Gun owners and NRA members should demand NRA-PVF take a position in this race--their entire reason for existence is to produce political victory.Today's Gun Rights Examiner column tries to make sense of a "Winning Team" strategy that looks remarkably like hiding under the bed and hoping no one finds them.
It's their damn job. [More]
Good grief.
Share the link?
9 comments:
"There's no excuse for NRA-PVF not endorsing Sharron Angle at this point."
Can the anti-NRA crowd give it a rest. I looked back at previous NRA-PVF endorsements in congressional elections and they have never announced their endorsements this early - no political impact for most Americans until 5-8 weeks prior to the elections. I guess they announced "not endorsing Harry" just to settle down all the anti-NRA pundits. No, they haven't endorsed Angle - yet - but they haven't endorsed anyone else either - yet. Give it a rest. If they come out with their endorsements and don't endorse Angle, then start your bitching.
Most Americans - and gun owners - are not as fired-up about the elections just yet... the same reason most running for office haven't distributed any or the bulk of their yard signs yet - not quite time for the biggest impact. Our local congressman, Mike Turner, didn't get the official NRA-PVF endorsement in 2008 until September when all endorsements were released for congressmen at that time.
The other reason a smart entity doesn't endorse too early is the stupid factor. If you endorse too early and your endorsee does something stupid, like get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, then you have to back track and folks like the Brady Bunch have a party on your grave.
Dann in Ohio
They're still trying not to appear too extreme to people who consider owning an antique revolver and six rounds of cruddy ammunition extreme.
Maybe you could tell us who "the anti NRA crowd" is Dann in OH? What, management machinations are above criticism with you?
I guess by that "logic" criticizing Obama's decisions makes one "anti-American"?
Maybe you ought to actually read the article first, including the part where I quoted: "An NRA spokesman said the organization will not be backing Angle either. 'We will not be making any endorsement in the Nevada Senate race,' said Andrew Arulanandam, the group's public affairs director."
Two NRA board members gave credit to Erick Erickson and Redstate:
This is all you guys.
Guess the Board is not willing to mention you, huh?
Just keep sending your yearly dues and replying with cash to the constant flow of donation requests.
Your opinion is worthless, it's your money they want.
[W3]
Chuckie Schumer?
The NRA is not above criticism, but regarding Angle, they HAVE NOT MADE A DECISION - regardless of what another person says an NRA spokesperson supposedly said. If they are not endorsing Angle, why didn't they officially announce that with the Reid announcement.
As for your comment, "I guess by that "logic" criticizing Obama's decisions makes one "anti-American"?". Criticizing a decision is one thing and I'm very critical of Obama's decisions, but again, the NRA has not made or announced any official decision regarding Angle.
It wasn't that long ago that the blogophere was reporting that the NRA was endorsing Reid according to NRA insiders - guess that was accurate - NOT. ...and back at that time all kinds of folks jumped on the NRA's back over something they HAD NOT DONE.
As for those who say the NRA is not listening, if they were thinking about endorsing Reid - guess what NRA pundits - they listened to you. Maybe they'll listen to you and endorse Angle.
You want to criticize decisions made - fine, but don't criticize for decisions not yet made - just like the reporting of the Reid endorsement, it may be a figment of someone's imagination or false information.
I emailed a friend who is fairly high in the NRA chain who lives in Fairfax, VA and he says as far as he knows the NRA has made no decision regarding Angle's endorsement at this point. He also said there are no NRA spokespersons for the PVF other than what you hear from official news releases or Chris Cox.
Dann in Ohio
By the way, I am a fan and regular reader of your various writings.
GOOD QUESTION:
"Noting the joint statement by NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre and ILA Executive Director Chris Cox that "There may be no vote a United States Senator casts that is more important than a vote to confirm a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court," don't you agree we ought to know, and that the "punishment" should fit the "crime"?"
GOOD ANSWER:
"The vote on Elena Kagan's confirmation to the Court, along with the previous year's confirmation vote on Sonia Sotomayor, are critical for the future of the Second Amendment. After careful consideration, the NRA-PVF announced today that it will not be endorsing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for re-election in the 2010 U.S. Senate race in Nevada."
Dann in Ohio
Dann: "they HAVE NOT MADE A DECISION - regardless of what another person says an NRA spokesperson supposedly said."
Not just another person, and not an unidentified spokeperson. The Las Vegas Review Journal has reported it. They quoted Andrew Arulanandam, who is the director of public affairs.
The New York Times Caucus blog reports: "The group will not endorse Mr. Reid’s Tea Party backed challenger, Sharron Angle, either, despite her work to win members over."
And from The Atlantic: "An NRA spokesperson confirms that the group will not endorse Angle, either.
"'We will not be making an endorsement in the NV Sen race,' NRA spokesman Andrew Arulnanandam wrote in an e-mail. The group declined to comment on its specific reasons for not endorsing Angle."
Those are three credible media sources reporting the same thing. I make no apologies for reacting to them and urging action to turn that reported decision around. If the reporters are making it up, if they're lying and there was no email or statement, or if Arulanandam was simply wrong or misspoke or showed his hand too soon or...well, that will come out and we'll deal with it then.
Dann: If they are not endorsing Angle, why didn't they officially announce that with the Reid announcement.
Beats me. I'm not responsible for explaining why Fairfax does things the way they do, simply of making sure there are credible sources for what is being reported before I comment on it. As for why, all any of us can do is speculate, which I try to do using past actions and statements as a guide.
If they weren't ready to talk about the entire race, they shouldn't have stirred everything up with this bombshell announcement until they were. What the hell kind of sense does that make?
And it's not like finding out about things from other sources without NRA confirmation is unprecedented. Just recently, why did we learn of their Chet Edwards endorsement from his campaign instead of PVF? Have you seen a retraction? No? Why do you think that is?
This leaves us with two choices: We can either take your advice to "give it a rest" and keep quiet and wait, or do what you have acknowledged works: Make noise so they listen to us.
Post a Comment