1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

NRA Now Leans Toward Endorsing Harry Reid

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by wireguy, Jul 2, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    Don't tell me there's nothing here girls. The write up was in NRA's own magazine for every member to see.

    NRA Now Leans Toward Endorsing Harry Reid

    Posted by Erick Erickson

    Thursday, July 1st at 8:00AM EDT

    106 Comments



    Multiple sources tell me the National Rifle Association is planning to endorse liberal Harry Reid against pro-gun champion Sharron Angle.

    Two weeks ago, I told you about the carveout the NRA received in exchange for their support for the DISCLOSE ACT deal.

    Then this week, RedState broke the story of the “gag order” the NRA issued to members of its Board on the Kagan nomination.

    Now, I’m getting credible reports that the NRA is leaning toward endorsing Harry Reid, even though the NRA is finally saying it will score a vote on Kagan — something that was not a sure thing.

    Why would they do this? Why would they go out of their way to protect a Senator who has demonstrated a repeated hostility to the Second Amendment in his votes and his leadership?

    Well, I thought perhaps the NRA carveout in the DISCLOSE Act might be the answer. But, there is more. It turns out, Reid secured a $61 million earmark for a gun range in Clark County, Nevada.

    NRA members were recently treated to a three-page spread in the American Rifleman about a visit to Nevada by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox to “thank” Reid for the earmark. The article even includes a cliché picture of Reid cutting a ribbon with a gigantic pair of scissors. (Every good porker has his own giant pair of gold earmark scissors.) More here.

    Here is a video of the event from Reid’s youtube site.

    At 3:25, you can hear LaPierre touting Reid’s record on guns saying, “I also want to thank you, Senator, for your support every day for the Second Amendment and for the rights of American gun owners. “

    The American Rifleman article also commends Reid’s Second Amendment record noting, “His dedication to this project is just one of the ways Sen. Reid has demonstrated his support for gun owners and the Second Amendment.”

    Well, that’s all very nice. What politician representing a pro-gun red state wouldn’t want Wayne LaPierre to come out for a personal photo op at their earmark ribbon cutting.

    But, here is the problem. Reid has not supported the Second Amendment “every day.” Or ever.

    Reid has a lifetime rating of “F” from Gun Owners of America (who Ron Paul once called “the only no-compromise gun lobby in Washington”). GOA is actively supporting the 100% pro-gun Republican nominee, Sharron Angle, in her campaign to unseat Harry Reid.

    But if you don’t believe GOA, see for yourself below the fold. Then call (800) 392-VOTE (8683) before it is too late and make the NRA knows they’d be betraying second amendment voters by endorsing Harry Reid.

    Below are just a few of the votes that demonstrate Reid’s longstanding hostility to guns and the Second Amendment. Not included in this list is the long list of consistent and active support for anti-gun nominees to the Federal Judiciary and to high level cabinet posts. The reason I did not include anti-gun nominees is because he supported every last one of them.

    June 28, 1991. Vote No. 115. Voted for a 5 day waiting period for handgun purchases.

    October 21, 1993. Vote 325. Voted to eliminate the Army Civilian Marksmanship Program. Only the most fringe anti-gun Senators voted for the amendment.

    November 19, 1993. Vote 385. Allow states to impose waiting periods over and above the 5 days waiting period required under the Brady Bill.

    November 19, 1993. Vote 386. Voted to eliminate he 5-year sunset in the Brady Bill.

    November 19, 1993. Vote 387. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

    November 19, 1993. Vote 390. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

    November 20, 1993. Vote 394. Voted for the Brady Bill, which imposed a 5-business-day waiting period before purchasing a handgun.

    August 25, 1994. Vote 294. Voted to close off debate on the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

    August 25, 1994. Vote 295. Voted for the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

    April 17, 1996. Vote 64. Voted to expand the statute of limitations for paperwork violations in National Firearms Act from 3 years to 5 years.

    June 27, 1996. Vote 178. Voting to destroy 176,000 M-1 Garand rifles from World War II, and 150 million rounds of 30 caliber ammunition, rather than giving them to the Federal Civilian Marksmanship program.

    September 12, 1996. Vote 287. Voted to spend $21.5 million for a study on putting “taggants” in black and smokeless gunpowder.

