NRA does it AGAIN .....

[Marlin]

This article is from this morning's Red State Briefing. Rather telling, I'd say !!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yet Again the NRA Sells Out Freedom to the Democrats
by Erick Erickson
Monday, June 14th at 3:16PM EDT


From the NRA press release on the day of the Citizens United decision, Wayne LaPierre called the decision “…a defeat for arrogant elitists who wanted to carve out free speech as a privilege for themselves and deny it to the rest of us.”
SOURCE


There are few organizations purportedly on the side of freedom that aggravate me more than the National Rifle Association.

In fact, these days I cringe when I see good conservatives with their lifetime member sticker from the NRA on the back of their cars. I support Gun Owners of America, which is a consistent and uncompromising defender of the second amendment, not a weak little girl of an organization protecting itself while throwing everyone else under the bus.

But that’s what the National Rifle Association is doing. You and I are willing to stand together because we know we either stand together or hang separately. The NRA legislative strategy in the past few years has been to hang everybody else so they can be the last man standing — more interested in maintaining the veneer of bipartisanship than actually standing up for the second amendment.
The Democrats are trying to come up with a new law to respond to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision on campaign finance rules. The NRA had objected to the Democrats’ proposal, but then secured a carve out for themselves from the legislation and have dropped their objection.

The new agreement would exempt organizations that have over one million members, have been in existence for more than 10 years, have members in all 50 states, and raise 15 percent or less of their funds from corporations, from the disclosure requirements. The NRA, with four million members, would fall into the exempted category and will not oppose the DISCLOSE Act now, according to Democratic sources.

So if you are a small organization that just started up to defend freedom, you are screwed. But if you’ve been collecting a large file of members for decades off the image of Charlton Heston while repeated screwing conservatives, you’ll be safe.

This is just the NRA not wanting competition for itself. If they were really committed to freedom, let alone the second amendment, they should be encouraging more freedom loving, second amendment loving organizations to rise and fight. Instead, they are collaborating with the left to shut out competition.

Remember, the NRA had to be cajoled into opposing Sotomayor.
The NRA refused to oppose the most anti-gun Attorney General nomination in American history.

The NRA supported Dede Scozzafava and it attacked Marco Rubio.
Now the NRA is endorsing the Democrat in Ohio against John Kasich while collaborating with the Democrats on restricting the freedom of speech.
Remember, the NRA also opposed taking the Heller case to the Supreme Court because it was too scared of what might happen.

Gun Owners of America never compromises on the Second Amendment.

The one bit of good news here is that Mitch McConnell is a serious first amendment advocate and while I’ve been open with my criticisms of him, he and I typically stand shoulder to shoulder on this issue and I hope he’ll kill it off in the Senate.

[Old Guy]

Add to that that the NRA ILA is in full support of Harry Reid!!! I am embarrassed that they would support the flaming progressive who has worked so hard to destroy this nation. How can this be???

[bcj1755]

Just got this in the email.

House Democrats Close to Reinstituting Penalties for Criticizing Congress
-- Help GOA get other pro-gun groups on board in this fight

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

We alerted you last week to the very dangerous DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), where liberal House Democrats are trying to gag their political opponents.

Well, there have been some late-breaking developments in the fight to kill this bill, but you're not going to believe what's happening. This is what Politico.com reported yesterday:

House Democrats have offered to exempt the National Rifle Association from a sweeping campaign-finance bill, removing a major obstacle in the push to roll back the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.

The NRA had objected to some of the strict financial disclosure provisions that Democrats have proposed for corporations and politically active nonprofits and that had kept moderate, pro-gun Democrats from backing the legislation.

But if the NRA signs off on the deal, the bill could come to the House floor as early as this week. The NRA said it would not comment until specific legislative language is revealed.

An NRA official also noted that the group would not be supporting the bill but would not actively oppose it if the deal with the Democratic leadership holds up.


So if the NRA gets an exemption for itself, it will not oppose the anti-freedom DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175). This legislation is designed to overturn major parts of the recent Supreme Court decision which restored the ability of groups like GOA to freely criticize elected officials during a campaign.

But the NRA would no longer oppose the bill once they've won an exemption for themselves. As reported by Politico.com:

The legislation in question is designed to restore more campaign finance rules in the wake of last year's Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, which removed prohibitions on corporations and unions running TV ads opposing or backing candidates in the run-up to an election.

