NRA ENDORSES SENATOR REID!

[funkyflathead]

NRA endorses re-election of Sen. Reid, D-Nev.......

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/10/state2048EST0157.DTL

[1a2b3c]

1. Nevada democrats are much different

Then the jersey/ny democrats. When the party starts to realize that they might win an election by so many votes that it would be impossible to steal.

[Redneck Socialist]

2. Very true...

...though I haven't been able to convince too many other people around here of that.

[salinen]

3. what ever Harry

does is o.k. by me. He is a most remarkable senator, and should have been the minority leader.

[MrBenchley]

5. Now what the hell does that mean?

Are you trying to pretend that there aren't Republicans lying their asses off in NJ? Are you trying to pretend NJ elections arenn't honest?

[1a2b3c]

39. Im not pretending anything

The democratic party one the east and sometimes west coast seems to forget that there is a democratic party that isnt bordering any water and that the land lovers, while still democrats, dont share the same opinions as the NY democrats. Gun laws is a perfect exaple of this.

[MrBenchley]

4. Jeeze, sure sounds like

the loonies are climbing on his bandwagon and not the other way around...

[Emoto]

6. I am curious...

...to learn what those who say that the NRA is an arm of the republican party think about this?

[Superfly]

7. See reply #4 for your answer

...

[Emoto]

8. not sure I follow that

I was hoping for more of an explanation.

[Superfly]

9. Exactly....

what you saw in post #4 is all you are going to get from him.

[Township75]

16. Super, check your inbox*

*

[Superfly]

17. I checked it, Town...

disregard my first message.

[MrBenchley]

10. It means

that the NRA knows they can't elect a Republican there and are trying not to get publicly saddled with a loser AGAIN.

[slackmaster]

11. Please direct us to the law, rule, etc. that says

That they are required to make an endorsement at all?

[Emoto]

12. Can you give me more on that idea?

Despite the efforts of some here, I still see the NRA as a single issue organization that is all about the Second Amendment. I see this endorsement as them saying this guy the the best choice for 2A.

[MrBenchley]

18. Sure...

If you're really asking yourself why the NRA would endorse somebody who has worked to close the gun show loophole, perhaps you ought to see who Reid is running against.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/10/state2118EST0177.DTL

[slackmaster]

19. So you are telling us the NRA is in favor of gay marriage?

From the cited article:

Reid's only confirmed challenger so far is Richard Ziser who headed a conservative group that was able to get voter approval in 2002 of an initiative barring recognition of gay marriages....

[MrBenchley]

22. Here's what I'm telling YOU, slack....

"slackmaster
38. It's the Big Lie strategy"

"slackmaster
58. Nice try but it's still based on a major LIE"

"slackmaster
65. If I may be so bold as to speak for the entire "RKBA crowd"
We aren't saying they are lying."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=20875&mesg_id=20875

[slackmaster]

23. MrBenchley attemps to discredit me by quoting out of context

Rather than addressing the issue I raised in the post to which he responded.

MrBenchley,

Please explain what you meant by "...perhaps you ought to see who Reid is running against." The source you cited apparently believes that the only position of Richard Ziser's worth noting is that he heads a conservative group opposed to gay marriage.

I followed your suggestion, and the only possible logical conclusions I can see are that A) The NRA supports gay marriage, or B) The NRA really is a single-issue organization as Emoto and others have asserted. Neither of those conclusions square with your oft-repeated statement that the NRA is a front group for the GOP.

As one of the moderators counseled me recently, "Please address the post, not the poster...."

[MrBenchley]

24. Attemps?

[slackmaster]

25. Yes, and a feeble attempt at that

I welcome anyone reading any of my previous posts in context.

So, MrBenchley - Are you saying the NRA supports gay marriage?

[MrBenchley]

26. I didn't attempt anything

I quoted you accurately. If anything discredits you, it's your own words.

[slackmaster]

27. Please answer the question

Are you or are you not saying the NRA supports gay marriage?

[MrBenchley]

30. Here's your answer...

"slackmaster
38. It's the Big Lie strategy"

"slackmaster
58. Nice try but it's still based on a major LIE"

"slackmaster
65. If I may be so bold as to speak for the entire "RKBA crowd"
We aren't saying they are lying."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=20875&mesg_id=20875

[1a2b3c]

41. Where are you going with this?

It makes no sense as to the post you replied to.

[slackmaster]

42. It makes no sense whatsoever

The link goes to his own freaking post.

[1a2b3c]

40. Is it just me or did that article say absolutly nothing about who his

challenger is? Wouldnt you think a group as racist as the NRA would be against gay marriage also?

