This is why I dislike the NRA.....

[Boozy]

I believe that less than 1/3 of your eligible voters actually show up?

In the US, I think it's more like 50%. I haven't looked for any numbers, so I might be wrong.

Canadian federal elections usually get about 65% (we do not have compulsory voting). Not disastrously bad, but still...

[CancelMyService]

Here's the thing about agendas: The NRA claims to be all about gun rights and doing whatever it takes to defend the constitution. OK fine, I'm cool with that.

However, the man they helped elected did more damage to the consitiution and civil rights than pretty much any other President in history, yet in 2004 they went to bat for the guy again only because he said the right things re: guns.

It doesn't matter that every other Amendment was at risk at some point in the last 8 years, as long as the 2nd one isn't messed with the NRA will continue to carry water for the GOP and that is what bugs me.

[the_std]

Here's the thing about agendas: The NRA claims to be all about gun rights and doing whatever it takes to defend the constitution. OK fine, I'm cool with that.

However, the man they helped elected did more damage to the consitiution and civil rights than pretty much any other President in history, yet in 2004 they went to bat for the guy again only because he said the right things re: guns.

It doesn't matter that every other Amendment was at risk at some point in the last 8 years, as long as the 2nd one isn't messed with the NRA will continue to carry water for the GOP and that is what bugs me.

I don't see the problem there. They're sticking to their agenda, forwarding guns and relaxed gun laws, and Bush was the guy to do it over Gore or Kerry. Yeah, he turned out to be a huge mistake, but they were pushing what they said they'd push.

[CancelMyService]

In 2000, that would be a fair argument. However they saw what a mistake Bush was and pushed for the guy again in 2004.

I don't buy the argument that any Democrat in office will go on some mad campaign to ban all guns, not only would it be political suicide but also there would always be enough resistance in Congress to stop it. The vast majority of folks are ok with everyone having access to firearms with reasonable gun control in place, yet the NRA continues to spend millions upon millions on these "THEY GONNA TAKE YER GUNZ!@!@!~!eleventy~!" campaigns to get people to vote against their interests in many cases just because of the positions on one issue.

Anyone who will willingly campaign/vote for someone they know will do huge damage to the country just because of thier stand on one issue is someone who needs to look at if that one issue is really worth everything else you'd get with that person.

It's like my mom, who informed me that she's voting McCain just because she feels Obama will only be "for the blacks". It doesn't matter that McCain is 100% opposite everything she stands for and would continue the policies she's been very much against the last 8 years. She's going to pull that lever based on that one thing alone. That's how I see the NRA and people who vote strictly on someone's opinions on guns.

[anriana]

Anyone who will willingly campaign/vote for someone they know will do huge damage to the country just because of thier stand on one issue is someone who needs to look at if that one issue is really worth everything else you'd get with that person.

While I personally agree with you (and am quite angered at your mother's opinions), do you really think the NRA thought Bush would do huge damage to the country? You and I might see it that way but I doubt they or most of their supporters did.

[Boozy]

While I personally agree with you (and am quite angered at your mother's opinions), do you really think the NRA thought Bush would do huge damage to the country? You and I might see it that way but I doubt they or most of their supporters did.

They supported Bush in 2004, and I truly believe that anyone who did so had their heads in the sand. In 2004, the economy was already circling the drain, the Iraq war was going badly, civil liberties were being lost, and the Bush administration basically promised more of the same.

Here's the thing: the NRA leadership knows damned well that they have a very large following of people who will vote for whoever they tell them to. Other than perhaps AARP, they're one of the most powerful lobbies in the country. As such, I think they have a responsibility to educate themselves on all the issues. The Democrats weren't going to take anyone's guns. With everything else in the shitter, gun control was barely on the agenda in 2004. Yet still the NRA endorsed a party that didn't represent the economic interests of their membership.

I suppose the blame really lies on the shoulders of anyone who blindly votes for whoever someone else tells them to.

[protege]

I suppose the blame really lies on the shoulders of anyone who blindly votes for whoever someone else tells them to.

