With McDonald v. Chicago Victory, NRA’s Reactions To Kagan Nomination Puzzling
June 29, 2010
Perhaps what we are witness to is the trouble groups such as the NRA get into when they place politics above principle, carving out exemptions for themselves in restrictive Legislative laws in what appears to be an exchange for backing off on opposition to Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court. This of course is mere speculation on my part but the path the NRA has chosen to take leaves unanswered questions.
Michelle Malkin declares the McDonald ruling “good news, bad news”. The good news of course being the Supreme Court ruling against the Chicago gun ban. Malkin states that with the NRA withholding a position of opposition against anti-gun Kagan, the bad news and surely it is. Why the hesitation? Kagan clearly is not a supporter of gun rights. Isn’t the NRA’s mission to promote and protect Second Amendment rights?
The NRA never opposed the nomination of now Justice Sotomayor until after members of the NRA Board and heads of state NRA affiliates signed and mailed a letter opposing Sotomayor to NRA management. As if there was some question about Sotomayor’s position on gun rights, that was clarified yesterday in her dissenting vote in McDonald v. Chicago.
Some point out that Kagan’s known work reveals an even greater support for strict gun control and yet we still see the NRA not officially opposing her nomination. Instead they have issued a public position stating they are “carefully reviewing” Kagan’s record and working with key Senators to make sure Kagan is “aggressively questioned”.
We see from what is found in the Malkin piece that the NRA management prohibited any NRA Board members from testifying or coming out publicly in opposition to Kagan. This is troubling and seems to mimic the same tactics this Obama administration uses in censoring anyone in opposition to his positions.
While Americans for the preservation of gun rights applaud any victory in court that supports the Constitution, we should not be willing to achieve those victories by compromising the very principles for which the Constitution itself was founded. When political wrangling, which is the norm in Washington, becomes a part of the NRA’s policies, it can only be expected that something will be given up in order to get.
Which brings me to wondering what the NRA gave up in order to get themselves an exemption in the DISCLOSE Act? Was it that they could have the exemption if they promised not to oppose the Kagan nomination? Who knows but the reality is that when you play these games, questions remain and speculation takes over.
Tom Remington
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
We feature the latest news, events and politics effecting the sports of hunting, fishing, and all outdoor activities in North America.
Question: Are you an NRA member? Because I’ll be honest, reading this, I don’t think you even know how the NRA is structured. You’re assuming an awful lot, and I don’t see how it is connected to how the organization actually functions.
I’m not trying to be sassy, I’m just trying to get a baseline for your experience and knowledge.
The NRA like any other organization can be infiltrated and destroyed from within.. I stopped supporting the NRA when the NRA sold out so called post traumatic syndrome troops returning home by taking from them their Second Amendment Rights via the stroke of some shrinks pen..
I suppose I shouldn’t bother since it looks like you’re not at all interested in having a conversation about this, but if you’re interested, board members are speaking out about the subject. It’s a false rumor.
Greg–I have to presume that these “so called post traumatic syndrome troops” are accepting government benefits for their condition, so-called or not. If they’re willing to accept a potentially incorrect label for the sake of money, they have to be prepared to deal with all other ramifications as well. If one of Our Boys is truly as unstable as a diagnosis of PTSD would seem to indicate, I (as a Life Member of the NRA and rabid 2nd Amendment supporter) am not sure I would want a firearm in their hands either.
Chuck,
I agree, but there be to much room for this legislation to be abused by the military deciding who is fit or unfit and most often mislabeled ex soldiers would likely be fighting and uphill battle to remove said label.. Also looking at the history of ex soldiers who have gone berserk and shot up a post office or other business facility is rare when compared to a civilian with no military background so the legislation seems like a thought crime process to me. After the Fort Hood debacle perhaps the military shrinks are not fit to examine anyone. I see to much infringement where infringement is not allowed.
I’m glad to see that the NRA does not support KAGAN.. She is in the wrong country, she should try Cuba, maybe China.. Stalin would have loved her..