[slackmaster]

43. See the link MrBenchley posted in #18

I think MrB mis-read it. He seems to have dropped the whole issue after I pointed out twice that Reid's only declared challenger, Richard Ziser, is a conservative Republican who's only claim to fame is that he opposes gay marriage.

[1a2b3c]

44. So thats why it made zero sense to me.

Gotcha

[MrBenchley]

45. Real quick...

Why do YOU think no challenger was mentioned...do you think there IS a challenger and the reporter just forgot his name?

P.S.: Think anti-gay bigotry is going to be a winning issue in a state with almost all of the population in Vegas or Reno?

P.P.S.: Who do you think is going to be more help to a bunch of asswipes who want a TV propaganda outlet? The Senate Democratic whip, or a jerkwater state legislator?

[slackmaster]

46. You're the one who brought up the gay rights issue, MrBenchley

In your misstatement in post #31, where you said that one of the Republican challengers is to the left of Reid on gay marriage.

Who do you think is going to be more help to a bunch of asswipes who want a TV propaganda outlet? The Senate Democratic whip, or a jerkwater state legislator?

False dilemma, MrBenchley. The NRA is not obligated to endorse anyone. You keep saying they are against Democrats. Their endorsement of Senator Reid pretty much blows that theory out of the water. They even bypassed an opportunity to endorse an anti-gay candidate, Republican Richard Ziser.

Are you going to try to tell us that Ziser isn't pro-gun?

[1a2b3c]

48. I doubt it

I doubt the reporter forgot his name. The conservatives probably havent decided who to run yet.

I think anti-gay bigotry will win in almost all states, dont ask me why.

I would hope the senate democratic whip, since owning a tv station for your propoganda outlet is, and rightfully should be, legal under the 1st amendment of the constitution, regardless of whether or not you agree with the propoganda.

[MrBenchley]

49. Well...

"The conservatives probably havent decided who to run yet. "
And that explains why you didn't see a challenger name.

"I think anti-gay bigotry will win in almost all states"
Gee, shouldn't the Democratic Party climb on that bandwagon too? After all, the RKBA crowd are always fretting that gun control is going to cost us elections...although the vast majority of Americans support it.

"I would hope the senate democratic whip, since owning a tv station for your propoganda outlet is, and rightfully should be, legal under the 1st amendment of the constitution"
Not even close to true...the airwaves belong to the people, not special interests.....

"The federal government's oversight of broadcasting has had two general goals: to foster the commercial development of the industry and to ensure that broadcasting serves the educational and informational needs of Americans. In many respects, the two goals have been quite complementary, as seen in the development of network news operations, and in the variety of cultural, educational and public affairs programming that has been aired over the years.

In other respects, however, Congress and the FCC have sometimes concluded that the broadcast marketplace by itself is not adequately serving public needs. Accordingly, there have been numerous efforts over the past seventy years to formally encourage or require programming or airtime to enhance the electoral process, governance, political discourse, local community affairs, and education. Some initiatives have sought to help underserved audience-constituencies such as children, minorities and the disabled.

In essence, the public interest standard in broadcasting has attempted to invigorate the political life and democratic culture of our nation."

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/pubintadvcom/novmtg/pubint.htm

[1a2b3c]

57. ...

shouldn't the Democratic Party climb on that bandwagon too?

No they should be for freedom and equality.

After all, the RKBA crowd are always fretting that gun control is going to cost us elections...although the vast majority of Americans support it.

The vast majority do not support the cost inefficient gun control that Al Gore was pressing for in 2000. (registry and ballistics)


Not even close to true...the airwaves belong to the people, not special interests.....


Not even close to true. The airwaves belong to everyone, even special interests. Do you see all them late night infomercials trying to sell you the latest fitness equipment? Thats a special interest too, they are on the airwaves. NRA has had airtime on the OLN channel before. Anyone, special interest group or not, should have the freedom of press.

[MrBenchley]

60. Not even close to true...

So in other words, the Democrats should stand for principle, except when it comes to guns...when they should knuckle under to the GOP's most extreme splinter group.

"NRA has had airtime on the OLN channel before."
I'll bet they will again...and nobody is stopping them from putting out press releases...but the airwaves belong to the people, not to special interest groups...

[1a2b3c]

61. Nope

So in other words, the Democrats should stand for principle, except when it comes to guns...when they should knuckle under to the GOP's most extreme splinter group.

They should stand knuckle under the constitution and stand for the right of a person to keep and bear arms for the defense of themselves and the defense of the country.

If you listen to AM radio, the airwaves belong to special interest groups as well as the people. If VPC wanted a radio show or a tv station, what would be the problem? Sure they would be telling some lies and spreading propoganda, but they have the freedom to do so.

[MrBenchley]

63. "They should stand knuckle under"?

