NRA to expand lobbying to other conservative causes
- Thread starter Gary L. Griffiths
- Start date
- Status
Bear in mind that almost no media reporting is completely unbiased. CNN has never been a particular friend to the NRA or gun owners in general, so I'm inherently sceptical of any claims they make on the subject.
As to the content of the article, it's really nothing more than a guilt-by-association piece. Tara Mica is the NRA lobbyist who also worked on voter ID and immigration laws, but there is no evidence that she worked on those laws as a representative, or with any involvement at all from, the NRA.
Likewise, the article points to the NRA's opposition to the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Law. While this law, on the surface, was not about 2A, it did affect lobbying organizations which the NRA is. I don't think it's wrong, or even particularly unusual, for an organization to oppose a law which limits its own lobbying ability regardless of what that organizations main focus is.
Given the NRA's history of support for left-leaning politicians who still have good records on 2A such as Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and former Rep. Barron Hill (D-IN), I don't really buy that they're part of some vast right-wing conspiracy.
As to the content of the article, it's really nothing more than a guilt-by-association piece. Tara Mica is the NRA lobbyist who also worked on voter ID and immigration laws, but there is no evidence that she worked on those laws as a representative, or with any involvement at all from, the NRA.
Likewise, the article points to the NRA's opposition to the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Law. While this law, on the surface, was not about 2A, it did affect lobbying organizations which the NRA is. I don't think it's wrong, or even particularly unusual, for an organization to oppose a law which limits its own lobbying ability regardless of what that organizations main focus is.
Given the NRA's history of support for left-leaning politicians who still have good records on 2A such as Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and former Rep. Barron Hill (D-IN), I don't really buy that they're part of some vast right-wing conspiracy.
I am more appalled at the forum members who are reacting viscerally to a headline, obviously without having read anything past that.
Sparks1957, Fishing_Cabin, and a couple others: reacting in this maner isn't normal for you, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But the meat of the article was about a lobbyist who has worked for the NRA, who has also done work for other organizations. There's no definitive tie between that lobbyist's work on non-firearms legislation and the NRA. It seems to be a CNN hatchet piece on the NRA, which is hardly surprising.
twins, you recently said you don't care about gun rights, and that if guns were restricted you'd just "find another hobby." A day or two later, you are NRA-bashing....
Sparks1957, Fishing_Cabin, and a couple others: reacting in this maner isn't normal for you, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But the meat of the article was about a lobbyist who has worked for the NRA, who has also done work for other organizations. There's no definitive tie between that lobbyist's work on non-firearms legislation and the NRA. It seems to be a CNN hatchet piece on the NRA, which is hardly surprising.
twins, you recently said you don't care about gun rights, and that if guns were restricted you'd just "find another hobby." A day or two later, you are NRA-bashing....
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-04-06/..._nra-officials-alec-gun-rights?_s=PM:POLITICS
Much ado about nothing.
The left attacking during an election year. Imagine that.
Much ado about nothing.
The left attacking during an election year. Imagine that.
Sparks1957
New member
There are ties between the right and the NRA that are disturbing to me, such as Grover Norquist being on the Board of Directors for one example.
This leads me to believe that it is possible for the organization to be broadening its focus outside 2nd amendment issues. I guess time will tell.
This leads me to believe that it is possible for the organization to be broadening its focus outside 2nd amendment issues. I guess time will tell.
I'm not worried about it.
The NRA is never in a cash rich position anyway so I don't think they'd risk going rogue on thier members on causes not directly related to firearms ownership.
However,where anti gun forces go to run gun laws around the corner of the open media that Americans have access too,the NRA will follow.
I'd simply say,as others here have already said,that the anti gunners have had a 'divide and conquer " attitude towards the steadfast support handgun,firearm ownership and our right to defend ourselves and our familes from crime has had in America and we should not ever stand divided on our rights to keep and bear arms-no matter where that fight may take us.
The NRA has always stood firm for those rights,your rights and it always will.
The NRA is never in a cash rich position anyway so I don't think they'd risk going rogue on thier members on causes not directly related to firearms ownership.
However,where anti gun forces go to run gun laws around the corner of the open media that Americans have access too,the NRA will follow.
I'd simply say,as others here have already said,that the anti gunners have had a 'divide and conquer " attitude towards the steadfast support handgun,firearm ownership and our right to defend ourselves and our familes from crime has had in America and we should not ever stand divided on our rights to keep and bear arms-no matter where that fight may take us.
