NRA is not Indorsing Harry Reid or his opponent

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by 199er, Aug 28, 2010.

  1. 199er

    199er New Member

    May 5, 2010
    Columbia SC
    From the Wall Street Journal Washington Wire at:

    For Reid, No NRA Endorsement

    By Naftali Bendavid
    The National Rifle Association announced Friday that it won’t be endorsing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) for re-election this November.

    The NRA has not endorsed Mr. Reid in the past, but his backers had been hoping for its official blessing this time around. Mr. Reid has long declared himself a supporter of gun rights.

    In March, Mr. Reid helped open the Clark County Shooting Park, firing a shotgun and hitting two clay birds as the crowd cheered, according to press reports. Mr. Reid helped obtain $61 million for the new facility, and he was accompanied at the opening by NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre.

    “I know how you worked,” Mr. LaPierre told Reid at the event, according to the Las Vegas Sun. Mr. LaPierre added that the park “would not have opened without the work of Sen. Reid.”

    But in a statement Friday, Chris Cox, chairman of the NRA Political Victory Fund, the group’s political action committee, said it would not be endorsing the majority leader. He cited Mr. Reid’s push to confirm Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, whom the NRA opposed.

    “The vote on Elena Kagan’s confirmation to the Court, along with the previous year’s confirmation vote on Sonia Sotomayor, are critical for the future of the Second Amendment,” Mr. Cox said.

    There was no word on whether the NRA would endorse Mr. Reid’s opponent, Sharron Angle.

    Mr. Reid’s campaign sought to put the best face on the decision, noting that the group has donated $4,950 to Mr. Reid’s campaign and suggesting it was significant that the NRA had even flirted with endorsing him.

    The NRA has been under pressure from conservatives unhappy with some of its recent positions, such as supporting for a Democratic campaign finance bill in exchange for being exempted from the bill’s requirements. Conservatives had strongly opposed the bill.

    Erick Erickson, founder of the influential conservative blog, urged his readers in July to pressure the NRA not to formally back Mr. Reid. “Both people at the NRA and people in the Senate are telling me the NRA will be endorsing Harry Reid later this year and the only way to stop it is to be very vocal about it right now,” Mr. Erickson wrote.

    Updated: The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that the NRA does not plan to endorse Ms. Angle either. An NRA spokesman could not be reached for comment.
  2. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest


    The NRA has stood by Reid for many years.

    In the last 12 months, the NRA has crapped in their own mess kit more times than they can count. The members aren't 'dumb rednecks' as they would like to believe.

    Once again, same as the case in the SCOTUS affirmations, the NRA is limp.
    Once again, the 1st is only good for the gander. All you gosslings can just shut up. WE know what is best for your 2nd amendment rights, and if it means sacrificing all the rest, that's ok.:eek:


    Keep it up Wayne. Pretty soon you'll catch up with the president.:p

  3. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Nov 19, 2008
    Akron, Ohio
    Steel on target Bob. I'm sure it was painful for the NRA to not be able to endorse Reid.
  4. graehaven

    graehaven Well-Known Member

    May 26, 2007
    Rochester, NY
    Well said, well said.
  5. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    The fact that the NRA won't support either one of them speaks volumes to me.

    They are backpedaling on Reid due to the members concerns, and an endorsement of his opponent would likely cost him a re-election.

    Can't have that can we.

    It's the same tactic they used in the contribution case. Fight until it becomes adventagous not to. Regardless of who wins, they can now claim a victory of sorts.

    Not endorsing Reid's opponent is the same as endorsing him. Reid gets it anyway.

    Am I the only one who can see this?
  6. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Nov 19, 2008
    Akron, Ohio

  7. graehaven

    graehaven Well-Known Member

    May 26, 2007
    Rochester, NY
    Yes, I see it too, totally agree. And now, they'll use whatever the outcome is to fund raise. It's ridiculous, and the main reason I'm no longer a member. Sacrificing core principles for money is the sure way to disaster in the long run, and they will find that out, too late I'm sure.
  8. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Nov 19, 2008
    Akron, Ohio
    In a way I understand what they are doing and why they are doing it, but I'm not willing to be a part of it any longer. I didn't renew my membership either, but signed up for a lifetime membership with the GOA.

    I think the NRA has long used it's considerable clout to intimidate politicians. They threaten, but when a politician votes their way on some issue, they reward them with their support, regardless of where that individual stands on any other issues. It's a power trip.
  9. hkruss

    hkruss Active Member

    Mar 13, 2008
    Mobile, Al.
    I will not be renewing my membership either. The NRA has left a sour taste in my mouth. Their flirting with supporting Reid was the thing that sealed it for me.
    Sad to say, as they have done a lot of good for gun owners in the past, but it is analogous to having a Republican in office who starts off good, but loses his way and starts going against the wishes of his constituents. (think; John McCain)
    So until or unless they get new leadership in the NRA, I will not be renewing.

  10. Marlin T

    Marlin T Well-Known Member

    Jul 8, 2005
    New Mexico
    I'm afraid that I have to leave the topic of NRA to you all, but here is another article about the same thing with further information. ;)
    Psst, check out the links in this article.


    NRA: No endorsement for Reid AND Angle?

    August 28th, 2010 9:48 am ET


    Harry Reid

    Photo: Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
    The National Rifle Association will not endorse Harry Reid for U.S. Senate, Political Victory Fund Chair Chris Cox announced Friday.
    Here's why:

    "The vote on Elena Kagan's confirmation to the Court, along with the previous year's confirmation vote on Sonia Sotomayor, are critical for the future of the Second Amendment. After careful consideration, the NRA-PVF announced today that it will not be endorsing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for re-election in the 2010 U.S. Senate race in Nevada."

