Election guide

Endorsements and a special election voting guide for Tuesday’s general elections are on the PVF website.

Unlike some people, I don’t make grandiose statements with no follow through just for fundraising appeals.  I point to specific actions taken in support of 2A rights including, but not limited to:

If you approve, donations to the NYSRPA-PVF can be made online here.

Cuomo’s role in national antigun campaign

The Times reports:

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo intends to take a lead role in a broad campaign pressing for a crackdown on the improper dealing of firearms, swerving into national politics on an issue that has caused him some political heartburn in New York but has become a defining subject of the 2016 presidential campaign …”

Two things:

  1. Gun control is not a defining subject in the presidential campaign by any stretch of the imagination.
  2. By political heartburn they mean effectively ending Andrew’s presidential aspirations.

“… Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, has pledged to throw his weight behind the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, one of the country’s most prominent gun control groups, in an as-yet-unannounced effort demanding that the Justice Department more closely scrutinize so-called bad apple gun merchants, according to people familiar with the campaign …”

This just shows how out of touch Cuomo is.  The Brady’s were long ago supplanted by Bloomberg/Everytown.

“… “The political climate is right again for action,” said Mr. Cuomo, who has endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton for president. He added, “The appetite is there, I think, in the presidential election, especially in the Democratic primary but also in the general election.” …”

His delusions on the issue are what got him in trouble in the first place.  If he wants to advise Hillary on it more power to him.

“… To start, Mr. Cuomo will be among the chief signatories of a letter to Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, to be released as early as next week, urging the Justice Department to punish what the Brady Campaign describes as a small fraction of gun dealers who sell an overwhelming share of weapons used to commit crimes. He has promised to lobby other governors around the country to join in the push …”

This would probably be more effective if Cuomo were thought of a national political leader in general, not just gun control. I don’t see more than a handful of other governors going along with him.

“… In addition to an emerging group of governors lobbying for federal action, the Brady Campaign also intends to enlist prominent mayors and police chiefs in related initiatives …”

Mayor Bloomberg has been trying this for years and it has not worked out too well. Stealing ideas from him is all the Brady’s have left.

“… It is unclear what Mr. Cuomo’s deeper participation in gun politics, at the national level, might mean in New York, where his stance on gun control has cost him votes. His popularity plunged across rural areas upstate after he signed the Safe Act … “There’s no doubt it cost me popularity,” Mr. Cuomo said on Thursday, adding that on this particular issue, “the polls don’t matter.” …”

Sure they do.  That is why Cuomo is not included in any ’16 presidential polls.

Paul Ryan new House Speaker

Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan appears to have sufficient support to become the next Speaker of the House.

Ryan had previously been endorsed by NRA so I don’t think gun rights will be an issue with him.  However, I would like to see him be more aggressive at pushing the issue than the wimp John Boehner was, especially the reciprocity bill.

Schumer goes Back to the Future with proposal

Chuck Schumer tries digging up a failed idea from the 90s:

“… Sen. Chuck Schumer said Friday he wants the federal government to use its “massive purchasing power” to put the financial screws to gun manufacturers who deal with shady weapon sellers.  The Army is seeking bidders for a $580 million contract to replace its aging handgun arsenal, and Schumer said he wants that contract to include two safety provisions — the winning bidder must develop “smart gun” technology, and must cut off business ties with the “1 percent” of gun dealers that sell guns to criminals …”

This is essentially a rehash of the deal that nearly bankrupted Smith & Wesson.  Manufacturers will never go for it and neither will Congress.  This is just more of Chuck’s grandstanding before an audience he knows is unlikely to check up on his record.

Ulster Sportsmen have a message for Ed Cox

State Republican Party Chairman Ed Cox was speaker at last night’s Ulster Co. GOP dinner.

Ulster Co. Sportsmen were there and got this picture:

Ed Cox

Why anyone would want this super-tool at their event is a mystery to me, let alone making him Guest of Honor. I’m guessing he does not even know what the sign means because standing in front of it makes him look like an even bigger fool than people already think he is.

2nd Circuit upholds most of SAFE

To the surprise of no-one, the 2nd Circuit upheld most of the SAFE Act.  We’ve said all along it would have to go to SCOTUS and that is the next stop after the 2nd Circuit.

The decision underscores the need to have higher quality judges on the bench.  To that end we’ve endorsed 3 candidates for state supreme court and 3 candidates for county courts this year.  While the SAFE lawsuit moves through the federal, not state, court system, the more good judges we have at all levels of the judiciary the better.

But it is a winning strategy

A couple of days ago Hillary endorsed Australia-style gun confiscation.  Today her mouthpiece is backing away from it:

Question: Why would a candidate walk away from an issue with such popular support?

Answer: When the polls aren’t true.

He’s going to learn alright

Last week Sen. Liz Kruger suggested gun control advocates join to NRA to undermine it from within.

