More on the NRA’s Harry Reid Endorsement

rick554

The NRA endorses Ted Strickland. Go figure huh?

http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com IronDioPriest

… indicates just how far gone this once-stalwart guard of freedom has slipped into its role as behemoth lobbying insider.

I made a call this morning, and threatened to cancel my membership. I let them know that trading endorsements for pork with betrayers of the 2nd Amendment will not be tolerated, nor will trading infringement on free speech for all in exchange for the NRA being permitted free speech.

It looks to me like LaPierre and Cox need to have a little “come-to-Jesus” meeting with the reality of their constituency.

Vegas_Rick

http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

why would we think the NRA was immune? Whatever the elixir is their pawning, a lot of people are buying…churches, elders, gun owners. Like locating the cause of cholera, at least we know where it is brewed..down by the docks inside the beltway. Time to call for vermin control, and the honey dippers.

Brian_Roastbeef

Of course, it isn’t because Reid likes guns. Its because he likes pork.

Geraghty does a pretty good job explaining the logic behind it. Assuming Dems will control the Senate, better for a single issue org. to have Harry Reid leading it than Chuck Schumer. It maybe seems rational enough, but I’m having trouble understanding it over the sound of Charlton Heston spinning in his grave.

I can see how the NRA isn’t beholden to any political party, but endorsing Democrats isn’t going to win them any support on the left. It will only serve to show how their mentality is more in touch with Beltway politicians than conservative gun owners.

Return to Revolution

as an organization that will stand for 2nd Amendment and/or other constitutional rights? If the answer is no, then maybe they should not be pressured against endorsing Reid. Let them destroy themselves while other organizations – like GOA – will be more than happy to take their place in numbers and popularity.

indyjohn

I sent the NRA an email expressing my alarm at the Harry Reid rumor, and a few hours later received a lengthy and detailed description of Senator Reid’s efforts on belhalf of the organization. The response did nothing to assuage my anxiety. I thought that I would share my response to the NRA email:

Thank you for your response. I understand that the NRA is a single-issue organization and that Harry Reid has, in the past, been a supporter of your legislative efforts. He does, however, have a viable opponent named Sharron Angle, who is currently ahead in the polls. She would most assuredly be even better on Second Amendment issues than Harry Reid, with the additional benefit that she would not vote for anti-Second Amendment jurists, which Reid always will.
The reluctance of the NRA to take a stand on this political race seems to me a little too Machiavellian. I do not believe that Harry Reid is a principled supporter of gun rights, but rather a cynical, manipulative politician who desperately needs the NRA’s endorsement to provide him with a thin cloak of moderation. I believe that he is using the NRA and that the NRA is allowing itself to be used. Yes, Harry Reid is powerful and has been a useful ally for the NRA, but the time for political pragmatism passed with the election of Barack Obama. An NRA endorsement of Sharron Angle, sooner rather than later, would be instrumental in placing her on the path to victory in November. A defeat of Harry Reid will be a victory for the American people, our political system, our economy, and for the NRA, because it will provide another nail in the coffin of Obama’s benighted, disastrous presidency.
Please demonstrate some courage and support Sharron Angle. Until such time that the NRA leadership proves that it places principle ahead of politics, I am withholding all financial support of the organization.

http://guyaverage.blogspot.com guyaverage

…then they’ll endorse Reed.

http://guyaverage.blogspot.com guyaverage

…that once the 2nd Amendment rights are gone, all the other rights will be easily removed as well. The right to keep and bear arms is the lynchpin of self-government and the only check against unbridled tyranny. The Founders knew this. The Progressive Marxists who currently rule The USA know this as well.

JamesSmith130

If they endorse a pro-gun person who is liberal on basically everything else, well it meets their mission. I don’t expect them to support other conservative issues solely because most of their members are conservative.

On the other hand, Harry Reid has not ever had a record of being pro-gun. Thus there is no reason whatsoever that he should receive a NRA endorsement.

JamesSmith130

Strickland has a record of being pro-gun. For example, John Kasich voted for the Assault Weapons ban and Strickland voted against it. I can see why the NRA endorsed Strickland.

