NRA Now Leans Toward Endorsing Harry Reid

[wazzle]

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/07/01/nra-now-leans-toward-endorsing-harry-reid/

 

 

 

 

Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

 

Thursday, July 1st at 8:00AM EDT

123 Comments

 

 

 

Multiple sources tell me the National Rifle Association is planning to endorse liberal Harry Reid against pro-gun champion Sharron Angle.

 

Two weeks ago, I told you about the carveout the NRA received in exchange for their support for the DISCLOSE ACT deal.

 

Then this week, RedState broke the story of the “gag order” the NRA issued to members of its Board on the Kagan nomination.

 

Now, I’m getting credible reports that the NRA is leaning toward endorsing Harry Reid, even though the NRA is finally saying it will score a vote on Kagan — something that was not a sure thing.

 

Why would they do this? Why would they go out of their way to protect a Senator who has demonstrated a repeated hostility to the Second Amendment in his votes and his leadership?

 

Well, I thought perhaps the NRA carveout in the DISCLOSE Act might be the answer. But, there is more. It turns out, Reid secured a $61 million earmark for a gun range in Clark County, Nevada.

 

NRA members were recently treated to a three-page spread in the American Rifleman about a visit to Nevada by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox to “thank” Reid for the earmark. The article even includes a cliché picture of Reid cutting a ribbon with a gigantic pair of scissors. (Every good porker has his own giant pair of gold earmark scissors.) More here.

 

Here is a video of the event from Reid’s youtube site.

 

At 3:25, you can hear LaPierre touting Reid’s record on guns saying, “I also want to thank you, Senator, for your support every day for the Second Amendment and for the rights of American gun owners. “

 

The American Rifleman article also commends Reid’s Second Amendment record noting, “His dedication to this project is just one of the ways Sen. Reid has demonstrated his support for gun owners and the Second Amendment.”

 

Well, that’s all very nice. What politician representing a pro-gun red state wouldn’t want Wayne LaPierre to come out for a personal photo op at their earmark ribbon cutting.

 

But, here is the problem. Reid has not supported the Second Amendment “every day.” Or ever.

 

Reid has a lifetime rating of “F” from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington”). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

 

But if you don’t believe GOA, see for yourself below the fold. Then call (800) 392-VOTE (8683) before it is too late and make the NRA knows they’d be betraying second amendment voters by endorsing Harry Reid.

 

Below are just a few of the votes that demonstrate Reid’s longstanding hostility to guns and the Second Amendment. Not included in this list is the long list of consistent and active support for anti-gun nominees to the Federal Judiciary and to high level cabinet posts. The reason I did not include anti-gun nominees is because he supported every last one of them.

 

June 28, 1991. Vote No. 115. Voted for a 5 day waiting period for handgun purchases.

 

October 21, 1993. Vote 325. Voted to eliminate the Army Civilian Marksmanship Program. Only the most fringe anti-gun Senators voted for the amendment.

 

November 19, 1993. Vote 385. Allow states to impose waiting periods over and above the 5 days waiting period required under the Brady Bill.

 

November 19, 1993. Vote 386. Voted to eliminate he 5-year sunset in the Brady Bill.

 

November 19, 1993. Vote 387. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

 

November 19, 1993. Vote 390. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

 

November 20, 1993. Vote 394. Voted for the Brady Bill, which imposed a 5-business-day waiting period before purchasing a handgun.

 

August 25, 1994. Vote 294. Voted to close off debate on the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

 

August 25, 1994. Vote 295. Voted for the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

 

April 17, 1996. Vote 64. Voted to expand the statute of limitations for paperwork violations in National Firearms Act from 3 years to 5 years.

 

June 27, 1996. Vote 178. Voting to destroy 176,000 M-1 Garand rifles from World War II, and 150 million rounds of 30 caliber ammunition, rather than giving them to the Federal Civilian Marksmanship program.

 

September 12, 1996. Vote 287. Voted to spend $21.5 million for a study on putting “taggants” in black and smokeless gunpowder.

 

September 12, 1996. Vote 290. Voted to make it a Federal crime to possess a gun within 1,000 yards of a school.

 

May 12, 1999. Vote 111. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions.

 

May 13, 1999. Vote 116. Voted to ban the importation of ammunition clips that can hold more than 10 rounds.

 

May 14, 1999. Vote 119. Voted to criminalize internet advertisements to sell legal firearms in a legal manner.

 

May 18, 1999. Vote 122. Voted to for Mandatory triggerlocks.

 

May 20, 1999. Vote 133. Voted to create new Federal regulation of pawn shops handling of guns.

 

May 20, 1999. Vote 134. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions. The vote was 50-50, with Vice President Gore casting the tie-breaking vote.

 

May 20, 1999. Vote 140. Voted for the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

 

July 29, 1999. Vote 224. Voted to close debate on the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

 

February 2, 2000. Vote 4. Voted to make firearms manufacturers and distributors’ debts nondischargeable in bankruptcy if they were sued because they unknowingly sold guns to individuals who used the gun in a crime. 68 Senators voted against Reid’s position, including 17 Democrats including Bryan of Nevada.

 

March 2, 2000. Vote 27. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings.

 

March 2, 2000. Vote 28. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings (reconsideration of vote 27).

 

March 2, 2000. Vote 32. Voted to use Federal taxpayer funds to hand out anti-gun literature in schools and to run anti-gun public service announcements.

 

April 6, 2000. Vote 64. Voted for a gun control package including new onerous restrictions on gun shows.

 

April 7, 2000. Vote 74. Voted against an amendment to provide for the enforcement of existing gun laws in lieu of new burdensome gun control mandates.

