VFW battles VFW PAC over endorsementsThe VFW felt the heat. And responded.
By Ed Morrissey:
Yesterday, the political world scratched its head over the endorsement of Barbara Boxer — “Senator Ma’am” — by the VFW’s political action committee. It turns out that veterans weren’t very happy about it, either. The leaders of the VFW have effectively denounced their own PAC for a series of endorsements that look more like an argument for entrenched incumbency than actual defense of veterans’ interests:
"The national line officers of Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) are at odds with the VFW Political Action Committee (PAC), calling the methodology process used by the PAC 'seriously flawed at best this year and in immediate need of extensive review,' in the wake of the recent congressional endorsements made by the committee.
"'Even though the law requires that VFW-PAC be a separate organization, the acronym ‘VFW’ is attached to the committee and the natural assumption is that the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States is somehow making the endorsement decisions. Nothing could be further from the truth, but perception is reality,' said National Commander Richard Eubank.
"'Obviously, an organization’s political positions have to reflect the opinions of its members. But those opinions can’t be perceived as ‘off the wall,’ and the methodology used this year to grade candidates obviously is skewed in favor of the incumbent. That isn’t fair, and it actually subverts the democratic process.'" [link]
This while the NRA blindly - and willfully - pushes its "we favor incumbents with all else being equal in a political contest" policy, despite what its members feel.
It always annoyed me that the NRA could support a Democrat as liberal as our own Rick Boucher (D-VA9). What the really smart people who run NRA have never seemed to have grasped is this: though Boucher is right on 2nd Amendment issues, 2nd amendment issues are purposely avoided being addressed in Congress. Year after year. Except in the margins. The last time a substantive issue came up was when Bill Clinton was president and the "assault weapons" ban was passed. That was sixteen freaking years ago.
And what has Boucher done since? Besides telling us - every other year - that he supports ... guns? He's done nothing to stop his anti-gun buddies in Congress from voting for every anti-gun candidate for federal district court, appellate court, and Supreme Court that has come up for nomination every year by every liberal anti-gun president since he was first elected to Congress last century. That's all.
The judiciary, where the 2nd Amendment is under assault every goddamn day.
An assault on our gun rights aided and endorsed by the man who gets the endorsement of the NRA every two years.
Are you people that dense?
Could I - a humble former member of the NRA - make a suggestion?
Current NRA policy dictates that if two candidates in any contest earn equal ratings (A or A+) then the incumbent gets the nod. Taking the bigger picture into account (see above), couldn't the premier gun rights organization on the planet skip any endorsement at all?
Wise up, people. It didn't take an act of Congress to get through to the powers-that-be at the VFW. They responded to the will of those who pay the paycheck. Do the same or risk losing all credibility. And membership.
Or go on blindly endorsing liberal candidates who do great damage to our gun rights where it counts most - in the courts. It's up to you.