NRA takes flak for ties with left

[cheneyschernobyl]

Source: Yahoo

The National Rifle Association, the powerful lobbying group that has been a longtime nemesis of liberals, is facing mounting criticism from influential allies on the right and even from its own board over a series of recent moves they say are selfish, short-sighted and ultimately harmful to the conservative movement.

Critics cite a list of transgressions, from considering an endorsement of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), to endorsing moderate Republicans — and even Democrats — rather than their more-conservative challengers, to taking a cautious approach to Second Amendment court cases and President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees.

And they are especially angry about the group’s willingness to play ball with Democratic leaders on campaign finance legislation vigorously opposed by congressional Republicans, powerful business groups and nearly the entire conservative movement.

Republican congressional leaders have privately conveyed their unhappiness to NRA officials, but online conservative activists linked to the tea party movement have been vociferous in their criticism.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/39591;_ylt=AiwEoLdEprujtsJF_ojff6z34494;_ylu=X3oDMTMwOG40cmY5BGFzc2V0A3BvbGl0aWNvLzIwMTAwNzEyLzM5NTkxBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDNwRwb3MDNwRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA25yYXRha2VzZmxhaw--

---

What? The NRA is backing Senator Reid? Wow! The tea-baggers mustn't be happy about this! Poor things!

[onehandle]

1. What does the NRA have to do with the 'conservative movement?'

Oh right. Everything.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. Yes, that's why the far-right is all pissed off at them.

:rofl:

[SteveM]

25. Can you figure it out, now?....

If the Democratic Party junked the prohibitionist culture war which surrounds "gun control," and just drop the subject, then the NRA would be placed into the position of endorsing candidates of both parties, and NOT be, de facto, a branch of the Republican Party.

Are you willing to drop "gun control" as an issue if Democrats can benefit from the "weakening" of the NRA?

[DissedByBush]

30. The right assumed they owned the NRA

They don't.

The left could have always had the NRA's backing if we didn't have a loud faction that believed in the "Bill of Rights Except One."

Lately many on the left support the entire Bill of Rights so the NRA is starting to back us again.

That has to be pissing off the right.

It's kind of fun.

It also removes a wedge issue they've used to gain votes for years. Sucks to be them.

[Doctor_J]

2. Harry Reid is "the left"?

Maybe in OozeBeckistan.

[onehandle]

3. He is to the NRAGOP's right-wing base. nt

[Glassunion]

19. How about Tim Walz?

Practically a Tea Partier if I ever saw one.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

4. The only thing the NRA needs to do to back up any endorsements is...

show the politician's voting record and stance on guns and RKBA.
The most gun-friendly politicians get the endorsements... Q.E.D.
The single issue stance of the NRA sans extraneous divisive topics is what makes it so strong.

For about 2 decades conservatives got real comfortable being the just about the only people in the NRA. This was due to Democrats strongly aligning with anti-RKBA and antigun policies. Nowdays, as more liberals embrace gun rights, conservatives lose sole possesion of the NRA. All I can say is tough shit... change is a bitch.

Also, I'm of the opinion that government giving it's people the right to defend thier own freedom is an extremely progressive concept. Especially in the kingdom era 200+ years ago when the notion was inked onto The Constitution.

[AlbertCat]

8. giving it's people the right to defend thier own freedom

in a well regulated militia....

obviously they can bear arms to come to the defense of the government.... not to pull a gun every time someone they didn't vote for gets elected.


"Nowdays, as more liberals embrace gun rights,"


Yeah.... the paranoia is running amok. A symptom of lousy government.... which has been right wingy corporatist for 30 years now. Hmmmmm....


BTW... it's "their" not "thier"... and "Nowadays" not "Nowdays".

[fascisthunter]

10. needs repeating every time

[Statistical]

12. You should read what the 2nd amendment says.

It gives the people the right to keep and bear arms. The militia relies on that right. The right doesn't rely on the militia.

Majority of DU recognizes that, majority of the country recognizes that, majority of the Democratic party recognizes that, all nine justices recognize that (they only differ on level of restrictions allowed under Constitutional review).

[chibajoe]

18. The government doesn't give "the people" anything

WE have the right, and it is WE who grant the government its powers. It really isn't that alien of a concept.

[Statistical]

21. To some it is.

Some people really do believe that for example we have free press because the govt has granted that "right to us". I say under such a system the word "rights" really has no meaning. If rights come from the government then they can take back what they gave.

Of course some of the gun-grabbers who cheer as the country marches towards fascism without realizing their is nothing "special" about the 2nd. If the government can revoke the 2nd then it can establish a national church, replace the press with state run TV, and place limits on all those things we once considered rights. However like moths to a flame they are so blinding by a singular goal to get rid of "the gunz" they don't see the larger picture.

Rights are inalienable and come from God. For the non religious you could say they are simply natural rights a birthright of being part of the human existence.

Part of the problem I believe comes from the education system which dumbs down the lessons of history. It weakens the bill of rights and hides the fact that the founders were utterly radical in their ideas. That rights didn't come from the King thus the King never had the authority to repress them and by that very action the King (and government of Britain) because tyranical and lost the legitimacy of rule.

Very radical concepts for the time and it resulted in a war with the superpower at that time. Had Britain one history might be much different.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

24. A right that can be given is a right that can be taken away. (n/t)

[SteveM]

26. The "militia clause" argument has gone the way of vacuum tubes...

Most constitutional scholars, historians, attorneys and political scientists who have written on the Second Amendment see 2A as a protection of the INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

"...not to pull a gun every time someone they didn't vote for gets elected."

I don't know what you mean by this, but certainly there is no "right" to do what you say, and I know of no one on these threads who advocates such.