And there's nothing at all in the least unconstitutional about gun control...nor does the Constitution give neurotics some sacred right to tote around hidden guns in public, despite the frantic lies of right wing asswipes.

"If you listen to AM radio, the airwaves belong to special interest groups"
Would that be Rush Limbaugh or Bob Grant telling you that?

"If VPC wanted a radio show or a tv station"
But they don't....they're more than content to let the truth speak for itself. How many newspeople turned up on the NRA's idiotic enemies list?

"Sure they would be telling some lies and spreading propoganda"
Sez who? Wayne LaPierrre? Sean Hannity? John Lott? Hahahahaha...

[slackmaster]

65. ROTFLMAO!

"If VPC wanted a radio show or a tv station"
But they don't....they're more than content to let the truth speak for itself.

Or maybe it's because they don't have anywhere near enough money. All they have is a Web site and an e-commerce operation through which they SELL propaganda.

Nice spin, MrB.

:D

[1a2b3c]

68. I guess some parts of this post are true

And there's nothing at all in the least unconstitutional about gun control...nor does the Constitution give neurotics some sacred right to tote around hidden guns in public, despite the frantic lies of right wing asswipes.

True. SOME, gun control is not unconstitutional, like say background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of convicted felons. Neurotics are emotionally unstable. They can not pass a background check or get a CCW. For the one that might slip past the already in place laws and get a ccw, this doesnt seem like a good enough reason to take away the rights of millions who are not unstable and exercise their right to carry concealed.

Would that be Rush Limbaugh or Bob Grant telling you that?

How clever. You see, when you turn on the radio and hear rush and bob talking, you should have been able to put 2 and 2 together and figure out that they ARE special interest groups.

ut they don't....they're more than content to let the truth speak for itself. How many newspeople turned up on the NRA's idiotic enemies list?

Good for them, no one said they had to have one. Just because the VPC doesnt want one, does this mean the NRA cant have one? :shrug:

Sez who? Wayne LaPierrre? Sean Hannity? John Lott? Hahahahaha...

And about anyone else with half a brain that can see through the propoganda.

[MrBenchley]

69. Too frigging funny

"You see, when you turn on the radio and hear rush and bob talking, you should have been able to put 2 and 2 together and figure out that they ARE special interest groups."
Actually, they are classified as "entertainers"...

[1a2b3c]

70. why yes, its hysterical

Since they have special interest groups that they speak to...the right wing.

[RoeBear]

13. I finf it surprising that they...

...made an endorsement before his opponent was nominated.

[Township75]

15. The NRA policy is that if a pro gun encumbant is running...

that individual automatically receives the endorsement

[MrBenchley]

20. Like I said

it sounds a lot more like they're climbing on his bandwagon than him climbing on theirs...

By the way...since Ken Starr bit the big one and the NRA's lawsuit about their COLLECTIVE first amendment rights went in the crapper (and not because the first amendment covered only individual rights hahaha), these racist imbeciles have announced they want to buy a TV network...which will probably require Congressional approval. Wonder why they'd suddenly be sucking up to the Democratic whip?

[Township75]

21. Are you saying that a well respected Democratic senator

will knowingly align himself with "these racist imbeciles" unless he rejects the endorsement?

[Emoto]

28. Racist imbeciles?

Unless I am misunderstanding you, you have repeatedly claimed that the NRA is a racist organization. To "prove" this you hold up a few examples of people who are racists, and expect us to believe that because of the beliefs of a tiny tiny number of people, the entire organization shares those beliefs. If that were true then by that logic, the democratic party is racist because Byrd belonged to the kkk.

Another thing is this "saddled with a loser" comment that you have made at least twice. I still do no understand what that means, can you please explain?

[juancarlos]

29. You think that you'll get an answer?

Right... No answer will be given because it will show that hysterical claims about "asswipe lunatic techniques", racism and being an arm of the Republicans are all false. You can't argue logic with the illogical...follow that rule and the Dungeon will be much easier.

[MrBenchley]

37. So now that there's been an answer....

It turns all those claims about the racist pieces of shit in the NRA are TRUE.

"You can't argue logic with the illogical..."
And ignorant bigotry is still ignorant bigotry...even when it's parading around screaming "gun rights".

[MrBenchley]

31. Yeah...

"you hold up a few examples of people who are racists"
Like NRA former PRESIDENT Charlton Heston, NRA BOARD MEMBER Ted Nugent, NRA BOARD MEMBER Jeff Cooper, NRA BOARD MEMBER Grover Norquist, NRA BOARD MEMBER Bob Barr, NRA BOARD MEMBER Leroy Pyle, NRA BOARD MEMBER Wayne Stump...