 

May 16, 2000. Vote 100. Voted to commend the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

 

May 17, 2000. Vote 102. Vote to overturn the ruling of the chair that the Daschle amendment (commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures) was out of order.

 

May 17, 2000. Vote 103. Voted against an amendment stating “the right of each law-abiding United States citizen to own a firearm for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense or recreation, should not be infringed.”

 

May 17, 2000. Vote 104. Voted for an amendment commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

 

February 26, 2004. Vote 17. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

 

March 2, 2004. Vote 25. Voted for Federal regulation of gun shows.

 

July 28, 2005. Vote 207. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

 

March 5, 2009. Vote 83. Voted against a ban on the United Nations imposing taxes on American citizens after France and other world leaders proposed a global tax on firearms.

[Federal Farmer]

Blah blah blah. Anyone have anything regarding the 2nd Amendment to drivel on about? Really, we all aren't conservatives here. Just sayin'.

[gravyboy77]

I would rather have the NRA endorse no one instead of endorsing Reid. I'll be even angrier if the NRA endorses Reid and he squeeks out a win and the Republicans pick up 9 senate seats but don't get his (that is very possible as of now).

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/01/too-bad-to-check-nra-thinking-of-endorsing-reid-over-sharron-angle/

Too bad to check: NRA thinking of endorsing Reid over Sharron Angle?

 

 

posted at 4:50 pm on July 1, 2010 by Allahpundit

printer-friendly

Not as far-fetched as it might seem. Just last year, they sent a letter to their Nevada members urging them to thank Reid for publicly opposing reinstating the assault-weapons ban. But that was then and this is now, and knowing which way their national membership skews politically — and how activist-minded conservatives have become since tea-party fever took hold — would they dare endorse the guy grassroots righties most desperately want to replace in November?

 

Gonna lose a lot of donations if you do, folks.

 

 

Now, I’m getting credible reports that the NRA is leaning toward endorsing Harry Reid, even though the NRA is finally saying it will score a vote on Kagan — something that was not a sure thing.

 

Why would they do this? Why would they go out of their way to protect a Senator who has demonstrated a repeated hostility to the Second Amendment in his votes and his leadership?

 

Well, I thought perhaps the NRA carveout in the DISCLOSE Act might be the answer. But, there is more. It turns out,

Reid secured a $61 million earmark for a gun range

in Clark County, Nevada…

 

But, here is the problem. Reid has not supported the Second Amendment “every day.” Or ever.

 

Reid has a lifetime rating of “F” from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington”). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

 

Follow the link up top for a list of anti-gun votes cast by Reid.

Jim Geraghty

plays devil’s advocate:

 

 

Believe me, I’ve had this sort of discussion many times. An argument put to me is that the Second Amendment would be better protected with a Senate that had, say, 52 Democrats led by pro-gun Harry Reid than 51 Democrats led by the most likely alternatives, Chuck Schumer or Dick Durbin. Since the chances of Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell are not great, it is in the best interest of the NRA and its members to have the most pro-gun Democratic Senate majority leader they can get.

 

Translation: He ain’t great but he’s the NRA’s best option under the circumstances. I’d add that it might be especially important to them to have Reid there right now in the wake of the Supreme Court’s latest decision on gun rights. I fully expect crime will drop as gun bans in major cities like Chicago are relaxed (a bit), but there are a lot of variables that go into that and the NRA surely knows that an aggressively anti-gun majority leader will look to capitalize if violence ticks upward anywhere initially. Reid, because he has to worry about votes in rural Nevada, is a better bet than Schumer or Durbin not to bring anything too dicey to the Senate floor. Then again, it’s a mortal lock that the GOP will have more seats next year than they do now. Given the terror felt by moderates like Olympia Snowe after Bob Bennett was ousted by tea partiers in Utah, how would any sort of anti-gun bill avoid a filibuster? Reid struggled for weeks to get to 60 on financial reform despite having 59 seats; how’s he going to get to 60 on a new assault-weapons ban when he has only 53 or 54?

 

What’s worrisome about this rumor, actually, is that it may show how little confidence the NRA has in an Angle victory. She’s up seven at last check, but the kookier elements of her resume have been trickling out from lefty media. Wait until late summer when Reid turns on the advertising hose full force. Maybe LaPierre and co. figure there’s no sense in antagonizing a guy whom they think is bound to win. It’ll be interesting to see if they end up simply avoiding this race altogether and endorsing no one.

 

[wazzle]

Blah blah blah. Anyone have anything regarding the 2nd Amendment to drivel on about? Really, we all aren't conservatives here. Just sayin'.

 

 

Just what are you sayin'?

[spec4]

IMO he pushed for the gun range because he is sharp enough to understand his constituents. What choice did the NRA have but to do a piece on him? He will be gone in November, hopefully we won't spend a lot of time on this.

 

Personally, I EXPECT every elected official to support 2A as they swear to do so.

[gravyboy77]

I could see if Angle was anti-2a and they endorsed Reid because he has a better record, but that is not the case. Sharon angle is 100% for gun rights:

Reid has a lifetime rating of “F” from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington”). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

[Federal Farmer]

I could see if Angle was anti-2a and they endorsed Reid because he has a better record, but that is not the case. Sharon angle is 100% for gun rights:

Reid has a lifetime rating of “F” from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington”). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

 

If they oppose an incumbent that has a good voting record in favor of a challenger with promises then their rating system and support is meaningless. Current legislators may stop voting for gun rights issues if their score is meaningless.

[papa]

I am a big boy and can decide for myself who I will vote for. If the NRA wants to support Reid , so be it. I am sure many people in his state can also decide for themselves.