Democratic leaders fear the Citizens United decision could open the floodgates for corporate money to flow into this year's midterm elections, which they believe would favor Republican interests.

The legislation, offered by Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, would require special-interest groups to disclose their top donors if they choose to run TV ads or send out mass mailings in the final months of an election.

In addition to benefiting the NRA, this "exemption" amendment will benefit Blue Dog Democrats who will be given a green light to support the Obama-Pelosi backed bill:

Democrats are justifying the NRA exemption, saying the organization has a long history of being involved in the political process, and they say the real goal of the new campaign finance bill is to expose corporations and unions that create ambiguous front groups to run attack ads during campaigns. Unions would not be allowed to use the NRA exemption.

North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler, an NRA backer and conservative Democrat, proved to be pivotal to the NRA deal. Shuler was the first to offer an amendment to exempt the NRA and other nonprofits from the legislation, but that move drew objections from campaign watchdog groups.

"There were a number of concerns that the DISCLOSE Act could hinder or penalize the efforts of certain long-standing, member-driven organizations who have historically acted in good faith," Shuler said, referring to the NRA. "Most of those concerns are addressed within the manager's amendment."

But here's the rub, the special exemption amendment will ONLY benefit the NRA and no other groups whatsoever. It will leave all other groups who are currently in Obama's crosshairs dangling in the wind:

The proposal would exempt organizations that have more than 1 million members, have been in existence for more than 10 years, have members in all 50 states and raise 15 percent or less of their funds from corporations. Democrats say the new language would apply to only the NRA, since no other organization would qualify under these specific provisions. The NRA, with 4 million members, will not actively oppose the DISCLOSE Act, according to Democratic sources.

The exemption for a huge group like the NRA is sure to outrage smaller special-interest groups [like Gun Owners of America].

We are in a political war, and our opponents are trying to change the rules of the game by gagging those groups that are their political enemies. Some might say that the requirement to disclose our membership is not a gag rule, but it most certainly is. Gun Owners of America will NOT do anything that would jeopardize the privacy of our members!

Gun owners know the dangers of being registered, as it has often proven to be the first step towards gun confiscation -- which, by the way, is why it's lamentable that the management of the NRA is selling out its members for the proverbial bowl of pottage. (Go to http://tinyurl.com/2uw9sm9 to see what a leading Capitol Hill blog has written about this sell-out.)

We're positive that regular members of the NRA would never want this to happen -- where all the other pro-gun organizations (like GOA) that are fighting to protect our rights would be gagged, while special favors are cut for one group in particular.

We stand shoulder to shoulder with NRA and all the other pro-gun groups when they are fighting to defend our Second Amendment freedoms. We all have to stick together if we are going to win these battles.

We're not sure who is making the decisions over at the NRA headquarters... but this type of thing would have never happened in the past, and we're positive that the NRA membership would not be happy with it. This cannot stand!

[NRA_guy]

I may have to change my name.

Of course the libs are trying to drive a wedge between NRA and gun owners...

[Bobitis]

Just another political entity looking out for its own behalf.
The NRA is too big for its own good. Or in this case, they're not.

Thanks for flushing more of my contributions down the toilet.
No more membership, no more to the ILA, no more shopping at the store.

No more from Bob.

Seems that the bad outweighs the good lately. It used to be a crap shoot and I gave them the benefit of the doubt. You just crapped out in my eyes. How many more will be alienated? Maybe a good chlorine injection would be a good thing.

Good job Wayne. But you got yours, so what the heck...

[wpage]

NRA belongs to the gun manufactures not to gun owners.

[Double D]

Originally Posted by NRA_guy

I may have to change my name.

Of course the libs are trying to drive a wedge between NRA and gun owners...

Dont feel pressured to change your name. I like it.

[45nut]

It's pretty easy for the libtards to drive a wedge between the NRA and freedom loving Second Amendment lovers, because the NRA is a sell out bunch of panty waist morons. I don't support them for this reason.

They are not interested in us, they are only interested in making their annual budget and keeping the money from all their lobbying contracts rolling into their bank accounts.

You might believe otherwise just as strongly as I do, but it's my opinion. IT may stink to you, but yours does to me too. Don't start none and their won't be none.