"expect us to believe that because of the beliefs of a tiny tiny number of people, the entire organization shares those beliefs"
Gee, these are not fringe members of the group, out somewhere in yokelville with a fading sticker on their brokedown truck. THIS IS THE ACTUAL LEADERSHIP OF THE GROUP. Furthermore, the NRA has been reaching out to white supremacist "militia" groups for some years.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/militia/militia7.html

What makes this even funnier is that the SECOND LARGEST gun owners group is headed by Larry Pratt (it's pretty much his one man band), who is such a virulent racist even Pat Buchanan had to flee his company.

"by that logic, the democratic party is racist because Byrd belonged to the kkk. "
Wow, a slur derived from Rush Limbaugh...really, who's surprised to see the RKBA crowd dredging one up AGAIN? Byrd denounced the KKK publicly back in the 1940's and garners high scores from civil rights groups. Not so the loudly pro-gun congresspersons: Hatch, Craig, DeLay, Lott, etc. When was it that pro-gun Trent Lott (keynote speaker at the NRA's 1998 convention) was telling the world how much better we'd be with Jim Crow in force? Oh yeah, about this time last year.

"Another thing is this "saddled with a loser" comment"
Is Reid likely to win? Yeah. As we saw from the article, at least one of the Republicans is running to the LEFT of Reid on gay marriage, which makes it likely that he will run left on other issues, including gun control...(which might be a popular issue in Vegas...getting tourists shot up is not going to help the casinos' bottom line).

For all their chest thumping and bellowing, the NRA has had a string of very public losses. In NJ they sank a fortune into two straight debacles; in Illinois they spent a fortune and lost, in Pennsylvania they spent a fortune and lost. FURTHERMORE, in all of those cases, they found the candidate they endorsed publicly fleeing their company as the election grew closer.

In many large states, especially in the north, they cannot actually endorse a candidate without HARMING his chances a lot more than they help (you might recall they did not endorse Chimpy in 2000 (while boasting privately to their inbred members that they'd be working out of the drunk's office).

And as I pointed out, now that Ken Starr's case at the Supreme Court went belly-up, there's suddenly an urgent need for this ugly bunch to suck up to Democrats, and especially the Democratic whip...

" Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry doesn't want to tune in to a National Rifle Association channel anytime soon.
The Massachusetts senator sent Federal Election Commission Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub a letter Tuesday asking the commission to block any attempt by the NRA to get a media exemption to campaign finance rules.
The gun-rights lobby is considering acquiring a television or radio outlet and seeking the same exemption from campaign finance rules that news organizations have. If the group won a media exemption, it would be free to say whatever it wanted about candidates at any time and spend unlimited amounts doing so.
"We urge you to prevent the NRA from hijacking America's airwaves with the gun lobby's money," Kerry's letter said. "If the NRA has something to say, it can play by the rules, just like the millions of people in America who do every day." "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031209/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_nra_3

Playing by the rules has never been the NRA's modus operandi.

[Emoto]

32. don't confuse...

...racism with not being politically correct. Heston marched for civil rights for blacks long before it became fashionable, for pete's sake.

[CO Liberal]

33. However.......

....any good Heston ever did associating with Dr. King was cancelled out long ago by his involvement with the Nuts Ruining America.

[MrBenchley]

36. You'll notice there's no response

covering the OTHER board members nor the NRA's outreach program to the Aryan Nation and Montana Freemen.....evidently that was some powerful marching Heston did 40 years ago...wonder if he carried Dr. King on his shoulders as he did?

[MrBenchley]

35. That's it?

One piddly example of that bunch not being overtly racist long ago?

Heston marched in the 1960s... (once and only once, by the way, at a time when a lot of Hollywood marched and it was apparent to all but the dimmest and most vicious that Dr, King had prevailed)? Yipp-dee-fuckin-doo. That sure makes up for lots of racist board members, all right.

Here's the text of his 1997 speech to the loony tunes at the Free Congress Foundation, which was a salute to bigotry that David Duke hailed as something every American ought to hear. That sums up Heston, he went from King to Duke over 40 years. You'll also find video and audio clips.

http://www.vpc.org/nrainfo/heston.html

[Emoto]

38. What are you talking about?

"Here's the text of his 1997 speech to the loony tunes at the Free Congress Foundation, which was a salute to bigotry "

I just read the full text (as presented by VPC, which raises a few flags) and there is no salute to bigotry of any kind in it.