Reid however has an anti-gun record, there is no reason why he should be endorsed.

I get that the NRA is not an arm of the conservative movement, nor should they be (their job is to defend the 2nd Amendment). But it is a betrayal if they are going to endorse anti-gunners against a strong pro-gun leader.

kowalski

They shouldn’t endorse either Angle or or Reid. Angle has been waging a proxy war against them, Reid basically hasn’t recently, and they should endorse neither.

KevinM

I think the original concern for this possible NRA action is the June issue of their magazine where Chris Cox talked about gun ranges and then cited the Clark County Gun Park where he and Wayne LaPierre attended the grand opening. The major error in the article was in the 2 paragraphs where Harry Reid was given sole credit for this happening. Yes, he played a role, but so did the rest of Nevada’s Congressional Delegation. Republican Senator John Ensign did just as much as Reid in getting this done, But unfortunately, since he is dealing with other issues of his own making, he is keeping a low profile. What was further misleading was the photo insert showing Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (NRA Grade “F”), Senator Reid (NRA Grade “B”), and Congresswoman Dina Titus (NRA Grade “B-”) there. Ironically, TItus played absolutely no role in this since she was first elected to congress in 2008. I had planned on letting the NRA know my displeasure about this pro-Reid article before today’s postings, but now I need to get off my butt and do it. Another thing to consider, when the legislation that secured the funding was passed (2002), Harry Reid was the Democratic Whip, not the Majority or Minority Leader.

Regarding Sharron Angle, she has always had an NRA grade of “A” and was endorsed by them for her runs in the State Assembly 2002 and 2004. If you believe what the NRA says about endorsements, this is based on her legislative track record, not what she stated in the questionnaire. When Reid ran for reelection in 2004, the NRA made no endorsement for that seat, they only posted the grades.

For the record, I am a Patron Life Member of the NRA and have been a member for over 30 years.

Joliphant

It just raises the question are NRA leaders possessed of an inability to assess peoples agendas and plans that would put Neville Chamberlain to shame or have they an agenda of their own ?

I understand the concept of buying political favor but the people the NRA have been trying to befriend of late have hated them from day one, and have been bought and paid for by people who hated the NRA from before day one.

npaul

I sent an email to the NRA tonight to tell them that if they endorsed Reid, I would call and ask for the cost of my membership to be refunded. This is the height of stupidity.

BTW, the NRA also endorsed Dede Scozzafava, the NY “Republican” who realized she was going to get beat by both the Democrat and the Independent candidate in the race, and at the last minute, withdrew from the race and threw her support to the Democrat anti-gun candidate, who then won the race for that open congressional seat. What a farce the NRA has become!

bk

In 2004 they had Ziser as an A and Reid as a B but failed to endorse Ziser.

I just saw the B but didn’t catch that they didn’t endorse the A.

kowalski

One of the things that’s missing here is a real discussion of who had any power to help get that range in Nevada built a few years ago.

It wasn’t Sharron Angle. Now, you can say that it was wrong of the NRA to work with Harry Reid to get the range built, and to ‘accept’ the earmark, but does anyone really believe that it would have happened without Reid’s support? And where did the money go?

If it’s wrong to convince the senior senator from Nevada to help get your big shooting complex built – particularly at the outset when someone named Sharron Angle was the approximate equivalent of dog catcher nationally, and Democrat leadership was almost preordained for several more years in Congress – I guess every single organization on Capitol Hill that talks to elected officials should STOP RIGHT NOW unless they want to get excoriated like Erick has done in the past few days to the NRA.

I think the NRA should be getting congratulated for it instead of ripped to shreds over alleged rumors and things people are saying, allegedly, about a Reid endorsement.

For the record if they endorse Reid I’ll pull my membership. But I’m thinking pretty seriously about doing it if they endorse Angle, also, given the way this whole thing is playing out. It stinks.

It’s getting harder by the day to decide who is and was out of bounds, here. Erick can be as purehearted for Sharron Angle as he’d like right now, but the fact is that when the range in Nevada was proposed, Sharron Angle wasn’t a name anyone knew.

