July 01, 2008
The NRA's Endorsement Still Pending
The National Rifle Association announced plans today for a $40M campaign to paint Barack Obama as an opponent to Second Amendment rights. But the effort, first reported by Politico, doesn't include -- at least as far as the NRA is specifiying publicly -- a firm pitch for the presumptive GOP nominee, John McCain.
The group is still withholding its endorsement, a vital seal of approval for the party's conservative base and a nod that matters to voters in rural swing states, such as New Hampshire and Virginia.
Andrew Arulanandam, the NRA's director of public affairs, said the organization will make an endorsement decision after the GOP convention in MN.
"We’ll let you know when the time comes what we decide to do," he told On Call.
Arulanandam noted that in recent history the NRA has twice decided not to endorse the Republican nominee for president: George H.W. Bush in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996.
McCain, who received a C+ rating from the NRA in 2004 (the group's most recent scorecard), has voted for legislation to close the gun show loophole, and his support for campaign finance reform also goes against the NRA's platform.
"If you look at his record he’s had a good record with us," Arulanandam said. "He’s voted against gun bans. He’s voted against ammunition bans. He’s voted against waiting periods."
Arulanandam said Obama's comment tentatively praising the Supreme Court's decision last week to strike down the District of Columbia's handgun ban belies his record of support for gun control measures.
"If you look at his voting record, he has spent a lifetime of voting against gun owners and hunters whether in the Illinois legislature or in the United States Senate," he said. "I don’t think there’s a dime’s worth of difference between Al Gore, John Kerry and Barack Obama when it comes to the gun issue. All have strong records of voting for gun control."
Arulanandam said that about half of the $40M will be used for literature, calls and advertising targeting the presumptive Democratic nominee.
(JENNIFER SKALKA)
For a reminder of the longtime tension between the NRA and McCain, read on as then NRA CEO and Exec VP Wayne LaPierre blasts McCain's campaign finance proposal. The write-up, dated 5/19/01, was reported by Newsmax.
Per (the very conservative) Newsmax:
KANSAS CITY, Mo. - Speaking to thousands of NRA members who packed the main convention center hall, CEO and Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre blasted Sen. John McCain.
The NRA chief harshly criticized McCain's efforts on behalf of the McCain-Feingold bill that would reform campaign financing.
LaPierre asked, "Is it possible that John McCain thinks you have too much freedom?"
LaPierre said McCain's new law would effectively shut the NRA out of the political system by not allowing independent groups from buying TV or radio ads 60 days before a general election.
Had this been true in the last election, LaPierre said, the outcome would have likely been different and Gore would have won.
Praising McCain's war heroism, and the fact for decades he was an ardent supporter of the NRA, LaPierre expressed exasperation. "But I gotta tell you, I don't know what's happening to John McCain."
He took the senator to task for appearing in public service commercials for a radical anti-gun group called Americans for Gun Safety.
McCain aroused even more anger from gun rights supporters earlier this week when he co-sponsored legislation with Sen. Joe Lieberman that would ban private gun sales at gun shows unless a background check was completed.
LaPierre wondered if McCain was becoming a point man for both an anti-First and Second amendment effort.
Clearly the campaign finance proposals have the NRA worried.
LaPierre said to cheers that if the law is enacted, the NRA might just put to sail a boat called the "Good Ship NRA" and broadcast its views from international waters.
He said the new law would benefit the politicians and major media conglomerates - and not independent voters or groups like the NRA.
LaPierre said: "Just think - eight weeks before a general election, the 4.3 million members of the NRA must shut up and step aside ... while Rather, and Couric and Gumbel and Rosie and Jennings and Hillary and Schumer hold court and won the airwaves without challenge."
