[Hkmp5sd]

Here are the recommendations of Neal Knox on the NRA Elections from his current Neal Knox Report in Shotgun News.

As a result of a unanimous vote by the Board to prevent the members from voting on whether or not to name the Headquarters Building for former President, founding Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action, and member-elected Executive Vice President Harlon B. Carter, Knox "recommends voting only for the following Committee selections and, perhaps, still unknown petition nominees: Scott Bach, Bill Bachenberg, David Caplan, Rep. Barbara Cubin, Don Causey, Jeff Cooper, Joe Foss, Steve Hornady, David Keene, Carolyn Meadows, Grover Norguist, Wayne Ross, Don Saba, Robert Sanders, Ron Schmeitz, J.D. Williams and Robert Wos."

[Jim March]

Joe Foss has a bit of a disability going into the race. He's kinda dead. Shame, he was one REAL fine gent, one I too would support 'cept for that one little problem :(.

Here's the recommendations from the California NRA who are backers of Wayne LaPierre; this page is run by Mike Haas and undoubtedly reviewed and agreed upon by Paul Payne, Chuck Michel and the rest of that group who supposedly are in "opposition" to Neal Knox:

http://www.nrawinningteam.com/bios03/wtad.html

Gee, guess what? Every single Knox recommendation is also supported by the Cal-NRA/CRPA/NRA/MC system. The same people Shamaya/Codrea/Puckett yell "TRAITOR" at, at every opportunity.

Very interesting.

Of the rest supported by the California NRA guys, I know Manny Fernandez and trust him implicitly. I just don't know the rest.

Funny story about Manny: a year or two back, the grabbers were proposing the new "handgun safety test" thing that eventually appeared this year. I testified against, as did Manny.

Thing about Manny though, is that the first couple of minutes of his presentation was in fluent Japanese. His point? Funding was only being supplied for paperwork and training manuals in English. It was racism in action, again. Switching to English, he explained that the DMV prints driver's license applications and road safety manuals in 34 languages, and proposed doing the equivelent for guns in just one.

He made 'em think, that's for sure. There was one Japanese *grabber* present who was clearly shocked :).

Net result: we got the requirements watered down quite a bit, and in the final version Spanish-language materials was put in. Not perfect, but coulda been worse.

(Manny's wife is Japanese, and he learned her language. He also speaks perfect Spanish, looks Hispanic, and is effective in Latino outreach on gun control issues.)

[Hkmp5sd]

Yea, I know about Joe Foss. I'll still vote for him though! :)

[F4GIB]

Neal has very little choice in his recommendations because only the nominating committee's list is available at this point. The petition nominees, if any, won't be disclosed until the ballots come out (I haven't received mine yet).

The problem at the NRA is very simple.

Only 7-10% of voting members actually vote (it's suspected that a hugh
percentage of "life" members are, in fact, deceased).

70% of those who do vote, cast their ballots for the Board endorsed candidates, i.e. "the winning team".

Since the Seattle meeting at which Heston beat Neal Knox by 2 votes for the Presidency, no one can get nominated who doesn't pass a 100% loyalty to LaPierre test. And loyalty to LaPierre means asking no questions at Board meetings and always supporting the "management" line. Notice how short,1/2 day, Board meeting have become (voting "yes" on only a few motions with no debate takes no time).

The members could change this by voting against every incumbent Director (even such as Jeff Cooper, Steve Hornaday, the actors and musicians who never show up, the politicians who are in LaPierre's pocket, and the competative shooters who don't care about "dirty" politics) until things change. You could change it by finding members who don't vote and getting them to vote. Help them fill in their ballots. :-) Assuming they listen to you, you can influence many votes.

Without STRONG board direction (and a FIRM willingness to discipline the EVP if he ignores them) nothing will change.

Management at the NRA is caught on the horns of a dilemma. NRA needs to be seen as "hard core" to attract members. But whenever it is seen as winning the gun rights war, it's members desert. Thus, losses are necessary to it's cash flow. And management knows this.

In 1993 and 1994 membership had explosive growth as Clinton and the Democrats attacked. Then, in Nov. 1994, the Republicans won the House. Tanya Metaksa (then ILA director) announced "we won" and a party mood took over the NRA. The result wasn't good, membership dropped as annual members (cheap but non-voting) invested their $25 in beer or ammo and not in liberty insurance. In fact, membership collapsed and stayed down until after the September 11 attack. Now it has built up again but the growth is in those fickle annual members. NRA needs the existence of a threat (Schumer, Feinstine, et al) to keep it's coffers full. NRA has no real financial reserves; like social security it spends everything every year - including all the cash from your life member dues - and depends on new membership dues for it's very existence.

So, how does the renewal of the "assault weapons" ban play out. NRA needs the fight but Republican congressmen are a fraidy-cat bunch. Will NRA support it's members or will it continue to be the national republican auxiliary? I bet we'll see lots of smoke and fury, a "voice" vote NRA can't count to renew it (like the last minute machine gun ban in 1986), and NRA basking in the cash flow produced by it's member's anger.

Everyone wins except you and I and the Second Amendment.

NRA needs members who pay attention to it's activities, vote intelligently, and stay the course. Deserting the ship, however satisfying, doesn't help.

Get active through www.nealknox.com.