Brooklyn Assemblyman Walter Mosley took her advice:

“… Assemblyman Walter Mosley, a second-term Brooklyn Democrat, says that “it’s important to read the publications they get and the articles they read.” He also plans on attending the annual NRA convention in Kentucky in May. “If we can see where their position is coming from, it gives us a better way to counter their position and how we can help those who are on the front lines still trying to thwart illegal gun trafficking and crimes that take place from that industry,” he said … “If we can see where their position is coming from, it gives us a better way to counter their position and how we can help those who are on the front lines still trying to thwart illegal gun trafficking and crimes that take place from that industry,” he said. “I have to go where the debate is, where the conversations and the narratives that are counterintuitive to what my position is are being shaped,” he added …”

Giving credit where it is due, it took balls to make a statement like that.  It is exceedingly rare for a NYC politician to even consider the notion that some people may have different ideas and beliefs from their own, let alone try to investigate them.

“… One Assembly Democratic insider called it a “bad move” for Mosley to pay money to the NRA, even if it’s a nominal $35 annual membership fee. He also dismissed Mosley’s contention that joining the organization will help him learn its playbook. “We already know what they think,” the source said …”

No, they don’t as most live inside the arrogance, elitism and ignorance of the NYC/beltway bubble.  The first thing Mosley is going to learn is that the Daily News does not tell the truth on the issue and unless there is a national toilet paper shortage, there is no reason to buy that newspaper.

“… “I hope this will allow for other legislators to be more proactive,” he said. “We have to have the audacity to step out of our comfort zones and step into places that make us feel uncomfortable. That level of discomfort brings growth and opportunity.” …”

Good for him.  However, the second thing Mosely is going to learn is that the last thing many of his colleagues want is any sort of discomfort.  They were elected by the Tammany machine specifically because they will do little but vote with the party leadership and keep their seats warm.

Media welcomes Democrat gun debate

This op-ed in the NY Times needs additional commentary, “Democrats Welcome the Gun Debate to the Campaign“:

“After 15 years of a virtual gag order on guns in presidential politics, Democrats are talking again. President Barack Obama is considering more executive action on gun control …”

More like a handful of the nuttiest Democrats are talking about gun control.  Most know it is a political stinker, especially for their party.  If the majority of them in Congress were hot about it Obama would have a lot more political leverage on the issue and put up more than the lame effort he is right now.

“… At the Democrats’ first debate in the presidential season, candidates jockeyed for bragging rights over who had the lowest rating from the National Rifle Association …”

Jim Webb wasn’t.

“… Democrats say support for new gun laws is broader now and the politics of the issue have shifted enough to make the push for tougher measures a political winner, even if there remains almost no chance for success in Congress …”

The only broad support for gun control is coming from crap media outlets like the Times. If there was genuine support among the general public Congress would take note of it.

“… Republicans are eager for Democrats to test the theory. They watched the Democratic debate and saw fodder for advertising aimed at rural voters and gun owners still firmly opposed to putting more restrictions on gun purchases. Those voters have tended to retain their passion on the issue and have been motivated to vote, long after a shooting recedes from the headlines …”

Which is true. Where is the energy and passion from the antis?

“… The White House has been upfront that it plans to keep attention on the issue …”

Probably true in so far as it draws attention away from more serious issues like the fact that Vladimir Putin thinks Obama is a joke.

“… “You see such strong support all across the country for proposals like closing the gun show loophole,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said, urging Congress to act. “There’s ample public data to indicate that even a majority of gun owners support something like this.” …”

This is more baloney Bloomberg bought and paid for. The general public is most certainly not urging Congress to act.

“… It was hard to imagine Democrats picking a fight with the NRA in past presidential contests. Democrats’ electoral losses after the 1994 passage of the ban on assault-type weapons had a chilling effect on the debate. President Bill Clinton posited that Vice President Al Gore lost the 2000 election because of opposition to Gore’s gun stance … Democrats have since all but taken the issue off the table in national campaigns …”

Why would they do that if indeed what Josh Earnest said were true?

“… Advocates of tighter gun laws are heartened by the fact the debate even exists …”

Even if it largely exists only in their own minds.

Not a winning strategy

Over at Hot Air is an op-ed, “Hillary’s gun confiscation proposal is going to backfire in a big way.

I agree. Pushing gun control is a bad idea for the general election.  What I don’t agree with is this:

“… this is a winning strategy for Clinton in the primary because her base has largely been sold on the idea of things like expanded background checks at the federal level and a national gun registry …”

It isn’t for several reasons:

  1. As I have said many times before, the antis do not have an ability to turn out people to vote on their issue.  There is a huge difference between having a person agree with an idea and going out and acting on it.  Show me where there is a serious effort by the antis to get people to register and vote for candidates based upon their gun control stance.
  2. Anything Hillary says during the primary will come back against her in the general election.
  3. By opening her mouth now, she has given time for gunnies to raise money and organize people in opposition to her.  Unless she is expecting Mayor Bloomberg to personally cut her a $100 million check, why bring up the issue now?  All she has done is raised millions of dollars for the NRA.
Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com