The National Rifle Association of America is being criticized in various quarters for its advertisement urging people to remind the U.S. Senate that the last time it confirmed a Barack Obama nominee to the Supreme Court, that candidate said the she understood how important the Second Amendment is, and that it protected an individual right.
The NRA’s advertisement raising red flags about nominee Elena Kagan is hardly worth watching…after the first dozen times, or so. It is one of two razor-edged political advertisements currently airing, and available now on YouTube. The other concerns Washington State’s senior Senator Patty Murray, now running for a fourth term. We will discuss that in a moment.
The NRA released an anti-Kagan ad this week that shows Sotomayor seemingly assuring senators during her confirmation hearing last year that she supports individual gun rights. Citing her vote in June to uphold a handgun ban in Chicago, the ad urges members to call their senators and "tell them not to fall for the same trick twice."-Los Angeles Times
Where the NRA has taken some heat lately for what many perceive as a horrible blunder on the so-called “DISCLOSE Act,” its opposition advertisement on the Kagan nomination is so precisely in the bull’s eye that it is drawing blood in Liberal corners. And it should.
Last year, when then-Judge Sotomayor was being questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee, she professed an understanding of the Second Amendment, explaining how she had friends who hunt, and a god-child who is an NRA member. The NRA’s advertisement cuts to the quick and Kagan supporters despise that. This column discussed the Sotomayor nomination at length, here, here, here, here and here. More recently, this column zeroed in on Kagan, and not without some disagreement from readers. We predicted that Sotomayor's position on the McDonald case would be a strong indication on where Kagan will come down on gun rights if she ascends to the bench.
The NRA’s advertisement is brilliant because it uses Sotomayor’s own words to not only rip her for having done (predictably) the opposite of what she said one year ago, but also as a warning to the Senate not to make the same mistake twice. Kagan’s insistence that the Second Amendment is a matter “of settled law” was a carefully crafted response to a question from anti-gun Sen. Patrick Leahy about whether the amendment protects an individual right to own a firearm and “use it for self-defense in their home.”
Do not think for a heartbeat that either Leahy or Kagan misunderstood the question or the answer, and do not be misled that Kagan thinks having a gun for self-defense outside the home is a hot idea. If she is confirmed to the high court – as pundits are predicting – she will probably have the chance to prove otherwise, as did Sotomayor prove her critics of last year to be correct in their assertions that she is fundamentally anti-gun.
Much was made recently about a photo of Kagan playing softball. The NRA advertisement is something of a welcome to hardball, Washington-style.
In the other Washington, an even more blistering advertisement about anti-gun Sen. Murray is taking her “mom in tennis shoes” image and rubbing her face in it, courtesy a website called MakeMurrayWorry.com, courtesy of a group calling itself the American Action Network. Arguably, it is the best political ad of the season, and those who whine about it are hypocrites of the highest order, considering what Murray backers did to challenger Dino Rossi for weeks before he entered the race.
Murray has never seen a gun control measure she did not immediately support. Blindly. The advertisement is loaded with symbolism; her white shoes turning dirty, the shoes treading across the backs of working people, mothers and children.
If Murray supporters find that tough to swallow, perhaps it’s their turn. Washington gun owners, who have no voice in the U.S. Senate at all, have had to choke on this woman’s far-left, anti-gun politics for almost 18 years. They believe that’s enough.
PLEASE FORWARD the link to this column and share with all of your chat lists and forums
More from Gun Rights Examiners
Atlanta Ed Stone | Austin Howard Nemerov | Boston Ron Bokleman | Charlotte Paul Valone | Cheyenne Anthony Bouchard | Chicago Don Gwinn | Cleveland Daniel White | DC Mike Stollenwerk | Denver Dan Bidstrup | Des Moines Sean McClanahan |Detroit Rob Reed | Fort Smith Steve D. Jones | Knoxville Liston Matthews | Los Angeles John Longenecker | Minneapolis John Pierce | National David Codrea | Seattle Dave Workman | St. Louis Kurt Hofmann | Tucson Chris Woodard
And Don’t forget to visit:
Are you traveling safer streets?
Los Angeles Gun Rights Examiner John Longenecker has created the Liberty News/Safer Streets Newsletter. You can read a recent sample here. (I already did.)
And to make sure you never miss an issue, you can sign up for convenient free email delivery here.
Comments
It is time to pull out all the stops if we are to stop the anti-gun movement from regaining what they lost recntly in the courts. The NRA has a log way to go to prove itself to the people again but taking Kagan down and preventing Obama from installing an anti gun Supreme Court will be a huge step in that direction. I am not an NRA fan but I will give credit where credit is due if they have returned to their roots and started fighting like the organization many of my older friends believed in years ago. Kagan needs to be stopped for the good of the country and politics is all over this campaign to put her on the high court. In Washington state that is their fight but if what this article say is true then this woman needs to be sent home with her tennis shoes caked in mud so to speak and her head hanging down in shame. It is time we played by the enemies rules and let them scream "foul". Kagan can't stop prior judgements but she could prevent any more pro-gun rights ones in the future.