    September 12, 1996. Vote 290. Voted to make it a Federal crime to possess a gun within 1,000 yards of a school.

    May 12, 1999. Vote 111. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions.

    May 13, 1999. Vote 116. Voted to ban the importation of ammunition clips that can hold more than 10 rounds.

    May 14, 1999. Vote 119. Voted to criminalize internet advertisements to sell legal firearms in a legal manner.

    May 18, 1999. Vote 122. Voted to for Mandatory triggerlocks.

    May 20, 1999. Vote 133. Voted to create new Federal regulation of pawn shops handling of guns.

    May 20, 1999. Vote 134. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions. The vote was 50-50, with Vice President Gore casting the tie-breaking vote.

    May 20, 1999. Vote 140. Voted for the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

    July 29, 1999. Vote 224. Voted to close debate on the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

    February 2, 2000. Vote 4. Voted to make firearms manufacturers and distributors’ debts nondischargeable in bankruptcy if they were sued because they unknowingly sold guns to individuals who used the gun in a crime. 68 Senators voted against Reid’s position, including 17 Democrats including Bryan of Nevada.

    March 2, 2000. Vote 27. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings.

    March 2, 2000. Vote 28. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings (reconsideration of vote 27).

    March 2, 2000. Vote 32. Voted to use Federal taxpayer funds to hand out anti-gun literature in schools and to run anti-gun public service announcements.

    April 6, 2000. Vote 64. Voted for a gun control package including new onerous restrictions on gun shows.

    April 7, 2000. Vote 74. Voted against an amendment to provide for the enforcement of existing gun laws in lieu of new burdensome gun control mandates.

    May 16, 2000. Vote 100. Voted to commend the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

    May 17, 2000. Vote 102. Vote to overturn the ruling of the chair that the Daschle amendment (commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures) was out of order.

    May 17, 2000. Vote 103. Voted against an amendment stating “the right of each law-abiding United States citizen to own a firearm for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense or recreation, should not be infringed.”

    May 17, 2000. Vote 104. Voted for an amendment commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

    February 26, 2004. Vote 17. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

    March 2, 2004. Vote 25. Voted for Federal regulation of gun shows.

    July 28, 2005. Vote 207. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

    March 5, 2009. Vote 83. Voted against a ban on the United Nations imposing taxes on American citizens after France and other world leaders proposed a global tax on firearms.
     
  2. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    More on the NRA’s Harry Reid Endorsement

    Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

    Thursday, July 1st at 4:53PM EDT

    29 Comments
    I’m getting a lot of emails from people saying the NRA has not endorsed Harry Reid in Nevada.

    As I said in the original post: no, the NRA has not endorsed Harry Reid. But they are planning to unless we bring pressure to bear on them.

    But here’s the other thing: Sharron Angle has been a true patriot on 2nd Amendment issues in the Nevada legislature and Harry Reid both voted for every anti-gun nominee Obama has put up and voted for the Brady Bill, the assault weapons ban, etc.

    The NRA’s fallback is going to be not endorsing. They should in fact be endorsing Sharron Angle.

    Regardless — and this is the key point — both people at the NRA and people in the Senate are telling me the NRA will be endorsing Harry Reid later this year and the only way to stop it is to be very vocal about it right now.

    So keep making sure they know it would be unacceptable.
     
  3. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    So, Who is your suggested alternative Organization with the political pull to do something????
     
  4. Ljutic111

    Ljutic111 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,730
    The Ribbon Cutting event for another Gun Range is just a way to get the NRA to hand over the money to him and his party . Can`t the NRA see past this ?? He has more wrongs going against him than rights for Gun Owners . I say dump him fast and keep him farther than arms length .
     
  5. SeldomShoots

    SeldomShoots Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,800
    Location:
    Indiana
    Gentlemen, can't all of you see that politcial or policy lobbying groups wouldn't have a cause or a fight to seek money from us to fight if there was no fight or no threat. Thats why, the government continues to teeter totter back and forth on these issues and why lobbying groups support certain candidates. If there wasn't some losses and some wins every now and then it wouldn't be much of fight to seek funding for.

    Its all a money game for the politicians and lobbying groups.