[Federal Farmer]

Blah blah blah. Anyone have anything regarding the 2nd Amendment to drivel on about? Really, we all aren't conservatives here. Just sayin'.

 

 

Just what are you sayin'?

 

I apologize for the rudeness in which I answered this. I retract the ad hominem portion. My broader point stands with respect this being a non-partisan issue and the NRA being a single issue organization that must maintain its loyalty to incumbents that back it or it will have a much lesser impact on Capitol Hill.

[Federal Farmer]

Sebastian at snowflakesinhell.com points out the hypocrisy of GOA endorsements vs. NRA endorsements. Follow the link for links backing up the claims.

 

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2010/07/02/on-the-reid-endorsement/

 

NRA hasn’t yet endorsed Harry Reid, but I would be shocked if they didn’t. Truth be told, they’d be insane if they didn’t. Why? Well, this is probably the best reason, but I also really want to address some of the distortions of Reid’s record mentioned over at Red State, which looks like they could have come directly from Larry Pratt. Pratt is a shameful hack, and it would appear he’s turned Red State into one too, at least on the gun issue. Red State has a long list of transgressions committed by Reid. I don’t have the time or energy to address them all, but I will address the main points.

 

Harry Reid did, in fact, vote for the Brady Act. This vote was in 1993. Also voting for the Brady Act was Kay Bailey Hutchison, who GOA gives an A grade to. Funny how Republicans get forgiven, isn’t it?

 

Oh, but he voted for the evil assault weapons ban, Sebastian! Well, he did, but he didn’t. The assault weapons ban was attached to the Crime Bill, which was a must-pass part of a highly popular President’s agenda. See my post on the history of the Assault Weapons Ban. The actual AWB was called the Feinstein Amendment, and Reid voted against that. There were only four Senators who voted against the final Crime Bill. One of the other votes for the final bill? GOA A-Rated Alabama Republican Senator Richard Shelby. Shelby also joined Reid in voting to eliminate CMP funding. And here too, along with Hutchison again.

 

But I’m not going to sit here and do this all day for decades old votes. I mean, yeah, he did vote against the Lott Amendment back in 2000, but so did Fred Thompson. He did vote for trigger locks back in 2004, but so did Hutchison. But he also voted against renewing the Assault Weapons Ban on that same bill. Reid also voted against the final version of the bill that was amended with the trigger lock provision, gun show provision, and assault weapons ban.

 

Also worthwhile to note Harry Reid voted for the PLCAA, which was NRA’s major legislative initiative for the last decade. But I think what stands out the most is Harry Reid’s leadership on the issue in this Senate. Shall we name what we’ve gotten?

 

•An amendment to allow National Park carry inserted into the Credit Card bill.

•An amendment to fix DC’s gun laws inserted into the Voting Rights Act.

•An amendment to create national reciprocity recognition that even included recognition for states that did not issue licenses, like Vermont. We lost his one, but the vote never would have happened without Harry Reid.

•Funding rider to force Amtrak to allow guns in checked baggage.

•Let’s also not forget all the other funding riders which are important for us, which Reid helped us get.

You can be upset all you want with him on other issues. But Harry Reid is solid on the Second Amendment. We’ve gotten more out of the Senate under Reid than we got out of Republican in the roughly 14 years they ran things. Reid is not perfect, but there’s no politician that has a voting perfect record, and many that have records on guns comparable to Reid which GOA rates highly. I will leave it to my readers to determine whether Red State and GOA have any credibility at all when it comes to these issues, or whether they are using gun rights as a club to try to beat Democrats they find unsavory on other issues, and beating up on NRA because they know they are going to be supporting a lot of Democrats this fall. I think the answer is clear.

[gravyboy77]

Looks like the NRA just opened a can of worms. This story is #1 and highlighted at the top of the page at Politico. Usually once a story is picked up by one of the main outlets it goes mainstream real quick. It's also kinda crappy that the NRA decided to give Reid $3500.00 to his campaign so he could bolster his estimated war chest of $25 million dollars.

NRA on firing line over Reid

NRA on firing line over Harry Reid

 

By MANU RAJU & JONATHAN ALLEN | 7/3/10 7:01 AM EDTThe National Rifle Association is in unfamiliar terrain on the conservative firing range this election year: It's the target.

 

The conservative Netroots are abuzz over the possibility that the NRA may endorse Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). This would be the second major slight by the NRA for political conservatives — the gun group also just negotiated a big exemption on a campaign finance bill loathed by the right.

 

Conservatives say there's a clear political calculation at work: If Reid loses, he's almost certain to be succeeded as majority leader by a fierce gun-control advocate, either Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin or New York Sen. Chuck Schumer.

 

The NRA isn't even denying this line of reasoning but says it hasn't made a decision about whether to endorse Reid.

 

"The Second Amendment and the National Rifle Association are always one bad incident away from politicians like Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin exploiting their agenda of gun control," said Andrew Arulanandam, an NRA spokesman.

 

Still, the fact that a Reid endorsement is even a possibility has conservatives buzzing.

 

"Sharron Angle has been a true patriot on Second Amendment issues in the Nevada Legislature, and Harry Reid both voted for every anti-gun nominee [barack] Obama has put up and voted for the Brady bill, the assault weapons ban, etc.," conservative blogger Erick Erickson wrote on Redstate.com. "People at the NRA and people in the Senate are telling me the NRA will be endorsing Harry Reid later this year and the only way to stop it is to be very vocal about it right now. So keep making sure they know it would be unacceptable."