    That's the right call. But why haven't they endorsed Reid's opponent, Sharron Angle?
    "In the coming days and weeks, the NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) will be announcing endorsements and candidate ratings in hundreds of federal races, as well as thousands of state legislative races. Unless these announcements are required by the timing of primary or special elections, the NRA-PVF generally does not issue endorsements while important legislative business is pending."

    That seems kind of a strange game to play with this race now that they've let the cat out of the bag about Reid. But does that mean if we're just patient with them and keep quiet things should work out in the near future?

    Not if The New York Times is correct in their analysis:

    "The group will not endorse Mr. Reid’s Tea Party backed challenger, Sharron Angle, either, despite her work to win members over...Keenly aware of the blow, a spokesman for Mr. Reid’s campaign responded quickly, noting that the N.R.A. donated nearly $5,000 to Mr. Reid and nothing to Ms. Angle and that the group’s vice president, Wayne LaPierre, once called Mr. Reid a “true champion of the Second Amendment.”

    The Las Vegas Review-Journal is even more definitive:
    "An NRA spokesman said the organization will not be backing Angle either. 'We will not be making any endorsement in the Nevada Senate race,' said Andrew Arulanandam, the group's public affairs director."

    Why the hell not? What kind of weaselly equivocation is that?

    NRA made great noise during the recent DISCLOSE Act debacle about being a "single-issue organization" with a "sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment."

    Look at Angle's record on guns. From Project Vote Smart:

    "Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all state legislative candidates in 2004, the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund assigned AM Sharron E. Angle a grade of A..."

    Gun Owners of America has endorsed Angle. And look at what she is willing to go on the record and be held accountable to. Seriously--take a few minutes and read her answers to the Gun Rights Political Questionnaire (Sen, Reid, incidentally, did not respond).

    There's no excuse for NRA-PVF not endorsing Sharron Angle at this point. That is, none that we know of. The cynic in me wonders about backroom discussions--they can't endorse Reid outright because they've seen the pledges to cut donations and cut up membership cards on innumerable gun blogs and related forums if they do. But they don't dare cut Reid off completely, either. So they shun his challenger while he keeps the cash and gets to continue savaging her as "extreme" for understanding that the Second Amendment isn't about shooting pork...uh...parks.

    Gun owners and NRA members should demand NRA-PVF take a position in this race--their entire reason for existence is to produce political victory.

    It's their damn job.

    Straddling both sides reflects neither political courage nor credibility as a source for reliable endorsement information--something we've unfortunately seen eroded time and time again. For years.

    As a long-time life member, I find this unacceptable, but unfortunately, all too typical and expected.

    Also see:
    NRA Members for Sharron Angle--be sure to sign the petition and call NRA!
    Sharron Angle for U.S. Senate
  11. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Reid can throw a little pork to Nev. for the range. The funds don't come out of his pocket anyway and is chump change in the Pork Olympics. It means nothing if he pushes legislation and votes for Judges who will negate the 2nd amendment and shut down the range anyway.
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2010
  12. graehaven

    graehaven Well-Known Member

    May 26, 2007
    Rochester, NY
    They'll take full credit too for "supposedly stopping" the EPA looking into banning lead based ammo.

    It's a win-win scenario for the NRA for fund raising possibilities:

    If they'd banned it: the NRA would come out and say they need your $$$ to fight to overturn it, or fight to keep them from going further...

    If they don't ban it (and they didn't): the NRA will now come out and say they were successful in THIS fight, but still need your $$$ for the next one - as surely there will be a next one.


    This is, of course, how most if not all non-profits function. However, the NRA is particularly "slimy" when it comes to this aspect.

    The high-end, plush office headquarters/accommodations and $1,000 suits don't do much to help their image either.
  13. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    That's the thing. 'Not for Profit'.

    They can take in as much as they can, divey up a bit, and spend the rest 'elsewhere' (cough-cough).:rolleyes:

    As long as they spend it all, they're good to go in the Feds eyes.

    Regardless of what they claim, their actions prove that they're not for the people any more. They are for the NRA and it's board members.

    Far too long has the mission been lost. It's all about me now.

    'Thanks for all your contributions. I/we get sweet digs, fancy clothes, free airfair and deluxe accomodations. Yes, they are posh, but we are fighting for your 2nd amendment rights after all. You need to understand that while we contribute a bit of our donations, we need to uphold an image of resistance and professionalism. We truly appreciate your understanding'.

    'In the mean time, pay no attention to our past and current indifferences. We didn't oppose the last two Supreme court Justices for a reason. Well, we did after it was all over. You members simply don't understand everything that's at stake. We've supported Harry Reid for a reason. But trust us, it was a good reason'.

    I could go on and on...

    Many years ago, the NRA actually stood for something. Any more, they sound like they've got the Obie machine working for them.:eek:

    Hope and change.

    I for one am hoping the change comes in firing the leadership in the NRA.
    Very much as I hope to get rid of those that are destroying our country.:mad:

    But that's my own opinion. Your's may vary.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Harry Reid Is An Idiot. Aug 15, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Senate taking up Harry Reids S.649 now Apr 9, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum GOA Alert Harry Reid Prepares to Annihilate Second Amendment Jan 2, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just won’t take “no” for an answer when it comes to Apr 27, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Is Harry Reid pro-gun or anti-gun? Sep 10, 2010