No, it is an opinion article on one of the most popular conservative websites. You are free to agree or disagree. Personally, I have seen enough evidence to agree with Erick's conclusion.
It's illustrative of the problems of the Internet.
Yeah, that darned internet thingy. Life was so much better in the good old days, when Uncle Walter and his two counterparts regurgitated the New York Times and told us all what to think.
One person starts a rumor, and now it has been posted here, with no backup, twice, this time as breaking.
You are free to refute anything in the article. Somehow I don't think refutation will be coming from you anytime soon.
A late addendum at RedState to the original story - sounds like a confirmation to me, unfortunately:
______________________________________
A Reader Email on the NRA
Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)
Thursday, July 1st at 10:10PM EDT
4 Comments
From the mail bag:
After reading your post, I wasted 30 minutes waiting on hold to talk to a human at NRA. I finally got a guy – I think he said his name was “Tag” – who was in full defense mode on all the good stuff Harry Reid had done, all his votes, how they gave him a B Grade, how he wrote an amicus brief for the Heller & Chicago SCOTUS cases. When I told them that there is a list on Redstate.com of all the anti-2nd Amendment votes by Harry, he said “Redstate, yeah, right.” This guy was combative and rehearsed in his defense of Harry Reid. I asked him how they can support a guy who voted against the SCOTUS nominees (Roberts, Alito) who were 2nd Amendment advocates, but vote for Sotomayor. “Tag” said that most judicial nominations are done on party line votes, and they don’t hold those votes against Harry Reid!! I said that those in the military community, where many NRA members serve their country, are still bothered by “the war is lost” comment on Iraq. “Tag” laughed at me, and said, “Oh, comeon!”.