘Battlefield’ Firearm Myth
O’Rourke’s anti-gun platform is completely out of touch with how Americans, and more importantly Texans, feel about firearms. He bitterly clings to lies about the MSR, labeling them firearms that were “originally designed for the battlefield.” That’s just false.
MSRs include AR-15-style semi-automatic rifles that are the most popular selling semi-automatic rifle today. There are more than 20 million of them in circulation and they operate on the same one-trigger-pull, one-round-fired technology that has been around for a century.
The original ArmaLite Rifle was developed in the 1950s and Colt began making MSRs commercially available in the early 1960s. This was before the U.S. military adopted the use of the fully automatic rifle, the M-16. Fully automatic firearms have been heavily regulated and restricted from civilian ownership since 1934 and new models have been banned from commercial sale since 1986.
O’Rourke and his gun control allies ignore these facts in order to perpetuate their gun control agenda. MSRs are commonly owned, popular among hunters and target shooters, and easy to use for self-defense.
Texan Stephen Willeford proved this when ran from his home to a nearby church and used his AR-15 to stop a murderer from inflicting even more carnage in Sutherland Springs, Texas, on Nov. 5, 2017. His quick thinking with his lawfully-owned rifle likely saved countless innocent lives.
Texans will have an opportunity to — once again — tell O’Rourke what they think of his extreme gun control policies; Don’t Mess with Texas gun rights.
Larry Keane is SVP for Government and Public Affairs, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
![By Larry Keane President Joe Biden traveled to New York City for a media event to try and show America he’s doing something about rampant crime. Instead, he blamed the Second Amendment and lawful gun owners, said nothing about holding criminals to account and repeated the same tired lies about the firearm industry he keeps at the ready – lies “fact-checked” as being false each time he’s previously recited them. It makes no difference to the president. He’s not even trying anymore. To President Biden and national gun control groups the problem is always the gun and the law-abiding members of the industry. It’s never the criminal. Blaming the ‘Resistance’ President Biden was joined by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, Democratic New York Gov. Kathy Hochul and Democratic New York City Mayor Eric Adams for a “Gun Violence Strategies Partnership” meeting to talk about how to solve the crime surge, particularly those involving firearms. Instead of real solutions, the focus devolved into blaming law-abiding gun owners and again pushing a gun control agenda. “Enough is enough,” President Biden said. “Because we know we can do things about this, but for the resistance, we’re getting from some sectors of the government and the Congress and the state legislatures, and the organizational structures out there.” That “resistance” the president spoke of is the American people. Over the past two years they’ve become fed up with police defunding policies and soft-on-crime prosecutors, like Manhattan’s Democratic District Attorney Alvin Bragg. They’ve invested in their own safety. The “resistance” is the 21 million lawful gun buyers in 2020, including more than 8.4 million first-time buyers, and the 18.5 million gun buyers in 2021, with more than 5.4 million first-timers. The ”resistance” has backstopped Congress from passing federal gun control that don’t address crime. It also stopped President Biden’s nominations of paid gun control lobbyist David Chipman to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and banking activist Saule Omarova as Comptroller of the Currency because not even all U.S. Senate Democrats could support them. They would have turned those agencies into bludgeons to hammer the firearm industry to achieve a special interest, gun control agenda. Favorite Falsehoods The president turned his aim from lawful gun owners towards the firearm industry and repeated a lie he’s rehearsed several times before. “Imagine had we had a liabil… [sic] they’re the only industry in America that is exempted from being able to be sued by the public. Only one,” the president protested. “Why the gun manufacturers?