Progressive group hits McConnell on guns
(CNN) – A group whose aim is to elect progressive Democrats to Congress released an ad Tuesday hitting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell for opposing gun control legislation while receiving campaign donations from gun manufacturers.
The spot, from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, will run on broadcast and cable television in McConnell's home state, as well as in Washington, D.C., including on CNN. The group said they would spend $27,000 initially to air the ad for one week.
It features Rodney Kendrick, a Kentucky gun owner who takes McConnell to task for his opposition to gun control measures like a ban on military-style assault weapons.
"I was born and raised right here in Kentucky," Kendrick says in the spot. "I served my country as a marksman and we were trained to use guns safely. It's unthinkable that guns meant for war could be used on civilians and children. As a gun owner and a veteran, I support the plan to ban assault weapons and keep guns out of the wrong hands, because I know these guns. I know what they can do."
"Sen. Mitch McConnell has taken thousands of dollars from gun manufacturers, and he opposes common sense reforms," he continued. "Senator McConnell, whose side are you on?"
McConnell, who is serving his fifth term in the Senate, faces re-election next year, and is hoping to fend off any possible conservative primary challenges. Actress Ashley Judd has been mentioned as a potential Democratic rival.
Responding to the ad, McConnell's spokesman Jesse Benton said the minority leader predicted "that protecting Kentucky from President Obama's gun control agenda would result in a flurry of attack ads from left-wing groups."
"It's no secret to Kentuckians that Leader McConnell is a stalwart supporter of their Second Amendment rights and George Soros funded commercials aren't going to change that," he continued.
CNN's Paul Steinhauser and Kevin Liptak contributed to this report.
From CNN Politics
- Potential 2024 GOP field responds to Trump indictment by attacking Bragg
- 10 Cards Charging 0% Interest Until 2024
- Untitled
- Republican leaders and Trump loyalists on Capitol Hill rally behind the former president after indictment
- Biden confronts an unprecedented challenge with a clear -- and quiet -- road map
- Trump's criminal indictment unleashes a bitter new phase in American politics
Yes, let's prevent Americans from having access to cheap birth control, but lay off of my guns.
Libertarians, independent voters and freethinking Americans need to start taking this country back.
Why don't people ask McConnell just how much he spent to buy his seat again,more than 10-1 over his opposition last election run and he barely just won at that..So Mitch what are yah gonna do if Ashly or someone with considerable financial clout,popularity goes against you next time,I'd quit and save face if I were you bulldog...McConnell ,the senate is through with you and your partys angry ole white racist crap and believe me Kentucky doesn't need your butt either...
Sen mitch is bold trying to tell obama what to do, if obama dont do what mitch ask him to do then what. Will mitch do or say about obama, Obama is a grown man an hes black man in the future not in slavery, obama has a wife an family thats who he let tell him what to do.
Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things? The concept of individual freedom seems to offend them.
The culture of Kentucky calls for hunting and guns. And any logicla person knows that. But the Senator is opposed to any sort of legislation and that is just plain ignorant. more stringent back ground checks and longer waiting period do not harm law abiding gun owners. Limitations of certian types of clips or assault weapons is also in no way going to keep anyone form defending themselves or hunting.
If guns were sold and registered and required new registration when sold, like a car, they would be easlily traced to criminals. If the sale is done without transfer, the last regfistered owner would then be responsible for crimes committed with that weapon. Unreasonable? I think not. Getting over 200 million guns registered? That may be a problem!
"Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things"
Why is it that "conservatives" – a euphemism for "fascist" always want to control the uterus of every woman in America, of child bearing age?
"Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things"
Why is it that "conservatives" – a euphemism for "fascist" always want to control the uterus of every woman in America, of child bearing age?
"The concept individual freedom seems to offend the "
"Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things"
Why is it that "conservatives" – a euphemism for "fascist" always want to control the uterus of every woman in America, of child bearing age?
"The concept of individual freedom seems to offend them "
Logic – hunting and defense of self is not in the 2nd amendment. Shall not be infringed. It allows me personal and inalienable rights.
"Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things? The concept of individual freedom seems to offend them."
There truly isn't enough yawn in the universe to respond to the "soshulizm" demagoguery nonsense. Seriously. Go learn what socialism is or stop talking about it.
"Logic – hunting and defense of self is not in the 2nd amendment. Shall not be infringed. It allows me personal and inalienable rights."