 

It all portends a nasty and prolonged fight between Republicans and a highly influential lobby that has long been a GOP partner in Washington policy battles — and it could hardly come at a worse time for Republicans, who see the Nevada race as one of the GOP's best opportunities to cut into Democrats' 59-seat majority.

 

Officially, the NRA is holding its fire for now in the race between Reid and tea-party-backed Republican nominee Angle, but conservatives are building a case that it's a matter of when, not if, Reid will get the gun group's nod.

 

First, Reid has a fairly favorable lifetime rating from the NRA. And then there's the $61 million for the Clark County Shooting Park, earmarked by Reid, which led Wayne LaPierre, chief executive officer of the National Rifle Association, to call Reid "a true champion" of the Second Amendment at an event commemorating the opening of the 2,900-acre park in April.

 

That's triggered a new round of recriminations from gun rights activists, many of whom believe the NRA is sort of a pale, commercial version of more dogmatic groups such as the Gun Owners of America.

 

"Harry Reid Buys NRA Endorsement With $61 Mil in Pork Spending?" asks the headline at one conservative blog known as Riehl World View.

 

The NRA says it won't make an endorsement — if it does make an endorsement — until the fall, when it can better judge the full results of the legislative season. This means an endorsement would come closer to the November election, when it would have greater impact.

 

An NRA endorsement would undoubtedly help Reid rebut criticism that he's become a down-the-line liberal since taking over the leadership of the Democratic Party in the Senate.

 

Guns already are an important component of his strategy to doff the liberal label: He's sent direct mail to voters on the issue and ran radio ads during the Nevada primary season proclaiming his "lifelong love of guns" and noting that he started toting his first rifle when he was 12 years old. It was a $100,000 ad campaign, according to Reid aides.

 

So it's easy to see why conservatives are worried.

 

The NRA's political action committee donated $2,500 to Reid last September and $1,500 in March, according to federal campaign finance records.

 

Arulanandam emphasized that past actions aren't tantamount to an endorsement of Reid and reiterated that any decision would most likely be announced in the September-October time frame.

 

Asked about the criticisms the NRA has received on its posture on Reid and on the campaign finance legislation, Arulanandam said: "We are a nonpartisan organization, and we have supporters on both sides of the aisle, and we have detractors on both sides of the aisle. What we have to do is look out for the welfare of the Second Amendment."

 

Conservatives highlight votes they say prove Reid's not NRA endorsement material, including his 1993 support for the Brady bill, which required a waiting period and background check for the purchase of handguns.

 

The truth is that Reid has a mixed record on guns: His marks from the NRA have ranged from A+ to F over the years, according to Project Vote Smart, and the Gun Owners of America frequently gives him an "F" rating despite his 100 percent score from the group in 2006.

 

Brandon Hall, Reid's campaign manager, dismisses the criticism, saying the majority leader has long been an advocate of gun owners' rights, pointing to a number of positions he's taken over the years. For instance, last July, the group sent a letter to its members thanking Reid for opposing Obama administration efforts to reinstate the assault weapons ban.

 

"If conservatives would look at his record, they'd agree with his record on the Second Amendment," Hall said.

 

While the gun fight is red hot right now, both sides expect outside groups to flood the airwaves with ads. Right now, the groups Vote Vets and American Crossroads are the only two on the air in the state, though the Tea Party Express plans to unveil a new ad buy praising Angle. Reid has already dipped into his war chest with a mix of ads criticizing Angle and praising himself, including one released Friday taking credit for helping bring a veterans hospital to Las Vegas.

 

National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesman Brian Walsh played down the potential impact of an NRA endorsement of Reid, casting the Nevada senator as a champion of organized labor rather than gun owners. Walsh said Angle's support will come from voters who want to see the state's 14 percent unemployment rate sharply reduced.

[Federal Farmer]

Everyone should note the comparison to GOA's A-Rated Senators...

 

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2010/07/02/on-the-reid-endorsement/

 

NRA hasn’t yet endorsed Harry Reid, but I would be shocked if they didn’t. Truth be told, they’d be insane if they didn’t. Why? Well, this is probably the best reason, but I also really want to address some of the distortions of Reid’s record mentioned over at Red State, which looks like they could have come directly from Larry Pratt. Pratt is a shameful hack, and it would appear he’s turned Red State into one too, at least on the gun issue. Red State has a long list of transgressions committed by Reid. I don’t have the time or energy to address them all, but I will address the main points.

 

Harry Reid did, in fact, vote for the Brady Act. This vote was in 1993. Also voting for the Brady Act was Kay Bailey Hutchison, who GOA gives an A grade to. Funny how Republicans get forgiven, isn’t it?

 

Oh, but he voted for the evil assault weapons ban, Sebastian! Well, he did, but he didn’t. The assault weapons ban was attached to the Crime Bill, which was a must-pass part of a highly popular President’s agenda. See my post on the history of the Assault Weapons Ban. The actual AWB was called the Feinstein Amendment, and Reid voted against that. There were only four Senators who voted against the final Crime Bill. One of the other votes for the final bill? GOA A-Rated Alabama Republican Senator Richard Shelby. Shelby also joined Reid in voting to eliminate CMP funding. And here too, along with Hutchison again.

 

But I’m not going to sit here and do this all day for decades old votes. I mean, yeah, he did vote against the Lott Amendment back in 2000, but so did Fred Thompson. He did vote for trigger locks back in 2004, but so did Hutchison. But he also voted against renewing the Assault Weapons Ban on that same bill. Reid also voted against the final version of the bill that was amended with the trigger lock provision, gun show provision, and assault weapons ban.