… It’s got to end. They’ve got to be held responsible for the things they do that are irresponsible.” He repeated the claim for emphasis. “And I find that outrageous.” This is flatly false. The president knows by now, or his speechwriters do and they don’t bother with the facts. CNN, Politicfact and Washington Post have all checked President Biden on his remark, including after he said it in the White House Rose Garden. CNN cleanly rebuked it. “This is false. Gun manufacturers are not entirely exempt from being sued, nor are they only industry with some liability protections.” Politifact rated it “false.” Washington Post wasn’t kinder, saying, “Biden is wrong to claim the gun industry is totally immune.” The firearm industry has liability protections under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), bipartisan legislation enacted under former President George W. Bush. The firearm industry cannot be held liable when unaffiliated third-parties, in this case criminals, misuse a legal, lawfully sold product. It’s fundamental tort law and is similar to an individual attempting to hold Ford and Budweiser responsible for drunk driving deaths. The law was passed in direct response to lawsuits filed against the industry by control groups and municipalities like the city of New York and the state of New York. These type of lawsuit continue to be filed, now even by foreign governments represented by the same gun control group, the Brady Center. Colonial-Era Error President Biden continued to ignore facts on the Second Amendment and its history. He even erred when speaking about the Revolution-era days and why the right to keep and bear arms was so sacrosanct. “When the amendment was passed, it didn’t say anybody could own a gun and any kind of gun and any kind of weapon,” President Biden remarked. “You couldn’t buy a cannon, and when – the – when this, uh, this amendment was passed.” It did, and does, say the right of the People “shall not be infringed.” Even The Washington Post was brutal in their assignment of “Four Pinocchio’s” to this statement. “Biden has already been fact-checked on this claim — and it’s been deemed false. We have no idea where he conjured up this notion about a ban on cannon ownership in the early days of the Republic, but he needs to stop making this claim.” In fact, the Constitution of early America – before the Bill of Rights, and Second Amendment, was even ratified – granted and encouraged “special waivers” to American merchants and sailors, “allowing private individuals to act as pirates on behalf of the United States against countries engaged in war with it.” Americans given waivers and who owned warships obviously also obtained cannons for use in battle. In fact, it is still perfectly legal to buy a cannon today. It is the presidents’ fundamental misunderstanding and blatant lying about the Second Amendment that informs his gun control agenda and misguided approach to solving the crime problem. Millions of law-abiding Americans took ownership of their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves, understanding the president won’t. Instead of mangling the meaning of the right and pushing for more gun control on law-abiding Americans, the president should keep it simple. Take on the criminals and punish them for breaking the law.](https://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/download-26-218x150.jpeg "Harris is a Human Disinformation Campaign When It Comes to Guns")
he cannot beat Allen West and he’s an idiot if he tries.
“he cannot beat Allen West”
dominion can.
Hell FIRST he must get past Matthew McConaughey and whatever other idiots decide to primary for the Lefts nomination to run… Obozo has the same chances of making it to the Big Show as those prosecutors in Kenosha had of getting a murder conviction against Rittenhouse…
Is McConaughey a rabid ant-gunner?
Don’t know about “rabid” but he’s made some anti-gun noises… McConaughey supports a semi-auto ban and cites criminal acts as “loopholes” in the law. McConaughey speaking at a “March for Our Lives” rally from 2018. In that speech, McConaughey stated, “Let’s ban the assault weapons for civilians. This is a no-brainer. And to my friends out there that are responsible owners of these recreational assault weapons that they use for recreation, please let’s just take one for the team and set it down.” That’s all I need to hear…
Must be nice to have nothing to do all day besides trying to decide which office to run for , the one where you get to phuk with people the most!!
I hope that Texas hand Beto O’Dork a beating that ends his political career for good. It won’t be easy. He raised $2.5 million on his first day of fundraising. Hollywood and New York City loves that horse toothed POS.
Ralph,
See my comment below where I mention that O’Rourke may simply be the Democrat Party’s “whipping boy” who they put forward in elections which the Party figures they cannot win.
What I failed to consider is that O’Rourke may be a Democrat Party campaign fundraising behemoth. That may be his actual value–raking in millions of dollars in campaign funds which could easily make their way into the Democrat Party’s general fund at the conclusion of O’Rourke’s failed/terminated campaign.
Anyone who funnels truckloads of cash into the Democrat Party is a “winner” in their eyes.
Sadly describes several NY republican campaign strategies.
Beatoff is like a case of the clap.
If he were only foreign born, he would have an Obiden nomination for some post. As Pres the idiot could not possibly do a worse job that Obiden though.
