It seems that Kristen Gillibrand is doing a flip-flop when it comes to guns and immigration.
She first ran as a Representative by being even more conservative than her GOP opponent, John Sweeney, when it comes to guns and immigration. But these days she seems to see things differently.
Why has Gillibrand flip-flopped? Did she really change positions, or was she just playing politics from the start? Most importantly, what does this mean for gun owners in New York and across America?
“Blue Dog” Democrat Beginnings
In the beginning, Gillibrand often sided with “Blue Dog” Democrats–a dying breed of politician whose party was Democrat, but whose voting record was mostly conservative. The representative came across as a very pro-gun, pro-America, anti-illegal immigration candidate. She supported increased funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)–including and encouraged local law officials to work that national organization.
Gillibrand even admitted–as most Democrat politicians now do not–that border security wasn’t just about immigration. In her own words, “Improving our border security is imperative in keeping America safe.”
On her 2006 campaign website, she proudly proclaimed her support for the Secure Fence Act–a bill which proposed 700 miles of double fencing at the U.S-Mexico border.
(House Minority Leader Democrat Chuck Schumer also voted for the bill–even though he now opposes any form of wall or fence to protect American borders. Go figure.)
Most importantly, she held a 100% “A” rating from the NRA when she first ran for office. As Representative, Gillibrand even sponsored a bill that would have expanded hunting on public lands.
The Representative Becomes a Senator–And Turns an About-Face
But things started to change when Gillibrand filled Hillary Clinton’s old Senate seat in 2012.
The New York Senator today says that she was wrong for her old views, which supposedly changed after talking to families affected by criminal use of firearms, as well as “undocumented”–in other words, illegal–immigrants.
She’s even gone so far as to claim she feels “ashamed” of her former political positions.
But what she should feel ashamed of is the way she betrayed the very people who voted her into office. Her about face from Second Amendment supporter to gun control advocate changed her NRA rating from an “A” to an “F”. S
he also “won” a 100% rating from the Brady Campaign–not a big winner in our book.
Curiously, Kristen Gillibrand’s policy changes coincided with her election to the Senate–where she came under intense scrutiny from other Democrats for her pro-Second Amendment, anti-illegal immigration, pro-America views. She almost looks like an unfortunate victim of liberal lock-step, group-think mentality.
But is she? Or is there something else going on?
Enter Kristen Gillibrand–Presidential Candidate
Gillibrand claims that her shifting stance in gun laws is in part due to a meeting with high school students who were affected by gun violence. While it’s tragic that these students had to undergo this trauma (which could have been prevented by any number of strong pro-carry policies), are we really supposed to believe that a handful of students are what changed the Senator’s outlook from an “A” to an “F” rating?
As an upstate Representative from the Albany area, Gillibrand claimed to be proud to stand on her own, even if that meant standing against her own party. But once in the Senate–the more “prestigious” house of Congress, where hungry career politicians seem to smell the Oval Office–her positions started to change in quick-time. Are we really supposed to believe that Gillibrand wasn’t thinking about a run for the Presidency then?
(And speaking of the Presidency–Kristen Gillibrand has called President Trump “weak and a coward”–even though he’s been extremely consistent on his views, while she has done a complete turnaround on hers. Go figure!)
Senator Kristen Gillibrand is currently one of 18 different Democrats running for president. She’s not the only one who is soft on crime, soft on immigration–and hard on gun owners. But unlike other candidates, she entered politics as someone who supported the vast silent majority of United States.
The current Democrat Party seems to be shifting to the left more and more every election season. Part of the reason is because of the new and younger ultra-liberal “diverse” candidates who are taking office. But politicians like Gillibrand represent an even more insidious element in the Democrat Party–the kind of politician who is willing to sell out the Constitution and the American people for political gain.
If you’re reading this newsletter, chances are you aren’t voting Democrat in 2020. But if you absolutely must–remember Gillibrand’s flip-flop!