Posted at 12:32 PM
Comments
Oh the tension! Just which candidate will they endorse? LOL
oy vey | 07.01.08 04:45 PM
 |
the question is not which candidate the nra will endorse but if the nra, given mccain's not so perfect record on guns, will opt NOT to endorse at all. a decision that would hurt mccain with conservatives, who are already tepid in their embrace of the gop nominee.
jessie | 07.01.08 11:57 PM
|
Dear NRA:
$40 million dollars against Democratic Nominee for President is $40 million for Republican Nominee John McCain. THE CHOICE IS YOURS, however remember that the next four years will be a Bush/McSame reign!!!
Rena Barber | 07.02.08 01:31 AM
|
Many supporters of less gun control legislation tend to cite "defending myself" as their reason to require weapons, and I've just figured out why that reason doesn't work for me: I've never in my life felt threatened or in danger in any way. I haven't much money, so if I were ever robbed, it's not a great loss. I care little for my family of drunk and abusive parents, my brother also hasn't needed money to survive, so he's in no danger of being robbed. Gun rights are for the rich who have junk that the poor might steal. And it's funny, many in the NRA are poor, and thus have nothing to fear from home intrusion, so their argument for home security is nonsense. The poor do not steal from the poor. I'm not saying that there should be no gun rights, just that I think the NRA has misled us on the reasons that we should own guns. We should own guns because our government has been getting more and more dangerous. We should own guns because as police force budgets continue to shrink due to rising gas prices, they will bring in the National Guard (the Naga) to fill the gaps. That, my friends, is what is called a Police State. The same circumstances ushered in the Gestapo and the Stasi. The police couldn't handle it on their own, and so the government decided to help and to do things their way. We're on the verge of civil war right now because McBush politics are quickly taking away our rights and freely spying on and monitoring us all.
Marik Bromine | 07.02.08 08:33 AM
|
While I agree with the theme of many of the comments here, it comes down to what really is our choice. We have one candidate who is a C, and will betray us on odd numbered days. The other candidate is an F and will go for our throats EVERY day. Maybe we should change the system where we vote against , and whoever gets the least number of negative votes wins. Unfortunately, the GOP Blue Bloods have decided to purge the party of conservatives, and redefine the word conservative to mean themselves. I do not intend to be purged.
.
Marik, I applaud you for getting the concept that the 2nd is about protecting ourselves from the Government. I wonder however, where you live. Your theory SOUNDS good, except that in reality criminals prey MOSTLY upon the poor and lower middle class. The wealthy have alarms and guards and lawyers. I can’t afford a security guard. I can afford a Ruger.
dlyn454 | 07.02.08 01:23 PM
|
Hi, I am a gun owner from Belgium. Last summer I had to fire a warning shot to repel a gang of drug-addicts who had assaulted and wounded me. The whole story spans several weeks and is rather complicated (because of inept police and courts). Briefly put, cops stole my guns with the excuse that I shot one round into the air. Eradicate gun control in America so it can be destroyed elsewhere as well. America's diplomatic, cultural and military influence has liberated many countries. Abolish gun control and jail the gun-grabbers for complicity in all the crimes they facilitated.
Marik, I know America is on the verge of civil war because I read Guns&Ammo every month from 1994 to 1999. This danger probably prompted the Supreme Court to acknowledge the INDIVIDUAL right to bear arms. You might be at war now had they ruled the opposite. Fully recover your gun rights, peacefully if possible. Then your example will inspire other countries to do the same.
If you don't inspire other nations to give up gun control, they will degenerate into full-fledged dictatorships with war as the only option to regain freedom. You Americans might have to once again die to fight these foreign wars. The only safe way to prevent this is to destroy gun control in your land so that others will immitate you.
Ben | 07.02.08 02:47 PM
|
I wrote "immitate" but it's "imitate", of course.
Ben | 07.02.08 02:52 PM
|
Obama's wounds from opposing gun rights are self-inflicted.
I hope he gets over them, but it's impossible to get excited over the issue as if someone were mistreating or misrepresenting him.
All he has to do is live up to his billing as a principled constitutional scholar and the whole issue goes away. It's obvious, even to scholars who despise guns, that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms unrelated to any collective concern. I am extremely disappointing to see his apparent lack of courage or integrity.
