Candidates who cozy up to Mike Bloomberg get a cool quarter million dollars plus in free advertising based on what he’s doing for the anti-gun Attorney General candidate here in Pennsylvania.
A super PAC founded and funded by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is spending over $250,000 to boost Democratic Attorney General hopeful Kathleen Kane. …
The ad is airing on cable and broadcast in the Philadelphia market to the tune of $257,000, according to a buy tracked by the Sunlight Foundation’s political ad sleuth.
This race is a problem for Pennsylvania gun owners. Polls show Kane holding a huge lead, but they often have a high margin of error and still show about 1/3 of voters haven’t made up their minds, even this late in the game. The race is still winnable, but gun owners need to help out.
I’m not just talking about knocking on doors or making phone calls. With so many voters not paying any attention to the race, one of the best and easiest things to do would be to talk to any friends and family members and just let them know your choice. You don’t have to get into the gun issue, just make remarks that Freed is your candidate of choice based on his record as a prosecutor and encourage them to join you.
Kane has already promised CeaseFire that she’s going to work on undoing the concealed carry reciprocity agreements with all other states – not just Florida that has been demonized by the media.
Kane received a perfect score on CeaseFirePA’s questionnaire. In particular Kane has committed toa review of all concealed carry reciprocity agreements currently in place between Pennsylvania and other states,including Florida, and renegotiating or terminating those that do not meet Pennsylvania’s standards.
To give you an idea of how extreme you have to be to get a perfect score on CeaseFire’s questionnaire, not even an NRA D-rated Democratic Senator from Philadelphia could get more than an 85% agreement with them in 2010 when he was running for Governor. That’s how anti-gun you have to be – a solid F with gun owners and more extreme than even entrenched urban Democratic politicians.
This is probably one of the most important issues that is under the radar of most Pa gun owners. Many Many Thanks!
That’s pretty atrocious to have an AG candidate declaring she’s going to undermine the will of the legislature, on guns or anything else. She seems unclear on the concept of separation of powers. Amazing.
Thanks for tip–I knew Bloomberg’s MAIG had a lot of quids in their quid pro quo, but I had no idea it was a quarter million!
She seems unclear on the concept of separation of powers.
How is that so? It seems to be entirely in keeping with the principle, assuming the state Constitution allows the legislature to impeach her.
Unless we want to stop celebrating e.g. prosecutors who say they won’t prosecute people for violations of unjust and unconstitutional gun laws? There’s been a few examples of that recently, right?
I don’t know about PA, but in most states CHL reciprocity is set by the legislature. For an AG candidate to promise to fight that looks like overstepping the boundaries of the office–which is meant to enforce laws, not to create them.
It depends on what level of finding of facts is required. Missouri is easy: a CCW from any locality in the US is fine, including for a resident of the state. I’m pretty sure the state doesn’t even do anything other than perhaps say “If have a concealed carry permitting system your people are covered in Missouri” when another state calls up.
Plenty of other states demand equal or higher levels of checking, e.g. fingerprints. I’m assuming Pennsylvania is one of these, and therefore someone in the executive has to decide. E.g. Missouri is almost as strict as any other state, but for some reason we don’t do an NICS check (the only available window in the mental health system) and evidently that’s why we didn’t make Wisconsin’s cut.
Note that as an administrative action there should be mechanisms for lawsuits if the AG doesn’t follow the law. Another example of the separation of powers.
I never understood the grading system. Why say that a candidate is just “OK” on a fundamental right. they either are or are not. Just like you are either racist or not… not “just a little racist”.
Note she doesn’t show up on the FOAC guide: http://www.foacpac.com
Well, because way over 90% of the politicians at the national level don’t give a damn about our issue. Almost all of them are “just a little racist”, so we have to grade by actions above all, and use that as input for when to use a stick or carrot.
Giving that 90% plus of the a grade of F would be pointless, however accurate it might be.
This race scares me a lot. Glad I have my Utah Permit which will help a bit.
Why do people who cherish their 2ndA rights live in liberal states?! Move to the north central midwest & enjoy your freedoms, f–k the libtards! Come join us here in North Dakota.
My Ex-wife lives there, so nothing personal but I just aint coming anywhere NEAR that state!