NRA to expand lobbying to other conservative causes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has the NRA forgotten that it has many members who are Democrats?

Haven't they considered the fact that moves like this could drive those people away from the NRA, thus reducing its effectiveness?

Further, when the NRA's core message is not its only message the core message gets diluted and the NRA becomes less effective at getting across its core message.

This is a colossally bad idea. I wish Wayne LaPierre would just go away and let the NRA be the NRA of all its members.
 
Since so many TFLers are responding to the thread title instead of reading the article or the thread itself, maybe the OP or a mod could edit the title to "Unsupported CNN story claims that..."

Because all the people coming in guns blazing about this are really growing old.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Having said that, when you pop open the (new wow high techie looking) NRA website there's Glenn Beck and Oliver North.
Glenn Beck????

Not seeing a lot of Democrats at the Leadership Forum
"Leadership Forum with featured speakers:
• Rick Santorum
• Mitt Romney
• Newt Gingrich
• Rick Perry
• Oliver North
• Darrell Issa
• Chuck Grassley
• Roy Blunt
• John Bolton
• Ken Blackwell
• Scott Walker
• Bobby Jindal
• Eric Cantor"
 
Last edited:
Just a warning - avoid inflammatory and insulting language.

Stick to the issue. Let's see the response from the NRA, if any.

Then decide.
 
Having said that, when you pop open the (new wow high techie looking) NRA website there's Glenn Beck and Oliver North.
Glenn Beck????
Click to expand...

I don't interpret that as NRA endorsement of Beck and North. I interpret that as Beck and North endorsement of the NRA.
 
Not seeing a lot of Democrats at the Leadership Forum
Click to expand...
Is that the fault of the NRA, or of the gun culture in general? We've allowed the issue of the 2nd Amendment to get lumped in with a right-leaning overall political ideology. Is it any wonder that those whose politics might not comport with that aren't in a hurry to stick their heads up in public?

Like any organization, the NRA wants high-profile speakers. If the only ones willing to step forward are the National Review readership, whose fault is that?
 
Thats an interesting question. Who's fault is that? Are these volunteers or did the NRA reach out? Has the NRA in the past had prominent Democrats speaking and if so, when did that change?

if there are no Democrats, how come the NRA is not cultivating those relationships?
 
This week, Coca-Cola and Kraft announced they are pulling their corporate memberships from a conservative group that was behind the spread of "stand your ground" laws like the one highlighted in Florida by the Trayvon Martin case.
Click to expand...

The CNN article is aimed directly at eroding support for Stand Your Ground laws. CNN apparently got a lot (all?) of its material from the Center for Media and Democracy. CMD is mounting an all-out attack on Stand Your Ground laws and is trying to smear or shame any supporters of those laws.Yes, Tara Mica is a lobbyist and the Texas state liaison for the NRA-ILA. Yes, Tara Mica was/is the NRA-ILA representative to ALEC. Interested in what Tara Mica did at ALEC?
2011 ALEC Annual Meeting Substantive Agenda
The following new model legislation was introduced:
- "Gun Owners' Privacy and Access to Health Care Act" (by Tara Mica, National Rifle Association)
- "Honesty in Firearms Act" (by Tara Mica, National Rifle Association)
- "Disposition of Firearms in State or Local Custody Act" (by Tara Mica, National Rifle Association)
Click to expand...
 
if there are no Democrats, how come the NRA is not cultivating those relationships?
Click to expand...
They have cultivated those relationships, and they get screeched at by rank-and-file members for it. Every time the NRA endorses a candidate who doesn't agree with a certain ideology on everything, people who aren't even members beat their chests and claim that's why they're cancelling their memberships.
 
Besides the Stand Your Ground laws, here are some other initiatives supported by ALEC/NRA that the Center for Media and Democracy thinks are "bad."

Recent ALEC "Model" Bills on Guns
 
Quote:
if there are no Democrats, how come the NRA is not cultivating those relationships?

They have cultivated those relationships, and they get screeched at by rank-and-file members for it.
Click to expand...
Why? With the growth of ownership, the organization should be even more neutral now. Probably the topic for another thread though.
 
With the growth of ownership, the organization should be even more neutral now.
Click to expand...
The organization is, but the partisan zealots (who'd love the CNN article to be true) are the most vocal and shrill.
 
Mike Irwin said:
"He said the NRA's work is cut out for it, because gun ownership is on the decline in America."
Click to expand...