[MrBenchley]

47. Well moto

I can't help somebody who reads crap like "Why is "Hispanic pride" or "black pride" a good thing, while "white pride" conjures up shaved heads and white hoods? I find my blood pressure rising when Clinton's cultural shock troops participate in homosexual-rights fund-raisers but boycott gun-rights fund-raisers... and then claim it's time to place homosexual men in tents with Boy Scouts, and suggest that sperm donor babies born into lesbian relationships are somehow better served and more loved. ...the homosexual coalition, the feminists who preach that it's a divine duty for women to hate men, blacks who raise a militant fist with one hand while they seek preference with the other..." and then professes to see not a speck of open bigotry and racism.


But David Duke wasn't fooled...of course David Duke knows his audience. He isn't trying to desperately pretend the speech doesn't say what it says, to whitewash Heston's racist idiocy and promote his own gun fetish.

Koresh knows how far someone would have to go for you to label them racist....would Heston have to had actually lynched Tom Sowell or Ward Connelly? The diseased old ass wanted his inbred followers to lynch Al Gore, and said so in public.

[Emoto]

50. Are you really so incapable of comprehension?

"Why is "Hispanic pride" or "black pride" a good thing, while "white pride" conjures up shaved heads and white hoods?

Don't you see the double standard here? Pride in some races is "ok" and positive, but pride in another is not ok. Anything that is ok for one race must be ok for all races, or not ok at all. Anything else is racism, and that is what was being pointed out by Heston.

blacks who raise a militant fist with one hand while they seek preference with the other

Can you not see the dishonesty of people who militantly fight for equality and then seek to impose institutional racism like affirmative action that excludes people from advancement based upon their race?

Heston did nothing more than point out that the emperor has no clothes.

[MrBenchley]

51. Who the hell are you trying to kid?

Moto, the REASON "white pride" conjures up shaved heads and white hoods is because they are the sort of imbeciles chanting such rubbish...as Heston knows only too well.

"Can you not see the dishonesty of people who militantly fight for equality and then seek to impose institutional racism like affirmative action"
Trying to pretend affirmative action is racism...well, that about sums it up, moto.

"excludes people from advancement based upon their race? "
Yeah, look at Dick Cheney....what he could have done if he hadn't been handicapped by the color of his skin (snicker).

"A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro."
--Martin Luther King

What Heston did was declare himself emperor and pull a sheet on his head. If you want to pretend otherwise, do it without me.

P.S.: Still no comment on the OTHER racist pices of shit on the NRA board....or on the NRA's handholding with white supremacist groups...

"When NRA lobbying chief Tanya Metaksa was reported to have met Michigan Militia leaders prior to the Oklahoma blast, and that her computer bulletin board posts a bomb recipe, it might have been shocking, but not surprising.
NRA officials have a history of making news:
1972: NRA official Harlon Carter argues against a ban on Saturday Night Specials, saying their small size is ideal for children.
1984: Lobbyist Warren Cassidy testifies to Congress against a ban on armor-piercing, "cop-killer" bullets. "

http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/1995/07/updates.html

[1a2b3c]

58. How could it not be racism?

Trying to pretend affirmative action is racism...well, that about sums it up, moto.

You know i heard Martin Luther King was against affirmative action. I seen it on a show about him. Another one of his fighters for freedom in the 60's said he would be upset with what affirmative action turned into today.

Founded in 1974, the American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA) is dedicated to the advancement of affirmative action, equal opportunity and the elimination of discrimination on the basis of race, gender, ethnic background or any other criterion that deprives people of opportunities to live and work.

This is what affirmative action should be. It is not how it is played out from my experience in the work place. I had a friend who was told that her employer was going to keep her on full-time because she was a black female. Thats fucked up. She quit. The whole 'quota' thing if fucked up and its racist. All equal is what affirmative action is. Filling quotas is not.

[MrBenchley]

59. You ought to stop believing Faux Noise....

You wouldn't hear right wing idiocy like "Martin Luther King was against affirmative action."
Here's some of what he actually said on the subject:

"The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death--but it was King himself, as chair of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who initiated the first successful national affirmative action campaign: "Operation Breadbasket."
In Atlanta, Philadelphia, Chicago and other cities, King staffers gathered data on the hiring patterns of corporations doing business in black communities, and called on companies to rectify disparities. "At present, SCLC has Operation Breadbasket functioning in some 12 cities, and the results have been remarkable," King wrote (quoted in Testament of Hope, James Washington, ed.), boasting of "800 new and upgraded jobs several covenants with major industries."
King was well aware of the arguments used against affirmative action policies. As far back as 1964, he was writing in Why We Can't Wait: "Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."
King supported affirmative action-type programs because he never confused the dream with American reality. As he put it, "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro" to compete on a just and equal basis (quoted in Let the Trumpet Sound, by Stephen Oates).
In a 1965 Playboy interview, King compared affirmative action-style policies to the GI Bill: "Within common law we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs.... And you will remember that America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans after the war."
In King's teachings, affirmative action approaches were not "reverse discrimination" or "racial preference." King promoted affirmative action not as preference for race over race (or gender over gender), but as a preference for inclusion, for equal oportunity, for real democracy. Nor was King's integration punitive: For him, integration benefited all Americans, male and female, white and non-white alike. And contrary to Gingrich, King insisted that, along with individual efforts, collective problems require collective solutions."

http://www.fair.org/extra/9505/king-affirmative-action.html

"I seen it on a show"
Bill O'Reilly? Sean Hannity? The 700 Club?

