That partisan NRA
Two candidates in a race both have an A rating from the NRA. The NRA wants one to win so they change one rating to an F. Further in the article we find the NRA’s reason:
On a portion of the tape from the hour-long show, Velazquez said, “Somebody once told me that in Montana, you have two choices: You could be in favor of gun control or you could run for office, but you couldn’t do both. So, you know, I’m not in favor of gun control because I might run for office again.”
Velazquez also said on the program that she wasn’t sure the framers of the constitution intended a broader, universal right to gun ownership and commented she believes “they had envisioned a limited right to gun ownership.”
Velazquez said Tuesday her remarks were taken out of context. The initial statement about running for office was made in jest, she said.
I’m not sure who is playing politics here.
October 27th, 2004 at 11:00 am
Read the rest of the article. There is a one-sentence admission of a comment along the lines of “I’m not sure the founders meant for us to have a universal right to firearms”. I’m betting it’s that statement that got her in trouble.
October 27th, 2004 at 11:03 am
Yeah, i quoted that part 🙂
October 27th, 2004 at 11:44 am
Maybe there’s more to the story than meets the eye. If not, I think the NRA was right to revoke her A rating, but an F is going overboard.