I don't expect a Chicago politician to take to the Second Amendment like a fish to water, I just expect him to *obey* it.
The open letter to Obama at www.obamaonsecond.com provides many facts on guns, history, and crime then points the way to real change on the Second Amendment.
Check it out, then write Senator Obama. We can make a difference.
Obama On Second | 07.02.08 03:22 PM
|
The facts are the facts and these politicians want to do away with what the media and themselves (politicians) are now calling the "Gun Show Loophole", a loophole? Or the right for a citizen to sale his property? I have a right to own guns, I have right to buy a car or a refrigerator, and the government does not have a right to bar me from selling my lawful property.
McCain endorsing this so called gun show loophole hoopla is anti freedom and anti gun rights. Basically telling Americans that private citizens do not have a right to sale there property. There for he should not get an endorsement. If the NRA just bends to the lesser of two evils every election they will lose credibility and I wont send them money anymore.
John | 07.02.08 09:09 PM
|
Vote Obama = Ignorance. Vote McCain = Stupidity. The very bottom line is that the Republicans and the Democrats are the enemy of this nation, it's Constitutiona, it's sovereignty and our freedom.
Peter Courtenay Stephens | 07.02.08 09:13 PM
|
After the Oregon and Colorado school shootings, each state wanted a new law to require background checks at gun shows. Each state was going to put it to a vote. The same law had been beaten in the Oregon legeslature.
This was at the time when Bush was running for his first term. McCain made 2 TV commercials for both states. The NRA rep. told me that more of the McCain spots were run than ethier canidate for president.
The law was passed thanks to in a great part Sen. John McCain. The results for gun shows in Oregon were terrible. The largest show in Portland, Oregon, Called the Expo. show were as follows. Before it was a 1,500 table show with a waiting list to get tables. Now thanks to the law it is a 450 table show were about 1/2 of it is junk.
A very big thank you should go to John McCain. Just think of what he will do for us as president.
The difference between McCain and Obama is almost nothing on most issues.
It has even occured to me that we just might be ahead if Obama gets is as the Republican party just might fight the same issues that if McCain is president they would cave in to.
I have never seen such a sad voting choice in my life.
Mike Percival | 07.02.08 09:41 PM
|
Please, NRA, do NOT endorse McCain. If you're going to endorse anyone, endorse Bob Barr, who actually believes in gun rights, and doesn't want to stifle free speech via "campaign finance reform."
Jeff | 07.03.08 12:02 AM
|
I agree with Mike that we have a pretty sad voting choice before us this year, but McCain is still the better candidate of the two for Second Amendment liberty. Obama considers gun owners and religionists as "bitter" - Obama is a supercilious
wanna-be tyrant.
Doug | 07.03.08 02:02 AM
|
My only hope is that if we keep letting the GOP know how little we care for McCain, perhaps he will choose a decent Vice. Then we might have some hope in a few years. DO NOT STAY HOME. Even if you will not vote for Pres, (which I sure understand) go to the polls and vote For pro-freedom candidates at every level---no matter what party.
dlyn454 | 07.03.08 08:57 AM
|
And no better way to tell who is Pro-Freedom than by who is Pro-gun. If they trust you with guns, they probably trust you with other freedoms. If they don't trust us with arms, we can't trust them. It comes down to whether they view you as a serf or a citizen.
dlyn454 | 07.03.08 09:10 AM
|
What needs to be done for the next election is people need to make sure they vote for conservative state law makers and if you have a Representative or Senator up for election they need to make sure they vote for the conservative. Then maybe Congress will be able to keep who ever is President in check.
One of these days the Country Club boys will see we mean business. We aren't all Evangelicals.
Sue | 07.03.08 10:29 AM
|
What needs to be done for the next election is people need to make sure they vote for conservative state law makers and if you have a Representative or Senator up for election they need to make sure they vote for the conservative. Then maybe Congress will be able to keep who ever is President in check.
