The National Rifle Association is a far-right conservative organization whose corporate sponsors just happen to be gun companies.
The spending underlines a broader shift by the NRA to step up support for Republicans at the expense of Democrats, in contrast to the past where it would back Democratic allies.
The NRA "took a lot of heat" from conservatives for helping some Democrats in the 2010 congressional elections "to the obvious detriment of Republicans," said David Kopel, a constitutional law professor at the University of Denver and a gun-rights advocate who writes for the association. Plus, now there are simply fewer pro-gun Democrats, he said.
Why would they "take heat" for supporting pro-gun Democrats? Oh right, because having the "correct" opinions about guns isn't sufficient for support, you also have to have the "correct" opinions on minorities, and the inherent evil of government, and all the other far-right notions that Wayne LaPierre and his legion of proto confederates froth on about during one of their many speeches. Anyway, since 2010 the NRA took steps to correct the problem of accidentally supporting a few pro-gun Democrats here and there. And they're shelling out a lot more cash these days as well.
This election, it has spent $17 million through Oct. 13, almost all to benefit Republicans. That's more than eight times what it shelled out in the 2006 congressional races. [...]
"The clear message to Democrats is if you're trying to decide between doing the right thing and making some sort of political decision to satisfy the NRA, it's a false choice," said Arkadi Gerney, a senior vice president at the Democratic-aligned Center for American Progress in Washington. "Just do the right thing, because this group is going to come after you no matter what."
As for the NRA's decision not to oppose anti gun [Sen. Susan Collins], he said, "The clear message is: If you cross the NRA and you're a Republican, there'll be no consequences."
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 01:37:49 PM MDT
[...]
The NRA "took a lot of heat" from conservatives for helping some Democrats in the 2010 congressional elections "to the obvious detriment of Republicans," [...]
[...]
Well, for example, the NRA supported Harry Reid several elections ago ... in hindsight, that was a GIGANTIC mistake, and they know it. I'm hoping the NRA won't ever make a mistake like that again.
Anyone who values his gun rights, and who is not an NRA supporter, has not been paying attention.
I'd like to think of them as a "pro constitution" organization. I really like the commercials I've seen as being the "good guys".
I'm not pro GOP in as much as the old guard of that party is about as big government as the other side of the isle. I at least see the changes happening with new blood challenging old establishment and having some success. I hope that continues.
There is a steam rolling of the citizen rights from the leftist side, and little resistance from the old guard. It makes me very sad.
I think the bottom line is the NRA has an issue all large special interests have. They become a self feeding, bloated bunch dependent on raising funds. Without a boogie man, it wouldn't be necessary. Unfortunately there are currently plenty of real enemies that have gun control as a goal. More of those wear a "D" after their name. Sorry about that fact, but its hard to argue.
Greg
Exactly Mike, the NRA should just keep supporting Republicans, even those that are anti gun.
I quit the NRA with the first President Bush.
I then joined the NYS Pistol and Rifle Association, a NRA affiliate. I warned them not to trust the GOP.
Result, the GOP that runs the senate in NYS, supported the SAFE Act the most strict gun control in America.
The NRA has accomplished nothing for gun owners, all they do is use us a fundraising tool.
Not me, never again.
There has been an increase in gun rights organizations over the years. I became a NRA life member since 1979.
NRA good or bad, is only one, a few that are actively working to preserve our rights and with help in key elections. Lately its all about the money and which ones can out collect and out spend the money to help their guy. :(
The National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) is also working very hard to help maintain our rights to gun ownership; http://www.nationalgunrights.org/ (http://www.nationalgunrights.org/)
However without these groups, we may have lost our rights and freedoms many years ago! ???
I will say I'm not a wealthy person and in my retirement, the rising cost of everything, especially health insurance, has placed a sizeable dent in my monthly funds.
Rights?
The GOP US Supreme Court just said a Poll Tax is OK in Texas.