I want to know: if my company or organization ever deals with a Democrat, Erick, will I/they get the same treatment? If that’s true, your next few posts are going to have to include many of the members of the Fortune 500 and a lot more besides.

kowalski

After the last week or so, if all you were reading was Erick’s posts about the NRA, you might think their Executive Vice President was Roy Cohn, not Wayne LaPierre.

kowalski

Who’s next after Erick gets done blasting away at the NRA? Does he start blasting away at the people who speak at their Annual Convention and accept the speaking fees?

Does he start blasting away at Sarah Palin? At Mike Huckabee? At Oliver North? At everyone on the floor there? At Haley Barbour? At Newt Gingrich?

Don’t tell me he’s going to start blasting away at Ted Nugent, because Nugent will shoot back, that’s for sure. I have absolutely no doubt about that.

All I’m saying here is — let’s take a deep breath — I don’t think the idea of receiving an earmark to build a shooting range in Nevada and congratulating Reid in the pages of the American Rifleman is as bad as it’s being made out to be.

I don’t want to see the NRA endorse Reid for Senate – and it will pull the plug on my now and future membership if they do – but I’d like to see this fight end as soon as possible, before it gets any uglier.

This is bad enough.

free2smooze

If you think the NRA has much to do with protecting the second amendment, you’ve bought the lie they sell to membership while consistently using their funds to undermine genuine 2nd amendment protection. Brady Bill – Compromise. Assault weapons ban – compromise. I left NRA for GOA during the Clinton administration. My dues go to an actual 2nd amendment protecting group, not one that has been selling it off piecemeal for political power for 20 years.

http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

Whether they like it or not the fact of the matter is that most gun owners are conservatives and the overwhelming majority of NRA members are conservatives. It’s simply a matter of philosophical beliefs and ideology. For the NRA to support Reid is an offense to the membership. Just because Reid might be good on gun issues the rest of his agenda is anathema to the conservative membership and they risk losing members, a lot of them if they endorse Reid.

http://charlemagne-the-hammer.blogspot.com/ DerKrieger

“I don?t expect them to support other conservative issues solely because most of their members are conservative.”

I do. To think that support for gun rights and conservatism can be separated is nonsense. Gun rights is a core conservative belief and to support a supposedly pro-gun politician who is hostile to the overall conservative agenda and your base is the height of folly. I predict the NRA will lose significant membership if they support Reid.

indylawyer

It is certainly frustrating to see a normally conservative group like the NRA back someone like Reid, but their approach has been very effective – support incumbents from either party who support gun rights. That’s why the Dems haven’t even touched that issue since they regained control of Congress despite their huge majorities. They know there are real consequences to crossing the NRA that can be at least partially avoided by supporting it.

And it also helps that there are a fair number of real swing voters for whom guns are an important issue.

Joliphant

I really don’t know what the demographics are like in NV but I imagine they are about the same for firearm enthusiasts as Florida, and I can’t think of one federally funded gun range in the state of Florida but I can think of dozens of little privately operated ranges often attached to mom and pop gunstores/gunsmiths.

I am pretty sure if this was a crystal meditation harmonic convergence park we would all be singing a different tune about how the government had no business funding such a thing. We would have the added fun of laughing at the kooks but thats another thing entirely.

Unless this gun range were on a military base, I have no idea why some ill informed defenseless vegetarian should have his tax money (provided he isn’t a dependant of the state) used for this anymore than mine should be.

As to blasting away at Newt Gingrich when a good man goes south what else should you do ? Or have you forgotten Newt’s Commercial with Nancy Pelosi ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154

That thing still has me turning shades of red.

All I see here is we are at a time when we need to push back and hopefully push crud like Reid off the map. Rasmussen has him 41 to 48 in the polls and he is the speaker of the house. The last thing a conservative organization needs to do is polish his image.

If they wanted to say thanks they could give him a dinner and make him a lifemember in December.

Joliphant

The gingrich pelosi thing had me nuts again.

