Gov. Bill Richardson has a perfect score on gun rights
Chase Martyn is an astute observer of Iowa politics, a blogger http://cmondisplay.com/ and managing editor of the Iowa Independent. http://www.iowaindependent.com/ In a recent blog post, Martyn calls attention to the "Democratic Gun Vote" in Iowa. Pro-gun rights voters are critical to winning in that state.
Martyn writes:
In Iowa, Democrats have lost elections over gun control issues. When I knocked doors in rural areas in 2004 for a State House candidate I was volunteering for, I heard constant complaints from no-party voters who shut the door in my face because my candidate wanted to take their guns away. That was all fine and good, except my candidate (and, in general, the Iowa Democratic Party) had no interest in taking their guns away.
In 2007, the political landscape is vastly different. Democrats, who for years have been trying to compete in rural areas, have finally gotten their message across that they are not all in favor of Giuliani/Pelosi-style gun control. Two candidates in particular have attempted this campaign cycle to court Democrats who hunt: Gov. Bill Richardson and former Sen. John Edwards.
Richardson, who has an A rating from the National Rifle Association (and who was the only Democrat to address the NRA’s annual convention this year, although it was by video), recently highlighted his status as a pro-hunting Western governor at campaign stops in rural Iowa. From Dien Judge’s coverage of Richardson’s stop in Albia earlier this month:
“I’m a hunter, by the way,” said Richardson after answering an unrelated question. “I know a lot of you are hunters, so please support me. The NRA gave me an A+ rating.”
While the right to bear arms is obviously not a burning issue in the minds of most Iowa Democratic caucus-goers, Richardson’s record on the subject may well earn him the respect of rural Democrats in places like Albia and other small towns that are often ignored by presidential candidates.
Edwards today held a conference call to unveil his “Hunting and Fishing Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.” Again, from Dien’s coverage on Iowa Independent:
In an impromptu telephone press conference this morning, Edwards said it’s part of his effort to “ensure that people who live in rural areas and small towns” that he has a commitment to “strengthening their way of life and their economies.”
Edwards used the event to announce a new set of policy proposals focused on hunting, fishing and the great outdoors. He explained that his “Hunting and Fishing Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” is an agenda to protect and strengthen hunting and fishing traditions.
While the majority of Democratic caucus-goers may not care much one way or the other about gun rights and hunting, Democrats in rural areas care quite a bit. Many of them are themselves hunters, and those who are not still recognize the importance of having a Democrat at the top of the ticket who will not alienate gun control opponents. Caucus-goers are known for their pragmatism, and having a name associated with strict gun control on the ballot as the Democratic presidential nominee could cause major problems for local Democratic candidates.
Right Democrat: Support for the right to keep and bear arms is strong in Middle America. Millions of rank and file Democrats are gun rights supporters as Second Amendment defenders exist across party and ideological lines. Democrats need to favor gun rights to win rural America and firearms owners are a critical swing vote in many states.
3 comments:
As Wyatt Earp said, Dodge City won't be safe until we get all the guns.
So, bang, bang.
When the gungrabbers start going after duck guns and deer rifles, then pro-hunting rhetoric might mean something. But the Second Amendment has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with hunting.
That said, Richardson does apparently have a strong pro-gun rights record. He's against the "assault weapon" ban and IIRC he supports the right to carry (I believe he has a CHL).
As for Edwards, while not as pernicious as some of the Democrats in DC, he supports renewing the so-called "assault weapons" ban and "closing the gunshow loophole," plus he didn't vote in favor of protecting the gun industry against frivolous lawsuits. Pushing bans and restrictions does not sound like a pro-gun rights candidate to me. Edwards isn't as bad as Obama, Biden, Clinton, etc., etc., etc., but someone who is pro-gun rights doesn't say crap like this: "I respect and believe in people's Second Amendment rights. That does not, however, mean that somebody needs an AK-47 to hunt."
Unfortunately, the most likely Republican candidates (Mitt, Rudy, and Fred) are even worse than the Dems on almost every other issue, especially climate change. I liked Richardson at first, but his la Raza open borders sentiments don't sit well with me at all.
It's all moot anyways. My money is on a Hillary vs. Rudy match-off. In other words, the end of the Republic....
Here's yet more evidence that Edwards is weak on the 2A. He considers a college education a "right," but handgun ownership a "privilege." In other words, he is stating that handguns are not covered by the Second Amendment or any of the various state constitutions. This is a man who made his millions as a trial lawyer. He is well aware of the distinction between a right and a privilege.
I will not be voting for Edwards. Just another communist who would take my rights away on a whim.
Post a Comment