Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NRA endorsement of Bush is on hold
The Hill ^ | 11 may 04 | Bob Cusack

Posted on 05/11/2004 5:24:24 PM PDT by white trash redneck

NRA endorsement of Bush is on hold
Gun-rights group watches, waits on weapons ban
By Bob Cusack

An influential gun-rights group known for backing Republicans is unlikely to endorse President Bush until after the federal assault-weapons ban expires in September.

Bush supports the renewal of the 10-year ban but has not called on the GOP-controlled Congress to act. If he does so, the move would probably cost him the endorsement of the National Rifle Association (NRA).

Some political observers believe that the NRA's endorsement is a certainty, pointing out the group's stinging criticism of Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

But gun-rights activists dispute the claim that Bush can count on the NRA's support; the group remained neutral in 1992 and 1996. The NRA did not endorse Republican nominee Bob Dole's 1996 presidential bid because of his wavering stance on the assault-weapons ban and opted not to back George H.W. Bush in his 1992 re-election effort. The NRA did endorse George W. Bush in 2000.

Many Capitol Hill aides and lawmakers say Bush will determine whether the ban is extended beyond Sept. 13. An aide to House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) has said privately that if Bush pushes for it, the ban will probably be reauthorized. But if he doesn't, the chances of legislation’s passing this year are remote.

Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist, said the group usually does not endorse presidential candidates until the fall and will not be changing its schedule this year.

He acknowledged that this year is a bit different from previous election years: "Clearly, there are some issues that are still on the table [in 2004]."

Cox declined to say when the NRA will make an endorsement decision, saying, "I'm not going to broadcast our strategy six months before the election."

He said the policy on the assault-weapons ban will be resolved by Congress, adding that it is no coincidence that soon after the 1994 ban was enacted, Republicans took control of Capitol Hill.

NRA officials said the statements and voting records on what the NRA calls the "Clinton gun ban" are key factors in its endorsements for all political candidates.
Centrist Republicans in the House are urging the administration to get involved. In an interview, Rep. Michael Castle (R-Del.) said, "Pressure will build" to renew the ban in the coming months.

Castle said he is working with Reps. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Mike Ferguson (R-N.J.) and Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) to pass a bill that parallels the gun bill passed in 1994.

"The legislation would pass if it came to the floor," Castle said. "There are a number of Republicans who would support this."

Gun-rights activists dispute Castle's vote count, but, at least for now, the question is whether the bill will make it to the House floor.

House Majority Tom DeLay (R-Texas) is against extending the ban, which was passed when Democrats were in control of Congress and the White House.

Hastert, meanwhile, has given mixed signals on the issue, and police chiefs from his state are lobbying him to call for a vote.

A majority of the Senate in March voted to extend the ban.

"The House is the issue," Castle said. "The problem is in the House."

If Bush and Hastert do not act, it is likely that a discharge petition would be launched to force a vote on the floor.

Castle, however, said, "It is too early to discuss discharge petitions," adding that House GOP leaders frown upon them.

So far this year, Bush has given no indication that he will speak out on the gun ban. Instead, the administration appears to be courting the NRA's endorsement.

Late last year, NRA officials visited with Bush at the White House. Last month, Vice President Dick Cheney spoke out, at an NRA conference, about protecting the right to bear arms.

Castle downplayed the significance of an NRA endorsement, saying a vast majority of NRA members are not going to vote for Kerry, whether Bush gets the group's backing or not.

But others said such an endorsement is key to Bush's re-election hopes because it would mobilize an integral cog in the conservative movement.

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, said many Reagan Democrats voted for Bush in 2000 partly because of the NRA's endorsement. He added that Bush's triumphs in states such as Tennessee, Virginia and Arkansas were attributable to the NRA's grassroots effort and Al Gore's strong gun-control views.

Asked when the NRA would likely endorse Bush, Pratt said, referring to the day after the ban would expire, "I think Sept. 14 would make a good date."


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: assaultweaponban; awb; bang; banglist; bush; cutnosespiteface; endorsekerry; endorsement; gwb2004; nra; oneissuevoters; rkba; voteforkerry
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 561-573 next last
If the AWB is renewed, Bush will lose. While I'm sure that most gunnies know in their heads that Bush has a long way to fall before being as bad as Kerry on RKBA issues, too many will sit on their hands if the AWB passes the House and Senate, Bush signs it into law. I hope that Bush and whoever is running his campaign realizes that if he signs a renewal of the AWB he will earn no goodwill and no votes, but he stands to lose plenty.

If the gunnies' votes are spoken for, why is it that Bush 41 and Dole, whom the NRA did not endorse, lost, while Reagan and Bush 43, who did get endorsed, won.

