I'm sure all of you well informed people have heard of the UN Small Arms Treaty that Hillary is about to sign. You may even be following Dick Morris' commentary about the issue. If you have, then you know this is an addendum to an existing treaty and, if the Senate doesn't vote on it, it becomes law.
Here's were the NRA gets involved. Now, for reference, I am a card carrying NRA member and NRA Pistol instructor. I support the NRA. The NRA rates politicians based solely on how well they support 2nd Amendment rights. For what it's worth, Harry Reid got an A back in 2010. Here's where it gets interesting.
The NRA says it has 58 votes, more than enough to reject the treaty. However, it all depends on if Harry Reid will bring it to a vote. Anyone wanna take bets on that happening. Now if the NRA really did their job of vetting candidates before giving them a rating would this be an issue?
Now I understand the NRA is trying not to show favoritism to one political party over another. If they did show preference, they would be labeled as partisan or as a wing of the Republican Party. However, we know that any democrat at any time will vote against his principles if they need the votes to get legislation passed. In this case all Reid has to do is not bring it up for a vote. Will the NRA condemn him for not doing that?
Apply the same logic to abortion, the economy, etc. and it's easy to see how a single issue voter/organization can be duped.