So what? If the Democrats take over the Senate, with Mr. Webb's help, it will be Chuck Schumer setting gun-control policy, not Mr. Webb.
From what I understand, he didn't return it until later in the game. They get the surveys shortly after they win a primary, or in many cases, as soon as their name is on file to go on even the primary ballot.
When I started checking PVF's site, they didn't have a grade for him at all which meant they hadn't received a response. Even by the time grades went public in early October, Webb's grades still hadn't been posted. In my experience, they've been pretty decent about doing a website update when they get new grades in. Doesn't mean they can't drop the ball in this case (as they've done before), it just could be a possibility.
Besides, when the incumbent in friendly, the policy is to endorse them. I think it's Montana (too lazy to look it up) that has an incumbent with a A-, but a challenger with an A. It benefits NRA more to issue an endorsement to a pro-gun person already in office who is more likely to have better committee assignments than to have a newbie who can't get crap done. But you already know that. 
Don't get me wrong, I think NRA would still be campaigning for Allen even if Webb returned his survey in sooner. From what I can tell, and based on previous experience, it's possible that they just didn't get the information in time. Remember, their publishing deadlines are insanely early. As for the card, of course he wouldn't be mentioned. Why would a card talking about an endorsement brag about the opponent's grade?
6 years ago I was a single issue 2nd ammendment voter. I'm not now. It's still very important to me, but Allen and Webb have very different ideas on national security. With Iran working overtime to nuke the western world, I think it's a good idea to have them literally surrounded. Webb doesn't agree.
There is simply no reason to EVER vote for a democrat...he may be dressed in 2nd amendment clothing, but trust me that when the time is right they will again try to curtail or eliminate 2nd amendment rights...
It isnt my only issue, but it in the top 5 for me...
Bitter,
Do you think he held off on returning it? Perhaps for fear of upsetting the Democratic base or maybe to release at the last second to take away some of the NRAs thunder?? Any chance the NRA might shed some light on when the survey was actually sent out and arrived back?? I forget when the primary was, but its dated (at his signature) on August 4th (though the fax markings on top show October 25th - but that may have just been when he faxed it to the campaign office - which begs the question why he didn't post it immediatly on his web page)???
As to the others, I understand your concerns - and trust me - I feel them. What I am struggling with is the question of how to change the Democratic Party from the inside so that we can stop having to worry about these issues.
Infringing on the 2nd Amendment should be a non starter for both parties - there is only one way to go, and thats to roll back the restrictions they've already put out.
However, its not going to happen without electing Democrats to office who have recognized the value of the 2nd Amendment. I have my problems with Jim Webb, as I do with George Allen. Neither is perfect, and so I am stuck holding my breath with either choice.
Frankly, I can live alot easier with Webb in the Senate (and Harry Reid in charge) than I can with Nancy Pelosi running the House. Just a simple fact of life. Reid isn't a moonbat liberal.
As to Walt's comment, I disagree with Webb on the war, but to his credit his is a long held position. He was against Iraq from the get go and isn't adopting it to be politically expedient. I tend to agree with you - and have long saw Iraq as simply the first step - necessary to secure a base of operations - in what will be a decades long fight against the forces of oppression radiating from the middle east. Until we as a country can understand that - and that this fight isn't going to be over in a single political election cycle - we won't be able to successfully win the war and these barbarians.
Yeah, but Webb hasn't been a democrat for very long. He switched parties because of the war in Iraq. He's really a DINO with the national security credibility to say whatever he wants. Jim Webb has forgotten more about modern warfare and national security issues than George Allen will ever know.
Paul Hirsh is spot on. Webb would be a junior Senator surrounded by Moonbat anti-second amendment LIBS where as Allen is a Senior Senator and will help maintain a pro-second amendment agenda going. The NRA is doing the right thing unfortunately for Webb he is running in the wrong party, he should be running as a REPUB if he was he would have a chance of getting my vote as a Dhimmi he has zero chance.
I can think of ONE "pro gun" reason to vote for a Democrat. My local state senator (a Rep) is a F- candidate. Sponsors anti gun stuff all the time. I've talked with the Democrat. She said "To be honest, I have not really thought out my position, and you make a good argument for responsible private gun ownership"
Now, even if you KNOW she's an F candidate - wouldn't it be better to get rid of an F- with high seniority?
What makes you think that he even told the truth on that survey?
The man lied about his involvement in the Vietnam Memorial--yeah, he was involved, but only peripherally.
I'm a Virginian, and I look at Webb bumper stickers the same way I look at Kerry/Edwards stickers. They are nothing more than "stupid stickers" that clearly identify the idiots in the neighborhood.
