Sporcle of the Day, 28 Jun 10  |   Home  |   Finding Peggy West’s borders

NRA Gag Order

Seriously?

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.

Sometimes organizations, and people, get in the habit of constantly sacrificing the present for the sake of the future.  The problem is that when the future arrives, it is then the present to again be sacrificed for another future.  Sometimes, you have to stand your ground.

Posted by Owen at 2008 hrs
Firearms + Law + Politics + Politics - General

1. As a long-time Life Member of the NRA I’m ashamed at what they’ve done. I suspect the rank and file membership will address this philosophy at the next Annual Meeting.

   If our country fought wars this way, by appeasement, negotiation and submission, we would lose. Hey…, wait a minute - that IS how we’re fighting wars now!!

   The NRA needs to change its logo from a Minuteman to a sleazy lawyer.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 29, 2010 at 0753 hrs
   
   
   

2. To hell with the NRA.  Quit that wretched organization and join Gun Owners of America.

   Posted by Jay4Liberty on June 29, 2010 at 0838 hrs
   
   
   

3. I think you’re reading way too much into this.  First of all, if there is any pressure not to take public positions as an NRA board member, the pressure has to be coming from other member-elected board members.  Staff cannot control the board.

   I also think you’re reading far too many conclusions that aren’t actually the case at this point.  Keep in mind that Erick hates the NRA.  He tells people he will not support them, he actively opposes them, and he takes his news about the issue from GOA which does factor in party affiliation to their ratings & work.  And, perhaps most importantly, has no serious representation on Capitol Hill.  Erick is pissed that NRA won’t change their name to the National Republican Association and fight all of his general conservative battles for him when they are focused on gun rights - even when Democrats are in power.

   If a group wants to be taken seriously on the issue and not be seen as a knee-jerk reactionary Republican group, they will listen to what Kagan has to say.  Give her a chance to speak - she will save or damn herself.  So far, the only question about guns was only asked about 10 minutes ago and it was a softball from Leahy.  I have a feeling you will hear a final, clear decision from many groups as her hearing progresses.

   I advise you to take your information about NRA from actual members.

   Posted by Bitter on June 29, 2010 at 0847 hrs
   
   
   

4. Keep in mind that Erick hates the NRA.

   I think you’ve got B&S confused with Red State.

   And I think one universal committment and belief of the NRA should be to oppose politicians who oppose the 2nd Amendment, and to strenuously oppose nominees for lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court who share such an antigun rights view. Take no prisoners!

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 29, 2010 at 0954 hrs
   
   
   

5. Duke:

   If our country fought wars this way, by appeasement, negotiation and submission, we would lose. Hey…, wait a minute - that IS how we’re fighting wars now!!

   And the outcome will be as you stated.

   Rules Of Engagement? See Enemy, Shoot. Not the BS they are required to do now. Do you think a taliban/al Qaida fighter would hold his/her fire if there were civilians present? Would they NOT destroy a church if soldiers were hold up inside, or using it as a fortress? Our politicians AGAIN are putting our soldiers in harms way, and tying their hands with their moronic ROEs Our politicians are aiding and abetting our enemies. This is called TREASON people, and until “we” act accordingly, they’ll continue to betray us.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 29, 2010 at 1128 hrs
   
   
   

6. Oops, guess I got a little carried away.

   The connect being the NRA, much like our Government, has apparently been infiltrated by the Left, and are now moving away from the concept of protecting our Constitution, and Bill Of Rights from those forces dedicated to their destruction.

   NOW is the time for all good men to come to the aide of their country. Our Rights and Liberies are under attack by the very people who have taken an oath to protect them.

   Wake up people.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 29, 2010 at 1138 hrs
   
   
   

7. NRA made the decision a few weeks ago to pitch 99% of the nonprofits over the side of the boat in order to save NRA’s own ass.

   Who was it that described the progress of the Nazis…

   ‘they came for the Catholics; I was not one and I did not object.

   ‘they came for the Jews; I was not one and I did not object.’

   ‘they came for the old….the infirm…...and I did not object.’

   Then they came for me—and no one was left to object.

   (Or words to that effect.)

   Well, GOA will be left to object, like JPFO.

   That American Rifleman subscription?  No longer worth $35.00

   Posted by dad29 on June 29, 2010 at 1305 hrs
   
   
   

8. Oops, guess I got a little carried away.

   Not to worry. A Senator from Arizona once said:

   I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
   ....
   And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

   Perhaps the NRA just needs to discard their penchant toward political correctness, and political cronyism.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 29, 2010 at 1314 hrs
   
   
   

9. penchant toward political correctness, and political cronyism.

   That’s lobbying in a nutshell.

   Posted by Jay4Liberty on June 29, 2010 at 1335 hrs
   
   
   

10. First of all, I was not confusing blogs.  No offense, but I don’t comment here to talk to most of you guys.  I was attempting to comment in response to Owen’s post - giving him context for that perspective.

    Now, perhaps you’d actually like to hear from a member of the Board of Directors.  Unfortunately, both blogs are guilty of spreading BS.  The Board members are completely accessible if you’re a member and you make even a little bit of an effort.

    I have known Tom for a very long time, and I know he’s telling the truth.  He fights for gun rights in New York, so he would have no problem telling it like it is if someone asked him to keep quiet.

    Posted by Bitter on June 29, 2010 at 1417 hrs
    
    
    

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.