Last November, after the National Rifle Association (NRA) endorsed a number of vulnerable, liberal Democratic incumbents (including Virginia’s own Tom Perriello and Glenn Nye), grassroots conservatives were angry. National Review‘s Jim Geraghty attempted to ease the right’s frayed nerves by reminding us that the NRA doesn’t exist to endorse the most conservative candidate in a political race, but instead the candidate who has the best record on Second Amendment issues, even if that individual sometimes happens to be a down-the-line liberal on every other issue:
The NRA endorsement says nothing about a candidate’s conservatism, good judgment on foreign policy or other non-gun issues, character, wisdom, reliability, or anything else other than whether they voted the correct way on Second Amendment issues.
As I understand it, the NRA Political Victory Fund’s endorsement is a matter of a formula. They have certain votes that they “score,” and that is all that goes into the grade. …When there is a tie between an A-rated incumbent and an A-rated challenger, they endorse the incumbent; in their eyes, a proven record outweighs any promise. [emphasis added]
…They see their purpose as helping the best candidate on the issue of gun rights, no matter what. Also fundamental to the NRA’s sense of mission is their reputation as a steadfast ally and the perception that they stick with their friends through thick and thin, through good polls and bad. Harry Reid may look increasingly toasty in Nevada, but the thinking within the NRA is that likelihood of defeat cannot be a sufficient reason to abandon a candidate they endorsed last cycle.
True to form, when the NRA released its endorsements for Virginia’s Senate races, it endorsed some pro-gun, yet otherwise liberal incumbents (John Edwards and Roscoe Reynolds, both of whom had “A” ratings), over across-the-board conservatives (Dave Nutter and Bill Stanley, both of whom also had “A” ratings). One race in which the Republican challenger took the endorsement from a Democratic incumbent is in the 38th Senate District where the NRA has endorsed conservative Republican Adam Light over Democratic Sen. Phil Puckett.
The NRA based its endorsement of Adam Light on his responses to the organization’s candidate questionnaire. Sen. Phil Puckett’s “C+” rating was based on actual votes cast during his long tenure in Richmond. In his letter to Adam Light announcing the NRA endorsement, the NRA’s Virginia State Liaison, Andrew Jennison wrote:
Your “AQ” rating is a reflection of your answers to our candidate questionnaire and your firm pledge to defend and uphold the Second Amendment rights of Virginia’s citizens. Our members will interpret your “AQ” rating as being pro-second amendment, and pro-hunting candidate who supports firearm owners and sportsmen in Virginia.
This statement must be a stinging rebuke to Sen. Puckett–who has attempted to brand himself as an old-school, pro-gun, downstate Democrat throughout this campaign–in very pro-gun southwestern Virginia. For some perspective on Sen. Puckett’s rating, the NRA defines a “C” rating as being:
Not necessarily a passing grade. A candidate with a mixed record or positions on gun related issues, who may oppose some pro-gun positions or support some restrictive legislation.
For his part, Adam Light is honored by both his “AQ” rating and the endorsement and is already touting them to the 38th District’s numerous gun-owners:
“It is an honor to receive the endorsement from the NRA. This proves I am the best candidate to protect the rights of Southwest Virginians guaranteed by the second amendment, and that I will advocate on behalf of sportsman and gun owners.”
