National Rifle Association endorses Walz
Monday, October 04, 2010 at 8:24 am
- 7 Comments
The National Rifle Association endorsed Rep. Tim Walz for reelection on Saturday. While the group also gave Walz’s opponent an ‘A’ rating, it applauded Walz supporting Second Amendment rights in Congress. Though the NRA is traditionally seen as backing conservatives in general and Republicans specifically, the group has endorsed as many Minnesota DFLers as Republicans among those vying for Congress.
“The NRA-PVF is endorsing Tim Walz because he has defended the Second Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, hunters and sportsmen in Minnesota and across America,” said Chris W. Cox, chairman of the NRA-Political Victory Fund, in a statement.
Walz added, “I grew up hunting and spent 24 years in the Army National Guard. I know how important Second Amendment rights are to the people of southern Minnesota. I’m proud to stand with the NRA to protect our Second Amendment rights, and I’m truly grateful for their endorsement,” said Walz.
In addition to Walz, the group has endorsed Republican Reps. John Kline, Erik Paulsen and Michele Bachmann and DFL Reps. Collin Peterson and James Oberstar.
Cox discussed his group’s endorsements in the National Review last week where he said the NRA looks at Second Amendment issues only, not partisanship. “There are a lot of Democrats who are going to lose, we all know that, but not one is going to lose because of their stance on the Second Amendment. And when pro-gun Democrats are going down to defeat, they’re going to be replaced by pro–Second Amendment Republicans, and we support politicians who support the Second Amendment regardless of party.”
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter7 Comments
Comment posted October 4, 2010 @ 11:44 am
So the question is, is this good news or bad news to liberal democrats?
Comment posted October 4, 2010 @ 2:06 pm
Think about the real question Dennis – just how much of a wacko is Alan Quist if even the NRA prefers the Democratic candidate?
Comment posted October 4, 2010 @ 2:15 pm
What’s Alan Quist have to do with it? He’s running against a non-veteran in Demmer.
I’m just wondering if the weapons-averse liberals would consider the NRA endorsement to be a negative for their guy Walz.
Comment posted October 4, 2010 @ 2:47 pm
Dennis – my bad – but in my own defense, I’m recovering from surgery and am all drugged up.
But my question is still valid – how much of a wacko is the republican candidate that the NRA is un-willing to support him?
Comment posted October 4, 2010 @ 2:50 pm
And I own guns – hand guns, rifles and shot guns – and I shoot them quite regularly. As well as load my own ammunition – so that “weapons adverse liberal” label you continue to misapply is bull.
Comment posted October 4, 2010 @ 2:56 pm
If it was “bull,” Tom, it wouldn’t be headlines when a democrat gets the NRA endorsement, now would it.
Get well soon!
Comment posted October 5, 2010 @ 6:34 pm
Dennis says “if it was bull, it wouldn’t be headlines when a democrat gets the NRA endorsement, now would it”.
Therefore, we can only conclude that whenever a headline says that a candidate got the NRA endorsement, we can conclude it is an anomaly. So if I find a headline that says the NRA endorses Bachmann, that proves that Bachmann is a liberal. Otherwise, why would it be headlined? I’m sure there is a headline that says “Emmer endorsed by NRA”, which of course proves, by its very existence, that Emmer must be a liberal or it wouldn’t be news.
Nice logic. Now when the teachers union endorses Dayton and it gets a headline, we can conclude that Dayton is a right wing voucher pusher.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
