Posted on 10/07/2010 8:30:58 AM PDT by Frantzie
The National Rifle Association’s political action committee has endorsed Democratic incumbent Earl Pomeroy in North Dakota’s U.S. House race.
Both Pomeroy and Republican challenger Rick Berg received “A” grades in the NRA-PAC’s election assessment, which is based on candidates’ records and answers to a questionnaire.
(Excerpt) Read more at inforum.com ...
this is nuts. I can understand backing a couple particularly friendly 2nd Amendment backers, but this massive backing of Democrats is nuts.
The way the NRA acts we can have a Communist style government as long as people can have a gun. Even in Stalin USSR people had guns as attested by the fact the top sniper in Stalingrad learned his “trade” hunting in the Urals.
Are really going to put up a separate post for every Democrat they endorse?
Why not put them all into one thread?
This is what happens when an interest group finds a friendly Congress willing to make special exceptions to the law that will benefit said interest group and hinder its competitors.
The NRA would have received an exemption from the stipulations of the DISCLOSE Act, had that bill become law. Being the only gun group able to substantively advrtise prior to an election would give the NRA a big leg on competitors like the GOA, JPFO, SAF, etc. since why would people give/join these other groups when they are hobbled in effecting the outcome of elections, while the NRA is not?
NRA is probably hedging its bets that a slim Dem majority in the house without an election right around the corner may be able to get the Act through in the next session, so it's in the NRA's interest to help the Dems keep control of the houses of Congress.
The NRA wants to keep leftist judges in so that the threat, and thus the money train, continues.
With recognition of the 2nds rights as is the 1st, there would be no need of the NRA staff, buildings, pensions, livelihoods.
No threat, No NRA.
Its
That
Simple.
The NRA needs to be slapped down by having their endorsed Dem candidates defeated. And members of the NRA in those states should become ex-members.
Why not put them all into one thread?
Can't. It would exceed the individual posting bandwidth limit.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the house that Wayne La Pierre in 2011!!
The NRA is being pragmatic.
In the past, when they would only support Republicans, it was only a matter of time before the Democrats would win, and start passing anti-gun laws. And there was nothing the Republicans could do to stop them.
So after showing the Democrats how they could severely punish anti-gun candidates if they had to, they opened the door to Democrats, if they were to oppose their own party and support gun rights.
This doesn’t mean that they have embraced the Democrat agenda, only that they have bought insurance.
And if you think that insurance isn’t important, look what is happening to the coal industry. They made the mistake of just supporting Democrats, and not demanding loyalty to coal from them, and the Democrats have declared the coal industry an enemy that must be destroyed.
This means that everybody involved with the coal industry now has to go, hat in hand, to the Republicans in hope that they will suddenly embrace the people who fought them for so many years, and save their rear ends from the Democrats who betrayed them.
And this is the fate of every business and voter bloc in the country. If you just embrace one side, it won’t be long before the other side sets its guns on you. You have to make allies on both sides, and be willing to put hot irons to them if they double cross you.
Yup. Always keep us in constant struggle to keep our rights. I am done with the NRA.
The long-standing NRA policy (as wrong-minded and ignorant as it is) has been - if two candidates have the same “rating”, then they always endorse the incumbent. That is called “hedging your bets”, as incumbents that are not embroiled in controversy, are generally favored.
The problem is - this is such a short-sighted policy. Even if this particular RAT is solidly pro-gun, by supporting a RAT of any flavor is supporting the RAT agenda. If the RATS retain the majority, they get to push their agenda which is soundly ANTI-Gun (and anti-American).
I would understand if the incumbent RAT had a higher pro-gun rating. But since that is not the case... the policy really should be addressed.
I am pulling my funding from the NRA.
I would like to the leadership of the NRA in front of a firing squad.
What a bunch of useless idiots.
I don't think it will have a big impact. Frankly, a lot of these Dems wouldn't have made it into office if they hadn't been pretty good at talking conservative and didn't have good records on RKBA.
I think the idea is to reward incumbent for good behavior. It's carrot and stick.
Contacting the NRA is pointless, you get a perfunctory canned response.I think the best way to address this is to contact each Director personally. Unfortunately, getting a list of the Directors email addresses is not an easy task.
You don’t know your history.
The NRA has always been a East Coast, Washington, elitist organization that wanted control of guns .....in the correct class of people. RINO’s really.
They’ve always support Democrats too.
However there is something going on, now, that for the NRA as an organization, separated from the gun question. That is the recent, mostly CATO, RKBA, Libertarian victories, mostly unsupported by the NRA, in courts. The Libertarians have done more to advance the 2nd in the past five years, with little money, then the NRA has.
Why? Because the motivation factor in the NRA is the NRA staff. They want and need a gun threat. That is were the money comes from. Frankly, right now they are INVESTING in Democrats, for later. They don’t want a GOP sweep, because the more the county and the courts move right...it threatens the NRA existence, money stream, their jobs.
Basically, Democrats, leftist at this point in the NRA, are good business....for them.
The NRA is in the fight of THEIR lives, they are really running the gauntlet. On one side is the true recognition of the the 2nd as a physical political tool against government in the courts. This puts them out of business. On the other side is the NRA Bubba’s that they have to keep to keep the money coming in. Somehow they have to, with out being seen, keep the gun threat alive, and yet not wake up the Bubba’s that send in their twenty, hundred dollars every year.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.