A congressional campaign commercial in Nebraska showing how one candidate’s support for an early prison release law tied in with a convict murdering four people within weeks of being let out is being blasted as racist by Democrat supporters of Brad Ashford. The state senator, now challenging incumbent Republican Lee Terry for his seat in Congress, was a proponent of the “Good Time” law, which allowed Nikko Jenkins to serve “half of his 21-year sentence,” Fox News reported Monday.
Jenkins, with a heavily-tattooed face, is black. A prison system psychiatrist labeled him a “psychopath,” and called him ‘one of the most dangerous people I have ever evaluated,’ per an Associated Press report. He maintained an Egyptian god ordered him to kill his victims as human sacrifices after he was “released from prison without supervision.”
The crazed killer’s incidental race, along with his unconventional appearance, is enough for some “progressive” websites to call the Republican ad “unspeakably racist,” and to draw comparisons to the (infamous to Democrats) Willie Horton ad that some nonetheless believe to have been appropriate to introduce into a debate about responsible government. That’s because it demonstrated how then-Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis supported the state’s furlough program, that allowed another career criminal, a convicted murderer serving a life sentence who also happened to be black, out on a pass he did not return from, and who went on to commit armed robbery, assault and rape.
“This repellent, race-baiting ad has no place in America, and national Republicans should apologize and take it down immediately,” Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spokeswoman Ashley Lewis complained. “Republicans should be ashamed that they have resorted to divisive rhetoric, playing up racial stereotypes and fear-mongering to save their sinking candidate.”
How is it the fault of the Republicans what Jenkins looked like, and what his race was? Are we supposed to impose censorship, like Comedy Central did with Mohammed on “South Park,” simply because he’s black? Is that, in itself, not racist?
And who thinks the indignant Ms. Lewis would embrace the diversity and invite someone who looks like Jenkins over for a glass of chardonnay? For that matter, who thinks Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton would want to be alone with this guy, knowing nothing else about him but the face he presents to the world?
Is criticism of Ashford’s support for letting inmates like Jenkins out early not a fair political issue to judge a candidate’s qualifications on? And once out, is the further support of politicians like Ashford for citizen disarmament also not an issue to inject into the public discussion due to its tangential relevance?
Because while Terry is rated “A” by Gun Owners of America and has been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, Ashford is a would-be gungrabber. Per KETV Omaha, the candidate for national office “said banning assault weapons or high-capacity ammo clips is a national issue.” He also supported a law making gun owners liable “if a minor or mentally ill person gets ahold of their firearms to commit a crime,” a bill that, per Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom, was “so vague that a home intruder could sue a homeowner whose child used a gun to shoot him.
Also per NTF, Ashford “pledged to ban semiautomatic firearms not used for hunting” and “In a 1997 editorial and in the Legislature, he opposed a law allowing lawful citizens to carry concealed handguns and hoped that the Legislature would strike down the bill.”
So on the one hand, Ashford supports letting loose raging monsters to stalk among us, and on the other, he wants to make it more difficult for their victims to defend themselves. Not that such laws slow down demonic killers like Nikko Jenkins, who, despite his “prohibited person” status, still never missed a beat getting the guns he used to slay his four victims.
Meanwhile, point any of this out, and the “progressive” citizen disarmament-demanding Democrats rely on their old standby, playing the race card. In light of the real issues at stake, not the fraudulent ones being used to distract attention from them, that’s what is truly unspeakable.
If you’re a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won’t find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (Dan) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.”
My latest GUNS Magazine “Rights Watch” column, “A Fast and Furious Getaway for Holder?”notes sometimes justice delayed is justice escaped.
My latest JPFO Alert, “Maybe more guns are needed on campuses to keep radical ‘feminists’ away,” notes some raging anti-woman sexists. Naturally, being Opposite Day “progressives,” they’re appropriated the title “feminist.”