No where in the US Constitution does it call for Photo ID to vote.
Rights are for all, not just rights that benefit one part of society to the detriment of others.
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 03:57:14 PM MDT
Rights?
The GOP US Supreme Court just said a Poll Tax is OK in Texas.
No where in the US Constitution does it call for Photo ID to vote.
Rights are for all, not just rights that benefit one part of society to the detriment of others.
Uhhhh....I think they said voter ID is ok....you and Ginsburg say it's a Poll tax....please explain.
Quote from: The_Shadow on October 18 2014 03:12:03 PM MDT
There has been an increase in gun rights organizations over the years. I became a NRA life member since 1979.
NRA good or bad, is only one, a few that are actively working to preserve our rights and with help in key elections. Lately its all about the money and which ones can out collect and out spend the money to help their guy. :(
The National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) is also working very hard to help maintain our rights to gun ownership; http://www.nationalgunrights.org/ (http://www.nationalgunrights.org/)
However without these groups, we may have lost our rights and freedoms many years ago! ???
I will say I'm not a wealthy person and in my retirement, the rising cost of everything, especially health insurance, has placed a sizeable dent in my monthly funds.
^^^
So true.
Too many folks look at one piece as the cure all......as stated above, they all serve a purpose...they all have their pitfalls too.
It's easy to say it's one or the other; but reality says different. If you don't like one, support another; however, just because you don't think it should be supported, doesn't make them the wrong organization.
Quote from: redbaron007 on October 18 2014 04:29:24 PM MDT
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 03:57:14 PM MDT
Rights?
The GOP US Supreme Court just said a Poll Tax is OK in Texas.
No where in the US Constitution does it call for Photo ID to vote.
Rights are for all, not just rights that benefit one part of society to the detriment of others.
Uhhhh....I think they said voter ID is ok....you and Ginsburg say it's a Poll tax....please explain.
He's obviously a trolling lib ... save your breath.
^^
It looks sort of like that. ;)
I don't get the point of your post. Do you really think the NRA has done nothing for gun owners? Do you think the D party is out to save your civil rights?
Do you use the name Wolfie on other forums? If so, I don't need to know anything else. I'm familiar enough.
Quote from: Mike_Fontenot on October 18 2014 04:34:46 PM MDT
He's obviously a trolling lib ... save your breath.
Thought yesterday's rant kinda laid that groundwork.
Dropped in for my daily sip of insight and wisdom from the river of knowledge this forum is, instead got a dose of left wing propaganda eye rape. :(
I decided to take a trip to the NRA grades and endorsement site and I found about the opposite of what Wolfie said.
NY State Senate had lots of Republicans with a "F" grade, just like they deserve.
There are plenty of Democrat folks in several state governments that are endorsed by the NRA based on their voting records.
I'm not a one issue voter. I think Harry Reid has a decent NRA grade, and hell would freeze over before I'd ever consider voting for him. He's been a one man wrecking crew in my opinion, but he blocks anti-gun votes along with every thing else.
Sorry Wolfie, you are just plain wrong in your assessment of the NRA in the political sense. Not unusual for those left of center.
Greg
Thats right baron, the court today said voter ID is OK.
When the court swings Democrat, they will say national licensing is OK, using this as case law.
If you noticed the Gay Marriage issue, Scalia's case law from a decade ago was used by activists to make Gay Marriage legal, and what did the USSC do?
Affirm it.
Mike,
You want to lay out your conservative bona fides?
I will lay mine out and we will see who the liberal is.
Geeman, it does not matter about the grades.
They still support them.
The GOP leader Skelos who gave us the toughest law in the land is still in power.
A real gun group would say, ANY Republican that votes for this and NONE of you get our support.
HEY! HEY! HEY! HEY! HEY!
I DON WANNA SEE NO BONAS.
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 06:08:38 PM MDT
Thats right baron, the court today said voter ID is OK.
When the court swings Democrat, they will say national licensing is OK, using this as case law.