Logic: when interpreting the Constitution and trying to understand its provisions, we turn first to prior decisions of the SCOTUS, which has consistently and repeatedly held that your right to bear arms is NOT absolute and is subject to reasonable regulation, control and limitations. It's not even remotely arguable. The proof is in the pudding: the DC and Chicago bans were only overturned because the bans themselves were absolute and therefore considered unreasonable infringements. The SCOTUS has never held that no bans, regulation, limitations, etc., are allowed whatsoever.
"The concept of individual freedom seems to offend them."
No. But the concept of utter stupidity offends me daily.
"I served my country as a marksman and we were trained to use guns safely. It's unthinkable that guns meant for war could be used on civilians and children. " you'd think that someone with military experience would be able to recognize that a AR15 is not a weapon ment for war.
Responding to the ad, McConnell's spokesman Jesse Benton said the minority leader predicted "that protecting Kentucky from President Obama's gun control agenda
-------------------------------------------------
What exactly is McConnell "protecting" his fellow Kentuckians from? Common sense approach touted by the President and supported by the MAJORITY of Americans both gun owners and not?
I fully support not only our President but his weapon of choice in his second term: average, everyday U.S. citizens, and his belief that our common sense will prevail over the demagoguery,and just plain insulting nonsense that these bought and paid for politicians are continuously trying to shove down our throats.
President Obama needs to continue to address Congress with his proposals as is required as a matter of pro-forma, but he shoudl turn right around and look into the cameras, speak into the mike and address the citizens of the United States to help bring about much needed action. Congress has lost or sold what little sense they had left. The ONLY chance to bring out much needed change is through US and the pressure that we as an electorate with a vote that is still viable can exert over elected government officials.
-How come no one talks about who the actual people are that run the NRA?
"you'd think that someone with military experience would be able to recognize that a AR15 is not a weapon ment for war."
BWAHAHAhAhAHA!!! That's precisely what it's for and why it was built and why, during the Vietnam War, there was huge debate over whether to go with the M-14 or AR-15. It's why the Advanced Research Project Agency recommended adopting it and the .223 round. As they said in their Project AGILE reports at the time, in which they gave AR-15s to Vietnamese soldiers to test them out:
'The suitability of the AR—15 as the basic shoulder weapon for the Vietnamese has been established. For the type of conflict now occurring in Vietnam, the weapon was also found by its users and by MAAG advisors to be superior in virtually all respects to the M1 Rifle, M1 and M2 Carbines, Thompson Sub—Machine Gun, and Browning Automatic Rifle."
HenryMiller
Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things? The concept of individual freedom seems to offend them.
_______________
The same could be said of social conservatives.
Rudy NYC
-How come no one talks about who the actual people are that run the NRA?
__________________
These people hide behind politicians that create laws to protect their interests.
J Russ wrote:
"I served my country as a marksman and we were trained to use guns safely. It's unthinkable that guns meant for war could be used on civilians and children. " you'd think that someone with military experience would be able to recognize that a AR15 is not a weapon ment for war.
-----------------
The AR-15 is a weapon designed so that civilians can carry out their own personal wars.
NRA & GOP have no interest in protecting 2nd rights, only gun manufacturer profits. Since when did GOP care about other peoples rights? Most laws they pass and write deal with limiting people's rights unless it conflicts with profits and income for corporations, wallstreet, and banks. They reluctantly go along with civil rights for American citizens. End of story.
This is justified. By obstructing common sense (and once-supported by the NRA) solutions like full-background checks and ending un-checked Gun Show sales, the NRA and the GOP are saying they support the ability of people to acquire firearms who otherwise could not of should not.In essense then- they support the murderers. Harsh, perhaps, but true.
HenryMiller
Why is it that "Progressives"–a euphemism for "Socialists"–always want to "control" things? The concept of individual freedom seems to offend them.
______________________
Sorry- YOUR individual freedom risks MY life.
This argument is utterly ridiculous. How is a ban on military/war weapons an infringment upon our 2nd amendment rights? People can truly be ignorant. Beyond the OBVIOUS observation that these specific weapons were not even in consumption or use during the time the amendment was drafted, the reforms being proposed DO NOT BAN ALL WEAPONS! Therefore, the right to bear arms is not being disposed!! Military weapons have no business in the hands of civilians. It's truly amazing how this is even argument.
McConnell met with the Republicans to plan obstructing the president proposals the day Obama was sworn in gaining the Congress the dubious distinction of the most do nothing Congress in all of American history. McConnell has overseen a minority in the Senate that is on the record for the most filibusters in history ( 430). McConnell only listens to the corporate rich, completely ignoring the majority of Americans who want gun regulations and background checks. Only fools or the obscenely rich listen to McConnell.