The NRA has always stood firm for those rights,your rights and it always will.
Fishing_Cabin
New member
My day hasnt been great so far, and I do apologize for a hasty response, MLeake and others.
While I do understand the fact that a percentage of the lobbyists groups are "hired guns" so to speak, I do admit a bit of an uneasy feeling with it.
While I do understand the fact that a percentage of the lobbyists groups are "hired guns" so to speak, I do admit a bit of an uneasy feeling with it.
The political rhetoric picked up when David Keene became president of the NRA. Keene is a long time political operative who got his start with vice president Spiro Agnew in 1960. Keene had been the NRA first vice-president. Keene was president of the American Conservative Union 1984-2011.
About the time Keene came aboard the NRA started warning about the UN taking our guns away.
About the time Keene came aboard the NRA started warning about the UN taking our guns away.
zincwarrior
New member
Not could be, is. The Second Amendment is not party specific. If true I'm cancelling my membership.
EDIT: it does look like a CNN hit piece. Will see if there's anything on the NRA site once I get off work.
Last edited:
Agree with Mleake and others who've seen this trashy excuse for journalism for what it really is: a lie, a bad lie at that.
The NRA has and always will be a single-issue organization. That single issue is the Second Amendment and the RKBA. They have worked against legislation in the past that would limit their ability to fight for 2ndA freedoms, and that is completely understandable.
I liken it to a church that fights a re-zoning of their neighborhood that would force them to move....
There's absolutely no substance to this story folks, organizations like the NRA and others use big-shot lobbyists (hired guns, if you will) all the time... Why? Because they are successful, they get the job done.
Think of the hired guns like you would your lawyer; the lawyer may not agree with you on everything, he may have litigated cases in the past that you don't agree with, but while he's on a contract with you, he is obligated to fight for your best interests. And there's nothing at all wrong with that.
Either support the NRA or don't, it's your money... But stop with this childish public threatening to stop sending money... Either do it or don't. Stop crying about it. The NRA is far from perfect, I don't agree with them on a few issues, but they're the best we have, and often the lone wall standing between our gun freedoms a nd oblivion.
The NRA has and always will be a single-issue organization. That single issue is the Second Amendment and the RKBA. They have worked against legislation in the past that would limit their ability to fight for 2ndA freedoms, and that is completely understandable.
I liken it to a church that fights a re-zoning of their neighborhood that would force them to move....
There's absolutely no substance to this story folks, organizations like the NRA and others use big-shot lobbyists (hired guns, if you will) all the time... Why? Because they are successful, they get the job done.
Think of the hired guns like you would your lawyer; the lawyer may not agree with you on everything, he may have litigated cases in the past that you don't agree with, but while he's on a contract with you, he is obligated to fight for your best interests. And there's nothing at all wrong with that.
Either support the NRA or don't, it's your money... But stop with this childish public threatening to stop sending money... Either do it or don't. Stop crying about it. The NRA is far from perfect, I don't agree with them on a few issues, but they're the best we have, and often the lone wall standing between our gun freedoms a nd oblivion.
Just a political hit piece presented as news - the enemies of gun rights and the NRA are always working to marginalize the NRA as it is the most politically powerful voice when it comes to second amendment rights. If they can paint and demonize the NRA as a "conservative" and/or single party organization they can effectively marginalize NRA support in the gun owning community and neutralize their effectiveness and political clout.
This kind of political garbage has been going on for years and there will be more hit pieces on the NRA the closer it gets to the election. The NRA has endorsed and will continue to endorse political candidates from both parties based on their support of gun rights. That is the key and the foundation to the NRA's political power - the knowledge of candidates/politicians in both parties that they can get the NRA's support or enmity based their support of gun rights. The NRA leadership is well aware of this and have no intention of losing that power by becoming a lapdog of either political party or of some political movement outside of gun rights.
This kind of political garbage has been going on for years and there will be more hit pieces on the NRA the closer it gets to the election. The NRA has endorsed and will continue to endorse political candidates from both parties based on their support of gun rights. That is the key and the foundation to the NRA's political power - the knowledge of candidates/politicians in both parties that they can get the NRA's support or enmity based their support of gun rights. The NRA leadership is well aware of this and have no intention of losing that power by becoming a lapdog of either political party or of some political movement outside of gun rights.
Armorer-at-Law
New member
Ditto.
- Status