 

Also worthwhile to note Harry Reid voted for the PLCAA, which was NRA’s major legislative initiative for the last decade. But I think what stands out the most is Harry Reid’s leadership on the issue in this Senate. Shall we name what we’ve gotten?

 

•An amendment to allow National Park carry inserted into the Credit Card bill.

•An amendment to fix DC’s gun laws inserted into the Voting Rights Act.

•An amendment to create national reciprocity recognition that even included recognition for states that did not issue licenses, like Vermont. We lost his one, but the vote never would have happened without Harry Reid.

•Funding rider to force Amtrak to allow guns in checked baggage.

•Let’s also not forget all the other funding riders which are important for us, which Reid helped us get.

You can be upset all you want with him on other issues, but Harry Reid is solid on the Second Amendment. We’ve gotten more out of the Senate under Reid than we got out of Republicans in the roughly 14 years they ran things. Reid is not perfect, but there’s no politician that has a voting perfect record, and many that have records on guns comparable to Reid which GOA rates highly. I will leave it to my readers to determine whether Red State and GOA have any credibility at all when it comes to these issues, or whether they are using gun rights as a club to try to beat Democrats they find unsavory on other issues, and beating up on NRA because they know they are going to be supporting a lot of Democrats this fall. I think the answer is clear.

 

The fact of the matter is that NRA ratings and endorsements actually mean something. If they dump decent 2A democrats for republicans full of promises then they'll become as trivia as GOA.

[gravyboy77]

NRA e-mail: You know who’s pretty great on guns? Harry Reid

NRA e-mail: You know who’s pretty great on guns? Harry Reid

POSTED AT 5:47 PM ON JULY 2, 2010 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

 

Two readers saw our post yesterday and independently e-mailed the NRA in a panic. Surely, surely, the organization isn’t about to endorse … Harry Reid, is it?

 

Here’s what each of them got in reply. One simple question as you read: Why didn’t this e-mail end after the first two paragraphs?

 

Thank you for contacting NRA-ILA regarding the recent rumor that NRA-PVF has indicated they will endorse Harry Reid.

 

Regarding any potential endorsement of Sen. Reid in the upcoming elections, NRA-PVF has not yet announced any ratings or endorsements in this race. Ratings and endorsements will be determined closer to the election. It is important to note, however, that the NRA is a single issue organization and that when our ratings and endorsements are announced, they are based solely on a candidate’s support for, or opposition to, our Second Amendment rights. Other issues, as important as they may be to many people, do not and cannot play any role in those decisions. NRA represents a broad coalition of American gun owners, who are bound together by their support for the right to keep and bear arms.

 

In 2004, Senator Reid was rated “B” in his reelection by the NRA Political Victory Fund. Since then, as U.S. Senate Majority Leader, Senator Reid has proven himself to be a supporter of our Second Amendment rights. It would be accurate to say that few, if any, of NRA’s legislative victories in Congress during the last six years would have occurred without his active support.

 

As an example, he was instrumental in Senate passage (and eventual enactment into law) of the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” (PLCAA)”, which shut down reckless lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers that attempted to hold them liable for the misuse of firearms by criminals. Sen. Reid also cosponsored S. 659 (PLCCA) in the 108th Congress and voted against “poison pill” amendments to it, including the Feinstein Amendment to renew the federal ban on so-called “assault weapons”, and the Kennedy Amendment that would have banned most hunting ammunition.

 

Following Hurricane Katrina, he voted for legislation, that is now federal law, to prohibit gun confiscation during states of emergency. He also voted for legislation to allow commercial airline pilots to be armed in the cockpit to protect their passengers and crew. In this congressional session, Sen. Reid voted for the Ensign Amendment to repeal Washington D.C.’s gun ban and restore self-defense rights in our nation’s capital. He cosponsored similar legislation–S. 1414–in the 108th Congress. He also voted for an amendment to allow law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for self-defense in national parks and wildlife refuges. This federal policy change just took effect on February 22.

 

Early last year, Sen. Reid emphatically stated that he would oppose any effort to reinstate an “assault weapons” ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future. In addition, he voted last year for the Thune-Vitter Amendment to provide national reciprocity for state Right-to-Carry permits. He also voted twice for the Wicker Amendment allowing Amtrak passengers to include firearms in their checked luggage. These votes were possible only because of Senator Reid’s actions in his capacity as Senate Majority Leader. Finally, he was among the 58 Senators who signed the pro-gun congressional amicus brief in the McDonald v. Chicago case, argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on March 2nd, which will decide whether the Second Amendment applies to all states and localities.

 

Most recently, the NRA worked with Sen. Reid to include in his manager’s amendment to the health care reform bill a provision that prohibits the disclosure or collection of information relating to the lawful ownership, use or storage of firearms or ammunition and also prohibits lawful gun ownership, possession and use from being used as a factor to determine eligibility or premium rates for health insurance. This provision was adopted on December 22, 2009 and was included in this legislation when it was signed into law on March 23.

 

Finally, Senator Reid is opposed to any anti-gun treaties that might come before the U.S. Senate for ratification.

 

These are a few examples of Senator Reid’s support and leadership on Second Amendment issues. Given the Senate could vote on gun-related issues in the coming months, rest assured any votes will be considered in future candidate evaluations. Regarding NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox recently attending the grand opening of the Clark County Shooting Park (CCSP) with U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and other Nevada elected officials.

 

The CCSP is the largest shooting park in the world. This 2,900-acre state-of-the-art facility is devoted entirely to the shooting sports and is the nation’s premier shooting park. As the nation’s largest shooting sports organization, the NRA’s presence at the ribbon-cutting ceremony should come as no surprise. NRA actively worked with several Members of the Nevada congressional delegation, including Senator Reid, to ensure that this range was built. The development and construction of the CCSP has the full bipartisan support of the Nevada congressional delegation, and Nevada’s Republican Governor.