Tbone

dontcha know?

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Just look at his judicial votes.

spainishirish

nt

Our verdict on you…

spainishirish

God help us our party,

tinwhisker

. . . now thinks of himself as part of the ruling elite more than he does as the representative of the millions of gun owners, NRA members or not?

This is all very enlightening. I guess that after LaPierre secured the NRA’s special carve-out deal in the Disclose Act that he’s feeling his oats; or is this pay back to Reid for the carve-out? It stinks to high heaven either way. NRA needs new leadership, someone who won’t lie down with dogs, someone who won’t sell his soul — and the NRA — for 30 shekels of silver.

atillathehun

Years ago when the world was flat the NRA had a women spokesperson testify before a Congressional Commitee who’s name escapes me.
In her ridiculous statement she said and I quote: “Magazine capacity has nothing to do with the firepower of a weapon.” I canceled my long time membership the next day.”
The NRA as with the Southern Poverty Law Center has been subverted by people who evidently belive that political expediency wins. That philosophy brought the conservative movement to the brink of extinction.
The endorsement of Reid by the NRA is unacceptable and I will cancel my membership again.

mschmitt

Assuming you were right about all this, of course. Then, sure, you got them to come out strong against Kagan. Any chance of a Reid endorsement has to be dead in the water, now…

But Barry will get his favors back, one way or another.

kowalski

I’m worried about it too. I want to learn the deatils more completely than I do. The “Good man going south” point is well taken: sometimes you have to crack the whip. I get it. I understand that point — personally! as one of the occasionally wobbly myself. So I want to say this, to Chris Cox, Wayne LaPierre, and to Erick Erickson:

If the NRA endorses Reid it’ll be a mistake with deep and permanent consequences, at least to me, on a number of levels. It’s one thing to be working with the Senate Majority Leader in the course of getting something positive accomplished for your members, but it’s another to sell your endorsements, and if that’s what this amounts to, I will to say to the NRA:

“I didn’t want this fight with you, but it has been thrust upon me, and I won’t back away from it.”

I’m not happy about it either way. It gives me absolutely no pleasure to see organization that did so much to protect and expand the 2nd Amendment in the past decade be dragged naked through this pile of broken glass, here on my favorite blog, by one of my favorite people and someone who I’ve “known” as closely as one can through a computer screen through the past 5 years.

It stinks. I hope it doesn’t happen.

soljerblue

if you examine the history, and the records, of the NRA against all the other so-called 2nd Amendment support orgs like GOA, the only one that stacks up anywhere near the NRA is the Second Amendment Foundation. There are a lot of good conservatives mad at the NRA now for its perceived lapses from constitutional orthodoxy. I happen to be one of them. Many, many other members are also upset, but most of us are making that known with-IN the NRA, not grabbing our marbles and walking away. I’ve been a member since 1959 — joined while I was serving overseas in the Navy. Became a Life Member in ’79. In that time I have seen the NRA’s top management drift away from the general consensus of its membership twice. Both times, that changed back to the original mission focus — not because people left, but because they stayed and forced the changes by using their financial clout, and their votes on the BoD.

There is, flat out, regardless of what some think, no gun rights group that can touch the political, cultural, or financial clout of the NRA. I wouldn’t trade my membership there for any other group. Like any other bunch of human beings, they make mistakes. But they are worth supporting and defending because there’s no other heavy hitter in the ball park like them.

End of rant. Sorry.

soljerblue

Sent my own letter expressing the same view…Messrs Cox and LaPierre need to hear from committed members loud and clear.

kowalski

GOA has 300,000 members. It’s less than 10% the size of the NRA.

Does GOA have anywhere near the resources the NRA does (which it expends) not only to help its members but to maintain the staff needed to stay on top of the law in all 50 states and maintain a presence there?

Does GOA have an annual convention with attendee numbers in the 6 figures and attract speaking talent it can pay $25,000 per appearance for?

Does GOA have a track record on Capitol Hill that — despite what this example is being made into — would have even 1/20th the effectiveness if the NRA was to disappear tomorrow?