"Another one of his fighters for freedom in the 60's said he would be upset with what affirmative action turned into today."
Yeah? Who was that, I wonder?

[1a2b3c]

62. History channel i believe

Dont remember his name. I do not know for sure if he was right or blowing smoke up our ass. What i can tell you is that no one else knows that either. I dont believe in favoring a person because of race, sex, religion, or anything else. I dont think Dr. King would either.

As for his quote, do you feel we should still be doing something special for the negro? I think its time we move past the era of doing something special for the negro and go onto doing something special for everyone. I think King would agree. Dont place a person on a pedastal because of thier skin color. Place them there because they deserve to be there.

[MrBenchley]

64. Rubbish...

"What i can tell you is that no one else knows that either."
And what I did tell you was what King said on the subject while he was alive....

"I think its time we move past the era of doing something special for the negro and go onto doing something special for everyone."
You mean like keeping black citizens from voting in Florida?

By the way, the gun nuts' favorite crackpot, John Lott, wrote an article for Crazy Bill Buckley's rag "proving" that open discrimination never happened (even though the state of Florida settled the NAACP lawsuit and admitted it happened). Earleir this year, he wrote an article for the Reverend Moon's idiotic brainWashington Times "proving" that Rush Limbaugh wasn't the racist idiot everyone knew he was. Good thing that gun rights is not just racism hiding under a new sheet, eh?

[MrBenchley]

66. Oooops....

"I think its time we move past the era of doing something special for the negro...."
Yeah, just look at this evidence...

"The study that sent specially trained pairs of black and white job applicants to temporary employment agencies in Los Angeles and San Francisco found a "significant preference" for white applicants over slightly higher qualified African Americans...
The agencies favored white applicants by a ratio of 4-to-1 in Los Angeles and more than 2-to-1 in San Francisco.
As examples, it said a white applicant was granted an interview, while the black counterpart was not; a white applicant was offered a job with a higher salary or for a higher duration; and a white applicant was the only one to be offered coaching or suggestions for resume improvement. "

http://www.nathannewman.org/log/archives/001448.shtml#001448

[slackmaster]

67. What does that have to do with the endorsement of Senator Reid?

:shrug:

[Emoto]

71. Not kidding, not even a little

Trying to pretend affirmative action is racism...well, that about sums it up, moto.

When you make decisions about people and their fate based upon race, particilarly when granting one favor over another simply because of that person's race, it is racism. Racism is morally wrong. Period.

"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." - Dr. Martin Luther King

[MrBenchley]

73. Shame on you...

As the attached stories showed, REAL racism is alive and well (and growinng under GOP rule).

And Dr. King spoke most eloquently FOR affirmative action. Trryinng to present him as opposed to the practice is disgraceful.

[Emoto]

74. so...

If you favor promoting (in the general sense) someone based entirely upon their race, and denying another that same promotion based entirely upon their race, then you think racism is good? Please explain how two wrongs make a right.

[MrBenchley]

76. Been there, done that.....

Martin Luther King said it much clearer than I could....

"The exploitation of King's name, the distortion of his teachings for political gain, is an ugly development. The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death--but it was King himself, as chair of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who initiated the first successful national affirmative action campaign: "Operation Breadbasket."
King was well aware of the arguments used against affirmative action policies. As far back as 1964, he was writing in Why We Can't Wait: "Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic."
King supported affirmative action-type programs because he never confused the dream with American reality. As he put it, "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro" to compete on a just and equal basis (quoted in Let the Trumpet Sound, by Stephen Oates)."

http://www.fair.org/extra/9505/king-affirmative-action.html


That Martin Luther King sounds like a pretty smart, decent guy. Say, whatever happened to him? Oh yeah, some gun owning idiot shot him.

[Emoto]

79. Try again...

Read this line from the very page you quoted above:

"King promoted affirmative action not as preference for race over race (or gender over gender), but as a preference for inclusion, for equal oportunity, for real democracy"

"not as a preference of race over race" (which is what current affirmative action programs are). King did not want racism, get it? Racism is always bad.

[MrBenchley]

80. In other words....

you want me to buy Newt Gingrich's vision of Dr. King. Fat chance.