 

Senator Reid was instrumental in arranging not only the transfer of the then-federal lands to Clark County where the Park is located, but also in securing $61 million in funding to develop and build the Park. The Clark County Shooting Park would not have been built without his active efforts and support.

 

Once again, thank you for your inquiry.

If you didn’t read

Erick Erickson’s post

raising the alarm about the NRA and Reid, scroll through it and note how many anti-gun votes he’s taken over the years. Granted, few of them are recent — only one since 2005 — but surely his record, Angle’s record, and the prospect of thousands of angry Republican NRA donors tearing up their checkbooks point towards endorsing Angle.

Right?

Exit question: They’re going to end up endorsing no one in this race, aren’t they?

[PPK]

These are a few examples of Senator Reid's support and leadership on Second Amendment issues. Given the Senate could vote on gun-related issues in the coming months, rest assured any votes will be considered in future candidate evaluations. Regarding NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox recently attending the grand opening of the Clark County Shooting Park (CCSP) with U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and other Nevada elected officials.

 

The CCSP is the largest shooting park in the world. This 2,900-acre state-of-the-art facility is devoted entirely to the shooting sports and is the nation's premier shooting park. As the nation's largest shooting sports organization, the NRA's presence at the ribbon-cutting ceremony should come as no surprise. NRA actively worked with several Members of the Nevada congressional delegation, including Senator Reid, to ensure that this range was built. The development and construction of the CCSP has the full bipartisan support of the Nevada congressional delegation, and Nevada's Republican Governor.

 

Senator Reid was instrumental in arranging not only the transfer of the then-federal lands to Clark County where the Park is located, but also in securing $61 million in funding to develop and build the Park. The Clark County Shooting Park would not have been built without his active efforts and support.

I don't see this as something deserving praise. Government spending on unnecessary pork projects is a huge problem with the financial mess we're in. I'm sure a 2,900 acre shooting park is nice but what fraction of a percent of the population will ever even see it. It's possible that I'm just a hypocrite and would see things different if it was built in Southern Illinois. Don't think so, though.

[gravyboy77]

I really don't care about the rating system between the NRA and GOA, Reid is a partisan A**hole and as a conservative I'm appalled that the NRA would use my money to support a guy that does nothing but put down conservatives, tea parties and republicans in the senate so he can push Obama & Pelosi's radical agenda. The Heathcare debacle, Crap$Tax, Amnesty, 800 billion dollar wasted stimulus, Wall street bill that is a joke, Disclose act and many, many more. I WILL NOT support the NRA if they endorse this partisan hack over Angle. Hopefully they remain neutral and don't endorse either one.

[bob]

I don't see this as something deserving praise. Government spending on unnecessary pork projects is a huge problem with the financial mess we're in. I'm sure a 2,900 acre shooting park is nice but what fraction of a percent of the population will ever even see it. It's possible that I'm just a hypocrite and would see things different if it was built in Southern Illinois. Don't think so, though.

 

Aren't the funds for this coming from excise taxes on guns and ammunition that are supposed to be used for this kind of thing?

[Xwing]

Blah blah blah. Anyone have anything regarding the 2nd Amendment to drivel on about? Really, we all aren't conservatives here. Just sayin'.

 

Look at his huge list of anti-gun votes (in the list above)! Why would the NRA endorse someone who votes so many times against the 2nd amendment and our rights. So he did a few good votes too; they don't stand up against his avalance of anti-gun votes. And the guy running against him (who has a great chance of finally unseating this troll) is pro-gun through and through!

[SmershAgent]

Blah blah blah. Anyone have anything regarding the 2nd Amendment to drivel on about? Really, we all aren't conservatives here. Just sayin'.

 

Look at his huge list of anti-gun votes (in the list above)! Why would the NRA endorse someone who votes so many times against the 2nd amendment and our rights. So he did a few good votes too; they don't stand up against his avalance of anti-gun votes. And the guy running against him (who has a great chance of finally unseating this troll) is pro-gun through and through!

 

Please refer to post #12 for a further analysis of his record. Many of his bad votes are not as "anti-gun" as they seem. I have to respect the NRA's rationale behind this. It makes more sense to support a veteran legislator with whom they can work and who usually votes our way than it is to forsake him for a newcomer who's all promises. And as has been mentioned before, if Reid loses and the Democrats keep control of the chamber, I guarantee we will be getting no relief from the new Senate leader.

 

If all it takes is pro-gun rhetoric to be a good candidate, then we all should have been celebrating when Rod took office. Remember, he was a strong supporter of the Second Amendment who believed in the rights of sportsmen and hunters.

[Bill Matio]

I don't see this as something deserving praise. Government spending on unnecessary pork projects is a huge problem with the financial mess we're in. I'm sure a 2,900 acre shooting park is nice but what fraction of a percent of the population will ever even see it. It's possible that I'm just a hypocrite and would see things different if it was built in Southern Illinois. Don't think so, though.

 

Aren't the funds for this coming from excise taxes on guns and ammunition that are supposed to be used for this kind of thing?

Ahhhhh

 

NO

 

See here http://www.blm.gov/n...y_shooting.html

 

Clark County Shooting Park and Related Documents

 

In 2002, Congress passed P.L. 107-350, requiring Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to convey to Clark County, Nevada, a specified and approximate 2,880 acres of public land for use as a centralized shooting facility. The BLM conveyed the land on November 26, 2003.The shooting park facility has been funded with county, Federal and private money. Since 2003, Federal funding for this project has totaled $64 million. The Federal funding was provided under the Southern Nevada Public Land Act of 1998 (SNPLMA), Parks Trails and Natural Area program. This money was used for site planning, development and construction.