I didn’t even know who GOA was until two weeks ago. My guess is that most of their members are in NEVADA. I really am very reluctant to take a small, regional organization and use it as the wrecking ball for an organization with more than 4 million nationwide members and a very long and documented track record of advancing its cause at every level of government.

I don’t think GOA will ever host a gun show in my home state, but the NRA did last year, in Springfield, MA — and I was able to attend it.

You’d better be careful what you wish for — because the McDonald decision only sets the stage for the legislative battles that are coming in its wake. And 300,000 people mostly living in Nevada and the surrounding states are ***NOT*** going to be as effective nationwide as the NRA will be.

http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com IronDioPriest

http://gunowners.org/

Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue.

GOA was founded in 1975 by Sen. H.L. (Bill) Richardson (now retired). Richardson continues to serve as the Chairman of Gun Owners of America, bringing his many years of political experience to the leadership of GOA. Richardson is also an avid hunter and outdoorsman.

The GOA Board of Directors brings over 100 years of combined knowledge and experience on guns, legislation and politics. GOA’s Board is not satisfied with the “status quo.” Americans have lost some of our precious gun rights and WE WANT THEM BACK! This is why GOA is considered the “no compromise” gun lobby.

From state legislatures and city councils to the United States Congress and the White House, GOA represents the views of gun owners whenever their rights are threatened.

GOA has never wavered from its mission to defend the Second Amendment — liberty’s freedom teeth, as George Washington called it.

Over the last 30 years, GOA has built a nationwide network of attorneys to help fight court battles in almost every state in the nation to protect gun owner rights. GOA staff and attorneys have also worked with members of Congress, state legislators and local citizens to protect gun ranges and local gun clubs from closure by overzealous government anti-gun bureaucrats.

As an example, GOA fought for and won, the right of gun owners to sue and recover damages from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) for harassment and unlawful seizure of firearms.

Associated with GOA are: Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund, Gun Owners of California and Gun Owners Foundation.

Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund is the political action arm of GOA. It raises funds to support the election of pro-gun candidates at all levels of government. GOA has a record of helping pro-gun candidates defeat anti-gunners in hundreds of races across the country over the past 30 years, and will continue to do so as long as our supporters provide the necessary financial resources.

Gun Owners of California operates solely within California, where it was also founded by Senator Richardson to address the pivotal gun issues arising in that state.

Gun Owners Foundation is a non-profit, tax-deductible education foundation. It is the research arm of GOA. Among the activities sponsored by GOF are seminars which inform the public, the media and government officials about key issues affecting the Second Amendment. GOF also publishes books and articles concerning gun issues as they affect people throughout the world.

Strength comes with numbers, and the more concerned Americans join Gun Owners of America, the more we can do to protect the Second Amendment and our freedom. We need you! Shouldn’t you become a member of Gun Owners of America?

etlib

Conservatives must stand together. Single issue organizations cannot stand alone and individual politicians must support ALL the conservative view points if they are to win.

Look at the left. The racial groups all support abortion. the anti-life groups all support gun controls, gun control groups all support the ACLU, the anti religion groups all support the peace groups and everyone supports the greenies.

Since I see a logical and moral connection between all the conservative positions I have no problem supporting them all but if gun control groups start focusing on gun control to the extent they ignore the importance of pro-life, lower spending, lower taxes, religious freedom, … the second amendment rights will be lost. In fact the second amendment is almost certainly the first to go (it’s almost gone now).

kowalski

If GOA had been the organization filing the amicus briefs in DC vs. Heller and in the most recent case, do you think it would have gone very far? Do you think Heller would have even filed the suit without the legal support from people at the NRA?

It strains credulity, at the very least, to imagine that GOA is anything other than the Johnny-Come-Lately 2nd Amendment organization right now. And it’s making everyone on this blog who supports the last two SC decisions sound like a bunch of ingrates.