"King promoted affirmative action"
Funny how you skipped right over that part..

"King did not want racism, get it?"
Gee, moto, what do you think HE'd have to say about the racist idiots who make up the leadership of the gun rights crowd today? Do you think Larry Pratt would have fooled him? Do you think John AshKKKroft would have?

[Emoto]

81. try again...

"King promoted affirmative action"
Funny how you skipped right over that part..

I didn't skip over it, I cut and pasted it right into my response to you. And remember, this all came fomr a page that you posted.

I posted (from your reference):

"King promoted affirmative action not as preference for race over race (or gender over gender), but as a preference for inclusion, for equal oportunity, for real democracy"

What that says is that King did not define affirmative action as preference of one race over another, but rather as preference for INCLUSION and EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. This differs from what affirmative action has become now, which is a racist method.

[MrBenchley]

82. Don't have to try again...been there, done that

"This differs from what affirmative action has become now, which is a racist method."
Sez who? Newt Gingrich? David Horowitz?

Dr. King sure wouldn't have thought so.

[Emoto]

83. I don't think so

I don't know what either of those guys say. I can't stand Newt, and I don't even know who the other one is.

Just give me a direct answer to a simple question:

Is making a decision, either for or against a person, where the decision is based entirely on the color of the person's skin, racism?

[MrBenchley]

84. Moto...

"I don't know what either of those guys say."
Gee, moto...wouldn't it be a good idea to find out what various people have to say on an issue? I'm certainly not fooled into thinking Bill Buckley or David Horowitz or Newt Gingrich spouts crap because they believe in Martin Luther King's vision of a color-blind society...which is how I know they're twisting his words...and sure enough they are.

But then I might as well ask how you could cherry pick a release to quote Dr. King from it and not notice that the scum of the earth (including both of THOSE GUYS) are trying to twist Dr. King's words to support their bigotry. ESPECIALLY SINCE THEIR UGLY DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS ARE RIGHT AT THE TOP OF THE RELEASE.

Ask me next at this point whether I'm going to waste any more time on this right wing rubbish...

[Emoto]

85. Bench...

Put aside what all those other people are saying, temporarily. Much of it is noise anyway. I am asking you to think for yourself and answer a simple question, if you please:

Isn't choosing to admit/hire/promote/whatever a person based solely upon their race, racism?

[MrBenchley]

86. Moto

I do think for myself...and I know I answered this question...affirmative action is not racist...

[Emoto]

87. Help me understand

You're saying that hiring someone based on thier race is NOT racist?

[MrBenchley]

88. Look up "Affirmative Action"

http://www.diversityinc.com/

http://www.feminist.org/other/ccri/cahome.html

http://www.affirmativeaction.org/

And then for a laugh...see the sort of scum that oppose it...amazing how often they're the same right wing racist pieces of shit that are trumpeting gun rights...but <sarcasm>that's just a coincidence....</sarcasm>

P.S.: After he got his tit caught in the wringer pining publicly for Jim Crow, Trent Lott went on Black Entertainment TV to declare that he was ALL for affirmative action. Think they believed him?

[Emoto]

89. I ask YOU

I know you can post a bazillion links to various sites, but I am interested in your personal analysis:

You're saying that hiring someone based on thier race is NOT racist?

[MrBenchley]

90. I already told you my personnal analysis

and you wanted to pout and rephrase the question.

[slackmaster]

34. MrBenchley, did you read the article that YOU cited?

i.e. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/12/10/state2118EST0177.DTL ???

MrBenchley wrote:

"...at least one of the Republicans is running to the LEFT of Reid on gay marriage..."

Excuse me, but the only mention of gay marriage in the Nevada senate race so far cited AFAIK is in the article that you cited, i.e.:

"Reid's only confirmed challenger so far is Richard Ziser who headed a conservative group that was able to get voter approval in 2002 of an initiative barring recognition of gay marriages...." Italics added by slackmaster for emphasis

Reid's only opponent, a Republican, is OPPOSED TO GAY MARRIAGE, MrBenchley! Did you mis-read that part?

...which makes it likely that (Republican challenger Ziser) will run left on other issues, including gun control...

Bad assumption, especially considering that you were 180 degrees wrong on the gay marriage issue, MrBenchley.

[Township75]

14. Good for Reid

I hope he wins, and he likely will as people support gun rights in general

[jjcahill]

52. NRA now "supports" Reid - not yet an "endorsement"

Despite the early release of this information, the NRA doesn't make endorsements until filing closes for an office. They have expressed their "support" for our Senator Reid and contributed to his campaign. Endorsements will come later. Here is the revised release:

For Immediate Release
Contact: Sean Sinclair/Megan Jones
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
702.699.7343

REVISED PRESS RELEASE

National Rifle Association PAC Supports Senator Harry Reid

Washington, DC-Nevada Senator Harry Reid received the support of the
National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund for his 2004
re-election campaign. The Senate Assistant Democratic Leader was
acknowledged by the NRA for his efforts to protect the Second Amendment.

