9 thoughts on “NRA Scoring the Vote on Sotomayor”

  1. I’m way to cynical. I followed the link and then the sublink (which is really the link that gives “info”) and found something that says “I contacted the NRA and an unnamed spokesman called me back”

    I’ll believe it when I see the e-mail from the NRA in my inbox.

    Of course there is always the tap dance of “sure it affected their grade, but it was negated by these other things that they did” thing that will always happen with any grading.

  2. It *should* be counted …….. anytime a legislator has an opportunity to side with or against the 2nd amendment, they should be held to account.

    In fact, it is my belief that voting on a life-time appointment should weigh more heavily than regular legislation.


  3. Considering that Specter has already made it clear he supports Sotomayor, doesn’t this mean that Toomey will probably get the NRA endorsement now?

    1. No, it doesn’t make it an automatic for anything. Specter will likely still have a very good grade after this since he has consistently voted with us throughout his career. However, he still holds on to one important status: incumbent. The fact is that Pennsylvania is, at best, described as a purple state, if not fairly blue at this point. The state House has turned, the Senate isn’t far from going, and right now, the Governor’s office is also blue. Even before Arlen switched, the other Senator made us purple, balancing out Arlen’s (at the time) red. That’s not a good sign for Toomey at all. Add onto that what I’ve been reading in the political sphere about the party not having high hopes for Toomey, and that’s asking NRA to take a big risk that the GOP might not even be willing to invest much in come election season.

      I wouldn’t be shocked if Specter got the nod in the primary, at the very least. I don’t know how that would translate into the general election. I tend to not be a fan of endorsing in primary elections because of what you might face in the general, but I wouldn’t blame NRA for wanting to get the union gun owners and Democratic gun owners out for Specter. At least that makes the decision on gun issues come November 2010 a choice between less evils.

  4. Sorry ’bout that–I didn’t think comment #5 went through, so I elaborated on #6.

  5. “Why shouldn’t gun ownership be regulated as much as automobile ownsership?”

    If gun ownership was regulated as loosely as automobile ownership there would be dancing in the ranges.

    There is generally no requirement to have a license to own an automobile; only to drive one in public. No regulation of private sale, no regulation of interstate sale, etc.

    (Or were you meaning that firearms ownerships should be regulated at that level? My snarkometer overloaded some Tam back).

Comments are closed.