First of all Bitter, I’m not here at your beck and call. Perhaps you come by your name rightfully and I certainly don’t understand the need for being such a pill about such things. The day is long and simply because you arrive half cocked and ready to do battle because you have all the answers, doesn’t mean the rest of us operate that way.
I’m still looking to verify the truth about the gag order and unfortunately what Mr. King had to say in the link you provided doesn’t necessarily do that although those looking to fully protect the NRA from doing anything wrong, will run behind Mr. King and hide.
I find it just as troubling that Mr. King made this statement, “I have not taken a position on Elena Kagen’s nomination to the Supreme Court because I find it absurd that anyone with no judicial experience would be nominated to the Supreme Court and fervently hope the Republican Senators will block this nomination.”
Is he serious? I think it is absurd that Barack Obama is president of the United States but I’m not going to sit back and let him do whatever he wants in “hopes” that the Republicans will keep him in check.
Snowflakes uses the same link to prop up NRA’s “position” on Elena Kagan as I did to show it’s not really a position at all. The NRA says they are keeping an eye on Kagan’s past, which they are hiding, and working with Senators to make sure she is questioned aggressively. Is that best they can do?
In actuality, it’s aside from the issue at hand as to whether NRA staff tried to gag the board or not. I find it difficult to swallow that they would do that but these days far too many weird things happen and the reports of this gag order came from many, many reputable sources…not that it makes it gospel.
My question still remains regardless of any damned gag order is why is the NRA not taking a stronger stance against Kagan? Are they planning to wait until after the vote is taken and then say, “Gee, we should have been more aggressive?”
And who is willing to answer the question of what the NRA gave up to get an exemption?
You know, I looked at the timing of your posts. I saw you posted quite a few items between the comment time and when I came back, so it was perfectly reasonable to assume that you weren’t interested in the conversation. Unless you add a note that says your posts are timed and do not require manual action, it’s reasonable to assume you were poking around the blog and just not answering the questions.
Just what is your evidence? Erick won’t “release” his evidence because he doesn’t have any – or he has rampant speculation that he is claiming as evidence. He did the same thing with the Will Folks payment promises. (Which is really too bad that he went that route in that case, I would have loved to have seen that jackass go down much harder than he did.)
NRA didn’t trade anything for DISCLOSE. The Democrats were very open about the reason they did the exemptions, they didn’t want any of the groups who fit the descriptions to get in their way of the votes – knowing that if the groups are true to their mission, they would have to back down once the rules no longer got in their way of doing business.
On this, I have multiple board members on the record – a few publicly – that there was never a gag order issued. You’ve got Tom flat out saying it. He’s waiting to see what comes out in the hearings which only effectively started this morning. Why is it a sin to just listen to what she has to say? It doesn’t mean they won’t ultimately oppose her, it means that no one can say that NRA – or any gun owners – didn’t judge her on the merits of her own background and statements.
Joe DeBergalis has been posting tons of stuff on her nomination & views very publicly. He also verified on forums that this claim simply is not true.
I’m sure you’ve done research into the bylaws, so I’m curious about why you believe that NRA staff can tell the board what to do. The only people who have any control over the board are the members – any other democratically elected board members (but only if they are on the nominating committee & said board member feels like they need the blessing of the committee for re-election). The board actually makes the hiring & firing decisions on executive staff.
If you actually look at the facts of the situation, the only thing that’s true is that NRA has not formally said, “She’s a terrible nominee & we’re scoring the vote.” Whether they do or not remains to be seen, but I think it’s fair for us to at least listen to here statements in the hearings. There will be plenty of time before a vote. I would hope you would encourage other organizations to at least listen to the hearings of a nominee you support. It’s a reasonable request to make, and I don’t think that spreading a rumor that multiple NRA board members have said is a fabrication is the best way to lash out at the Administration.
You obviously have an agenda; one I assume is to support the NRA at all costs. You also don’t seem to read well either. I said I was still investigating and that obviously isn’t good enough for you because you are right….end of discussion. If you would take a deep breath and stop feeling so obligated to defend the NRA you would read that I wrote that I find it difficult to believe the NRA would gag board members. How does this make me in need of providing you evidence that they did?