I find it really hard to trust Webb when he goes out and campaigns with John Kerry who has one of the most anti-gun voting records in the Senate. From what I can see, all he is interested in is power and will do whatever the leadership tells him to do if he is elected to the Senate. Until the Democratic Party reforms itself and has pro-gun leadership, it would be foolish in the extreme to vote for any Democrat.
A few thoughts in response to the responses.
On Countertop's response, I don't know what to think about the date he sent it in and when he signed it or faxed it. I think he needs to explain that in his response or somewhere. It just loses the impact when you come crying about not getting any coverage a month after magazines have already been mailed. If he was trying to hold off for a last minute attempt to steal their thunder, I don't really know why this would be a good thing for him. Early voting already started so even if I didn't have a problem with his views on women, it's too late for those of us who already hit the polls. (There was a short line when I went and people were coming in every few minutes behind me. It's obviously got a decent following.) And let's face it, is this really something that would get a ton of attention? I doubt it. Not saying it can't, but I have my doubts.
I also then wonder why he brought in strongly anti-gun Dems like Kerry to campaign for him. If NRA really wanted to go after him, they'd pull photos of those two at Webb's campaign rally out and plaster them all over the state. I would assume he called in Kerry to help in order to turn out the Dem base, but that doesn't help him in a red state like Virginia. If he's going for the moderate label, he's hanging out with the wrong wing of the party.
I agree with your idea of promoting more pro-2A Dems. If Webb hadn't written that article and been so openly hostile to women in general in it, this news could probably have swayed my vote (if I hadn't already voted) because I'm so unhappy with the GOP right now.
I'm also with you on rather having the Senate go Dem than the House, but not because of Reid. First, I wonder how long he'd really be in leadership if the Dems really did take over. Second, it's not like we're getting much through the Senate right now. With RINOs like Chafee on hand, we've seen nothing of conservative substance come through when debate heats up even a little. It wouldn't be a huge loss.
(More in a second, post was too long...)
That all said, I honestly think Webb could have been elected if he'd just held out for either Allen's seat when he (would have) run for President or Warner's when he finally leaves. As a Republican, I think he'd be unbeatable. Of course then that gets back to the trick of trying to get more pro-gun Dems.
There is no easy solution for this race. I can honestly say that I was searching for Webb's positions on gun control for months and couldn't find a damn word about it. If timing was what he wanted, it was very poor with this release. Hell, if he had done this for the primary or even shortly after the primary or even issued a statement without relying on NRA, I would have covered it on my site and probably wouldn't have been so tough on him for some of the side issues like Wal-Mart. The fact is that it appears he wanted to hide it for a long time and that makes me uncomfortable. Let's face it, when you've got an opponent like Allen who keeps pissing people off every time he opens his mouth, there's no need to worry about turning off the Democratic base with something like gun control.
Until the Democratic Party reforms itself and has pro-gun leadership, it would be foolish in the extreme to vote for any Democrat.
Unfortunately, this is a chicken and egg situation. You have to start with electing junior pro-gun Democrats who will rise to leadership position.
So at some point we gun owners have to take a risk and hedge our bets.
I don't live in Virginia and this is not an endorsement of Webb per se. However Virginians are in the enviable position of having two viable pro-gun candidates. I am impressed with Webb's pro-gun statement which is one of the clearest I have ever seen from any politician - no weasel words about support the "Second Amendment rights of hunters".
"Reid isn't a moonbat liberal."
In what fantasy world is Reid not a moonbat?
If he wins, Webb needs to change parties. According to Dave Kopol's website, Harry Reid was a/the lead sponsor of national gun registration legislation, and that doesn't make me very comfortable, but hell I live in CA between Pelosiville and Boxertown...
You'd think it would be a wonderful time to be a Virginian, but I'm really of two minds in this election. I stopped being a single-issue voter a while ago, and while it's nice not to have to worry about the gun issue, there are just so many more to think about. I like Webb's stance on some issues, I like Allen's on others.
My trouble is that I can't figure out which of Webb's positions are because he's running as a Democrat and which are because he believes in them. And if he gets into office, will he act on those beliefs, or just go along with his party?
I do not trust a Democrat with this issue, none nada, zero, not at all. It will be taken over by Schumer and Pelosi and party loyalty demanded. There are no options, vote 100% Republican or say hello to Nancy Pelosi and San Francisco gun control laws. You think New York laws are better?
These people don't need a reason, nor will they accept compromise.
No options.
I read all of these comments and you guys sound just exactly like the leftwing radicals I knew in my college days 1968-72. I didn't like them then and I don't like you folks today. You are all dumber than posts and apparently, like Abbie Hoffman, it's all about just getting your way and screw the vast middle group of which I am one. I support the second amendment, and the first and the fourteenth. All of them, actually. What about you guys? Sad. It's a sad time. You'll never vote for a democrat. That means you'll get incompetent republicans who can win no matter how badly they perform. Hey that's what we have now, isn't it?