I’d like to ask, for example: Is Erick himself a gun owner? Has he ever been an NRA member? I mean, I received the issue of the American Rifleman in the mail — but Erick apparently had to be informed of it by other people. He’s in Macon, not Nevada. Is GOA active in Macon? I know the Friends of the NRA are active there. Has Erick ever been to one of their meetings?

mjdzfun

I contacted the gun range I belong to as well as my local gun club to express my concerns about the NRA endorsing Harry Reid. (Here, to get a range badge for the firing range, you must belong to a local gun club. To join the gun club, you must belong to the NRA.) I’ve heard from both organizations who said like me, they were concerned and frustrated about NRA’s pending endorsement of Reid. The gun range added they were sending out an email to all their affiliated gun clubs to discuss the matter of having to join the NRA as a requirement to belonging to the gun club.

So contact the NRA for sure, but don’t stop there. Contact every 2nd Amendment organization you know.

indylawyer

As a voter, I agree with you. I’d absolutely vote for Angle if I lived in Nevada, and in fact will vote for Dan Coats even though he voted for an assault weapons ban and Ellsworth is supposed to be pretty solid on guns.

But the NRA exists to promote one issue – gun rights. Their position is a conservative one, and most of the time that’s going to mean supporting the candidate who is more conservative overall. But they aren’t a conservative organization per se. And their strategy of supporting pro-gun incumbents of either party has worked very well for that purpose. I’d note this isn’t anything new – Bernie Sanders first got elected to Congress because the NRA went after the Republican incumbent for an anti-gun vote.

TexasTami

…then they’ll lose me as a paying member.

josephmn

I am a member of the NRA as is my wife. We have been proud to be part of this patriotic ogranization for many years. When the NRA supports harry reid and backhands freedom loving people by doing the stupak two-step and making a deal with the devil on free speach they have lost claim to my loyalty and continued membership.

profchuck

I have contacted the NRA. As a long time member I informed them that if they did support Reid I would cancel my membership.

Joliphant

The NRA gets the message.

warrior06

I also, after waiting for approximately 30 minutes, had a pleasant conversation with a rep also named Miranda (same one?). She also defended Sen Reid. She stated their decision will not come out until Sept/Oct. I explained he is a democrat, and she responded they are not a political organization, I informed her (forcefully) that the Democrat Party as POLICY is hostile at best and determined to emasculate/eliminate at worst the 2nd Amendment. That as a matter of policy, the GOP is the party of the 2nd Amendment. I brought up Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that Democrats are only allowed to vote for 2nd Amendment issues when their votes will not affect the course of the bill. Otherwise they WILL vote the Democrat line. I said I was disappointed with the NRA’s position on the DISCLOSE act, but while not agreeing, understood their position. I made it forcefully clear (I made sure she got my life time NRA membership number) that IF, IF the NRA endorsed Sen Reid I WOULD cancel my life time membership via signature receipt requested letter, and transfer all my monetary support to the GOA. She was quite subdued. Please continue the pressure.

gowallygo

If the NRA endorses Harry Reid, I along with many of my friends will drop our membership with the NRA. Harry is a back stabber, a lair and will tell you anything to get your support . I hope the NRA thinks twice before they make a decision and endorse the correct person and that being SHARRON ANGLE.

THANKS, WALLY

jplfly

Well, after leaving a voice mail on their recorded comment line I called back to speak with a live person. I held for 45 minutes and finally gave up. Sounds like we are keeping them busy. I do plan to call again later.

But let’s face it folks, the NRA and the AARP are both nothing more than huge fundraisers and mouthpieces for anyone who promises to cut them a deal. They are no longer principled organizations who give the small guy a voice.

The NRA is NOT representing their members if they endorse Reid and they should suffer the same loss of financial support and membership that the AARP did by supporting Obamacare.

profchuck

Reid is a progressive and as such he is willing to cut any deal that furthers the progressive agenda. The progressives want a populace that is dependant upon the government and they want the government to be feared. As Jefferson observed, “when the people fear the government there is tyrany” My word to the NRA is don’t be like the AARP. Sicophants are regognized for what they are. Stand up for the second ammendment but stand for liberty as well.
If the NRA supports Reid the impact on membership will be catastrophic.

pburton

“… the key point ? both people at the NRA and people in the Senate are telling me the NRA will be endorsing Harry Reid later this year …”

Eric, as you may have guessed from readership and the CNN job, you’re a player now — someone who is to be used, when possible.