Anything I have written about the Kagan hearings has nothing to do with whether anyone should or should not here what the woman has to say, although it is clear that we will never be able to find out the truth as long as information about her is being sat on and not made available.
As I said before, I’m not here at your beck and call. I suppose it should be consider a compliment that you so closely watch my site and are able to scrutinize it so well, about as well as you know precisely what the NRA is doing and not doing and what goes on behind closed doors.
Just so you know, I don’t know either. Once again if you would calm down and read everything instead of focusing on only the things that make you mad, you would have read this sentence in my opening paragraph. “This of course is mere speculation on my part but the path the NRA has chosen to take leaves unanswered questions.”
It just baffles the shit out of me why people come along with blazing guns, when the ultimate goal is to nominate the most qualified candidate to sit on the highest court in the land, which includes getting to the root of Second Amendment, along with all the other issues. And then when someone finds some issues with someone like the NRA, they want to declare war. Come in shoot first and ask questions later. Is that how you operate? It very much reminds me of conversations I’v3e tried to have with staff at NRA who don’t listen and do all the talking.
Nobody or organization is perfect and if the NRA or anyone else is doing anything that is underhanded, why should they get a free pass?
The NRA is a bittersweet pill at best, usually more bitter, than sweet. I find any gun owner who has a tendency to believe in the ‘common sense’ denial of a god given right, suspect. I know, I know, I have heard all the arguments, safety this and safety that, yada yada yada. The simple reality is: a right is a right and a right is above government restrictions. I catch some flack on this position, but I stand fast on it, because you have to think a few levels deeper than the average citizen is willing to think.
The fact we deny felons of their god given 2A rights, is absurd. And here is why. If they are so heinous that they can not be trusted with their rights, they should be in prison. If they have paid their debt to society, they are square. Their rights should be reinstated, period. How many non violent ‘felons’ are now incapable of the tools of freedom and self defense because of ‘common sense’ laws designed to restrict freedom for safety, yet have proven no ability to provide the safety part, only the restrict freedom part? But, you see, the government needs that restriction, and they need the crime. Why? because even ‘reasonable’ people will agree to infringe on someone’s ‘right’ in the name of safety. I have a hard time with other gun owners who get all bent out of shape at any gun control measures they hear of, yet will fold on this one. Frustrating……
Same thing with the soldiers, I agree with Greg, they rolled over on the very people who fought to protect those rights. We were never promised a safe society, but a free one, and the two do not coexist when ‘common sense’ yet freedom restricting laws exist.
Here we have a suppose gun advocate posting, and making excuses for the restrictions, but I bet if I stated we need to outlaw guns to reduce suicides, he would come back with the, people can commit suicide with anything, you can’t blame the gun! Same thing for those soldiers, if these guys are intent on doing harm to themselves or others, not having a firearm isn’t going to stop them. If they need help on that level, these men and women are first in line, before the illegals, the welfare recipients, the poor or the rich and prosperous, right to the front, do not pass go, do not collect $200, and do NOT send them the damn bill.
Every gun control law in the history of this country was passed in the name of safety and reduction of crime, they have completely failed at both. Therefore, they ALL need to go. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, seems pretty self explanatory to me………
I belong to the NRA solely because it is required of me to participate in the target shooting events that my daughter and I compete in. Half of their stances make me wonder who’s side they are on.
I am not an ardent NRA defender, no matter what you want to believe. I raise plenty of holy hell with them when I disagree with them, and it gets results. Why does it get results? Because I stop to think about the constraints they may be facing first.
In this case, there are some very clear alarm bells that go off when I read the unproven rumors.
First, who the hell is going to gag 76 board members? The staff cannot control them because they hire the staff. The membership votes for them. Chris Cox made a crack earlier today about how on earth you would manage to muzzle Ted Nugent. I would point out that Sandy Froman testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last year before NRA ever made a formal announcement, and Cleta Mitchell wrote a scathing op-ed disagreeing with their position on recent legislation. These 76 board members guide NRA, not the other way around. That’s a simple structure matter, and one I presumed you had already covered in your further research. (Bylaws are available to every member, and they are automatically sent to each life member. The specific board examples are all available in Google searches.)