Exactly--how is the NRA different from the AARP or any other "special interest" group? The AARP has instilled fear in many older people. Specifically, if they vote for certain candidates, that their taxes will go up, along with the prices on anything...including their prescriptions. In short, they get scared--mention anything about a tax increase, and in some areas you've pretty much lost the election. That's why some towns in Florida, which have a *huge* amount of senior-citizens are having trouble with funding. They simply can't get the tax dollars...since any increase is usually defeated.

As to losing civil liberties, what, exactly have we lost? All of these supposed losses were just propaganda. Other than the Patriot Act (which only means you have to fill out additional forms for certain types of banking), nobody's trying to take our rights away--we still have freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, et al.

[AFPheonix]

Warrantless searches and wiretaps were and are not propaganda.
Locking up a US citizen in Guantanamo indefinitely without charges was not propaganda.

There are many more examples. Sorry, this administration is scary as all hell.

[protege]

I'll give you that one...but didn't that get legalized by Congress (in which the Democrats hold a majority in both houses) in 2007? If so, to put all the blame on Bush is a bit much.

Also, I agree with you about the detainees--they should be charged with their crimes, and put on trial. If found guilty, they should be dealt with accordingly. If innocent, why not send them home? We've already dealt with the "American Taliban" notably J.W. Lindh and Yaser Esam Hamdi. Lindh is currently serving a 20-year sentence, and Hamdi was sent to Saudi Arabia and stripped of his US citizenship. Jose Pedilla (also imprisoned) was sentenced to 17 years.

[AFPheonix]

It did, unfortunately, at the strong urging of Bush. I'm extremely disappointed in Congress for letting that one go through. Part of it was that although the Democrats have a slight majority, it is not enough to block vetoes. However, those democrats that rolled over and voted for it need to have a pretty strong message sent to them by their voting blocks.
Our Democratic senator from my state voted against it, bless Wyden's bald little head. He can be Senator for life as far as I'm concerned. Our other senator is up for reelection this year, and while I'm not super crazy about his opponent (I liked the other guy that got beaten in the primaries better), I'm still going to vote for him over Gordon Smith. Smith has just done too many stupid things and voted on the party line to the detriment of our state a few times too many. Sorry bucko.
I wrote him and let him know, too.

[CancelMyService]

Somewhat old of a thread to bump, but it goes to the original topic.


Shockingly the NRA is airing more ads falsely accusing Obama of wanting to take people's guns away.


Spoiler Alert: CNN calls the ad "misleading" which IMO is generous at best.


Again I'm left asking why a group like the NRA is reduced to fear mongering FUD. They really must think their membership is dumb that they need to be catered to in such a manner.

I'm not holding my breath for anyone to call them out on it though.

[Greenday]

CMS, as long as people keep believing that crap, they'll keep giving it to them.

[Fashion Lad!]

I think CancelMyService is saying that they wouldn't necessarily switch allegiance, because the NRA is a shill organization for the GOP.

The NRA has the second amendment as their main concern. They've even blasted John McCain for his stances on gun control. I don't think that anyone (well, I can't say that entirely) feels that we need absolutely no gun control, but we don't need as much as we think we need.

Tim Walz a democrat from Minnesota has been endorsed by the NRA.

Now, Obama seems to be quite ridiculous when it comes to answering questions about gun control. http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/...un_Control.htm

And about personal responsibility that we all like to talk about on CS.com, that's all thrown out the window with Obama and guns. He would actually allow people to sue the gun manufacturers.

What's wrong with the NRA pointing this out? They keep close tabs on voting records. And if you're subscribed to their magazine, it's obviously an important issue for you.

[Slytovhand]

I just read your link, FashionLad, and to be honest, all I read of that bit is just how well a politician won't answer a question.

There was nothing specific about anything he said, just a stack of waffle!

But, I'm perhaps cynical enough to think that what was posted on that particular site wasn't, and hasn't been, the be all and end all of what Mr. Obama has had to say on the issue for all of his political career. (not to mention, it wouldnt be particularly unreasonable to think that a person could change their opinion after the various shootings that have occured). After all, he's been in politics for how long now??

[crazylegs]

I just read your link, FashionLad, and to be honest, all I read of that bit is just how well a politician won't answer a question.

There was nothing specific about anything he said, just a stack of waffle!

I think that's the point, didn't Obama respond to one question (at some point) with 'That's above my paygrade'?