 

That 64 million dollars sure is a bunch of TAX-PAYER money that only few people reap the rewards of!

 

There's more at the link above.

[Drylok]

I really don't care about the rating system between the NRA and GOA, Reid is a partisan A**hole and as a conservative I'm appalled that the NRA would use my money to support a guy that does nothing but put down conservatives, tea parties and republicans in the senate so he can push Obama & Pelosi's radical agenda. The Heathcare debacle, Crap$Tax, Amnesty, 800 billion dollar wasted stimulus, Wall street bill that is a joke, Disclose act and many, many more. I WILL NOT support the NRA if they endorse this partisan hack over Angle. Hopefully they remain neutral and don't endorse either one.

Remember the NRA is a one issue organization. We don't care about cap and tax, health care crap and so forth. Only the 2nd amendment. We would have to give Obama himself an A as president. The only two 2A issues he has dealt with he supported the 2nd. Carry on mass transit and carry in national parks.

[Gooch]

 

Look at his huge list of anti-gun votes (in the list above)! Why would the NRA endorse someone who votes so many times against the 2nd amendment and our rights. So he did a few good votes too; they don't stand up against his avalance of anti-gun votes. And the guy running against him (who has a great chance of finally unseating this troll) is pro-gun through and through!

 

 

If memory serves me correctly, It is my understanding that if Reid looses and the Democrats retain the majority, our very own Dick Durbin moves into his seat as Senate President. (Don't get me wrong as I am in no way advocating this kind of philosophy of voting for the "lesser of 2 evils") but the Honorable Dick "Turbin" Durbin's voting record on 2 A issues is a mirror image of King Daley.

 

What a mess.

 

Gooch

[gravyboy77]

Look at his huge list of anti-gun votes (in the list above)! Why would the NRA endorse someone who votes so many times against the 2nd amendment and our rights. So he did a few good votes too; they don't stand up against his avalance of anti-gun votes. And the guy running against him (who has a great chance of finally unseating this troll) is pro-gun through and through!

 

 

If memory serves me correctly, It is my understanding that if Reid looses and the Democrats retain the majority, our very own Dick Durbin moves into his seat as Senate President. (Don't get me wrong as I am in no way advocating this kind of philosophy of voting for the "lesser of 2 evils") but the Honorable Dick "Turbin" Durbin's voting record on 2 A issues is a mirror image of King Daley.

 

What a mess.

 

Gooch

 

The Republicans are most likely going to take the house (projected between 40-50 seats at this point) and possibly (very, very close) to taking the senate. Once the Republicans take the house it's game over even if the Dems have Turbin Durbin as senate leader, because he can't do anything if the republicans control the house. If the NRA is not smart and endorses this partisan clown, they will lose members.

[Tvandermyde]

Obama will be judged on 2A issues by NRA. Issues like Sotomayor and Kagin, the Actions of ATF and DOJ under his administration. I have no doubt of where is rating will be.

 

I would rather see Harry ried as the leader of the dems than durbin or schumer if the repubs don't take the majority.

[gravyboy77]

Obama will be judged on 2A issues by NRA. Issues like Sotomayor and Kagin, the Actions of ATF and DOJ under his administration. I have no doubt of where is rating will be.

 

I would rather see Harry ried as the leader of the dems than durbin or schumer if the repubs don't take the majority.

 

I understand who you think would be BETTER (lesser of 2 evils), but i think it's time for Reid to go. The guy has been nothing but a cheerleading mouthpiece for Obama and Pelosi, bashing and criticizing the republicans every chance he gets, yet wants our support so he can get re-elected? Like i said before, i hope the NRA remains nuetral on this because if not they will p*ss off alot of conservatives.

[papa]

Yep I agree. Lets get Durbin in there so he can really stomp on our rights from a great position and for a very long time.

[Xwing]

The Republicans are most likely going to take the house (projected between 40-50 seats at this point) and possibly (very, very close) to taking the senate. Once the Republicans take the house it's game over even if the Dems have Turbin Durbin as senate leader, because he can't do anything if the republicans control the house. If the NRA is not smart and endorses this partisan clown, they will lose members.

 

I agree. If the NRA helps the Democrap socialists (who are pretty uniformly anti-gun) keep the senate, they will be making a huge mistake. I mean, just look at the averages. The Dems are all about hating guns (with only a few exceptions) while most (except several RINOs) Republican's are 100% behind restoring 2nd amendment rights in America.

 

Obama will be judged on 2A issues by NRA. Issues like Sotomayor and Kagin, the Actions of ATF and DOJ under his administration. I have no doubt of where is rating will be.

 

I would rather see Harry ried as the leader of the dems than durbin or schumer if the repubs don't take the majority.

Obama is very anti-gun. He's on tape saying "no citizens should have the right to own a firearm". I can't imagine the fact that he got lassoed and trapped into voting for a pro-gun rider to a bill, against his scheming, will help his rating much.

 

And while Ried may not be nearly as bad as Durbin, think about how much better for our 2nd amendment rights it'll be when the Republicans take the majority of both houses come November.

[Federal Farmer]

The Republicans are most likely going to take the house (projected between 40-50 seats at this point) and possibly (very, very close) to taking the senate. Once the Republicans take the house it's game over even if the Dems have Turbin Durbin as senate leader, because he can't do anything if the republicans control the house. If the NRA is not smart and endorses this partisan clown, they will lose members.