Second, Tom King is one of the board members who signed the big letter Sandy Froman sent last year for the Sotomayor hearing & NRA announcement about their opposition. He’s not afraid to buck the organization. So when he says he’s not facing a gag order on this, he has credibility on the specific issue. (Again, something that is available online, and the letter he signed last year is on his blog.)
Add in that another signatory to the letter of opposition, Scott Bach, also confirmed to me on the phone that he has never been asked to be quiet about Elena Kagan, and he has heard of no other board members facing any type of gag rule. (Unfortunately, that’s not verifiable online. However, participants at the Second Amendment Blog Bash from 2008 & 2010 all had the chance to get his contact information, so he’s not unreachable.) Finally, we have Joe DeBergalis who admits on one of the largest gun forums online that he had received no such orders from NRA, but that he has actively been sharing information about Kagan’s record online.
It’s not about getting wound up, it’s about stopping to think about the facts before getting wound up and spreading false rumors and rampant speculation. It’s also about being willing to ask questions before jumping on board with such wild accusations. So, I asked people about the connection with DISCLOSE, and each board member and staff member said it was absolutely not true – no deal was cut.
I don’t know which staff members you’re talking about as being terrible to work with at NRA, but it sounds like you’re not working with the right folks. I’ve used the opportunities at the annual meeting to introduce bloggers to the people who will listen and get them answers when asked.
And as for paying attention to the blog that closely, it’s called RSS. It leaves a time stamp.
Bitter- You know, I respect their position they may find themselves in. But, you would think by now they would realize you can’t reason with unreasonable people. Rebecca Peters, and her boi Georgie have exactly zero intent of ever stopping. We are well aware of the incremental approach these people use, and when you give a little today, you will be expected to give a little more tomorrow, and eventually you will be expected to just give up the last little thread you hold when you finally paint yourself into a corner. The NRA has become more political than anything else, do we need them? Yes. But, we also need them to start providing a strong and consistent position that doesn’t included allowing incremental losses.
And they should also be doing one hell of a lot more in promoting youth programs, if they don’t, we will lose the 2A through attrition in the next two generations. If not the next one.
A quick update: As of this morning, Erick Erickson of Red State is standing firm in his resource(s) of “leaked Senate emails” of a “gag order”. What is not clear is the specificity of this “gag order”.
And a reminder that this idea of a “gag order” is only one part of the entire story, not that we should get lost or bogged down in whether leaked emails exist or not. The bottom line is that not only are we interested in Second Amendment preservation now, but in the long term as well.
Alright, youse guy….give way here. Most of you are talking over my head, when it comes to what is going on, both at the Kagen hearings and any deals made with the DISCLOSE Act…But the fact is, is that even though a supposed “gag order” has no validity in and of the fact that the board sets policy, that does not preclude the possibility of any “advisement” regarding public statements which might cause press concerns, or some other reason which might be used to bolster the Kagen nomination…A simple letter from LaPierre, could have been conceived as such by anyone outside of the NRA. You are all jumping to conclusions here, both and all!
I myself, am a lifetime member, simply because of the fact that, even though now there are other worthwhile groups that promote our 2nd amendment rights, the NRA has stood at the foremost of all of them, long before there were any others in the woodwork….And without them, no matter what the criticism, we would have lost the rights we still have. Now, in logic, there is now way to support that proposition, but it is something that most of you can believe, if you have any history of life you have lived…
I can readily understand criticism, bitter, and perhaps if you knew Tom Remington from more of HIS history, you would understand what he is saying….(not that I need to defend him) Sometimes it just keeps us on our toes…when we hear that there is something in the grapevine, and we need to have a say about it. It lets those who are in power know that it makes a difference!
