How does the NRA become more important than your own Party

When a congresscritter is in a fairly red district, the NRA can make or break them.

ability to run ads 24/7.

Fuck the NRA.

But that would require enough of us to join the NRA and steer it in another direction...away from supporting any political party, and just following its mandate of supporting the Second Amendment...nothing else, no puppy mills, no pork farms...just the right to bear arms!

Note, I said steer it away from politics not destroy it...because if it's destroyed, then another group will step in and continue doing it what it does.

and they send you glossy magazines and stickers, along with a letter in September that lists the electoral races in your district and tells you who they want you to vote for. Thats about it as far as a members' "involvement" in the organization. Attempting some sort of "operation chaos" from within their ranks would be the worst idea imaginable as it would amount to them collecting more in membership dues and claiming more membership... and nothing else.

I will say this at every opportunity: Fuck the NRA

along with a letter in September that lists the electoral races in your district and tells you who they want you to vote for.



WHAT SORT OF DISCIPLINE DOES THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAVE....THEY DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD TO DO.


THEY DO NOT CONSIDER THE CONSTITUION OR THE WELFARE OF THE COUNTRY. EVER.


THAT IS NOT THEIR PRIORITY...... SEE IT WITH YOUR OWN EYES, WE ALL DO EVERYDAY....

But the membership does hold them accountable. When Bill Ruger suggested compromise, donations dropped. When Joaquin Jackson advocated magazine limitations, donations dropped.

Lots of NRA members do disagree with their policy. Lots belong because their range requires membership or includes NRA membership in their dues. The NRA is a single issue advocracy group - defense of the second amnedment.

When Repukes are in power, they go after the "base" and "support" of the Democratic Party like Unions, Voter Registration Organizations and Community Organization Groups.

When Democrats are in power...it appears we go after the same groups.

Maybe the next time the Dems are in power they'll go after these powerful Repub-neocon front groups, but I won't hold my breath!

is nothing more than an "extension" of the Republican Party.

It's time to start asking some of these "democrats" if they "Stand with Ted Nugent and Darrell Issa, or with President Obama"?

Hell, we may not need to ask them...their votes will tell us all we need to know.

That is all.

Is it in your post, or elsewhere? Explain please.

AND I WILL ALREADY GIVE YOU ONE ANSWER: IT IS NOT THE PEOPLE


THAT HAVE: 'organic brain damage' ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????







The people want their Democracy, and that is neither 'organic brain damage' or paranoia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They don't give a shit about democracy as long as they are allowed to be armed to the teeth and they are armed to the teeth because they are scared to death - unrealistically - of their fellow citizens. They spew paranoid bullshit about the Scary Negro in the White House coming to take their guns. They are by definition nuts and fact-free.

Just what is it you are ranting about anyway, Francis?

I have been a gun owner all my life and have never done any of these things. Could it be that I am the only one or is it that you are just wrong.

My stepsister is as lefty as they come. She also knows how to handle a shotgun with extreme competence. She also thinks the NRA is insane.

Were I to answer your question I would merely say BECAUSE IT IS. Open your own eyes and you can see why.

THE WAY I LOOK AT IT IS YOU HAVE AN ORGANIZATION THAT DOES NOTHING BUT DEAL WITH GUNS DECIDING YOUR VOTE AND YOUR DEMOCRACY and all in Very Bad ways.....Everyone needs to open their eyes to this.

NOTHING good can come from this.

Think about why I said 'DECIDING' in the context of what is going on. Right now, in front of your own eyes.

responsibility for killing more Americans.

You need to decide: Does the Democratic Party stand for Freedom and Democracy or NOT

I say it does. I hope that it still does, because if it truly does not, I think we're finished then. At least with this Chapter.

Meanwhile the World moves on, and the progression continues..... Think about that. It is the way that it works.

THE SIMPLE QUESTION IS WHO ARE PATRIOTS, AND WHO ARE NOT...... AND PEOPLE HAD DAMN WELL BETTER ANSWER THAT QUESTION PROPERLY.......

I WILL GIVE YOU ONE ANSWER RIGHT NOW: THE ELITES ARE NOT PATRIOTS

THEY OWE ALLEGIANCE TO NO ONE. PERIOD. THEY DON'T NEED TO HAVE ALLEGIANCE TO ANYTHING.

UNDERSTAND THIS.