One of these days the Country Club boys will see we mean business. We aren't all Evangelicals.
Sue | 07.03.08 10:30 AM
|
There are Americans who don't believe there are gangs in Belgium because they are told gun control is better in Europe (but not told the truth).
There are Americans who insist a gun used to defend your self only DOUBLES the violence to society and the peace so the means to defend your self is absolutly "bad."(You should be punished...but about the gangsters they will have no rebuke because it rebukes the society!)
That is because they don't require anything from their favorite politician but "come together" toward them and parrot what the politician says. The politicians draw on people who believe if we all "just come together" then really stupid ideas are magicly turned into smart ones!
Don't worry because if these losers take a "side' in any hypothetical civil war or revolution they will lose as fast as un-armed people attacking armed people,(determinded armed people) can lose!
We are a long way from such an event in the USA, A very long way! the terrorist goals to devide us are coming up short!
dennis christensen | 07.03.08 12:54 PM
|
There are Americans who don't believe there are gangs in Belgium because they are told gun control is better in Europe (but not told the truth).
There are Americans who insist a gun used to defend your self only DOUBLES the violence to society and the peace so the means to defend your self is absolutly "bad."(You should be punished...but about the gangsters they will have no rebuke because it rebukes the society!)
That is because they don't require anything from their favorite politician but "come together" toward them and parrot what the politician says. The politicians draw on people who believe if we all "just come together" then really stupid ideas are magicly turned into smart ones!
Don't worry because if these losers take a "side' in any hypothetical civil war or revolution they will lose as fast as un-armed people attacking armed people,(determinded armed people) can lose!
We are a long way from such an event in the USA, A very long way! the terrorist goals to devide us are coming up short!
dennis christensen | 07.03.08 12:56 PM
|
marik bromine- it sure sounds like you have a pitiful existence. But, even so, we have the god-given, Constitutionally protected (as well as protected by those of us willing to die defending it) RIGHT to keep and bear arms. You are free to leave... for a while yet, at least. Maybe you would think about doing so instead of more incessant whining like you dems tend towards....
ralphy | 07.03.08 01:07 PM
|
"Jeff | 07.03.08 12:02 AM"
Barr?
Jeff, you are aware that Barr was in
favor of the Lautenberg Amendment, right? Not exactly a ringing 2A endorsement.
GrumpyUnk | 07.03.08 05:50 PM
|
Gun owners have but one choice: vote AGAINST Obama, who represents everything that we despise. He is a smooth-talking, charismatic, Marxist phony. And if you think that Congress or the Supreme Court can defend our rights against him, think again. He will adopt the U.N.'s anti-gun policies in a heartbeat and put us under international law. McCain might have a C record with the NRA, but Obama has a well-deserved F- record. If Obama becomes President, even for one term, we are totally screwed!!!
Peter Caroline | 07.03.08 06:54 PM
|
Gun owners have but one choice: vote AGAINST Obama, who represents everything that we despise. He is a smooth-talking, charismatic, Marxist phony. And if you think that Congress or the Supreme Court can defend our rights against him, think again. He will adopt the U.N.'s anti-gun policies in a heartbeat and put us under international law. McCain might have a C record with the NRA, but Obama has a well-deserved F- record. If Obama becomes President, even for one term, we are totally screwed!!!
Peter Caroline | 07.03.08 06:54 PM
|
The NRA should be ashamed of itself for not endorsing Bob Barr for president. The Gun Owners of America have rated McCain on gun rights as follows : 2000 C, 2002 C, 2004 F and 2006 F.
As a life member I will pull my membership if they continue to support RINO Republicans which hurt this country more than anti-gun Democrats.
Ed Baldwin | 07.12.08 12:27 PM
|
The NRA should endorse Bob Barr, and it will finally give the Libertarian party some endorsement that it deserves. Besides, it is a party that understands the constitution, unlike the Democrats and the Republicans currently.
Alette | 07.17.08 09:43 PM
|
Post a comment
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
