Buckeye Firearms Association Supports Kevin DeWine for Deputy Chairman of the ORP
From Chad Baus on their website:
Many gun owners have lamented the apparent OhioGOP disconnect to us during the past two decades. There has been much speculation as to whether or not Bennett, the muscle behind the likes of anti-gun politicians like Bob Taft, Mike DeWine, George Voinovich and Betty Montgomery, would keep our Second Amendment rights in mind when choosing a successor. 61% of participants in an online poll on the subject (which is still open for voting), say they believe Bennett would pick a clone - out of touch with gun owners.
Kevin DeWine is a three-time endorsee of this political action committee. As the attached letter (.pdf) indicates, he is the current Speaker Pro Tempore. His voting record in the Ohio House is solid for gun-owners and sportsmen. He has co-sponsored and voted for concealed carry legislation, the Apprentice Hunting License legislation, and worked to protect the sportsmen hunting, fishing and trapping license monies in the last budget cycle.
Buckeye Firearms Association's Larry Moore stated recently that he has "personally worked with Kevin DeWine on gun owner, sportsmen, and conservative issues. He addresses the need to recruit better candidates for the Ohio Republican tickets. I have to note that every gun owner should be working to recruit gun-friendly candidates."
"The position of Deputy Chairman of the ORP is not one that will appear on any state ballot," continues Moore. "The position will be filled by the vote of the sixty-six members of the Ohio Republican State Central Committee. If you are involved and know members of your county central committee or state central committee members, I ask you to urge them to support Kevin DeWine as the Deputy Chair ORP."
I have no doubt that DeWine is a staunch defender of the 2nd Amendment.
But I'm curious as to why the Buckeye Firearms Association is so quick to go out on a limb and support a candidate for chairman.�During the 2006 election, unlike�Ohioans for Concealed Carry, BFA played it safe by not endorsing in the governor's race. BFA did everything they could to suck up to Ted Strickland and Lee "I never met a gun control bill I didn't like" Fisher. So why are they suddenly willing to take a political chance like this?
Did the BFA weigh in on the ODP choice of Redfern?� If so, there's a precedent.� If not, do they seek to use the ORP as if it were an appendix of their own organization?
I'm all for protecting 2nd Amendment rights, but that doesn't mean I want the ORP to be a puppet of a PAC.
A couple of things to note: 1) Your headline is incorrect. Buckeye Firearms Association as an political action committee has NOT taken a position on which of the three candidates would make a better deputy chairman. One individual who writes for buckeyefirearms.org - Larry Moore - has expressed his support for DeWine. There is plenty of precendent by the PAC's website for individuals taking positions independent of anything the PAC took as an official stance/ endorsement/etc. I've written two articles updating news on DeWine's candidacy, which could be described as favorable, but lack even a personal endorsement, let alone an official one. And yes, to your commenter - the same type of positive stories were written about another multiple-endorsee Chris Redfern when he was up for party chair, but no endorsement was made. The PAC has been 100% consistent. http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/article2837.html Every story on the deputy director stories are bylined. As such, your headline could only be accurate if you said "Buckeye Firearms Association Volunteer Supports Kevin DeWine for Deputy Chairman of the ORP", or perhaps "Buckeyefirearms.org writers offer positive commentary on DeWine candidacy". So to answer your question - "I'm curious as to why the Buckeye Firearms Association is so quick to go out on a limb and support a candidate for chairman"? Buckeye Firearms Association didn't. As such, I would appreciate you correcting your headline to something accurate. 2) If you would like to know why I personally have written about one candidate and not the others, I would point out that while the others may be good too, I just don't know it. How could I, if they never contacted me or the PAC. How else should I read it but that they are not interested in pursuing pro-gun grassroots support? What does that say about how dedicated are they to the cause I dedicate the majority of my writing to? After how much time I personally have spent fighting Bennett cronies like Taft, Voinovich, DeWine, Montgomery, etc. etc. ad nauseum, I am ready for a proven pro-gun chairman. I know DeWine would be such a chairman. I don't know the others. Not my fault - theirs.
Thanks for the clarification.
Thank you cbaus and Jim I.