If you noticed the Gay Marriage issue, Scalia's case law from a decade ago was used by activists to make Gay Marriage legal, and what did the USSC do?
Affirm it.
And your point is? Every SCOTUS turnover uses precedents in future cases.
Still struggling with your point.
My point is that you are not consistent.
If you were a conservative, you would be outraged at any attack on the Constitution.
So woofy:
You don't think that a license or ID should be required to exercise a constitutional right?
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 06:30:41 PM MDT
My point is that you are not consistent.
If you were a conservative, you would be outraged at any attack on the Constitution.
LOL!!
You are an all knowing troll ! You can not be taken seriously.
Quote from: The Earl o Sammich on October 18 2014 06:34:58 PM MDT
So woofy:
You don't think that a license or ID should be required to exercise a constitutional right?
LOL
Greg
Earl, does the Constitution prescribe such?
Thats right Baron, pick and choose what rights are worth fighting for.
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 06:47:14 PM MDT
Earl, does the Constitution prescribe such?
No, it doesn't.
But I read in one of your other posts that you are for national registration of all firearms. How would that work with out a national ID?
....For someone accusing someone else of being inconsistent...
Well,
Pot, I would like to introduce you to Mr. Kettle.
All this BS Politics trash talk doesn't solve the problems that this country is in...and bashing on each other is so childish!
If this continues the route it is going, and the animosity gets to personal attacks, I'll just close this thread...
Earl read what I said.
I am for licensing if we get national reciprocity.
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 07:07:03 PM MDT
Earl read what I said.
I am for licensing if we get national reciprocity.
I did read your post(s)
And I implore you to read mine. How would you propose that to happen with out a national ID?
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 06:48:20 PM MDT
Thats right Baron, pick and choose what rights are worth fighting for.
C Ya!
Just like a drivers license (set standard) and states that do not want to join don't have to.
If Alabama says no, they don't have to join but that citizen cannot carry out of state.
Real simple and the system is already there.
Look at the requirements for a gun license in NY and TX and they are nearly identical.
So the same card could be used to prove that you are a registered voter than too?
You can negotiate that in also.
Who says we cannot?
As long as the poor can get a photo ID for free, I have no problem with photo ID to vote anywhere. NYS has the toughest voting laws in the nation, yes liberal NY. When you fill out a voter registration, your signature is on a signature book at the polls. If your signature does not match, the poll worker can challenge you and disqualify you. (Most of the time they ask you for?????? Photo ID to confirm identity.)
Good system in NYS.
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 07:36:17 PM MDT
Just like a drivers license (set standard) and states that do not want to join don't have to.
If Alabama says no, they don't have to join but that citizen cannot carry out of state.
Real simple and the system is already there.
Look at the requirements for a gun license in NY and TX and they are nearly identical.
Than why the national reciprocity if a state can opt out? I don't care for a federal reciprocity for a States right. There is no need to have the Feds involved.
Quote from: Wolfie on October 18 2014 07:49:45 PM MDT
You can negotiate that in also.
Who says we cannot?
As long as the poor can get a photo ID for free, I have no problem with photo ID to vote anywhere. NYS has the toughest voting laws in the nation, yes liberal NY. When you fill out a voter registration, your signature is on a signature book at the polls. If your signature does not match, the poll worker can challenge you and disqualify you. (Most of the time they ask you for?????? Photo ID to confirm identity.)
Good system in NYS.
Well I see we are getting somewhere here. Do you think in a "free society" you should have to "show me your papers please"?
If you think we live in a free society you are fooling yourself.
I took out 50K cash out of the bank last year and they gave me hell.
Oh, I know we are not living in a free society.
...at least as our "rulers" are trying to cram it down our collective throats.
Maybe we are not so far apart. I'm not Republican, I'm not Democrat, I'm not TEA, Libertarian, ....
Maybe I'm Laissez-faire anarchist.