"nowdays, as more liberals embrace gun rights," followed by your commentary "Yeah... the paranoia is running amok. A symptom of lousy government...," etc.

Can you also explain what you mean here? Is the statement "liberals embrace gun rights" true or not and how is that paranoid?

Most folks here don't pick at spelling, but they are inclined to question the entire meaning/clarity of some posts.

[Turbineguy]

5. Maybe the NRA

has figured out that dead people don't buy guns?

[Robb]

7. They vote, though.

:D

[X_Digger]

16. In Chicago, at least. n/t

[fascisthunter]

9. Reid is NOT part of the left

[SteveM]

27. You have a point. Not much left of the Left. nt

[Heywood J]

11. Congratulations to the NRA for recognizing that their issue

is not the sole providence of conservatives and that they're not a Republican PAC.

[Populist_Prole]

14. Agree 100 percent

And this may be a good wedge to separate the 2. I'm living proof.

[spin]

28. They are, have been and will be a one issue organization ...

that issue is RKBA.

That's why they are so successful.

[Statistical]

13. NRA support for Democratic party candidates has almost tripled in the last decade.

Hopefully that trend will continue.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00053553&cycle=2010

2002 - 12% Democrats
2004 - 15% Democrats
2006 - 16% Democrats
2008 - 22% Democrats
2010 - 29% Democrats

As more and more Democratic leaders support the RKBA equally with other Constitutional protections, and abandon failed gun control policies I am sure the party will gain increasing support.

[X_Digger]

15. Screw the conservatives.

The NRA is a single-issue organization.

I'm sure some of the progressive supporters of NARAL are unhappy with them supporting republicans.

[MisterBill45]

17. This is really old news

If you go onto the usual gun forums, which aren't right-wing, but waaaaay over the edge to plain old crazy for the most part, you'll see people there excoriating the NRA all the time for not being more aggressive and (large c) Conservative. When you point out that the NRA is taking what is in FACT a conservative approach to the issue, their heads explode.

The hallmark of actual (small c) conservatism is pragmatism and cautiousness about over-reaching. The NRA didn't like Heller because had the case gone the other way it would have been a setback that would have been disastrous. Similarly their Amicus in McDonald saved the day because the P&I is an issue the court won't touch.

If you want to see ACTUAL right-wing gun rights organizations, you have to go to GOA or JPFO etc. They make no bones about being (Large c) Conservative organizations.

The hoplophobes in the Democratic Party have been foaming at the mouth over the NRA for decades and for decades the NRA has been completely consistent in their stance. Stop being anti gun and we'll endorse you. It's not the NRA's fault the party establishment won't bother with facts.

[rrneck]

20. Change is always stressful. nt

[Glassunion]

22. It could be better...

Up to date(7/11/2010) the NRA in the 2010 election cycle...
12% in independent expenditures supporting Dems.
5% in PAC to PAC supporting Dems
Contributions to House Democrats = 32%
Contributions to Senate Democrats = 18%

They have raised a total of 12.2 million. They have only spent 2.8 to date.

Since my post on the 9th, http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=327833&mesg_id=327833 the overall support to Democrats has risen to 30% from 29% for this year. As of the 11th, (30% to Democrats, 70% to Republicans)

I like the trend considering in the 2000 cycle (the year the NRA had the most money to play with since 1990) the ratio was (15% to Democrats, 84% to Republicans). In ten years Democratic Party support by the NRA has doubled.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00053553&cycle=2010

If our reps continue showing their support of the 2nd Amendment this trend will continue.

[Callisto32]

23. I guess the "conservative movement" needs to learn they don't own RKBA.

Idiots.

[spin]

29. And very liberal Democrats need to learn that RKBA ...

doesn't automatically lead to "a return to the Wild West".

Our party should work to improve and ENFORCE existing gun laws. Gun control should focus on taking guns way from violent criminals rather than honest citizens.

It is true that to many voters living in some large urban areas, gun control is very popular. In cities like Chicago or Washington D.C. the honest citizens have little good experience with firearms but considerable experience with the tragedies that criminals can cause when armed. These voters form an important base for many Democrats who wisely support gun control in order to get elected. If Obama would have been a strong supporter of RKBA in Chicago, he would have been lucky to get elected dog catcher.

At one time it seemed logical that allowing honest citizens to own firearms would lead to an enormous increase in crime and tragic incidents. After all aren't firearms designed as tools with only one function, to kill? But RKBA has proven popular in many states over the last 30 years and now those states allow firearm ownership including shall issue concealed carry with truly reasonable restrictions. Instead of a dramatically increasing crime rate, violent crime has actually fallen in our country. Sometimes what seems logical is wrong. Many educated people once believed that the world was flat and was the center of the universe.

Admittedly, allowing honest citizens to own handguns for self defense will not in itself solve the crime problems in Chicago or other cities with very restrictive gun laws. Armed citizens are NOT police. It will, however, allow some homeowners a means to defend themselves in case a violent intruder enters their home. Eventually, citizens in Chicago may be able to legally carry firearms concealed, but again this alone will not solve the crime problem. But if and when shall CCW does pass in Illinois, citizens in Chicago will have a means to defend themselves on the street and in many public locations. Crime will not disappear, but citizens will have the ability to stop a violent attack and criminals will learn that all honest citizens are not always helpless prey for an armed predator.

The actual solution to crime lies in better policing backed by a justice system that is NOT a revolving door. But police can't be everywhere at all times. There are occasions when a call to 911 will do little good to save your life or the lives of members in your family. Some people prefer to have the legal means for self defense in those situations and denying them this right leads to unnecessary tragedy and emboldens criminal activity.