Castle, Shays, Kirk, and Ferguson - what a group of RINO's.

1 posted on 05/11/2004 5:24:39 PM PDT by white trash redneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
The AWB is my line in the sand. If a renewal gets passed I will abandon Bush and the Republicans...
2 posted on 05/11/2004 5:31:57 PM PDT by 2banana (They want to die for Islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
If the AWB is renewed, Bush will lose.

Horse crap. Given the choices that have to made in this time of war, one would have to be a real pinhead not to vote for Bush because of a single issue. The AWB is in reality very minor and more symbolic than substantive. Besides, if the ban is renewed, it will be dropped or ignored when more of the fight comes to our shores.

3 posted on 05/11/2004 5:33:08 PM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
The AWB is my line in the sand. If a renewal gets passed I will abandon Bush and the Republicans...and support the Democrats and the Greens.

You forgot to mention the consequences.

4 posted on 05/11/2004 5:36:16 PM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
Who runs around hunting deer with a machine gun anyway?

I don't think the ban should be extended, but don't really care that much.
5 posted on 05/11/2004 5:36:55 PM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?" -- Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
I hunt and don't need an assault weapon for deer.
6 posted on 05/11/2004 5:40:17 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: rwfromkansas
In case no one has ever mentioned it to you, the Second Amendment isn't about hunting ducks - or deer.
8 posted on 05/11/2004 5:41:49 PM PDT by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
I think it would be foolish to vote against Bush if he reextends the ban...that being said, there are a lot of people who won't vote for him if he does it and probably even more who will BUT who won't campaign, etc.

So, I hope Bush doesn't sign it.
9 posted on 05/11/2004 5:44:15 PM PDT by votelife (Elect a Filibuster Proof Majority)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
This is my line in the sand.
10 posted on 05/11/2004 5:44:37 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("I bury those cockroaches")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalebert
The 2nd amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting.
11 posted on 05/11/2004 5:45:52 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("I bury those cockroaches")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
If the AWB is renewed, Bush will lose.

No, I don't think so. This is much like the Mexican immigration thing: I will be very, very unhappy, but I can't risk a President Kerry.

The fact that the Republicans know this and are playing me feeds my inchoate rage...but I won't stay home.

12 posted on 05/11/2004 5:46:02 PM PDT by prion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .38sw
Too bad not enough people have read the bill of rights to know that.
13 posted on 05/11/2004 5:47:16 PM PDT by Sofa King (MY rights are not subject to YOUR approval http://www.angelfire.com/art2/sofaking/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
The AWB is my line in the sand.

CFR was mine.

14 posted on 05/11/2004 5:48:35 PM PDT by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: .38sw
True. It protects the right to bear arms for any lawful purpose.

But, a machine gun being banned really doesn't get me too riled up for some reason.

Yeah, it should be legal due to the Constitution not excluding some weapons, but I have enough things to try to fight for without having to add another that doesn't seem all that critical. I am not saying I think the AWB is good or constitutional, just that everybody seems to have gotten fine without that automatic they want so badly so it is hard to get worked up over it.
15 posted on 05/11/2004 5:49:38 PM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?" -- Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: All
The AWB ban will never get out of the House. I trust Tom Delay's word that it is beyond DOA.
16 posted on 05/11/2004 5:51:01 PM PDT by COEXERJ145
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
"Given the choices that have to made in this time of war, one would have to be a real pinhead not to vote for Bush because of a single issue."

The single issue is Freedom and the future of Freedom. The war with jihadis means nothing if you surrender to the socialists. They are the same thing, they both demand your submission.

" Besides, if the ban is renewed, it will be dropped or ignored when more of the fight comes to our shores."

ROTFLMAO!

17 posted on 05/11/2004 5:51:11 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: white trash redneck
Bush supports the renewal of the 10-year ban.

What else needs to be said.
18 posted on 05/11/2004 5:51:55 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas; dalebert
Since you have been told what the Second says about hunting, I will only add that:

1. We're NOT talkiing about machine guns...so-called "assault weapons" are semi-auto ONLY;
2. They use the same rounds and actions as many hunting rifles.

19 posted on 05/11/2004 5:52:37 PM PDT by Long Cut ("Fightin's commenced, Ike, now get to fightin' or get outta the way!"...Wyatt Earp, in Tombstone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: .38sw
In case no one has ever mentioned it to you, the Second Amendment isn't about hunting ducks - or deer.

Let's just lay it out for the obtuse here on FR:

The Second Amendment affirms the right of The People to possess arms to defend our liberty and kill our government, should it become tyrannical.

Too scary for 'em? Tough.

20 posted on 05/11/2004 5:55:51 PM PDT by Hank Rearden (Is Fallujah gone yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 561-573 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson