The NRA Responses

[tombogan03884]

Don't be too quick to jump on the NRA for the Reid endorsement. When it became evident the 2010 Harry Reid / Sharon Angle race was becoming too close to call, because Angle kept sticking her foot in her mouth regarding Hispanics, the NRA made a deal with Harry Reid. He was willing to "be bought" by the NRA because he thought he needed them to defeat Angle at the time. He was probably right. The race was very close.

No one knows for sure what type of deal was made. Neither the NRA or Reid discussed it much. The NRA membership was crying loudly about it. But if you think about it, all of it made sense. Having a Democratic Senate Majority Leader somewhat "in your pocket", made a lot more sense than backing a losing conservative. It all panned out. Reid won, Angle was sent packing.

Before Sandy Hook, Reid was quoted as saying when asked, if the subject of gun control would come up this past session, he said "there was no time for it". He was then asked about it when the Senate reconvened in the new year. He said, "Fat chance." The fact of the matter is Reid doesn't want to deal with gun control anymore than the NRA does. Gun legislation has been very toxic for the Democrats. If another Assault Weapons Ban were to pass, Reid knows he would lose his powerful job as Senate Majority Leader in the 2014 mid term elections. I doubt he will even allow it to come up for a vote unless he , (and the NRA), are assured it won't pass.

The NRA getting into bed with Reid is a classic example of keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer. Sometimes, as this proves, it pays to, "make a deal with the devil".

Bill makes a very good point.
Reid has been able to keep a budget from being passed for 4 years. Anything he doesn't like never makes the floor.
He has already said DiFi's AWB will not get his support, he is in a position to make sure the Senate never see's a gun control bill.
The question is did he get paid enough ?
Sure buying political action is wrong, but we are not working with a system that is right, we are working with a system that is.

[billt]

.....he is in a position to make sure the Senate never see's a gun control bill. The question is did he get paid enough ? Sure buying political action is wrong, but we are not working with a system that is right, we are working with a system that is.

While I doubt any actual cash was exchanged, to a politician the NRA's support can in fact be worth more. Especially in a case like Reid was involved in this past 2010 election. The facts starring him in the face were these:

1.) Nevada is very pro gun.

2.) Nevada's housing market and job market are at or near the bottom of the nationwide list.

3.) Democrats are known for high taxes, of which Nevada has some of the lowest, along with a non existent state income tax.

All of that played against Reid. Sharon Angle should have walked into office. Her screwing up by losing the Hispanic vote, along with the NRA backing Reid, was what put him marginally over the top in a real nail biter of an election. Reid is full aware of all of this, and knows if he were to allow most any type of restrictive gun legislation to pass, he would be out the door much like Tom Foley was in 1994.

Remember, the Senate Majority Leader is God when it comes to which bills will be voted on, and which ones won't. He also has the political clout to be very persuasive when it comes to strong arming which way a Senator votes on given legislation. This can be accomplished by dealing out chairmanships to various powerful committees. As much as it pains me to say it, Reid could be a valuable ally to the NRA, along with it's 4.5 million members. At least for now.

[MikeBjerum]

Don't be too quick to jump on the NRA for the Reid endorsement. When it became evident the 2010 Harry Reid / Sharon Angle race was becoming too close to call, because Angle kept sticking her foot in her mouth regarding Hispanics, the NRA made a deal with Harry Reid. He was willing to "be bought" by the NRA because he thought he needed them to defeat Angle at the time. He was probably right. The race was very close.

No one knows for sure what type of deal was made. Neither the NRA or Reid discussed it much. The NRA membership was crying loudly about it. But if you think about it, all of it made sense. Having a Democratic Senate Majority Leader somewhat "in your pocket", made a lot more sense than backing a losing conservative. It all panned out. Reid won, Angle was sent packing.

Before Sandy Hook, Reid was quoted as saying when asked, if the subject of gun control would come up this past session, he said "there was no time for it". He was then asked about it when the Senate reconvened in the new year. He said, "Fat chance." The fact of the matter is Reid doesn't want to deal with gun control anymore than the NRA does. Gun legislation has been very toxic for the Democrats. If another Assault Weapons Ban were to pass, Reid knows he would lose his powerful job as Senate Majority Leader in the 2014 mid term elections. I doubt he will even allow it to come up for a vote unless he , (and the NRA), are assured it won't pass.

The NRA getting into bed with Reid is a classic example of keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer. Sometimes, as this proves, it pays to, "make a deal with the devil".