In a letter dated November 25, 2003, the National Rifle Association
expressed their support, "NRA members deeply appreciate your defense of
their rights to keep and bear arms. Your advocacy of the Second
Amendment has earned the support of the National Rifle Association
Political Victory Fund."

Senator Reid thanked the NRA for both their financial contribution to
his campaign and their support. "My legislative record in the
United States Senate reflects my dedication to representing the views of
Nevadans when it comes to responsible gun ownership and it is gratifying
that NRA has recognized my efforts."

Recently, Senator Reid received praise from national and Nevada gun
owners alike, for his work in creating the Clark County Sport Shooting
Park. The park is dedicated to providing a safe wilderness area for gun
owners to recreate. The park is located about one mile northeast of
Floyd Lamb State Park, ten miles northwest of Las Vegas.

Art Dixon, Secretary and Treasurer of the Nevada State Rifle and Pistol
Association (NSRPA), Nevada's NRA Chapter, stated, "The Clark County
Sport Shooting Park is a treasure for Southern Nevada and Senator Reid
was the driving force behind the park. I want to thank Senator Reid for
his hard work on behalf of Nevada's gun owners."

"This is another testament of the wide-ranging and bipartisan support
for Senator Reid," Sean Sinclair, campaign manager for Senator Reid
stated. "Senator Reid truly represents the majority of Nevadans and we
are proud to have the NRA's support."

The National Rifle Association was formed in 1871 and represents 4.3
million members. Under the NRA-Victory Fund by-laws, official
endorsements cannot be given prior to the close of candidate filing.
For more information contact Friends for Harry Reid
702.699.7343.

###

If you are a Democrat in Nevada and you support Article 1 Sec 11.1 of our Nevada Constitution - "Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes." - please contact me about the Nevada Outdoor Democratic Caucus.

[email protected]

[MrBenchley]

53. Wonder who flinched?

[jjcahill]

54. Now, now, don't be cynical.

Nobody flinched. It was a matter of semantics and only a slight misunderstanding of procedures. The NRA said we support you and we want to contribute to your campaign. Reid is solid and I am betting the endorsement will come when procedures allow. Reid is the only Democrat with the wherewithal to get out in front of the big-name high profile Democrats on such matters. He really showed his stuff on S. 659 when he lead the Democrats to make it filibuster-proof.

Because of his personal stature and his leadership in the Democratic Party, he is probably the most important individual in the Senate in defending our individual rights. Reid makes me proud to be a Nevada Democrat.

[MrBenchley]

55. Too TOO funny

The NRA is America's scummiest lobby...it couldn't overturn campaign finance reform and suddenly it's sucking up to the Democratic whip while it's trying to get a TV station and nobody's supposed to be cynical?

[slackmaster]

56. You think NRA is scummier than NAMBLA?

Do tell.

[davidinalameda]

72. How can you compare the NRA to NAMBLA?

I really hope that you're not gay-baiting

I don't see NAMBLA conventions broadcast on C-SPAN and covered on CNN

[CO Liberal]

75. There's No Comparison

NAMBLA doesn't spread lies about its opponents. The Nuts Ruining America does.

[MrBenchley]

77. For that matter

I yet to hear about the head of NAMBLA calling for a lynch mob for Al Gore or anyone else, as that diseased fucktard Heston exhorted his inbred followers.

[slackmaster]

78. Not gay-baiting at all!

In fact a large majority of homosexual men and women loudly condemn NAMBLA. They consider it to be an embarrassment and not representative of their community. It's always a pariah, trying to get a float in every Pride parade. (The last time they were allowed in the San Diego Pride Parade they were the ONLY float that got booed by the crowd.) NAMBLA is among other things a political lobbying organization. It seeks to legitimize sexual relationships between boys and adult men.

That seems pretty "scummy" to me. My response was directed at MrBenchley's hyperbole, his over-the-top ire at an organization that surely has some bad people in it but also has over 4 million members who can't all be as bad as he makes them out to be. I'm sure I could think of some other lobbying groups that anyone without a head full of hatred would agree are scummier than the NRA, but I have better things to do with my time than ruminating on filth.

I don't see NAMBLA conventions broadcast on C-SPAN and covered on CNN

If they had 4 million members and a high level of influence over Congress you surely would. The comparison is scumminess to scumminess, not visibility or effectiveness. :eyes: