Pork and politics, Harry Reid and the NRA

By Michael J.W. Stickings

According to RedState's Erick Erickson -- while it pains me to link to him, I must concede that he does have good connections on the right -- the National Rifle Association (NRA) may endorse Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid over Republican challenger Sharron Angle in Nevada's Senate race.

But why? Is Sharron Angle too crazy even for the crazy gun nuts at the NRA? Is that it?

No.

While the NRA's exemption from the Disclose Act may be part of it, the real reason may be all about pork:

It turns out, Reid secured a $61 million earmark for a gun range in Clark County, Nevada.

NRA members were recently treated to a three-page spread in the American Rifleman about a visit to Nevada by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox to "thank" Reid for the earmark. The article even includes a cliché picture of Reid cutting a ribbon with a gigantic pair of scissors. (Every good porker has his own giant pair of gold earmark scissors.) More here.

Here is a video of the event from Reid's youtube site.

At 3:25, you can hear LaPierre touting Reid's record on guns saying, "I also want to thank you, Senator, for your support every day for the Second Amendment and for the rights of American gun owners."

The American Rifleman article also commends Reid's Second Amendment record noting, "His dedication to this project is just one of the ways Sen. Reid has demonstrated his support for gun owners and the Second Amendment."

What's more, according to The Weekly Standard, "[t]he NRA is frightened by the possibility that Harry Reid would be replaced by an anti-gun Democrat as majority leader. 'Truthfully, the two individuals vying for majority leader should Harry Reid lose are the two most rabidly anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment senators in Washington, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin,' Cox said. 'Does that give concern to NRA members and gun owners all over America? Absolutely, it does.'"

The Standard reports that the NRA hasn't yet "decided on an endorsement," but clearly the organization realizes that Reid can do a lot more for it than Angle ever could and that it's not so bad to have a pro-gun Democrat in charge. Cox exaggerates about Schumer and Durbin -- really, they're more "rabidly anti-gun" than anyone else in the Senate? -- but he's right that Reid is better for the NRA and its members than the likely alternatives.

All of which should be a reminder to Democrats that Harry Reid, however much they may want him to beat Angle, isn't exactly the most admirable guy around. I understand that you have to be solidly pro-gun to win a state-wide race in Nevada, if not to win there at all, but Reid isn't just that, he also seems to be the NRA's main Democrat in Washington, a powerful senator who is obviously more than willing to use his influence to help and protect the NRA.

Politics can be ugly, to be sure, and sometimes you have to make deals with the devil. And Reid is nothing if not politically savvy. But at what point is enough enough? Well, maybe Reid hasn't crossed the line just yet. As Erickson notes:

Reid has not supported the Second Amendment "every day." Or ever.

Reid has a lifetime rating of "F" from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called "the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington"). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

Indeed, Reid has a "longstanding hostility to guns and the Second Amendment."

The truth is somewhere in between. Reid is generally pro-gun, but he's not a pro-gun extremist like Angle, Paul, and the GOA -- and Erickson himself, of course. In that world, the NRA isn't pure enough, and isn't extremist enough in its opposition to any and all gun control, even if it understands Washington well enough to take a more nuanced, and more rationally self-interested, view of the Nevada Senate race.

Go ahead and vote for Reid in November, but, with the NRA at his side, endorsement or no, you might still want to hold your nose.