And Barry, you give me something to think about….and that’s good! Sometimes we just too readily accept the status quo…
Jes- I am glad it gave you something to think about. It is really so very obvious to me. The government has the power and authority to keep truly heinous people in prison. yet they refuse, and actually work toward the other end of the spectrum. One has to ask why? They spew lies about safety and freedom, yet fail to act. Unless of course, it reduces freedom and promotes their own freaking power. They have extended most crimes even of non violent nature to a felony level. Huh, I wonder if the two are connected?
I am sorry, I detest crime, and I detest violence, but it’s obvious gun laws do nothing to solve either, but the things that would are ignored. Logic tells me that the known and obvious hatred of weapons by most politicians has been attacked from a different angle. And they use crime and criminals to promote it. In the end, I am less safe and more importantly less free.
Never accept the status quo, if it sounds to good to be true, it is, especially coming from a politicians pie hole.
In all honesty, I agree we would be worse off without them. But I also think they could do a better job by not rolling over.
Barry, your concept of allowing “everyone”, including felons to their 2nd amendment rights, seems flawed to me…Not that can’t respect your way of thinking, because
I do, but because I find when we carry anything to the extreme, we run into problems…For instance, do you think “everyone”, should include children, and not have an age limitation? And why not grant the convicted felon his right while in jail? Of course these are extreme examples, but that is the problem when not finding a moderate and acceptable level of “compromise”, for want of another word. The term is practically synonymous with politicians, as well it should be, since that is pretty much what a politician is..and there is nothing wrong with that.
This is the reason for both a two party system, and the reason for having a system of laws which are influenced by both sides of any argument…And our democratic principles, which influence our outcome of laws, is still circumspect, by the elected representatives, who SHOULD have more sense than than those who elected them….not that they do, but that is what was intended by our founding fathers of government.
So, suffice to say, we disagree with the limitations of laws, but agree in the principles which should govern them. Perhaps the most important of all those principles are the moral principles which are the basis for them all, and when these are corrupted and compromised, we become a corrupted nation as well. Whenever we leave God out of our lives, He leaves us out of His protective and beneficial hands…and we all will suffer as a nation if that is the case.
How is it we continue to over look a group of felons who would disarm us and give us over to the U.N. What do these treasonous felonious bastards have to do, boldly burn the Constitution in Public and claim it is null and void.. Oh wait, their doing that.. Oh shoot, here comes another European Treaties for the vanquished u.s. serf populance to ignore, why is it criminals pushing UnConstitutional British Admiralty Maritime ” laws ” in this Republic have the right to Define what a felony is.. You Know what Jes, this simple, no violent action against others, time served, restitution paid.. A man should not have to carry that Felony around like a brand all his life.. Lets get back the Frederick Bastiat, John Locke, Constitutional Common laws as set forth which are the original basis for these founding laws, which are trampled to death beyond recognition by Modern Commercial Code Bull shit Admiralty Maritime Babylonian Codes.. See the George Town Law Journals where these treasonous bastards installed this crap and changed this legal system in secret.. These Babylonian laws of the merchant and their contracts defrauding men of their natural sentient sovereignty which the Constitution protects men from need to be recognized for what they are, and kindly tossed onto the scrap heap of UNBIBLICAL HISTORY.. No more tolerance, no more compromising with these devil worshiping sonsabitches.. And they can take that stupid wild dog they have crammed up our ass with them..
I can see the whites of these scoundrels eyes and guess what, they ain’t got whites in those eyes their yellow.
Greg, what can I say….other than complacency? The majority of the population doesn’t even vote!
I can agree with restoring civil rights after time served, as long as felons aren’t let out to remedy overcrowded conditions, but the fact is, they can get those rights back, now, although it will take a lawyer and some funds to do it.
When the time comes for us to take stock of how our nation fell apart at the seams, and after we begin to resurrect it from anarchy, we will need your historical perspective to try it all over again…
Jes- Think about what you said “of allowing “everyone”.
