Unregistered
Moderator
No, you don't have any point at all.
NRA & Ron Paul - What's the Deal?
- Thread starter Chui
- Start date
No, you don't have any point at all.
Unregistered
Moderator
I guess I missed the "humor".
I think you also over-estimate my level of support for RP. He is wrong about several issues. I support him because he is not an authoritarian, not because I think he is god-like, which apparrently many of his followers believe he is.
I think you are intentionally baiting overly zealous Ron Paul supporters to engage in senseless, circular arguments.
Not only is GOA a "no-compromise gun lobby", they are also a "no accomplishment gun lobby." Both the GOA and Ron Paul opposed the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Thankfully, the NRA was able to effectively lobby both Republicans and Democrats to pass the Act to prevent the stupid lawsuits that were threatening to bankrupt firearms manufacturers and gun shops. Once again, Ron Paul has associated his name with a bunch of wackos. First his face shows up on fake currency produced by guys who get raided by the FBI. And now we get some weird claim that the NRA has somehow "excluded" Paul from the race for President. It's cheesy, and it makes Paul look even weirder. But not to worry; Ron Paul and the GOA will get to the bottom of this non-existent conspiracy.
TheCaretaker
New member
Ron Paul who?
Ohh wait a minute, I remember him... He was singing this song I think!
http://it.stlawu.edu/~x0tsing/takeaway.htm
Ohh wait a minute, I remember him... He was singing this song I think!
http://it.stlawu.edu/~x0tsing/takeaway.htm
cabin pressure
New member
The nra is attempting to ignore Ron Paul's existence just like the rest of the establishment. If we want to keep they're strategy from working we must not be afraid to speak up to people we know and meet OUTSIDE of the internet. So far 100% of those I speak to outside of the net have never even heard of Ron Paul. Keep in mind that most people only hear 1/10th of the garbage the TV media pumps out. Even if they hear Ron Paul's name mentioned one time, it won't stick because most of the public focuses the majority of their attention on being entertained.
I've found that explaining the truth to people I know and physically meet has the effect of turning almost half of them into Ron Paul supporters because they can instantly see how the media and establishment is intentionally ignoring Dr. Paul. They can instantly see how a very tyrannical federal "government" (and it's supporters) are very threatened by him.
I've found that explaining the truth to people I know and physically meet has the effect of turning almost half of them into Ron Paul supporters because they can instantly see how the media and establishment is intentionally ignoring Dr. Paul. They can instantly see how a very tyrannical federal "government" (and it's supporters) are very threatened by him.
Compared to the NRA, there is some truth to that statement. I don't wish to bash the NRA, and I pointed out early in this thread that Ron Paul is shunning the NRA as much as they are shunning him. It's kind of sad, to me anyway, because I support both.
That said, the compromising and sometimes timid approach taken by the NRA, while prudent and successful at times, is also just a slow retreat, and sometimes other tactics are needed.
An example is the current Parker/Heller case. The NRA never wanted to risk bringing a second amendment case to the Supreme Court, afraid we might lose. When it became apparent that Parker would be heard, the NRA tried to hijack the case, which they had previously opposed, by tying it to their own (worse) case. Thankfully, that didn't fly, and Parker was tossed (at least for now), but Heller WON.
The NRA never wanted the current situation, in which the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on this question:
I did want it. Does that mean the NRA is useless to me? No, but it means we need the others as well.
We might lose. So that's not irrational at all.
The NRA attempted to help other gun owners in DC. They did nothing to hurt the case. If you disagree, please cite that part of the final order (granting the plaintiffs their requested relief) which shows that the NRA somehow hurt the case. I'd like to see that part of the order. So show it to us.
cool hand luke 22:36
New member
Considering that the entire issue will now most likely be decided by Justice Kennedy's views, the NRA's fear is well justified.
Don't be too shocked if the Court decides against the "Individual Right" construction of the second amendment. It's even money that the decision will go that way.
cool hand luke 22:36 said:
thats not gonna happen. i suspect the liberal justices dont want to hand the republicans the presidency so easily. it will be ruled individual subject to "reasonable restrictions"...whatever the hell that means (well, it basically means exactly what we have now). i hope for a better outcome, but wont hold my breath.
OK. This thread is not about the NRA and Parker/Heller. I won't delete those comments because of a second point I want to make.
Fremmer, I am an NRA member and have been for several years. I support them in most things. But the fact is, that the NRA did just about everything they could to sink the Parker case. Give me a day or two and I will detail it in the main Heller thread, where I touched upon it way back on page 1, of that thread.
Having said that, let's get this one back on track. The deal is with the NRA and Ron Paul. Other side excursions will kindly cease.
Fremmer, I am an NRA member and have been for several years. I support them in most things. But the fact is, that the NRA did just about everything they could to sink the Parker case. Give me a day or two and I will detail it in the main Heller thread, where I touched upon it way back on page 1, of that thread.
Having said that, let's get this one back on track. The deal is with the NRA and Ron Paul. Other side excursions will kindly cease.
my responses to our little thread veer in the megathread.