It really scares me that you wacko gun nuts are allowed to have guns when you are soooooooo paranoid. (I noticed that you are mostly white males also)
Anna, it would appear you're paranoid. Myself? I have firearms so why should I be paranoid?
At least we have training to channel our so-called "paranoia" into good things, such as knowing when to engage/disengage, accurate threat acquisition, situational assessment, etc.
If you put on a seat belt every day when you drive to work, you must be paranoid, because the chances of you getting into an accident are apparently very small - even though the costs of an accident can soar sky high when you least expect it.
What do you have? By reading around in the papers, I don't see much.
"It really scares me that you wacko gun nuts are allowed to have guns when you are soooooooo paranoid."
So, we should have our guns taken away because we're unjustifiably afraid that people want to take our guns away?
"(I noticed that you are mostly white males also)"
That's two bigoted opinions. Care to go for the trifecta and bring up "compensation" as well?
Sotomayor said she has family that hunts and a godson who is an NRA member. Does that mean she would let them disuade her from taking a Gun Prohibitionist stance? Based on what I had seen in my family, I think not. I doubt a semi-trailer load of well footnoted documents supporting our side could out-weigh a fifth generation post-it message supporting Helmke, Hennigan and Sugerman for her. Check the Telephone Game for message degradation. It seems logical to assume Kagen finds Heller and McDonald are as settled in case law as Plessey v. Furgeson which was overturned in Brown v. the Topeka Board of Education.
Anna, you know what scares the H out of me? That uneducated wackos like you vote. You and your ilk are directly responsible for the state of the nation today. You are a control freak who seems to think it is perfectly fine to tell others how to live and what they can and cannot be allowed to do. Grow up.
The NRA sees red flags on everything. I am begining to think they have red flags on their contacts. They said that democrats would take their rights to bear arms away, and the fact is that they have more rights than they did under previous Republican administrations. Gun rights have been extended, if you don't believe me check law changes in DC, Chicago and other major cities. We Liberals are not saying don't have guns, we are saying we want to make sure you are not a criminal or a nut job before you get one. Isn't that reasonable?
If I were you, Anna,(blargghh), I would be scared too. Apparently, being around grown-ups frightens you. Try becoming one.
Eric holder knowns it is dereliction of duty to the Oath of office as the leadership of common defense it is Treason to di mis the rights to arms, they can be suited out of office Appointed or elected Use Direct criminal constitutional Contempt, Sanctum Mcgallium Use U.S. Title 42 usc section 1983. thats why the black pathers in so many ways was let Go, The Sticks they were holding Arms, The words they said Right or wrong Freedom of speech, The freedoms we have are no better then those that up hold IT, Isaiah 10-1-4 & proverbs 27.5
The States Rights or Constitution is to be Governed By the Federal Constitution Any act by the leadership of common defense to Dis Miss Self Defense rights is unconstitutional, So Out lined By the Bill of rights Bill of rights "Amen"dment 2 .
Thank God for Term limits psalms 109:8 In Yeshua name So Mote it be
Bruce Anderson
writing.com
If one can show a history of persecution, Show evidence of collusion on the part of one's enemies to deny that enemy's constitutional rights, Show evidence of propaganda and indoctrination of the youth of the country and of the adult population as well, If one can show evidence of censorship based upon idealogical grounds where one side cannot get an ad on TV at even DOUBLE the current rates, would you call that person paranoid?
If you do, you aren't informed and if you are informed and still hold the same beliefs, you are not objective, nor I'm afraid, are you honest. As you will find here, most ordinary people are honest. Those who continue to be offered the truth and deny it's authenticity today, are not interested in truth or objectivity. They are the extreme left, seeking to win and incite by lies and deceit and any other "means necessary". Their victories always herald the approach of death and destruction.
A smile below:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0heL2Czeraw&feature=
"Luis T"
You are being rather disingenuous. The District of Columbia and Chicago gun bans were not removed by the good-hearted liberal Democrats who run those cities, but by lawsuits tht went to the Supreme Court, with the liberal Democrats kicking and screaming all the way, arguing that there is no individual right to keep and bear arms.
"Reasonable" to a liberal appears to involve regulating a civil right as if it were a privilege bestowed by government. No, Luis, that's not reasonable at all.
Your comments here are always welcome, of course, even if we disagree.
How can any true representative of the people even consider Kagen for a guaranteed job for life? Does Obama now possess the Clinton's blackmail box of FBI files?
Listening to how evasive and untruthful Kagan was at the hearings, using that tactic during a job interview guarantees you will not get the job, not even a part time job at McDonalds.
Anna, I hope that you will never need a gun, if you see a man following your every step, and you wonder if he's going to rape you. Perhaps, you'll blow on your Susan Brownmiller rape whistle, and hope Gloria Steinem will come to your defense wielding a burning bra, and screaming "male chauvinist pig", all the while.
What are the latest WA Senate polls showing, BTW?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!