Jes, we are talking rights here, not privileges. It is not my place, nor yours to ‘limit’ anyone’s rights if they are in good standing in the society. That is such a slippery slope, because once government believes they can limit our rights, that will be expanded on…oh wait……
We are a country of laws, when you violate a law, you are sent to prison. When in prison most all of your rights are suspended as you are no longer in good standing within our society. Once that debt is paid, it is suppose to go away, your debt is paid, you are once again in good standing. Your rights restored.
The truth is, by not keeping truly violent and heinous criminals in prison where they belong, the government fosters a system of high crime. They then use that crime as an excuse to pass laws that restrict freedoms, and people don’t rise up against them because they think it will make them safer. Which is ridiculous, criminals by definition do not follow laws, only people with the desire to follow laws obey them, and that includes those who may have broken the law in the past. The government is and has been expanding on what is seen as a felony, do you think that is by happenstance, or by design? Could you explain to me why a country that has been existence as long as this one, still has law makers passing new laws daily? They are outlawing just about everything but breathing, and they are working on that one as we speak. I mean how did we ever exist in the past without these laws?
How many truly violent criminals are going to follow that law anyway? As we can see from experience, none to hardly any. The non violent felons on the other hand, you know the ones who made a mistake, hurt no one, paid their debt and learned their lesson, are denied what I see as perhaps our most important freedom. This is just another perfect example of trying to solve a problem on the back end as opposed to the front end, by design. It’s an illusion that belongs on the stage of a magician.
Now, to bring up another subject, kids. Children are the wards of their parents, and for good reason. Those choices of which freedoms a child has are the choice of the parents. As long as a kid isn’t being physically or mentally abused. My youngest daughter is completely competent with a firearm, she is a better marksman than I am. She understands the respect they deserve. She is 18 and is still denied her ability to protect herself from the heinous d bag the government has turned back into society. I would have felt very comfortable with her having a handgun when she was about 16, not that I have a problem with her having to wait until she is an adult, as she was my responsibility up until that point. If your 18 y/o isn’t prepared to handle their freedoms and rights upon being turned into society, you have failed as a parent.
If you want to convince me otherwise, show me one gun law, including the one that denies past felons their right to the 2A, which has reduced crime or made us safer. I’ll save you a lot of time though, because I have searched extensively, it doesn’t exist. The only times in the history of this country that we have seen crime go down, were periods where gun laws were being slackened, not tightened.
The bottom line solution is this: Lock the truly heinous and dangerous people up where they belong, and keep them there.
And stop voting them into positions of authority..
Barry, I can agree with what you say, and you have some valid and acute criticism of a number of the misuses of our penal system and our system of laws and punishments. But what we have is not going to change unless something is done to change it. And bought off politicians and a complacent public voters won’t do the job.
The most you can do is try to extend you sphere of influence, and you still have to leave the choice up to those who vote, and those work in areas where they can chose those who dictate responsibility, and just about there, you are getting into the area of the politicians….Maybe, as much as you dislike the idea, you need to think of what potential that would have for you. Finding the person who represents the values and reflects the virtues, is getting to be difficult…You will be faced with as difficult decisions as those in power already have to make. Which way they turn is dictated by that inner voice we often call conscience..but it is only the way God has of speaking with us….and it is only a whisper, compared with what the world throws our way, especially in the way of temptation, which is the other road, and so often it becomes the main highway…..
But, as a responsible parent, for God’s sake, keep those guns under lock, for as I well remember when I went into my dad’s drawer to handle his old official police .38, and found a note saying he knew I had been there, and had better leave it alone…even though I wandered the woods, by myself, with a .22 and knew how to handle it, I knew I was playing with something I shouldn’t be playing with!
And there are for certain sure, parents who have no sense of responsibility, and couldn’t care less that their kids would find and play with something that could bring down disaster upon them and their family….
Jes- all of my guns are in a safe, not for my kids, trust me they very much know better, but for those friends of theirs that I have no trust in their knowledge. My girls all know, if they want to burn up some gunpowder, dad is always game for that. They were taught at as early of an age as they could process the information, the realities and the dangers involved with all firearms. I have a very shocking way of demonstrating that, that imprints it in their brains. And girls are by nature much less likely to be so intrigued with them as boys. A right brain / left brain thing I guess. Maybe the ONE positive thing about raising girls.