Total firearms ownership in the US is estimated at 270 million firearms. From 11/30/98 to 3/31/12, there were over 138 million NICS background checks. If that reflects a decline in ownership, I would hate to see the type of buying frenzy that would represent an increase.
 
I don't interpret that as NRA endorsement of Beck and North.~Silver Bullet
Click to expand...

Is Glenn Beck as the keynote speaker this Saturday "an endorsement", and if not, has anyone told Mr. Beck? Cause he spent the better part of two hours on it, today only.
Mainly to demagogue the words of the ex-Green Jobs Czar Van Jones and his new catch phrase the Kill at Will Law which was in Mr. Jones opinion...."Because of ALEC". Along with quite a few other things, but
"Because of ALEC" was the basic repeatable mantra following each wacky statement, sermon style. I have some pretty good quotes that are obviously gun activism related, but they are also purely the worst type of political in nature, thereby upsetting the apple cart.
I suppose the NRA may know what it's getting itself into. Still....it's moonbat territory, hearing those types rant in the general direction of each other over NRA legislation, membersm, and direction.

Probobly all timed to coincide with the OP article.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...LEC-Funneled-The-Corporate-Cash-To-Spread-It-
 
Last edited:
I recall one year at the annual convention, NRA had Ted Kennedy as a guest speaker. If that's no reaching out, I don't know what is!

This artical looks like a CNN hatchet job.
 
My post from another site:

Its true that most of our national gun control legislation was accomplished by "liberals". We all know the history of those onerous acts. My problem with the NRA putting all their eggs in the "conservative" basket is this:

1. "Conservatives" did a net nothing for US gunowners when they ruled the white house and both houses of congress. They could have rolled back the Hughes Amendment, the bans on importation of fireams by previous presidents, the ban on concealed carry in national parks and parts of the GCA 1968. Instead they did nothing.

2. In 1984 and again in 1986, a "conservative" US president was first to ban long guns under the provisions of the sporting purposes clause of the GCA 1968. Other presidents would cite this precedent when they banned long guns from import.

This same president banned carry of handguns in national parks. After leaving office he joined other ex-presidents in shilling for the AWB. That president had banned the carry of loaded handguns when he was governor of his home state. Today, the NRA-ILA calls him the "gunowners champion".

3. In 1989 a "conservative" president banned about 40 semi-auto milsurp firearms from import based on the sporting purposes clause of the GCA 1968.

4. The AWB passed the US house by one vote: 38 "conservatives", including the house minority leader, voted in favor of the AWB. 76 "liberals" voted against the AWB.

5. A "conservative" presidential candidate, trolling for liberal votes, promised to sign an extension of the AWB if it reached his desk: Thankfully it did not.

http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1998/importban-kf.htm

For a long time "conservative" politicians have played the lesser of two evils game on gunowners and we have sucked up the Kool Aide. We don't need an NRA thats in cahoots with either party.
 
Last edited:
Having said that, when you pop open the (new wow high techie looking) NRA website there's Glenn Beck and Oliver North.
Glenn Beck????

Not seeing a lot of Democrats at the Leadership Forum
"Leadership Forum with featured speakers
Click to expand...

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps prominent pro-2A Democrats are simply rare? While there are certainly exceptions, including members of this very forum, it is undeniable that anti's, more often than not, have the letter "D" next to their name when they run for public office. Unfortunately, a list of most of the prominent Democrats in national politics reads much like a "who's who" of gun control supporters including former President Clinton, Sen. Feinstein, Sen Schumer, Sen. Kerry, the late Sen. Kennedy, Rep. McCarthy, Rep. Boxer, and Rep. Pelosi. Also, all three of the most historically significant federal gun control laws were passed under Democrat Administrations: '34 NFA (Roosevelt), '68 GCA (Johnson), and '94 AWB (Clinton).

When there is a pro-gun Democrat, the NRA does not hesitate to support them as was the case with both of the politicians that I cited in my previous post. Likewise, when a Republican supports gun control, the NRA doesn't hesitate to fiercely oppose him. For example, the NRA is quite critical of Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R-NYC) and witheld their endorsement for former President George W. Bush's re-election campaign until after the '94 AWB had failed to be renewed (to be fair, Bush was luke-warm at best on 2A but he was still much better on the issue than his opponent, Sen. Kerry, was). However, the fact remains that pro-gun Democrats are, and have been for decades, the minority within their chosen party.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top