Did you seriously just challenge a democrat with not being able to fuck up worse than their predecessor?
Why does that democRat beto remind me so much of that democRat anthony weiner?
I agree with Robert Francis. I don’t want my family, friends, and neighbors getting shot with weapons designed for the battlefield. I’ll go one further and say I don’t want them getting shot period. That’s one of the reasons I own AR-15s.
Who says O’Rourke and his handlers are super serious about winning the 2022 gubernatorial election?
At any rate O’Rourke can count on 10s of millions of dollars in campaign donations which means he can count on huge salaries for himself and his most important campaign employees. That is a definite win in O’Rourke’s book.
Second of all O’Rourke can probably keep the Democrat base even more riled-up if he loses the election.
Finally, if the Democrat party figures they are unlikely to win the 2022 election, O’Rourke may simply be the Democrat Party’s “whipping boy” who dutifully runs for elections which the Democrat party believes they cannot win. Either way, they might as well put forward a candidate with name recognition on the off-chance that O’Rourke can actually win.
I guess I’m naive but I never really understood that you can make a living running for office, even if you have no chance of winning.
Learn something every day…
Actually, that’s how a lot of the MSM hosts and daily contributors got their jobs in the first place: Left wing dimwit darlings that failed in their attempt to break into the taxpayer’s bank but were later offered jobs at huge salaries to continue their diatribes on the TV every day…
In some states (like Virginia) you can convert campaign funds to personal income after the election, in the right race you could very easily become a millionaire…
“O’Rourke was asked about his gun confiscation plans and famously answered, “Hell yes, we’re taking your AR-15, your AK-47!” ”
““‘O’Rourke says he won’t back away from mandatory assault weapons buyback in gov race. ‘I think most Texans can agree…that we should not see our friends, our family…our neighbors, shot up w/ weapons that were originally designed for use on a battlefield.’””
1. There is not such thing as a mandatory weapons buy back. Its forced confiscation, period.
2. The U.S. government can not constitutionally or legally make it mandatory to sell your personal property “back” to them. They could only do that if they have an original ownership in the property with a legal agreement that say you will do that upon demand.
3. There is no such thing as a commercially manufactured “AR-15” or “AK-47” intended for or sold in the civilian market in the U.S. that was “originally designed for use on a battlefield.” The “AR-15” has not existed as a “military weapon contender” since the 1960’s. Today the term “AR-15” is an identification term for marketing purposes which is applied to a semi-auto rifle platform of modular design using function technology that is over 100 years old that has cosmetic looks similar to a military rifle, and is intended for for general sporting purposes (although some do use it for self/home-defense). There is no such thing as a commercially manufactured “AR-15” or “AK-47” intended for or sold in the civilian market in the U.S. that is an “assault rifle” nor can these pass the rigorous military testing to qualify as an “assault rifle” and they are made that way on purpose.
“…commercially manufactured…
should have been “legally commercially manufactured”
“Today the term “AR-15” is an identification term…”
should lave been
“Today the term “AR-15” is legally an identification term …”
To add:
“…using function technology that is over 100 years old…”
the same as over 99% of other rifles and shotguns and hand guns on the market that are semi auto or single shot or bolt action or manual load.
Go for it Beatoff! Make a fortune being a loser. Makes sense to a dim. Anyone remember Harold Stassen?!?
“The “AR-15” has not existed as a “military weapon contender” since the 1960’s.”
clarification:
The “AR-15” created by Aramalite as a “military weapon contender” was never sold to the general public nor did it ever enter production intended for the commercial general public market.
The design (the patent for the Armalite AR-10 and AR-15 which was a re-calibered version of the Armalite AR-10) was sold to Colt who redesigned it. That redesign eventually became the M-16. That Colt redesign was never never sold to the general public nor did it ever enter production intended for the commercial general public market.
All remaining original “production capable” versions of the “Armalite AR-15” were destroyed in the 1960’s after the patents were sold to Colt except one and that one remaining rifle is safely secured at today’s Armalite headquarters and has never been fired. Although there were prototypes, those prototypes have either been destroyed or are locked away at Armalite HQ.