As far as the other issue’s, I spend about 90% of my time trying to reason with people and challenging their minds to think one level deeper, to get involved, be aware and to stop being freaking lemmings.
Our society has been so dumbed down I find it a difficult task, but I make progress with some people, and some are of no hope. You take your wins and move on.
Voting is a perfect example, people in other parts of the world risk their lives to have their vote. In this nation if 30% show it’s considered a great turnout. And of that 30%, 95% vote on a 30 second clip of lies pushed at them over the tube by a politician. The very sad reality is, that I don’t think there is a chance in hell of it ever changing until a crash of real proportions happens. When people of this nation experience real hardship, perhaps then, just maybe, they will wake up and realize what their slumber and ignorance has cost them. I have not missed one election, on any issue, even local, since I was of legal age to cast a vote. What does that place me in? The top 1%, maybe 5% at most. That is a sad statement.
If I have one thing to offer this society, I hope it is the ability to get people to think. I spread it far and wide, and irl, I am talking to folks about this stuff all the time. I make progressives heads explode ( something I truly enjoy) and try to convince people the left / right paradigm is a manufactured hoax. Greg is spot on, even if people don’t want to admit it or face it. I have seen some of his sources, I have logically evaluated the evidence, and it makes me sick to my stomach. We have one very valuable tool and advantage over those from the past. We have history to learn from, and anyone ignoring it is bound to suffer severely. I have been asked on several occasions to run for local office. But one of two things would happen, my head would explode or someone would take a hit out on me.
This was posted 19 hours ago, on facebook:
http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/Kagan.pdf
The fact the NRA took this long to take sides, is not a good sign for this member. But the sad fact is, is that, without a filibuster, which these days seems like a nuclear bomb to the congress, (something only used as a last ditch, God save us, PUSH THE DAMN BUTTON tactic) there is nothing going to stop the nomination.
Just what did they, you, or me expect from an Obama nomination?
And, Tom, I suspect there was something to this rumor, after all….maybe nothing we can put or finger on, but something went on which slowed the process of them finally getting off their asses and posting this letter….And some good came from the grapevine which prompted the NRA to get off their ass…..Thanks for spreading the grapes!
Barry, lets hope your head won’t explode, and whoever shoots your way misses, and you don’t!
Seriously, the threat to you and your family is something politicians must deal with. And I have the feeling that plays into the compromises that we see even presidents being subject to, especially when you’re dealing with the big boys and high stakes…
And the only trouble with history, is that it is constantly being re-written by those who would like to us to believe what they think is the truth, even when it is not….When you carefully look at “history”, you find there is very little evidence, and sometimes even the evidence is subject to just how and who recorded it…But not to let that discourage us from learning as much as possible about it…
Jes- I agree on the history needing to be very carefully evaluated and thought through. But the history that I was referring to takes a lot let thought. It address’ the current ‘it could never happen here’ mentality.
We know for a fact…..
That hard times, and I mean really hard times can happen here.
Civil unrest and even civil war, can happen here.
We seen the 2nd most powerful nation in the world crumble, what makes people think it couldn’t happen here?
Considering we know this to be factual information, it seems preparation is prudent. Especially when we see the same situations that lead up to those happening.
Preparation is always smart, I am still a Boy Scout when it comes to being prepared!
We are in peril, to be sure, even though at times the government looks more and more like Big Brother from G. Orwell…But I am in no way certain that if and/or when that day comes, I will much survive it, myself, as my years are getting long in the tooth…
As the Lord says, there is always time for the harvest, and until then, let the tares grow among the wheat, until He comes to gather them, separate them, and then willow the wheat, and burn the tares…(and I find willow isn’t even listed in the dictionary anymore, but it used to mean beating off the chaff and letting the chaff blow away..)
Looks like the word is winnowing, not willowing, just to set the record straight..(no wonder it wasn’t in the dictionary, haw)
Matthew 3:12 “His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”