Posted on 07/14/2010 6:13:47 AM PDT by Second Amendment First
Democratic candidates in key states are embracing gun owners’ rights, winning favor from the National Rifle Association, a lobby that has long been the target of disdain from the party faithful.
In New Hampshire, Representative Paul Hodes, a Democratic Senate candidate, has an “A minus’’ NRA rating, potentially insulating him from progun rights attacks in a state that’s big on hunting and personal liberties.
Senate majority leader Harry Reid, in a bruising campaign for reelection in Nevada, has conservative activists buzzing because the NRA is considering endorsing his reelection.
Indiana’s Democratic Senate candidate Brad Ellsworth, who has an “A’’ rating from the NRA, may get the group’s endorsement this fall over GOP candidate Dan Coats, whom the NRA criticized in mailings to Hoosiers as being weak on gun rights.
And in Kentucky, Democratic Senate candidate Jack Conway has not only heralded gun rights but also signed friend-of-the court briefs supporting gun owners before two landmark Supreme Court rulings backing their rights in District of Columbia and Chicago cases.
“I think there’s been a change in the country as a whole,’’ said Jon Delano, an independent political analyst associated with Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. “Unless you’re from an urban area, where gun violence is so intense that there’s a feeling you need to control these weapons, the vast majority across the country do not support gun control.’’
*
While Republicans still tend to capture more endorsements and campaign contributions from the NRA, Democrats have made inroads. In 2002, Democrats took just 11 percent of the contributions the NRA made to candidates in federal campaigns; this election cycle, they’ve received 28 percent, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Democrats have muted their calls for gun control and raised recognition of gun rights, as evidenced by the text from their convention platforms since the presidential elections of 2000.
2000
Strengthen gun control to reduce violence: “Democrats passed the Brady Law and the Assault Weapons Ban. We increased federal, state, and local gun crime prosecution by 22 percent since 1992. Now gun crime is down by 35 percent. Now we must do even more. We need mandatory child safety locks. We should require a photo license ID, a background check, and a gun safety test to buy a new handgun. We support more federal gun prosecutors and giving states and communities another 10,000 prosecutors to fight gun crime.’’
2004
Reauthorize assault weapons ban, close gun show loophole: “We will protect Americans’ Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do.’’
2008
“We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact and enforce commonsense laws and improvements — like closing the gun show loophole, improving our background check system, and reinstating the assault weapons ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Acting responsibly and with respect for differing views on this issue, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.’’
Just like John McCain is embracing border controls.
Paul Hodes:
Typical slippery Democrat quote chock full of escape hatches. “Sportsmen,” “federal”, blah blah blah. Gun Owners of America gave him a “C” in 2010, and the NRA “A-” is from 2008, undoubtedly the result of his survey answers, not any actual rubber on the road.
They sure are desperate enough to keep their jobs by saying they are for the 2nd Amendment but lets see if they actually follow up their words with actions.
And Satan quotes scripture...
“...but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne.”
WTF?
Gun control was proven NOT to work in Chicago, and the Dems keep on with this charade.
The REP from SE TX, Jack brooks, had been in office past memory, and had a NRA A rating, He failed the course and voted for the AWB, The gunnies zapped him and elected the first pubbie since recon. Bush didn’t deny Algore the POTUS, the Gunnies of TN did.
barbra ann
Paul Hodes is a flat out communist. If polls showed overwhelming support for gun control he’d be on that side too. Real sleazebag who BTW is going to get crushed by Ayotte or Binnie in the General.
I have a new litmus test question for candidates.
“The McDonald decision has Incorporated the 2nd Amendment as a Fundamental Right. The Heller Decision mandated that an entire class of arms may not be banned. Will you if elected work diligently to repeal 922 (o) also known as the machine gun ban to make Federal Law compliant with these Supreme Court rulings?”
Democratic candidates in key states are embracing lying about supporting gun owners’ rights to get elected
There fixed it.
This is an interesting conundrum. Could one say the NRA is a victim of it’s own success? That gun control is not longer holy writ amongst dems like abortion is? And therefore no one party “owns” either side of the issue anymore? The NRA is about the 2nd amendment specifically, so this unavoidably clouds it’s stance on republican vs. democrat elections; when a strong pro-gun dem is running against a squishy RINO pubbie. Like abortion, once upon a time pro-life democrats walked the earth, so did pro-gun dems. Pro-gun dems were rendered extinct for a time, but unlike dem pro-lifers, the species has made a comeback as gun control has become percieved as political hemlock.
I well remember feeling that George H.W. Bush did not care about the issue, and had a lordly disdain for us common commoners. Of course, beyond being a decent enough chap, he didn’t really care one whit for conservatism and was really utterly bereft of ideas and convictions (other than a strong defense and foreign policy). There are plenty of RINOs out there who don’t care for peasants having arms and they are starting to find out that attitude can cost them. Presumably this should be decided in Republican primaries but when a squishy rebub is up against a progun dem what do WE do when we know the dem will vote party line on every other issue?
I really don’t know what the NRA should specifically do in such circumstances. I think we all know that Obama is merely biding his time on this matter. Once the Manchurian Candidate has enough power (or so he hopes) he will strike like the snake he is. Do we become single-issue suckers or do we go with the better overall candidate and hope he or she is not dumb enough to piss us off when in office?
Look at unions, civil rights movements, etc.
These movements were, at the time of their inception, NEEDED.
Now, they exist solely to self-perpetuate. They are not needed for their original purposes.
Democrats lying to get elected? I just can’t believe it.
Yes, but for us the struggle goes on. Even Mothers Against Drunk Driving could (had they not become corrupted) be working toward effective enforcement of drunk driving laws at the state or local level. Drunk driving is still a problem but MADD has become obsessed with blindly lowering the BAL limit to zero rather than making sure repeat offenders are ruthlessly dealt with.
The big battles have been won at the national level but there are always local and state politicos who are determined to do their worst and have to be dealt with. I get the Virginia Citizens Defense League newsletter in my email and there are plenty of battles to be fought in the ground game. Furthermore, we must stay on offense. The NRA fought a defensive, reactive strategy during the dark years of the seventies and eighties and it was only when the “shall issue” movement gained momentum (starting with FL) that gun rights groups started taking the war to the enemy.
That basic strategy would also work well against the rest of the lefty activist firmament. The lefty litigators have always been free to choose their battles. The ACLU types would find it hard going if groups and locales across the country picked fights with them simultaneously.
Shocking Emails Show National Rifle Association Worked to Prohibit Rifles From National Parks
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2552227/posts
Reid will vote for Supreme Court judges like Kagan and Sotomayor that will eviscerate the second amendment on a moment’s notice. That is why the NRA is making a big mistake. They should get real and stop being so stupid. If Reid voted against Kagan because of gun rights, then the NRA would have a case. And Reid will vote against Kagan when monkeys fly out of my........
Dems are using the ‘say what you need to to get voted in’ mantra to the max.....people need to wake the frak up on this.
The calculus has changed somewhat in the wake of the Heller & McDonald cases. Theoretically, Congress is now at least somewhat constrained as to what kinds of gun regulation it is allowed to enact, which may limit the amount of damage to gun rights that anti-gun Republicans might do.
“..but lets see if they actually follow up their words with actions...”
Actually, no, let’s NOT; instead, let’s show them the f***ing door, and get REAL pro-Constitution people elected that will demand that every state respect our rights.
When it comes to guns, the Dems cannot be trusted. RINOs need to be shown the door as well, and if that door hits them in the ass on the way out, all the better.
Trusting Dems to be anything other than Dems is one of the reasons why we are where are.
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.