More NRA Shinanigans

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Marlin, Jun 28, 2010.

  1. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    It seems to keep getting worse and worse.....

    What next ??????????

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

    NRA Issues Gag Order to Its Board Members on Elena Kagan



    Posted by Erick Erickson
    Sunday, June 27th at 12:45PM EDT

    [​IMG] Internal Senate emails confirmed by NRA Board Members are highlighting just how far the National Rifle Association has fallen.


    The organization recently collaborated with the left to obtain a carve out of the DISCLOSE Act, legislation designed to silence bloggers and outside interest groups like tea party activists. This was a first amendment issue and the NRA gladly took a position and campaigned for its members to take a position on the DISCLOSE Act.


    One of the NRA’s chief arguments was that it needed the carve out to be effective in its advocacy of Second Amendment issues. But here’s the problem: these internal Senate emails confirmed by NRA Board Members show that the National Rifle Association’s management team has explicitly and directly told the NRA’s board they are prohibited from testifying about second amendment issues during the Elena Kagan confirmation hearings.


    That’s right: the foremost gun rights lobby in the nation is prohibiting its board from testifying in the Elena Kagan confirmation hearings about the second amendment.


    The NRA did issue a statement on Friday after the internal Senate email began leaking out informing people of the gag order. The statement noted Kagan’s problematic record on guns, but that’s just smoke and mirrors.


    Don’t believe them when they say they are working with Senators to investigate her record. If they were really working with Senators, they would have accepted an invitation to testify on the Kagan nomination when they were invited. The gag order on board members is not limited to providing testimony, but it prohibits board members from coming out against Kagan in their individual capacity.



    If the NRA is really working with pro-guns Senators and Kagan is really hostile to Second Amendment rights, which she is, they will score her confirmation vote and actually make the score count this time, unlike they did on the confirmation of Sonya Sotomayor. With Sotomayor, they waited until several days after RedState began demanding a score and then, in effect, announced they’d score it and ignore it.


    First they collaborated with the left to get the DISCLOSE Act through the House, now they are blocking their own from speaking out against Elena Kagan. Is this the deal the NRA cut with the left? They get a carveout and shut up their board?
     
  2. I want to gag when I see a picture of Ms. Kagan......
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2010

  3. rentalguy1

    rentalguy1 Former Guest

    Anybody else seeing these signs from the NRA as the beginning of the end?
     
  4. new308handloader

    new308handloader New Member

    535
    Jan 11, 2009
    Maryville, TN
    no.....the DISCLOSE Act was going to pass with a House and Senate majority, and as a result would have restricted speech for all such groups....the NRA compromised and did what they had to do to ensure they could at least be able to have their say in pre-election times. I agree it sucks for other groups, but at least the NRA will be able to broadcast many commercials prior to the elections and I'm sure turning many voters to vote conservative.

    If the NRA had not compromised, it is likely all would have lost. If GOA can get over 1 million members, then they too will be exempt.

    Martin....I know you despise the NRA....but please, for the sake of keeping TFF cohesive on a single theme of protecting the 2nd Amendment, please stop trashing the NRA. It would be different if it was a "regular" TFF member, but you are like the "Grand Poo Pa" of this place...so it's like the leadership of this forum is anti-NRA, and thus pushing an anti-NRA agenda.
     
  5. rentalguy1

    rentalguy1 Former Guest

    I'm sorry, but I cannot support a group that is willing to trample on the 1st Amendment right of everyone else, that they can still freely speak. This is a huge affront on the rights of everyone, and if they do not change their tune, then I hope they go down in flames with the dems.
     
  6. graehaven

    graehaven Well-Known Member

    May 26, 2007
    Rochester, NY
    He posted a story from another source. He didn't say those things. The NRA did them, and a story writer wrote about it.

    Why is it such a problem to bring such things to light? I understand that you and others here are passionate about the NRA, but, it's the NRA that is proving itself to be two faced, NOT the senior/members/Mods here. They are simply bringing us the information and asking relevant questions.