IF YOU ARE A CITIZEN AND A PATRIOT IT IS YOU WHO MUST HAVE ALLEGIANCE TO DEMOCRACY.

NOT THEM.

That sounds kinda -- woo-woo-swear-alleigiance-to-the-state-or-else-comrade-ish. I think I understand your intent but the delivery is somewhat lacking.

just sayin'

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

PERIOD. WAKE UP.


THERE ARE ONLY TWO SIDES TO THIS: RABID PARTISANS AND PATRIOTS. WHICH ARE YOU?

THE ELITES STAND ON THEIR OWN. UNDERSTAND THAT.

I SIDE WITH THE CONSTITUTION.

DO YOU THINK THIS IS THEATER? PEOPLE BETTER WAKE UP.

Then why THE THEATRICS?!?!?!?!

I also side with the Constitution. The Tea partiers assume they do as well. Hyperbole, poor messaging and all caps will win you more frustrations than victories.

AND NOT JUST MY OWN TIME EITHER.....I ALREADY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON. I HAVE HISTORY, CURRENT EVENTS AND MY OWN TWO EYES.

WHAT DO YOU HAVE?


EITHER YOU DO UNDERSTAND AND YOU ARE ON THEY'RE SIDE, OR YOU DONT UNDERSTAND YET. PERIOD.

You haven't really even made a testable assertion; you're just telling us how smart you think you are.

Typing in all caps and insulting people doesn't win anything. In fact, it's pretty much a guaranteed recipe for alienating your audience. It's not even logical that pointing that out makes me suspected of being "on they're side." As of yet I don't even know what constitutes "on they're side." For all I know I may want to be "on they're side" or at least not on the side of wild-eyed blandishments.

an international war criminal vis-a-vis drone strikes. I don't share that opinion as I trust Obama's ethical character (ditto same benefit of the doubt on F&F). Yet, when I ask those why they would tolerate a war criminal, let alone actually vote in favor of a war criminal I get some Mussolini-esque rationale that a GOPer would be worse/at least the trains will run on time.

Now, I'm not pro-NRA but I am pro-2A. That being said, the NRA is just public policy lobbying group. Lobbying is a far cry from drone striking people. If people can "Yes, but -- " in favor of maintaining a Democrat in the WH then why can't they see their way clear in granting a Mulligan because a Democrat doesn't want to alienate a significant portion of his constituents who are pro-2A and thus take their cues from a lobbying group that presumes to represent them?

(Bigger question -- why don't Democrats have a pro-Democrat pro-2A alternative to the NRA? I'd support that.)

important than who's running the country.

THEIR OBSESSION DOES NOT NOT MATTER. IT IS NOT THE POINT RIGHT NOW. UNDERSTAND THAT.

WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO ASK IS WHAT SIDE ARE THEY ON. PERIOD.






PEOPLE HAD BETTER LEARN TO CALL THESE PARTISANS WHAT THEY ARE: I CALL THEM 'NEO AMERICANS' ....



MYSELF.......PEOPLE BETTER FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY ARE. REAL QUICK. AND THEY BETTER PICK UP A HISTORY BOOK OR TWO.....AND THIS IS RECENT HISTORY EVEN.......

I AM GOING TO MAKE THIS MORE CLEAR EVEN

THIS IS NOT ONLY ABOUT REPUBLICANS OR THE GOP EITHER........


THE NEO-AMERICANS=WAR,TORTURE,MURDER AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO ALL OF THIS


EITHER YOU ARE ONE OF THEM, OR YOU ARE NOT.


PICK A SIDE.

None of this is a joke.....HOW MUCH DOES IT TAKE.... HOW MUCH.....

Not so much a Democrat as an anti-Republican.

Nothing is quite as strong as the reaction to an "enemy".

It is well that war is so terrible - otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
Robert E. Lee, Statement at the Battle of Fredericksburg (13th December 1862)

I could not find anything about "WAR,TORTURE,MURDER AND EVERYTHING ELSE TO ALL OF THIS ".

Hence: Today's NRA exists.

That is the end result oh what they promote. So that is why I say it. PERIOD.

So how do you explain our historically low levels of gun violence in America? We have seen a 50 % drop in fire arm murders and manslaughter since 1992. You have never been safer despite the NRA.

ARE YOU INSANE? CANADA HAS HISTORICALLY LOW LEVELS OF GUN VIOLENCE. NOT AMERICA. PERIOD.