And as far as taking your guns away, the feds are more likely to do it now, with Bush in charge. He's already taken away habeas corpus. All he has to do is say you're a terrorist. And I'll bet the NRA's membership lists are copied and sent to the FBI every month. You guys are so innocent.
If you look at the time stamp on the fax copy of Webb's response, it's dated October 25. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but I'm interepreting that to mean that he didn't respond to the questionnaire until October 25.
Just a couple of weeks ago I asked a guy working for the Webb campaign about Webb's stance on guns. He told me that Webb was very pro-gun, but reluctant to make a big deal out of it publicly because it'd turn off the hardcore left. (But I had no idea how reliable his information was.) My sense of things -- just my sense -- is that Webb wanted to see if he could get by without publicizing this. Now he has less than a week to go and it's a statistical dead heat, and maybe the calculus has changed. He may now think the benefits outweigh the risks.
At any rate, if Webb didn't return the questionnaire until October 25, he shouldn't be surprised that the NRA gave him a "?" rating.
Nor should it come as a shock that the NRA would endorse an "A+" incumbent from the relatively pro-gun party over an "A" challenger from the relatively anti-gun party. I'm very happy with Webb's stance on guns -- it'll be one less (big) thing to worry about if he wins -- but politics is politics.
Anon,
If the Dems would stop trying to fuck gun owners for a decade or so, some of us might be persuaded that they're not going to continue to try and fuck us in the future. But they keep doing it. Over, and over, and over. If we behave like Pavolov's dogs when someone mentions Democrats, it's the Democrats who've been ringing the bell all these years.
From the 2004 Democratic Party Platform: "...reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole...".
If actions speak louder than words, then George Allen is a proven Second Amendment supporter. He sponsored S.3275 which was the Senate version of nationwide CCW reciprocity.
No way. Too many democrats have spoken for full English style confiscation.
One is judged by the company you keep after all.
Webb's lying. He'll say anything to get elected and if he wins, he'll just say, "I could not convince my party to support me."
Not only that, but he's not 2 cents different than Mark Foley. They both wrote about their sexual fantasies. Foley had the decency to resign - Webb should too.
This isn't - or shouldn't just be about guns. I would find it extremely hard to vote for anyone who trampled on gun rights created by the founders, but it still isn't the only (nor the biggest) issue by far.
And if Webb can get away with writing about a father having oral sex with a toddler son, what kind of values to you think this slime-ball has in any area? Don't be fooled by Webb any more than you'd be fooled by Kerry just because they both served in the military. So did Lee Harvey Oswald. So did Timothy McVeigh.
This is James Webb:
James Webb served with the Fifth Marine Regiment in Vietnam, where as a rifle platoon and company commander in the infamous An Hoa Basin west of Danang he was awarded the Navy Cross, the Silver Star Medal, two Bronze Star Medals, and two Purple Hearts. He later served as a platoon commander and as an instructor in tactics and weapons at Marine Corps Officer Candidates School, and then as a member of the Secretary of the Navy's immediate staff, before leaving the Marine Corps in l972.
In government, Mr. Webb served in the U.S. Congress as counsel to the House Committee on Veterans Affairs from l977 to l98l, becoming the first Vietnam veteran to serve as a full committee counsel in the Congress. During the Reagan Administration he was the first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs from l984 to l987, where he directed considerable research and analysis of the U.S. military's mobilization capabilities and spent much time with our NATO allies. In 1987 he became the first Naval Academy graduate in history to serve in the military and then become Secretary of the Navy. He resigned from that position in 1988 after refusing to agree in the reduction of the Navy's force structure during congressionally-mandated budget cuts.
Webb is a strong man and a true hero. Allen is a fake and a buffoon. I don't agree with Webb on all things, but for the sake of the country we need leaders like him.
I'm voting for Allen for one reason and one reason only: a vote for any Senate Democrat is a vote to replace Justice Stevens with a younger Justice Stevens.
I votED for Sen. Allen. At least I am pretty sure my paper absentee ballot will be counted.
I agree with the right-thinking citizens above - a vote for a DEM is a vote for bans on guns (except for the gov't of course.)
GO ALLEN!
you again, o5? If he were running R instead of D you'd be calling him a baby-killer as well as a perv.
Webb will only help Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Kennedy, Conyers, et al, register, round up and ban guns.. so they can get kudos from their European, English, and Austrailian brethren....
Jim quit Reagan, when it suited him politically, he'll quit gun rights, when it suits him too..
Plus his take on the war on Terror is cut and Run! GWB had the balls to take out Saddam and as a previous commenter said, we have Iranians surrounded!!
That group of mullahs will be next, if we can keep a Pub Congress and President!
Commenting by HaloScan
