Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Michigan 7th District

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Barbara, Jul 19, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    The NRA-ILA just endorsed Joe Schwarz. This is insane.

    He voted against CPL, voted against Vear, told me personally no one in Wayne County needed to carry a gun, and stood in front of our Jackson group 2 years ago and told them he supported the AWB.

    His "legacy" as they call it includes the 2 pro-gun votes he's made: Voting for gun ownership in DC (that was a safe bet to lose!) and the manufacturer's protection bill.

    I know, politics, etc.. but Tim Walberg is a former state Representative and is 100% solidly proven pro-2nd Amendment.

    http://www.walbergforcongress.com/

    Schwarz called us "Bubba's with a 9 mm." and said, literally he "didn't give ****" about the votes of gun owners.
     
  2. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    Michigan Legislative Update

    Wrong thread. :)
     
  3. Sheldon J

    Sheldon J Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    991
    Location:
    Cereal City, Michigan
    We had him at our CCGOA meeting

    And he said he did support the re instatement of the Clinton gun ban, did not feel that CCW was a good idea, but profesed to pro gun what a crock:fire:
     
  4. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    That the one two years ago?

    I was there..arrive towards the end. I was so mad by the time I left, I was fuming.

    Pro-gun legacy. Pfft.
     
  5. FJC

    FJC Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    391
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Did anyone make NRA-ILA aware of this? Did they give any reasoning behind endorsing him?
     
  6. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    They know.
     
  7. hoghunting

    hoghunting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    I had a problem with the NRA-ILA a few years back about giving money to one of our TX reps who voted mostly anti-gun. Their response was that they base their decisions on recommendations and donations according to a questionaire that the candidates fill out. The persons voting record doesn't mean a thing to the NRA-ILA, it's how a survey is answered. Obviously, the NRA has not changed anything to correct this.
     
  8. Father Knows Best

    Father Knows Best Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,503
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA
    I don't believe that for one minute. NRA (including ILA) is much smarter than that. They watch actual voting patterns, committee involvement, amendments offered, etc., very closely.

    If NRA is supporting a candidate that we don't view as being very pro-gun, they have a reason for it. We may never know the reason, but I can speculate. There are lots of backroom deals made in Washington. There may well be other politicians that the NRA wants to stay close with, and who want this guy re-elected. Those politicians tell the NRA to support this guy, despite his less-than-stellar record, if the NRA wants their continued support. If the NRA believes that not supporting the guy would result in an even worse guy getting elected, what do they have to lose?
     
  9. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,896
    Location:
    Illinois
    yep. politics is not always straightforward, and the NRA plays the game as well as any lobby in town.

    I often wonder at the grades they give politicians. there does seem to be a definite bias toward incumbents. I guess they figure better the devil you know....
     
  10. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    As long as in incumbent votes pro-gun during their last term, the NRA will usually give them the endorsement. I don't usually slam the NRA but this is a horrible choice. The opponent is a former State Rep who is 100% pro-gun. He and I disagree on some other issues, but as far as guns go, Walberg is the candidate that should be endorsed.

    Schwartz. Gack.
    http://www.walbergforcongress.com/
     
  11. Sheldon J

    Sheldon J Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    991
    Location:
    Cereal City, Michigan
    Barb:
    Yep that one it was the one when he was first running for office, he won the primary and the Democrat was not a good alternative either, N the off party had a showballs chance.:barf:
     
  12. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I voted for the Dem that election. At least she was pro-gun.
     
  13. hoghunting

    hoghunting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    You might not believe it, but it took 6 calls to different people in ILA before someone would answer my question. That was their response. That is the reason I let my NRA membership die. I still sent them money each year and contribute to the NRA programs with Brownells and Midway because they are the main lobby organization, but I am not interested in a membership.

    I went to one of W. LaPierre's book signings before this happened and he was telling all of us to call him if we see a problem with the NRA. I tried doing that at least a dozen times and his people will not let you speak to him. They will take a message, but either he does not respond or he never receives the message.

    If you still don't believe this, then call ILA and see what response you get!
     
  14. Father Knows Best

    Father Knows Best Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    2,503
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN, USA
    Just because you can't get someone to tell you what they're thinking doesn't mean they don't have a good reason. They have very good reasons for not discussing the rationale behind a lot of their political strategy -- it will be used against them. That applies in lots of other contexts, too.