READ A NEWSPAPER. THERE ARE 50 PEOPLE SHOT IN A WEEKEND IS SOME AMERICAN CITIES. WHO DO YOU DELUDE? NOT ME.

WAKE UP TO THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE. AMERICA AND AMERICAN CITIES ARE JUST AS DANGEROUS AS ANY CITIES IN... IRAQ FOR EXAMPLE.

WHY IS THIS? WHY ARE OUR CITIES AS DANGEROUS AS ANY OF THOSE IN SOUTH AMERICA? WHY?

THIS IS NOT NORMAL. IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.... YET WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE LARGER PICTURE, IT DOES.

THINK ABOUT IT. NONE, NOWHERE DOES EUROPE HAVE THIS VIOLENCE. NOT MOST OF ASIA, ASIA/PAC, OR CANADA.


THINK ABOUT IT. WHY DO WE HAVE THE SAME VIOLENCE ON OUR STREETS AS THAT IN MEXICO, OR AFRICA, OR IN SOUTH AMERICA?


WHY WHY WHY.


OUR COUNTRY, OUR ENTIRE SOCIETY IS MILITARIZED BY ALL OF THIS......


WAKE UP.





I KNOW WHY. NOW DO YOU KNOW WHY? NO OTHER WESTERN COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, RUSSIA TOO, HAS A GUN VIOLENCE PROBLEM LIKE THAT IN AMERICA......ONLY PLACES LIKE IRAQ, MEXICO....AND SO ON..... WHO ARE BEHIND THE WARS IN THESE PLACES?

THERE YOU WILL FIND SOME ANSWERS. WE HAVE THE SAME WARS OCCURING IN AMERICA. WAKE UP.


HELL READ A DAMN NEWSPAPER....WHO WAS JUST CAUGHT SMUGGLING AK-47S INTO MEXICO? HUH. GODDAMN HOW HARD IS IT?

IT WAS NOT THE DEMOCRACTS EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP. IN TECHNOLOGY AND IN SCIENCE WE ARE THE MOST ADVANCED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, AND YET WE HAVE THIRD WORLD VIOLENCE IN OUR STREETS AND CITIES. WHY?

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls

So explain to me how the NRA is making America a more violent place. The facts would argue otherwise.


Please stop yelling - is your cap lock key broken?

OUR COUNTRY, OUR ENTIRE SOCIETY IS MILITARIZED BY ALL OF THIS......


WAKE UP.





I KNOW WHY. NOW DO YOU KNOW WHY? NO OTHER WESTERN COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, RUSSIA TOO, HAS A GUN VIOLENCE PROBLEM LIKE THAT IN AMERICA......ONLY PLACES LIKE IRAQ, MEXICO....AND SO ON..... WHO ARE BEHIND THE WARS IN THESE PLACES?

THERE YOU WILL FIND SOME ANSWERS. WE HAVE THE SAME WARS OCCURING IN AMERICA. WAKE UP.


HELL READ A DAMN NEWSPAPER....WHO WAS JUST CAUGHT SMUGGLING AK-47S INTO MEXICO? HUH. GODDAMN HOW HARD IS IT?

IT WAS NOT THE DEMOCRACTS EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP.

Do not try to fool me, or other people. You only delude yourself.

PEOPLE NEED TO YELL.......YEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LOUDLY......

btw - care to fill in the blank?

AND I AM A WISE MAN. WHAT ARE YOU?

showing that there is no direct link between gun laws/availability and violent crime.

But then I saw you had written in all caps.

Now I'm torn. Both are compelling arguments.

of how the NRA promotes violence.

And they are very well organized.

and many Democrats represent districts where RKBA is a wedge issue that can cost them their jobs if they don't play it right.

...feel strongly about.

or Moral Majority or the Christian Coalition or the Tea Party or the Bishops.....................

for funding from other sources rather than from the NRA, IMO.

Once again, a certain gun-religionist has made a post conflating lower crime rates & gun ownership.

This guy has been debunked so many times it's crazy. Whenever he is called on it, he says he didn't do it. Then, on the next gun thread, there he is again making the same lies.

But gun-religionists are crazy, so there you are.

gun owners.

The views and the propaganda from NRA officials and the constant donation seeking mailings from the NRA-ILA turn off many of those who join. Otherwise they might well have a much higher membership.