    The leaders/mods here are NOT anti-NRA, they are anti-compromise on our fundamental right to keep and bear arms. When the NRA compromises, or ANY organization compromises, they should be exposed.

    The NRA wants to be BIG, they want to be the big dog on the block when it comes to 2nd Amendment issues. Well, when the big dog lets you down, EVERYONE should know about it. If they keep making these types of decisions - compromises - they will fulfill the faithful saying: "the bigger they are....the harder they fall."
     
  7. Marlin

    Marlin *TFF Admin Staff Chief Counselor*

    First, the name IS NOT Martin...

    Secondly, I do not hate the NRA. After all I am a longtime Life Member, going on fifty years.

    I am, however, very upset that they seem to wish to compromise, which leads to surrender little by little.

    My post is not my words, but those of a reliable reporter siting statements by the management of NRA ordering its board to be subject to a gag order.

    Like Jack Webb, I just report the FACTS, Ma'am.....
     
  8. Eddie N

    Eddie N New Member

    Apr 23, 2009
    Colorado
    I have to agree, Marlin. Compromise is not always, if ever, a good thing. If what I read is true, then, it looks like the NRA needs a whole new (board of directors)? If compromise is part of a bigger plan, then it better be a good one. Just my 2 cents.
     
  9. al45lc

    al45lc Active Member

    Mar 8, 2010
    colorful colorado
    Perhaps it's time for another Cincinnati.
     
  10. new308handloader

    new308handloader New Member

    535
    Jan 11, 2009
    Maryville, TN
    I don't think they trampled on the rights of everyone else, that they could speak freely.....had the law passed without the comprimise of the NRA, ALL groups would have lost their 1st Ammendment rights....I think the NRA was powerful enough to make sure they were exempt. Do I wish the NRA had stuck up for all other groups and not just their own? Yes....maybe they tried but that was a show stopper and without the comprimise all would have lost.

    Almost every significant pro-gun advance has been because of the NRA....members of this forum most likely can carry in their state because of the NRA.
     
  11. new308handloader

    new308handloader New Member

    535
    Jan 11, 2009
    Maryville, TN
    I believe it is more than just bringing information to light....previous post show clearly a dislike of the NRA.

    As pro 2nd Ammendment people, we don't want compromise...we want to carry without permits...I totally agree...BUT, in many cases, without compromise you wont even get a little of what you want (carry with permits)...you end up with nothing. If getting to the ultimate end game of carry in all states without permits means getting there via compromise, than I am OK with that.
     
  12. new308handloader

    new308handloader New Member

    535
    Jan 11, 2009
    Maryville, TN
    Marlin...I am so sorry I mis-typed your name...no disrespect was intended.
    Why don't the NRA and GOA work together? Of all the NRA mags and literature I have read, I have never seen the NRA bash GOA.....but GOA members bashing the NRA, yes. I actually am very open minded and will often change my mind based on new information to me....but I am having a hard time thinking the group that fought for all these rights is somehow bad.

    Is the government bad? No, but certain elements in government are bad (more these days with all the Liberals)
    Is the NRA bad? No, but certain elements might be bad....and certain elements in GOA might be bad.....as within any organization.
     
  13. wpage

    wpage Active Member

    Aug 25, 2009
    We will regret the day Kagan gets on the court.
     
  14. Nighthawk

    Nighthawk New Member

    Aug 22, 2006
    South Central Texas
    When the NRA is the only one who can support guns thru free speech then
    just the threat of losing this monopoly will make them toe the line.
     
  15. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    That's a different perspective.

    Hmmm...
     
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum More Gun Control Shinanigans - - - Jun 30, 2005
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum One more question about the Electoral college Nov 10, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum More drivel from a Hollywood knucklehead Mar 23, 2016
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Obama speech tonight. More gun control? Dec 6, 2015
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Another mass killer - more federal gun control coming? Jun 18, 2015