[Dan Nunn]

Unfortunately, some FReepers still won't get it - NRA is a Second Amendment organization, NOT a conservative organization. They have no duty to any other issue or any other candidate.

[Crim]

They endorsed strickland for Ohio...

They are DEAD to me...I wont be renewing my instructor certs.

[kbennkc]

Simple . NRA are collaborators . Yes we got it .

[Mr. Lucky]

By cooperating in the infringement of individual rights which were thought by the founding fathers to have been protected by the First Amendment, the NRA is hastening the day when the last few vestiges of rights protected by the Second Amendment are abrogated.

[NraFreedom]

I do understand that the NRA is to defend the second amendment. However, in doing so, I would think that if this bill is not good for the NRA, then it is not good for Americans. If it is not good for Americans, then the NRA should oppose it whether or not it receives special treatment from those liers in Congress or not.

BTW, I am a Benefactor member of the NRA.

[Niteranger68]

NRA is a Second Amendment organization, NOT a conservative organization.

I struggle to separate the two. I am an NRA member and recognize the work they have done to protect our 2A rights. BUT...their endorsements of Strickland, McCain, Reid, (Bev) Perdue (and others) have me puzzled. Shouldn't they only endorse when one candidate is clearly more pro-2A than the other instead of picking favorites? And regardless of his rhetoric, I don't believe Reid is pro-gun at all. If so, why in the world is he a member of a party that has gun-control as one of its major issues? He can't be that dedicated to the cause....

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"NRA is a Second Amendment organization, NOT a conservative organization. They have no duty to any other issue or any other candidate."

As a lifetime NRA member and frequent defender of them on this board, I think they are wrong here. I know they still oppose this bill, but they will not actively oppose it and will not score it for legislators voting for it. In effect, they are punting on the bill. I got their e-mail with this statement last night.

You are right, the reason they are so successfull in promoting the second amendment is because they focus only on this issue. I've pointed this out numerous times myself. It is why they will support a Harry Reid much to our disgust. But I understand it because he is solid on the 2nd amendment. However, by punting on this issue, they are allowing other 2nd amendment groups to be muzzled and that is not good for the second amendment.

[Steamburg]

The First Ten Amendments are interdependent. If they get to excuse themselves from embracing the whole package, because they got an exemption for themselves, they have abrogated their right to speak for anyone. It’s time to throw out the lapdogs.

[rmlew]

We didn't "sell out" to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill.
How is that not a sell out? It's saying "we won't stand on principle if you exempt us from the unConstituional bill." Shades of Nebraska and the health care debate.

[Errant]

"We didn't "sell out" to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate."

Yea, you sold out...

There are those who say the NRA has a greater duty to principle than to gun rights. It's easy to say we should put the Second Amendment at risk over some "so-called First Amendment principle"

Why do you think the founders added the second Amendment?

"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

THEN THEY CAME for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

THEN THEY CAME for me and by that time no one was left to speak up."

~ A poem published in a 1955 book by Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free

[NewJerseyJoe]

> Unfortunately, some FReepers still won't get it - NRA is a Second Amendment organization, NOT a conservative organization

Unfortunately, the NRA doesn't yet get it: the Second Amendment does not stand alone in a vacuum.

If you do everything right for heart health but destroy the rest of the body, that heart's still going to die.

[Sybeck1]

The NRA is backing the Rat that voted Bela Pelosi in Mississippi 1:

Nunnelee Proud of Pro-Second Amendment Record
Senator Respects NRA’s Expected Endorsement of Childers

TUPELO - Senator Alan Nunnelee said Thursday he’s honored to have received the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) endorsement in previous campaigns for office, but expects the NRA to endorse Congressman Travis Childers for re-election because of their ‘friendly-incumbent rule.’