    As for not being able to speak to Wayne, well, the NRA has hundreds of thousands of members, many of whom are quite passionate about the subject and have lots of time on their hands. If he actually took phone calls personally, he wouldn't have time to do anything else (or even eat, sleep or poop, for that matter). Like any other large organization, the NRA has phone banks of staffers who take calls from members and listen to their concerns. Reports are compiled periodically summarizing those calls, and I bet Wayne gets them. I wouldn't be surprised to find out there are thousands of calls per month, summarized in a couple of pages with statistics showing the items of greatest concern to callers.

    Don't get me wrong -- I don't think the NRA is perfect. There are things I wish they would do differently. The NRA is still one of the most sophisticated and effective lobbying organizations in America. They know how to play the game, and they play it very effectively. That's a big part of the reason why you hear the left complaining about it all the time. If the NRA wasn't so effective, the left wouldn't complain about it so incessantly.

    The game of politics is more like chess than checkers. You and I can stand and watch, and have no idea why the grand master did something that appears patently stupid, like moving his rook into a space where it would be taken by the opponent. The grand master, however, is thinking and planning 20 to 30 moves ahead. He anticipates how his opponent will respond to every move, and executes sophisticated strategies designed to keep his King alive and protected and create opportunity for attack. When he sacrifices a piece, it's because he has determined that it is necessary to satisfy the long term objective. He can't tell you and I what his plan is, however,, because his opponent would overhear the conversation and use it against him.
     
  15. Ryder

    Ryder Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    2,433
    Location:
    Mid-Michigander
    They lose integrity and members.
     
  16. hoghunting

    hoghunting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,597
    Barbara,
    I didn't mean to hijack your thread so I will make a last response.


    I agree with you, but he should not be telling people to call him if he has no intention of talking to them.

    I have a problem with any company or corporation that will tell me that what a person did in the past doesn't matter as long as he/she give the right answers in a questionaire. If they are feeding me a line, then at least get a better line.
     
  17. Sergeant Bob

    Sergeant Bob Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,505
    Location:
    The Swamps of Goldwater, MI
  18. SteveS

    SteveS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    866
    Location:
    MI
    I am aware of his anti past, but is it possible he has changed?
     
  19. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I don't think so.

    This is an email from David Coy, NRA Director.


     
  20. Dan from MI

    Dan from MI Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2003
    Messages:
    430
    Location:
    Livingston County, MI
    I should mention that there are very good reasons why SAFR endorsed Walberg and gave Schwarz an unacceptable rating. Both candidates earned what they got.

    I'm an NRA EPL member. The decision by PVF shows me that they are either ignorant, have short memories, play political games, or all of the above. :fire:

    Tim Walberg for Congress!!!
     
  21. MishMash

    MishMash Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    Michigan
    Go, Tim, Go!
     
  22. Dan from MI

    Dan from MI Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2003
    Messages:
    430
    Location:
    Livingston County, MI
  23. Brett Bellmore

    Brett Bellmore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    Capac, Michigan
    Ever heard, "If you try to kill the king, you'd best succeed."? Or that you shouldn't wound a bear?

    The NRA ballances the odds, as they see them, of actually unseating an anti-gun incumbant, against the probality that they'll unsuccessfully oppose him, and in the process turn him from generally anti-gun to a dedicated, blood in his eyes enemy out to do everything possible to hurt us.

    Schwartz is anti-gun. But it's not the animating cause of his life. They probably think that if we try to defeat him, and fail, it WILL be. I can't say this is irrational, even if I still think it's a bad policy.

    Not the least because it involves lying to us about who is and isn't anti-gun.
     
  24. Reedo

    Reedo Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Michigan
    I find this post somewhat funny. I go to school with one of the guys who works pretty high up on Schwarz staff. I also go to school in the 7th district and have met the congressman several times. The reason that I find this funny is because I had this same arguement with the guy I know and was fed the same line of bs you guys are talking about. The truth is that Joe Schwarz is one of the most liberal Republican reps around. But regardless I have to agree with the above setiment that the NRA knows what its doing when it comes to playing political games. I work in MI state politics and it would shock most people to see all the behind the scenes dealing and wheeling. That is just part of our political system. So vote for his opponet but understand that by endorsing Schwarz the NRA may have gained ground somewhere else.
     
  25. Barbara

    Barbara Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    3,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    Pfft. Schwarz isn't fooling anyone. He's not pro-gun, he's pro-Joe, and having met the man myself on several occasions and heard his opinions on who should and should not own guns.

    I also understand the politics involved, very well, but regardless of the NRA's decision in this case, I will not vote for Schwarz, I will not support him in any way, and will actively support his opponent, a man I also know and know to be 100% supportive of the 2nd Amendment.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page