[new308handloader]

I just have to give my opinion....GOA members claim the NRA is "bad" because the NRA compromised when pushing for carry laws in states that didn't allow any carry, by pressing forward to have these laws enacted where citizens would have to obtain a permit.....GOA believes the NRA sold us out because citizens should be able to carry without obtaining a permit.

Sometimes compromises have to be made so that you don't end up with nothing. We've seen it happen.....a Republican and Tea Party go up against each other in a primary...the loser has too much pride to drop out when they have lost and then run in the main election as an independant....in the end, even though there are more conservitive votes, the Democrate/Liberal ends up winning.....not the same, but you can see similarity in the attempt to get pro-gun laws passed....I would rather be able to carry and have to have a permit than to not be able to carry at all.

What the NRA has done is good for citizens. If they got states that would not allow carry at all, to ulimately allow carry with permits, then how much easier will GOA's job be to take those states to the next level of carry without permits? The NRA has them half way there.....be thankful GOA members. For two strong pro-gun groups to bash each other is not helpful to our cause. I want to join GOA (in addition to the NRA), but the NRA bashing must stop first. When I hear someone fairly and calmly state their concern or an issue with the NRA, I read and listen....but when their stated concern or issue is blanketed with pure hate, it makes me think they have an ax to grind and my normally open mind closes up into a defensive position. Lighten up, you may agree GOA's position more, but that doesn't make the NRA "bad"....they have done alot for us and will continue to. God Bless

[cowboy50]

I have been an NRA member,off and on most of my life. I Quit them every time they stab us in back, and rejoin a year or two later, when I cool down. I quit for the third and last time when they SUPPORTED the Veterans Dissarmament Act and actually worked with Charles Schulmer. I have NEVER Quit GOA, or The Second Ammendent Foundation, or The Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms. With good groups out there why give your hard earned $$$ to a group that continues to work with the ENEMY!!!

[45nut]

Right there with you cowboy. I don't believe they made decisions like this when Charlton Heston was president. I loved that man. especially for you Mr. Gore

[NRA_guy]

I think the real problem is NRA members like some of us here who don't know anything about the people running for office in the NRA and don't bother finding out how they stand.

I never have sent in my ballot because I don't know anything about the candidates. Sounds like we need to pay more attention and vote in the NRA elections.

It probably would only take a small number of organized voters to make a difference---an NRA Tea Party!

[graehaven]

The NRA is a whore, and this is just more proof of the fact.

Yet again, why I will not join.

[Double D]

This thread is nothing more than an attempt to make people mad and cause more division between members.

[graehaven]

Originally Posted by Double D

This thread is nothing more than an attempt to make people mad and cause more division between members.

LOL, so, controversial opinions on the NRA can NEVER be discussed because it might tick off those who are wrong? Wow. All the critics ever do is post what the NRA has done or said - and shown conclusively that the NRA is compromising across the board (advocating a loss of our right), and the comeback is "it shouldn't be talked about because it might make a few people mad?"

Ummmm, ok.

Really, I don't care if they've done a hundred good things with all their shooting programs and safety this and that, if on the flip side, they're selling us out, which is what they're doing.

[new308handloader]

Originally Posted by Double D

This thread is nothing more than an attempt to make people mad and cause more division between members.

True....I'm now mad...and not at the NRA. If the NRA is so bad, how come the Democrats and Liberals absolutely hate them and consider them a threat? I will not bad mouth the NRA or GOA, both are pro-gun groups that help us.

Division between members? Yes it is happening, and that is not good when we all are here for the 2nd Amendment. Unfortunately, I now consider many of these “anti-NRA” rants to come from what I would consider conspiracy theorist

[armedandsafe]

Speaking of division, I think it is time to close this thread, again.

Not because it is something that needs discussed, but because it is getting personal, again. It is difficult, I know to keep cool about something which you feel passionately, but we need to try.

Pops

[Marlin]

Originally Posted by Double D

This thread is nothing more than an attempt to make people mad and cause more division between members.

This thread was started to state a FACT. NRA was compromising the First Amendment rights of every citizen merely due to its having crafted an exemption for itself, which, BTW, is no guarantee, as that can be removed by a mere vote at any time.

The fact that they have so acted is in many news releases in the media and on the net. It is not a rumor nor is it a device to get people angry. As Jack Webb once said in a very popular TV show, "...just the facts, Ma'am!"

Retired Jurist
Life Member of NRA, 46 years