+1

[santahog]

I know...
As much as I can for never having been there, I know they swim in a rather large cesspool.
I "get" pragmatism, I just don't like it much..

[mooner]

The NRA getting into bed with Reid is a classic example of keeping your friends close, and your enemies closer. Sometimes, as this proves, it pays to, "make a deal with the devil".

This is very true.  In 2010 I was quite upset with some of the ratings the NRA gave to people I knew were huge leftists.  I even sent the NRA a letter voicing my concern.  Now (especially after the seeing what it will take to win a real war)  I realize that they cannot survive without being a single issue group.  They have to support politicians that I may not support in order to keep winning.  Yes, even Harry Reid.  I hate that I just typed that and will now go wash my hands.

That being said, they need some work on the public face of the NRA.  I don't know if it is Wayne, the board members, or what it is, but we need more strength in the public arena.  Bho is using his campaign to get public support.  The NRA needs to mechanize a similar campaign. 

You can see the results in the last election.  Its not about ideas anymore (unfortunately) its about bombarding the public to get them on your side in strategic areas.  I realize there is a more difficult sell with something like this.  Conservatives are used to using logic and history - not emotion.  Liberals use emotion.  The "we need to save the children" argument is too easy in today's P.C. world.  We need to find our "easy" argument and get on the offense and off the defense.

Andy

[Sponsor]

[1Buckshot]

Mooner your right about the NRA needing a new face and some that will get the attention of the American people. I'm all in favor of, What for it.








Jessie Duff





Yes our own little Jessie Duff. Watching her on the News programs lately I believe she has the ability to sway both men and women in our direction. I know my wife is very impressed as I am, on the way she spoke and how she got her point across. Just the girl next door that the NRA needs.

[billt]

It is becoming more apparent every day, the far left Dems are getting quite desperate in trying to pass any gun legislation at all. Hussein is now trying to, "take the issue directly to the American people". That will work about as well as trying to sell a turd as a Tootsie Roll. As will using idiots like Tony Bennett and Chris Rock as spokespeople for their cause.

Who do the Dems think are stripping the gun shop shelves bare? It isn't Syrian stowaways from a cruise ship. Mainstream America, including a lot of Democrats, have gone from being marginally pro gun, to all but becoming hoarders of anything that goes bang. This isn't about "preppers". Just because the MSM and the far left refuse to talk about it, doesn't mean they aren't seeing it loud and clear. I'm willing to bet Democratic politicians are walking away from Feinstein as if she cut a beer fart at a Washington cocktail party.

I'm expecting Hussein to toss it into his speech tonight. Along with a lot of other nothing. Saying crap like, "As a people there is nothing we cannot accomplish!" What he fails to grasp is what the people have in mind to accomplish is the exact opposite of what he has on his agenda.

[billt]

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/19/17371231-congress-assault-weapons-ban-nixed-from-bill?lite

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GUN_CONTROL_CONGRESS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-03-19-13-51-09

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said on Monday that a controversial assault weapons ban will not be part of a Democratic gun bill that was expected to reach the Senate floor next month,

“After a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday, a frustrated Feinstein said she learned that the bill she sponsored — which bans 157 different models of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines — wouldn’t be part of a Democratic gun bill to be offered on the Senate floor.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has decided that a proposed assault weapons ban won't be part of a gun control bill the Senate plans to debate next month, the sponsor of the ban said Tuesday, a decision that means the ban stands little chance of survival.

This more or less proves there was fruit to be picked from the Harry Reid / NRA deal that was struck back before the 2010 mid term elections. Who would have thought?

[Solus]

I suspect Harry dumped the Assault Weapon Ban not because of any good will towards the 2A, but rather because he thought running with it would make the water too hot too soon and too many frogs would jump out.

[Magoo541]

From what I have seen LaPierre is capable of that if the Board is ready for that.  My problem is that many of the bios for board members are vague concerning their stance and resolution.  How do we vote with the limited info we are presented?

All of that aside, it is time we start writing to the National Rifle Association with the same "take no prisoners" attitude we are using on our elected officials.

Another question:  Where are all of the other organizations?  I am hearing very little from either the media or groups outside of the NRA and Twin Cities Gun Owners & Carry Forum.

Do you recall some legislation a few years ago that the NRA supported that would have effectively eliminated all other grass root gun rights organizations?  There are groups out there working behind the scenes and the NRA seems to become pretty effective at taking ALL the credit.  So much so that the SAF asked the courts to keep the NRA away from a case because they felt the NRA was trying to undermine the case.