    John
     
  6. RobertT

    RobertT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,354
    Seems the thing to do is tell the NRA your next cash donation is going to Sharron Angle and no futher donations to the NRA will be forthcoming if they do not reverse course.

    Robert
     
  7. Bill Stern

    Bill Stern Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    214
    It appears that the NRA has joined the ranks of politicians. We all know the old joke about politicians: How do you know when a politician is lying? His mouth is moving." Unfortunately, it's all too true!
     
  8. wolfram

    wolfram Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,261
    Well of course there will be strings attached to a $76 M shooting facility.

    NRA backing or not, I think Harry is in trouble this time .... hope ... hope.
     
  9. old george

    old george TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    17
    Reguardless of whom the N.R.A. endorses ,Each person should vote his own consience.
    92 yr old "old george"
     
  10. WS-1

    WS-1 Banned User Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    3,885
    Jeez, Wayne, "Say it ain't so."

    Kit
     
  11. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,643
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    <object width="512" height="323">
    <param name="movie" value="http://home.nra.org/embedded/bn_videoplayer_nra.swf"/>
    <param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"/>
    <param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"/>
    <param name="FlashVars" value="autoPlay=true&videoInfo=http://home.nra.org/videodetails.aspx?videoid=Chris W Cox NRA Officially Opposes Elena Kagans Nomination.xml"/>
    <embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="512" height="323" src="http://home.nra.org/embedded/bn_videoplayer_nra.swf" flashvars="autoPlay=true&videoInfo=http://home.nra.org/videodetails.aspx?videoid=Chris W Cox NRA Officially Opposes Elena Kagans Nomination.xml"/>
    </object>

    You can go to 6 minutes if you don't want the rest.

    HM
     
  12. crk

    crk Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2007
    Messages:
    131
    does not sound like he answered the direct question that was asked at 5:30 on the time meter other than to say "we'll decide later."
     
  13. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    Frankly I no longer trust Chris Cox. I see a lot of waffling in this video, a lot of "this is what we haven't done" and "these are distractions from what we should be looking at" (as defined by NRA, not necessarily as defined by logic)) but little on what they HAVE done. He looked very uneasy to me. A little dry mouth there Chris?

    Why did it take until about day 3 of the Kagan look-see in the senate before NRA took a position? Was this such a difficult situation to discern that NRA needed that much time before they knew what they thought?
    It is a FACT that NRA stabbed every liberty loving organisation in America in the back when they got in bed with the democrats to get themselves an exemption to a monstrous piece of liberty killing legislation. Does anyone really believe they got that exemption without something in return? LOGIC people, LOGIC. Use logic to probe for the truth. Don't just accept what NRA says, look at their ACTIONS, and the timing of those actions.

    I don't want NRA destroyed , I want them to stop being a politically expediant bureacracy and actually start taking solid positions that have logical authority and refuse to back down, and to hell with what big shot gets in a snit and quits. My NRA renewal arrived today. I cannot bring myself to re-up when I see the kind of cowardice and expediancy and outright treachery I am seeing lately. That NRA got in bed with the enemy to do what was good for the NRA bureaucracy, at the expense of every liberty promoting organisation in America, is un-deniable. Given the level of treachery that entailed, why should I believe what NRA says about NRA as opposed to what others are saying about NRA when the evidence is in front of my eyes? A big shout out for Harry Reid in their own magazine?

    I feel like I have become the official anti-NRA spokesman. I haven't. I am not enjoying this. There is a problem fellow gun enthusiasts, and if we aren't willing to face the truth, it is WE who are going to suffer for our own culpability in not forcing NRA to do what is best for US, not necessarily what is best for the NRA bureaucracy.
     
  14. jimrich60

    jimrich60 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    810
    One word for this media anti-NRA campaign: Garbage

    Jim R
     
  15. spritc

    spritc Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,483
    Location:
    Indiana
    Wireguy, you subscribe to liberal white wash. The NRA will not sell us out! The one to watch is Obama who has sold our country down the river. If we don't get a Republican majority in November, our chances for our country will be nill. We will live in a socialist country. Don't believe me? Read the article from one of his Columbia U. classmates. Google it! When/if we regain majority control we need to impeach his ass for trying to ruin this country as we know it. His well orchestrated plan needs to be stopped.
     