I wrote the NRA about why Ron Paul was left out and this is the repsonse I recieved.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your email to the NRA-ILA regarding Ron Paul. You mentioned that you think the NRA is ignoring Ron Paul’s candidacy for the presidency; I assume you are referencing the site on which you saw the presidential candidates on our website. Allow me to clarify that this site solely addresses the Celebration of American Values conference which the NRA recently held in Washington, DC. Congressman Ron Paul was invited to the National Rifle Association’s Celebration of American Values conference, but the NRA did not receive a response from him. As a result, there is no mention of your candidate in the article. If Congressman Paul had accepted the invitation, or contacted the NRA prior to the event, every effort would have been made to accommodate his appearance. In fact, NRA did work with a number of candidates who did not RSVP and we facilitated their appearance in person or via videotaped message. The same courtesy would have been given to the Ron Paul campaign had they contacted us. If and when the NRA has another candidate forum, we would hope that Congressman Paul would participate - either in person, or via videotaped message.
The NRA-PVF has not yet released its grades or endorsements for the upcoming presidential election. The NRA’s candidate endorsement process is a complex one, and the Political Victory Fund takes great care to examine many factors when endorsing a candidate. First and foremost is a candidate’s demonstrated record on firearms, hunting and civil liberties issues relative to firearms and hunting. We support incumbent officeholders who have a record of supporting Second Amendment rights, building a relationship of mutual trust with them. Our grades and endorsements are then reported to NRA members via our Political Preference Charts (PPC), which are available on the NRA-PVF website (www.NRAPVF.org), and either included in NRA’s magazines, or mailed directly to members prior to Election Day.
When deciding where to apply our efforts in various races nationwide, we consider whether the candidate has a reasonable chance of winning. Some pro-Second Amendment candidates, unfortunately are so handicapped by local political conditions, lack of funds, lack of staff or volunteer support, and other difficulties that even a massive NRA effort could not put them over the top and would simple be a waste of NRA members’ time and money. On the other hand, some pro-Second Amendment candidates may be in such a strong position politically that little or no expenditure of resources is necessary to ensure their reelection, and our efforts can go to a more critical race elsewhere.
Your concern regarding our endorsement of Ron Paul is very much appreciated, and I assure you that the NRA only endorses those candidates who support your Second Amendment rights. Once again, thank you for your comments. If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address, or at (800) 392-8683.
Sincerely,
Alicia Borgess
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your email to the NRA-ILA regarding Ron Paul. You mentioned that you think the NRA is ignoring Ron Paul’s candidacy for the presidency; I assume you are referencing the site on which you saw the presidential candidates on our website. Allow me to clarify that this site solely addresses the Celebration of American Values conference which the NRA recently held in Washington, DC. Congressman Ron Paul was invited to the National Rifle Association’s Celebration of American Values conference, but the NRA did not receive a response from him. As a result, there is no mention of your candidate in the article. If Congressman Paul had accepted the invitation, or contacted the NRA prior to the event, every effort would have been made to accommodate his appearance. In fact, NRA did work with a number of candidates who did not RSVP and we facilitated their appearance in person or via videotaped message. The same courtesy would have been given to the Ron Paul campaign had they contacted us. If and when the NRA has another candidate forum, we would hope that Congressman Paul would participate - either in person, or via videotaped message.
The NRA-PVF has not yet released its grades or endorsements for the upcoming presidential election. The NRA’s candidate endorsement process is a complex one, and the Political Victory Fund takes great care to examine many factors when endorsing a candidate. First and foremost is a candidate’s demonstrated record on firearms, hunting and civil liberties issues relative to firearms and hunting. We support incumbent officeholders who have a record of supporting Second Amendment rights, building a relationship of mutual trust with them. Our grades and endorsements are then reported to NRA members via our Political Preference Charts (PPC), which are available on the NRA-PVF website (www.NRAPVF.org), and either included in NRA’s magazines, or mailed directly to members prior to Election Day.
When deciding where to apply our efforts in various races nationwide, we consider whether the candidate has a reasonable chance of winning. Some pro-Second Amendment candidates, unfortunately are so handicapped by local political conditions, lack of funds, lack of staff or volunteer support, and other difficulties that even a massive NRA effort could not put them over the top and would simple be a waste of NRA members’ time and money. On the other hand, some pro-Second Amendment candidates may be in such a strong position politically that little or no expenditure of resources is necessary to ensure their reelection, and our efforts can go to a more critical race elsewhere.
Your concern regarding our endorsement of Ron Paul is very much appreciated, and I assure you that the NRA only endorses those candidates who support your Second Amendment rights. Once again, thank you for your comments. If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address, or at (800) 392-8683.
Sincerely,
Alicia Borgess
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division
Good post, UGH; thanks for finding this stuff out. This portion of the response clears this whole thing up:
So there is no NRA conspiracy against Ron Paul. They invited him, but received no response or other communication from Paul. Which happens, especially when a candidate like Ron Paul, who is very busy running for President.
My guess is that neither Paul nor the NRA intended any slight or offense toward one another. Things just get busy, and sometimes signals get crossed.
So there is no NRA conspiracy against Ron Paul. They invited him, but received no response or other communication from Paul. Which happens, especially when a candidate like Ron Paul, who is very busy running for President.
My guess is that neither Paul nor the NRA intended any slight or offense toward one another. Things just get busy, and sometimes signals get crossed.
FirstFreedom
Moderator
I just got the same email response from Ms. Borgess...I conclude that the NRA did nothing wrong, and GOA is demagogueing the issue for the most part. It was entirely Mr. Paul's fault (damn his hide) for not accepting the invitation. They both do good work however (NRA & GOA); I'm a life member of both. Take the bad with the good....