Emboldened by the recent 2nd amendment ruling, the National Rifle Association will spend $40M this fall, $15M of which will be used to paint Obama with the usual gun hating colors.
Anybody want to bet they’ll use Obama’s “bitter” comments against him?
Oh wait…they already have:
â€œOur members understand that if Barack Obama is elected president, and he has support in the Senate to confirm anti-gun Supreme Court nominees, [the District of Columbia v. Heller decision] could be taken away from us in the future,â€ Chris Cox, head of the NRAâ€™s political arm, told Politico.
â€œWe look forward to showing him â€˜bitter,â€™â€ Cox said.
By the way, here’s Obama’s position on the D.C. law before the ruling…
Q: Is the D.C. law prohibiting ownership of handguns consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms?
A: As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.
And here’s his response after…
“Today’s ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country,” he said, adding that “what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne,” but the decision reinforced that “if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.”
My guess is that the NRA is going to try and use those bitter comments against Obama, and he’ll come out with spots that apologize again and talk about how he views gun rights. Who knows what will come of it, but Obama’s team has been very careful to make sure that if an issue has the potential to gain traction, they jump on it extremely quickly. This issue will be no different.