Now here’s a step in the right direction…
One of the National Rifle Association’s senior lobbyists said an ad by the nation’s leading gun-rights group just one month after the Newtown shooting, that refers to President Barack Obama’s children was “ill-advised.”
VIDEO: Kickin’ It With Joe! Vice President Biden Answers Gun-Control Questions In Google Hangout!
Jim Baker, head of the federal affairs division at the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, says he had made his views very known to others at the powerful gun-rights organization.
When it first became public on January 15th, the ad, which cast Obama as hypocritical for having expressed skepticism about putting armed guards in schools, when “his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools,” drew tons criticism.
But in a telephone interview Baker told Reuters:
“I don’t think it was particularly helpful, that ad. I thought it ill-advised.”
He continues:
“I think the ad could have made a good point, if it talked about the need for increased school security, without making the point using the president’s children,”
Reuters reports:
He said he was not involved in creating the ad, and once it appeared, he had let others at the NRA know what he thought. “I got to say my piece,” he said.
Baker gave no details of the their response to him, but said, “Believe it or not, there are occasionally differences of opinion in this building.”
In the ad, a narrator asks, “Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” Obama’s daughters, 14-year-old Malia and 11-year-old Sasha, attend private school in Washington and receive Secret Service protection, as is routine for children of presidents.
Meanwhile the White House has called the NRA ad “repugnant and cowardly,” while New Jersey Governor Chris Christie said it was “reprehensible”
Well we’re glad Baker is taking a stance for what is right. Take another look at the NRA’s offensive ad above.
SOURCE: Reuters