  16. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,248
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Quote: <i>"The NRA will not sell us out!"</i>

    The NRA sold a lot of us out in 1986.
     
  17. USMC85

    USMC85 TS Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    I read the post and wrote the NRA an email. I also read the other post here:
    http://www.trapshooters.com/noframes/cfpages/message.cfm?messageid=678811
    which complains about the BS NRA posts here. I think its good to get this out there if its true. I dont think its some liberal posting this because there are links to NRA interviews, NRA posts, and letters people have received.

    It sounds like the NRA will rate Reid again closer to the election. I am OK with that because there is no way he can get above a "B" and thats if you just look at him since he helped open that range in Nevada. His opponent on the other hand is an A+++!! So, enforcing Reid would prove to me that I need to find a better organization to fight for the 2nd Amendment (as read by patriots, not liberals). I have been donating money to Angle via the Teaparty Express website http://www.teapartyexpress.org/home Anyway, I also emailed NRA about H.R. 5175, The Disclose Act http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=13902
    and them making deals with the devil. I am a life member and these decisions lately are making me wonder if I should resign. The NRA wrote me back regarding the DISCLOSE Act saying:

    "The NRA cannot defend the Second Amendment from the attacks we face in the local, state, federal, international and judicial arenas without the ability to speak. We will not allow ourselves to be silenced while the national news media, politicians and others are allowed to attack us freely.
    The NRA will continue to fight for its right to speak out in defense of the Second Amendment. Any efforts to silence the political speech of NRA members will, as has been the case in the past, be met with strong opposition. "

    I wrote back and said I know they have to speak, but making deals with the devil at the expense of anyone else fighting the same fight is a loss for our side.
    More later when I get a reply.
    K-ROD
     
  18. JH

    JH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,359
    Wire guy,

    You REALLY NEED HELP......I am amazed by your simplistic, child-like, absolutist view of the world....thanks to people like you who refused to support McCain/Palin because they "were not conservative enough" Pelosi and Hussein are in power....you are no less guilty of the mess we are in than Moveon.org.....thanks to you, those in POWER are unrelenting enemies of gun ownership....under these dire circumstances, the NRA has to build bridges with those who for whatever reason will vote for gun rights....yes, despicable, left-wing a-holes, whomever...as long as gun rights are protected.....

    Grow up and see the world for what it is...dynamic, ever changing, allegiances are temporary as long as they are for mutual benefit....

    Besides trying to destroy the one friend we have, what DO YOU DO to protect gun rights....are you an officer for some whacked out/fringe and more importantly, POLITICALLY POWERLESS organization? Are you looking for members?

    Join the NRA! THE BEST FRIEND WE GOT!
     
  19. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,643
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    The NRA needs to know how their members feel. An unpopular stance can cost them money.

    So let them know already.

    HM
     
  20. pyrdek

    pyrdek Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,296
    Whether you chose to support this pro-gun organization or that pro-gun org. or the other pro gun org. PLEASE take the time to see just what the organization(s) you choose are actually doing.

    In some of my looking, I have found an individual or group or two that seems to have decided to mount a pro gun advertising campaign but when you research who is organizing the, supposedly, gun group, you find that the principle organizers seemed to have dedicated virtually all of their past efforts in some non-gun activity. Many times the leaders of these groups still maintain their activities and connections to their original groups that have either no gun interest or even anti gun interests. My concern is that these organizers are simply looking for dollars and names from gun owners and then will put those resources primarily into supporting their original goal with support for the gun owners taking a distant second place or not taking place at all.

    Notable for this approach were some groups whose primary focus had been baaed on religious grounds in past years but have now "found" gun owners to be a source of money to support their original religious desires (NOT any particular religion or anti-religion group). For those groups who openly publicize that they have a religious basis for supporting guns, I look at what they have done for the gun owner in the past. One Jewish group JPFO, had been particularly strident in their fighting for the rights of gun owners, not just Jewish gun owners, but lately, and this may be because of a change in my activities, I have not run across their public activities as often as in the past.

    Don't go just by the name of the group or the name(s) listed as organizing the group. With the Internet being what it is, find out for yourself just EXACTLY what they have done, are doing and plan to do to support YOUR needs.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.