>Yep, the NRA needs to broaden it’s assessment of what is important about who they support. We have a bunch of RINOs with a high NRA rating who will help the Dems consolidate power and then stab us and the NRA in the back. Stupak should have given them more than a clue.
Very simply, this is nonsense.
The NRA rates politicians on how they vote on gun rights not on some possible later actions which they might engage in. The NRA is not the GOP and it is not a purely conservative organization. They are single issue and to follow nonsense like you and others propose would remove their focus and their ability to accomplish what they do.
It’s OK to get on the case of the GOP for endorsing RINOs but if that RINO has always voted against gun control, then the NRA is only rational to support them. If you don’t support what they do, which is protecting the Second Amendment and promoting shooting sports, then don’t support the NRA. If you expect them to be something other than what their charter entails because you want them to live up to your theories and politics, well don’t hold your breath.
I’m an NRA Life Member and it is certainly true that they endorse politicians whom I despise. However I accept why they do it.
Let’s put it this way- if the NRA didn’t work the way it does, do you think there would be a single Democrat stopping gun control measures that Holder (and the big O) would love to see? If they were simply an adjunct of the GOP and didn’t consistently stick to their issue they would be marginalized and the largest Democratic majority in quite a while would have rammed plenty of gun control down our craws.
However because the NRA is plenty smarter about this than many who have posted here, even Pelosi, who hates guns with a passion won’t even entertain bringing up gun control legislation on the floor of the House.