Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Congressman boasts of being targeted by D.C. voting rights protesters

Travis Childers for DC Mayor?A Mississippi congressman targeted by D.C. voting rights activists is actually touting the protests in his reelection campaign.

Members of D.C. Vote stood outside the Capitol South Metro station Thursday morning distributing fliers featuring an illustration of Rep. Travis Childers (D-Miss.) wearing a monocle and straw hat under the headline "Travis Childers for DC Mayor?"

"Childers is acting more like DC's mayor than a Congressman from Mississippi," the flier reads -- referring to his sponsorship of a law that would strip most city gun laws.

Childers, in response, issued a campaign news release noting that "members of the anti-Second Amendment group, DC Vote, handed out fliers and ran a newspaper ad in North Mississippi mocking the importance of Americans' right to bear arms, directly attacking Travis' record of protecting this constitutional right."

There's one problem: D.C. Vote's not an anti-Second Amendment group, and the protest materials -- including print and Web ads running in Childers' Mississippi district -- never mention guns, just that he "can't keep his hands off DC's local laws."

But Childers, locked in a tough reelection battle with state Sen. Alan Nunnelee (R) -- sees value in painting the protest as yet another front in the battle over gun control.

"This latest tussle over Second Amendment rights is another example that when the pressure is on, Travis stands up for North Mississippi and doesn't back down," the release said.

Childers is widely regarded as one of the most conservative Democrats in the House. On Monday, he accepted the endorsement of the National Rifle Association while "[s]tanding beside two hunting rifles and a shotgun on the DeSoto County Courthouse lawn," according to an account in the Memphis Commercial Appeal.

D.C. Vote protested Childers as part of a new willingness to target congressional Democrats who have supported obstacles to a bill that would allow the District to have a vote in the House. Last month, activists targeted Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) with a "pray-in" at his office.

"I think this is no more Mr. Nice Guy," D.C. Vote Executive Director Ilir Zherka told me this month. "I think the political calculus that people have had up to now is that they could hit the city in almost any way, and they would pay no price whatsoever. We have to change that calculus. ... We have to exact some price."

They still have some work to do.

By Mike DeBonis  |  June 24, 2010; 7:30 PM ET
Categories:  The District  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Behold Bob Ehrlich's fake news clips
Next: DeMorning DeBonis: June 25, 2010

Comments

Uhh, Mike, DC Vote actually IS an anti-2A group. The only reason they opposed the DC voting rights act is because it restored 2d Amendment protections to DC residents. Why else would they oppose a chance for DC to get a vote in Congress - the very thing they are claim they are fighting FOR??

Posted by: k_romulus | June 25, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

k_romulus:

Because we would rather not have our gun laws stripped down to basically nothing? Maybe? Most Washingtonians, as far as I know, are not crazy about more guns. If we want Second Amendment rights, we can elect people who will give them to us. We don't need some prick we didn't vote for to do anything for us except give us our due representation.

Posted by: ravensfan20008 | June 26, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Ravensfan20008, I'm sure if the Washington DC council passed a law to segregate it's citizens by race because they believed it would decrease the violence in the city (this is one of the things we tried in our prison system in Arizona), you'd want Congress to step in and help enforce what's consitutionally legal and what's right, despite the fact that the majority of citizens of DC via their elected officials would be discriminating. By the same token, because the DC council does not want to honor the minority's constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense, Congress should step in despite what the majority of the citizens in DC think is the right thing to do.

Posted by: tjtackleberry | June 29, 2010 1:41 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company