It is certainly a question worth asking. Let's look at the people involved. John McCain, the Republican nominee for President, only has a "C" ratingwith the National Rifle Association (NRA). He has even been described as "one of the premier flag carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment" by the them! Not only that, McCain has earned the NRA's anger with his campaign finance reform that limits their ability to support candidates. He's on thin ice with them to say the least.
The Libertarian Party candidate for President, Bob Barr, on the other hand, was a member of the NRA's Board of Directors. He also has an A+ rating with them.
Enter Sarah Palin, a lifetime member of the NRA and now the Republican nominee for Vice President. She is well known in conservative circles for her staunch support of gun rights. Certainly selecting her is reassuring to the NRA.
While I'm not suggesting that the NRA's endorsement of a Presidential candidate was the only factor in McCain picking Palin, the mere possibility that they might have endorsed Barr very well could be a much bigger factor than the mainstream media and the Republican Party will ever admit.
Could it be that he's courting the NRA to make sure that they don't end up not endorsing anyone for President? That too is a possibility. This author can not say exactly what they were thinking. These are questions that only the McCain campaign can answer. Hopefully they will be asked and answered honestly.
Darren Wolfe is the former Eastern Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He grew up in Puerto Rico and lived in Venezuela for seven years, including the first year of Chavez' rule. His articles have appeared in OpEdNews.com, the Libertarian Penn, and the Nolanchart.com. News services such as the New York Post.com and Rational Review have published links to his work.
Anyone interested in a good game of chess can challenge me below, if you dare. LOL
http://gameknot.com/stats.pl?darrenlobo
*****************************
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."
--Thomas Jefferson
vote for Bob Barr, does not remember he and Henry "Youthful Indirection" Hyde were guilty of also being adulterers along with many prosecuting Clinton during his Impeachment trial by Congress.
Just more of the same problems in Washington, not real change.
by
Stanimal (0 articles, 4 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 702 comments)
on Sunday, August 31, 2008 at 2:05:27 AM
My take on third parties this time had Barr as the only one likely to be spoiler. So when you analyze the NRA connection, there's all the more reason to think McCain has a right to worry. Georgia was placed in the iffy column by some polls against a sure Republican win. If Barr is endorsed, Palin can keep her day job IMHO.
by
Margaret Bassett (38 articles, 2210 quicklinks, 30 diaries, 1501 comments)
on Sunday, August 31, 2008 at 8:46:41 AM
I am sure Palin's position on the Second Amendment was a factor. Given his C rating by the NRA does not make him a strong candidate for the NRA to support but he is much preferred over Obama who was rated an F.
I think there are several other reasons as well. She is very pro-life, including her personal decision to give birth to a baby she knew had Down Syndrome. She is an evangelical Christian. All of this more appealing to conservative Republicans who believe McCain is not conservative enough.
And I am sure her selection was a not-so-subtle ploy to encourage PUMAs who are not happy Hillary is not the Democratic Party nominee and Obama did not give her the VP nod. McCain already has focused ads for Dems to vote the McCain/Palin ticket.
I don't think McCain's strategy will work. We'll find out in November.
by
Mike Kimball (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 69 comments)
on Sunday, August 31, 2008 at 10:31:18 AM
It started out as an organization of hunters and gun enthusiasts. Now it is full of liars and bullies who think guns are good as a defense. Yes, they are if you enemy is incredibly stupid and unable to figure out how to stab you in the back. Guns are limited. Smarts are better. Like every other racket (including Cable TV) the suckers pay crooks to give them rat poison with their bait.
by
John Hanks (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1485 comments)
on Sunday, August 31, 2008 at 10:40:54 AM
The NRA is the gun manufacturer's protection racket
IMHO, they represent the gun manufacturer's interests over the gun owners. They definitely don't stand for any kind of gun rights on principle. That's why they should change the name to National Republican Association.
by
Darren Wolfe (7 articles, 226 quicklinks, 110 diaries, 813 comments)
on Sunday, August 31, 2008 at 12:04:10 PM
Darren Wolfe wrote: "(The NRA) started out as an organization of hunters and gun enthusiasts. Now it is full of liars and bullies who think guns are good as a defense."
The government helps the NRA with its propaganda by claiming that it is for self-protection that police are issued handguns. They don't want to say that police are armed so they can kill people on command.
by
Frank Silbermann (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments)
on Tuesday, September 2, 2008 at 6:41:55 AM
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