“The right to keep and bear arms is sacred and enshrined in our Constitution, and I will fight with every bone in my body to defend it from the anti-gun liberals in Washington,” Nunnelee said. “Most importantly, I will vote for a House Speaker who will advance a pro-Second Amendment agenda in Congress. I am a member of the NRA and have deep respect for them. I accept their expected decision to endorse the incumbent, but I remain immensely proud of their previous support due to my diligent advocacy on gun owners’ behalves.”

In a May letter, the NRA thanked Nunnelee for his “leadership on Second Amendment issues during the 2010 session of the Mississippi Legislature” and his “long record of support for NRA-backed initiatives.”

In the recently-concluded Republican primary, Nunnelee was also proud to have received the endorsement of Gun Owners of America.

[Little Ray]

We didn't "sell out" to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill.

Why does sound like a "sell out" to me?

[maine-iac7]

“The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That's their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members.”

The NRA is there to fight and use it's money to protect the NRA and it's members, not to fight for any and all other organizations.

That seems pretty simple and straight forward. To get involved in spending millions helping other organizations fight their battles would REALLY bring cries of outrage from the members! And make the gov’t even more determined to ‘get’ the NRA.

They are absolutely right. It's up to the other organizations to fight on their behalf.

You can't have it both ways.

I am grateful they hung tough for us.

[RickB444]

I hear you. At first I was bugged by this sellout, but the more I reflect on it the more I can see their point.

[Still Thinking]

When they came for the GOA, I didn't stand up because I belong to the NRA.

When they came for the SAS, I didn't stand up because I belong to the NRA.

When they came for the JPFO, I didn't stand up because I belong to the NRA.

You get the idea.

[deoetdoctrinae]

Let me toss a couple of scenarios into play, and see what everyone thinks.

SCENARIO # 1

CONGRESS--"We are going to pass a bill that limits free speech."

NRA--"We can't support that."

CONGRESS--"If we give you an exemption, will you be OK with it?"

NRA--"That will work."

CONGRESS--"You got it."

Now imagine there is a single-issue organization called Free Speech America.

SCENARIO # 2

CONGRESS--"We are going to pass a bill that limits gun rights."

Free Speech America--"We can't support that."

CONGRESS--"If we give you an exemption, will you be OK with it?"

Free Speech America--"That will work."

CONGRESS--"You got it."

________________________________________________

In scenario one, the NRA said to heck with the free speech rights of others, so long as they got theirs.

In scenario two, Free Speech America said to heck with the gun rights of others, so long as they got theirs.

I understand the goal of a single-issue organization (I am an NRA member), but tunnel vision is sometimes short-sighted.

Just throwing this out there for discussion. My two cents.

[Joe Brower]

Thanks for posting this, Dan Nunn. Saved me the time.

Here is what The Federalist had to say about this:

"The DISCLOSE Act, a campaign finance bill meant partially to reverse the outcome of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, came one step closer to passing this week. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) made a deal with the National Rifle Association that would exempt the organization from disclosure rules in the bill. The NRA's reasoning for this back room deal is that it exists to protect Second Amendment rights and will fight to keep its donors' information private. They aren't offering support for any version of the bill, but by backing out of the way, they are handing the keys to passage to Democrats and their union allies, who oppose everything the NRA stands for. Despite the NRA's Faustian bargain, Republicans remain opposed and Democrats were forced to cancel a Friday vote as they struggled to unify their own caucus."

Personally, I'm still trying to separate the truth from the lies.

[BCR #226]

The NRA is NOT a 2nd Amendment organization... They are a professional lobbying organization under the guise of the 2nd Amendment. Their goal is not our 2nd Amendment rights, it’s 2nd Amendment controversy in order to get a larger membership and more money.

[rarestia]

/agreed

*signed, a Life Member

I don’t follow the NRA for conservative activism, I follow them for gun rights. I’ve seen them endorse plenty of folks for their gun rights stances (e.g. Harry Reid), but the rest of their record is abysmal.

I follow the NRA for my gun rights first. I come here to FR for conservative activism and read The Patriot Post for other endorsements.