 

I agree. If the NRA helps the Democrap socialists (who are pretty uniformly anti-gun) keep the senate, they will be making a huge mistake. I mean, just look at the averages. The Dems are all about hating guns (with only a few exceptions) while most (except several RINOs) Republican's are 100% behind restoring 2nd amendment rights in America.

 

Obama will be judged on 2A issues by NRA. Issues like Sotomayor and Kagin, the Actions of ATF and DOJ under his administration. I have no doubt of where is rating will be.

 

I would rather see Harry ried as the leader of the dems than durbin or schumer if the repubs don't take the majority.

Obama is very anti-gun. He's on tape saying "no citizens should have the right to own a firearm". I can't imagine the fact that he got lassoed and trapped into voting for a pro-gun rider to a bill, against his scheming, will help his rating much.

 

And while Ried may not be nearly as bad as Durbin, think about how much better for our 2nd amendment rights it'll be when the Republicans take the majority of both houses come November.

 

All I remember us getting the last time R's controlled Congress was the Patriot Act. What great pro-gun bills did we get back then?

[abolt243]

The Republicans are most likely going to take the house (projected between 40-50 seats at this point) and possibly (very, very close) to taking the senate. Once the Republicans take the house it's game over even if the Dems have Turbin Durbin as senate leader, because he can't do anything if the republicans control the house. If the NRA is not smart and endorses this partisan clown, they will lose members.

 

I agree. If the NRA helps the Democrap socialists (who are pretty uniformly anti-gun) keep the senate, they will be making a huge mistake. I mean, just look at the averages. The Dems are all about hating guns (with only a few exceptions) while most (except several RINOs) Republican's are 100% behind restoring 2nd amendment rights in America.

 

Obama will be judged on 2A issues by NRA. Issues like Sotomayor and Kagin, the Actions of ATF and DOJ under his administration. I have no doubt of where is rating will be.

 

I would rather see Harry ried as the leader of the dems than durbin or schumer if the repubs don't take the majority.

Obama is very anti-gun. He's on tape saying "no citizens should have the right to own a firearm". I can't imagine the fact that he got lassoed and trapped into voting for a pro-gun rider to a bill, against his scheming, will help his rating much.

 

And while Ried may not be nearly as bad as Durbin, think about how much better for our 2nd amendment rights it'll be when the Republicans take the majority of both houses come November.

 

All I remember us getting the last time R's controlled Congress was the Patriot Act. What great pro-gun bills did we get back then?

 

 

 

Nice shot FF, and I'm a conservative!

 

AB

[PPK]

The Republicans are most likely going to take the house (projected between 40-50 seats at this point) and possibly (very, very close) to taking the senate. Once the Republicans take the house it's game over even if the Dems have Turbin Durbin as senate leader, because he can't do anything if the republicans control the house. If the NRA is not smart and endorses this partisan clown, they will lose members.

 

I agree. If the NRA helps the Democrap socialists (who are pretty uniformly anti-gun) keep the senate, they will be making a huge mistake. I mean, just look at the averages. The Dems are all about hating guns (with only a few exceptions) while most (except several RINOs) Republican's are 100% behind restoring 2nd amendment rights in America.

 

Obama will be judged on 2A issues by NRA. Issues like Sotomayor and Kagin, the Actions of ATF and DOJ under his administration. I have no doubt of where is rating will be.

 

I would rather see Harry ried as the leader of the dems than durbin or schumer if the repubs don't take the majority.

Obama is very anti-gun. He's on tape saying "no citizens should have the right to own a firearm". I can't imagine the fact that he got lassoed and trapped into voting for a pro-gun rider to a bill, against his scheming, will help his rating much.

 

And while Ried may not be nearly as bad as Durbin, think about how much better for our 2nd amendment rights it'll be when the Republicans take the majority of both houses come November.

 

 

 

We have strong 2A supporting democrats on this forum. There's really no reason to try and p!$$ them off with name calling. It's possible to disagree in political matters without the insults. Also, there are a lot of pro-gun Democrats in Washington. They have control of the house, senate, and white house. If they were all anti-gun we'd at the very least have the so-called assault weapons ban of Pelosi.

[ilphil]

Look at his huge list of anti-gun votes (in the list above)! Why would the NRA endorse someone who votes so many times against the 2nd amendment and our rights. So he did a few good votes too; they don't stand up against his avalance of anti-gun votes. And the guy running against him (who has a great chance of finally unseating this troll) is pro-gun through and through!

 

 

If memory serves me correctly, It is my understanding that if Reid looses and the Democrats retain the majority, our very own Dick Durbin moves into his seat as Senate President. (Don't get me wrong as I am in no way advocating this kind of philosophy of voting for the "lesser of 2 evils") but the Honorable Dick "Turbin" Durbin's voting record on 2 A issues is a mirror image of King Daley.

 

What a mess.

 

Gooch

 

The Republicans are most likely going to take the house (projected between 40-50 seats at this point) and possibly (very, very close) to taking the senate. Once the Republicans take the house it's game over even if the Dems have Turbin Durbin as senate leader, because he can't do anything if the republicans control the house. If the NRA is not smart and endorses this partisan clown, they will lose members.

 

A Democrat controlled Senate can still cause us problems. Just think about the consequences if one of the conservative bloc on the SCOTUS dies or has to resign due to illness.

A Dem majority ensures Obama will appoint another radical leftist. If the GOP controls the Senate he quite probably will have to go with someone a lot closer to the center.

It is still a long 2 yrs until we can even hope to send Obama back to Chicago. Or Indonesia. Or Nigeria...or where ever the heck he is really from.