The number of NRA members does not explain the power of the gun lobby but the NRA usually gets the blame from liberals for why attempts to pass new gun laws fail.

Many gun owners often have a significant amount of money and time invested in a hobby which they enjoy. While most own only a couple of firearms and only shoot occasionally, they still have an interest in electing candidates who believe in the Second Amendment. Consequently they show up at the polls to vote against any politician who opposes gun ownership and wants to impose strong gun laws or fees for ownership. Gun rights are an extremely important issue for such voters. In the past, Democrats have favored extreme gun control and while that is popular in many large urban areas such as Chicago, it has cost our party dearly in many other states just as the fight over abortion rights and opposition to the theory of evolution have hurt the Republicans.

Many Democrats own firearms for target shooting, hunting or self defense. It is an unfortunate fact that many gun owners simply refuse to vote for ANY politician who favors strong (draconian) irregardless of party gun control and are one issue voters. Since most Republican candidates favor gun rights, Republicans benefit the most from this segment of voters. If both the Republican and Democratic candidate are pro-gun, they will consider other issues when making their decision on who to vote for.

In general the majority of gun owners are not opposed to reasonable gun control measures but the problem is in the definition of reasonable. Another "assault weapons" ban, a limitation of the size of magazine (clip) capacity, national firearm registration, micro-stamping schemes, bans on all semi-auto pistols or a general handgun ban are examples of very unpopular ideas with gun owners.

I know a lot of gun owners and many basically agree with our party on many issues but absolutely refuse to vote for a Democrat. I often try to explain to them that the Republicans are quite possibly more dangerous to gun rights than Democrats and mention that Richard Nixon told the reporter William Safire that, "Guns are an abomination" and "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles.". President George Bush Sr. banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989 and wished that firearms could only be used for sporting purposes. Governor Ronald Reagan, while governor of California signed the Mulford act which greatly prohibited the right to carry firearms in public or in a vehicle. (source: http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/issue11/dont_blame_liberals.htm)

Romney who has been on every side of every issue at one time during his political career is now pretending to be a strong conservative and appears to be taking a pro-gun position. The problem is that, if elected to President, it's impossible to predict what he will support.

Obama has actually shown support for gun rights but most gun owners suspect that he will change that view in a second term and point out his position on gun control prior to becoming President. I will agree that this is possible however I point out to those who say this that Obama was a politician from Illinois and he would have never became a senator from that state if he would have been pro-gun. He would have had a had time getting elected dog catcher.

As an American citizen I support gun control measure that help to insure that only honest, sane citizens can buy firearms. I strongly favor law enforcement efforts to stop the straw purchase of weapons and the smuggling of firearms to Mexico. Therefore I am deeply concerned about rogue and ill conceived programs such as Fast and Furious. I feel that it is important not only to stop such programs but to find our how they were allowed to happen and exactly who approved them. I also would like to learn why similar programs were allowed in the previous Bush administration.

One of the many reasons that I voted for Obama was that he promised transparency. I'm not quite sure why he has decided to invoke executive privilege on some administration documents related to Fast and Furious. I hate to say this but, in my opinion, it smells of a possible coverup. I will grant that this is the first time that Obama has claimed executive privilege which is far better the Bush the junior's administration which invoked it 6 times. Perhaps his reasons are logical and justified.

However I will agree that the investigation led by Rep. Darrell Issa does appear to be a witch hunt. His demand for documents does appear to be far reaching and unnecessary to discover the when and how of Fast and Furious. He does seem to be targeting Eric Holder for political gain.

Will this "scandal" hurt Obama's chances? Probably not as the results of the investigation will not be released until after the election. Unfortunately, if truly embarrassing, they could make Obama a weaker President in his second term. Is this as serious a scandal as Watergate? I doubt it but I can't say for sure since I don't know all the details.
I love conspiracy theories and I have wondered if there is a possible CIA involvement in the operation. That's far out in left field and in the area that Jesse Ventura loves. Therefore since I am intelligent enough to know that most conspiracy theories are bunk and nonsense. Still I would like to know for sure as in our nation's history we have had situations such as the Iran-Contra affair.

Still the most important problem our nation faces is the recovery form the Great Recession. Since the Fast and Furious operation has ended, we might be better served if Congress and the President worked together on solving our economic situation. Unfortunately this is unlikely as the Republicans appear far more focused on playing politics then solving problems.