We ought to get perspective on the real nature of the most recent push on gun  control, initiated out of the White House.

This is classic bait-and-switch politics, characterized by what current  Chicago mayor and former Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel once described as  never letting a crisis go to waste.

This has been sadly and transparently the case with this latest round of gun  control politics.

One target of convenience in this round of “never let a crisis go to waste”  is New Hampshire Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte.

Sen. Ayotte sticks in the craw of the left because real conservatives are not  supposed to get elected in New England. 

But Ayotte, the lone Republican in New Hampshire’s four-member congressional  delegation, elected in 2010 to take the seat of Republican Judd Gregg who  retired, is a conservative.

She was a tough-on-crime prosecutor in New Hampshire and is staunchly  pro-life.

As New Hampshire’s attorney general, she appealed to the Supreme Court a  federal district court decision, which found New Hampshire’s abortion parental  notification law unconstitutional, and personally argued the case.  This despite  opposition of New Hampshire’s then-Democratic Gov. John Lynch.

She is a staunch supporter of traditional marriage, traditional values and  limited government.

In a state that went for Barack Obama in 2012 and has been in the Democratic  column in five of the last six presidential elections, it is no surprise that  Democrats have drawn a target on the back of a conservative like Ayotte.

So the political barrage from the left has been pouring in attacking her for  her vote against the Manchin-Toomey bill, which provided for new, expanded  background checks on gun purchases. The bill fell six votes short of the 60  votes it needed to move forward in the Senate.

The Manchin-Toomey bill was problematic for a number of reasons, one of which  was weakness in its supposed provision against setting up a national gun  registry.

Ayotte supported an alternative measure sponsored by Iowa Republican Chuck  Grassley, and she has sponsored legislation that focuses on the mental-health  aspects of this problem.

The real issue here, and why Ayotte and those who have been in opposition to  rote expansion of current gun control law should be viewed as heroes, is  bait-and-switch.

The tragic Sandy Hook murders that provoked these new initiatives to expand  gun control would never have been stopped by anything being proposed.

No background check can stop a kid from taking a gun from his mother’s  lawfully owned gun collection, as happened in this case.

Further, as I have written before, criminals will find ways either to get  guns they want or commit their crimes some other way.  So any perceived benefit  from giving up any of our Second Amendment protections to arm and defend  ourselves is not justified by the costs incurred.

But those pushing new controls could care less about this, because this is  about “never letting a crisis go to waste.”   It’s not about carefully thinking  through whether we will wind up freer or safer.

It’s about the left using this crisis for their ongoing agenda to expand  government control over our lives.

A good chunk of the resources financing the onslaught of ads and protests  against Ayotte is coming from out of state from the pocketbook of New York Mayor  Michael Bloomberg, whose net worth, according to Forbes magazine, is $27  billion.

Bloomberg might consider tending to his own city, the nation’s abortion  capital, where 40 percent of pregnancies end in abortion – almost twice the  national rate.

Kelly Ayotte is a hero for courageously standing her ground despite the  well-financed liberal onslaught.  She can proudly claim the banner of her  state’s motto “Live free or die.”