There has not been an actual “military weapon contender” AR-15 since the 1960’s, and in the 1960’s the AR-15 ceased to exist as a “military weapon” and that rifle version was never really an assault rifle until after Colt redesigned it. The only reason the AR-15 designation exists today is because as part of the agreement between Colt and Armalite for sale of the patents it was agreed that the AR-15 would be carried forth to represent Armalite’s originality and contribution being responsible for the Colt military weapon.
He’s a loser who can’t get over himself. Third time will be a charm for Mr. Beat Off.
Beat Offs dream of gun confiscation is nothing more than a odd wet dream and that dream isn’t going to help his candidacy for Texas Governorship.
This man has discovered how to make money without working. Running for office keeps him employed as there are people dumb enough to keep sending him money. Oh well, it’s their money and they can support any loser they want but you think they would catch on.
jeff said, “This man has discovered how to make money without working.”
I think you’ve got something there!
“This man has discovered how to make money without working”
not at all – he’s discovered how to get money without working. the never-audited “federal” “reserve”, a private banking consortium, makes the money, and hands it out to whoever it pleases.
“… modern sporting rifles (MSRs) or so-called ‘assault weapons’ as … gun control advocates love to label them.”
I understand our need to communicate effectively. We must be extremely careful (in our effective communication) that we do not reinforce Progressive “alternative” language tactics.
A much better way to effectively communicate the above partial sentence without reinforcing Progressive “alternative” language:
“… modern sporting rifles (MSRs). (Civilian disarmament advocates crafted a fictitious, misleading, and emotionally manipulative term ‘assault weapons’ to describe modern sporting rifles.)”
Perhaps someone can think of a slightly more succinct and eloquent way to convey the above idea. I welcome any suggestions/improvements as long as those suggestions/improvements demonstrate that civilian disarmament advocates created their fictitious, intentionally misleading, and intentionally emotionally manipulative term “assault weapons”.
For those who have not kept up
Today is the fourth day of jury deliberation for the Rittenhouse trial. Various experts are predicting that either the jury will have a verdict toady or they’re going to claim they’re hung, maybe take this a grain of salt.
There seems to be a particular specific jury interest in the Rosenbaum shooting and the jury has asked to see that video evidence and pics more than any other.
i just pictured a hopping wart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFn7VjYksBM
I have an idea for an article to submit to JAMA. Pencil necks constrict the flow of blood to the brain.
Founding Father G. Washington said upon the formation of our Gov’t–Make not the offices of Congress too wealthy else you will have people of no account seeking them and to stay in them in as long as they can. That is why all Dem LibTurds seek office.
You can’t fix stupid.
I can’t wait to watch him tip toe down the line of simultaneously supporting BLM/defund while saying only police should have ARs.
If he can change his name then so can I. From now on he’s known as ‘bater.
“originally designed for the battlefield”
they don’t want you to be armed on the battlefield they mean to impose on you.
“how we burned later in the camps” ….
Money!
Beto and Kamala are one in a kind and neither is the sharpest tool in the shed. When you see some of these people who run for office you wonder if its because they really can’t do the job in the public sector. Beto who is an anti gun person ought to take note of the number of people who purchased firearms in the last couple of years in record numbers. Why because people don’t like the Democrat policies of letting criminals into the Country, releasing them from jails, not prosecuting people who have clearly committed crimes, defunding the police, and constantly relegating American Citizens as second class to illegals, refugees and criminals.
Anyone with half a working brain would know those policies alone will not fly. If Beto thinks he can take our firearms I would ask him to volunteer to go out on the first raid and be the person who knocks on the door and rings the doorbell. He better bring one of those big black heavy duty plastic body bags with the zipper with him because that will probably be his last door knock.
Beta is kind of like a Kardashian — famous for being famous. Some rumor started that he could be Cruz,, so lots of out-of-state money poured in. He can raise money, which makes him a viable candidate, which makes him able to raise money. The problem for him is that raising money and getting votes isn’t the same thing.
Comments are closed.