Do you ever worry about being made a dupe, Mr. Erickson? Do you suppose there may be people out there who are every bit as clever?

If you’re right on this, I’ll not renew my NRA membership (14903XXX) for whatever term Senator Reid corrupts principle, nor praise the NRA by name. And I’ll apologize.

And if you’re wrong …?

BTW: The primary problem, as pointed out, is not endorsement or single advocacy. The problem is putting politics before principle; the problem is regarding law as means.

Although the form (strength through unity and number) can be corrupted by men, the enduring part will live on, supported by other of the true principles.

In this case, it is particularly sad. The gun-guys only have to work with 27 words. You’d think such brevity would lend itself to understanding; that the single hot spark would ignite a greater enlightenment.

billcaris

They say they are not endorsing Reid and that Angle has an “A” on 2nd Amendment issues and that Reid “hasn’t helped” them. I pointed out that he sure helped the NRA on the DISCLOSE Act…NRA rep said they oppose the version in the Senate. I told him I’d never renew my membership if they cave.

Folks, you gotta call and be heard. Reid has almost 20 MILLION in the bank to pound Angle…You CAN’T ASSUME a Republican sweep in November…An NRA endorsement would hurt Angle badly…

Call NRA and be heard!!

You may also contact us by phone at (800) 392-VOTE (8683), Monday-Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m., EST.

hproesemann

Eric,
you were wrong about NRA confirming Kagan and you were wrong about NRA`s stance on the “Disclose Act” .

You were too quick to judge the NRA. If you are wrong about the NRA endorsing Harry Reid, I am discontinuing my subscription to your MB newsletter.

dmdalton

The following explains why NRA says it plans on supporting Reid. Received from a colleague who has friends that work for the NRA (we both live in the Washington DC area). YMMV, BIDI

“As we discussed by phone a few minutes ago, it appears the NRA
does indeed plan to support Harry Reid’s re-election, its rationale
according to JK being that Shummer of NY would replace Reid, and Shummer is the greater 2nd Amendment threat. Of course there’s more behind the scenes, but, like you, if NRA supports Reid directly or indirectly, that would end my NRA membership once and for all. And you and I would be just the tip of the iceberg.”

Tbone

Let’s see, 6 day wonder, this is your first post and you say this:

“Received from a colleague who has friends that work for the NRA (we both live in the Washington DC area).”

Let me help you flesh it out a bit. ….”who once knew a guy that heard from his sister-in-law who shot ducks in an arcade game that she was pretty sure that was what the kid said while bagging the groceries to the person ahead of her mother in line on Wednesday, or maybe it was this morning.” LOL

dmdalton

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/07/13/nra-openly-floats-a-harry-reid-endorsement/

The NRA?s lobbyist, Chris Cox, claims that Chuck Schumer would be Majority Leader were Harry Reid gone (note the NRA?s implicit expectation of a Democratic Senate majority). But here?s the thing ? Chuck Schumer could not get anti-gun legislation through the Senate and what?s more, Schumer, when head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, recognized the damage to the Democrats being anti-gun was having. Many of the Democrats in the Senate the NRA loves were people supported by Chuck Schumer.

So they have gone from denying they would endorse Harry Reid to ?not tamping down speculation.?

josephmn

Harry Reid has spent his political life destroying Americans freedom. He walks carefully around the NRA because they give him cover from Americas gun owners. Fill the congress with harry reids and see how long they will support our gun rights. I cancelled my NRA membership because they would not abdicate their support of the hateful little anti-American from Nevada.

It is exactly how Protestants (and Catholics?) refused to deal with the Nazi’s.

We either strive together for freedom from tyranny or offer the door to those who want to placate the monster. harry reid is worthy of no mans endorsement who loves America and what we stand for.

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

More on the NRA’s Harry Reid Endorsement

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL