Michigan 7th District

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

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.
 
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:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
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....
 
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/
 
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:
 
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.
Click to expand...

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!
 
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.
 
Barbara,
I didn't mean to hijack your thread so I will make a last response.


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
Click to expand...

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.
 
I don't think so.

This is an email from David Coy, NRA Director.


Yes - Mr. Schwarz was endorsed in the last day or so by NRA-ILA. Again, an endorsement is different than a grade.

There have been a number of comments and inquiries made of me regarding this. The following, which I sent to another list, responds to most of them.

My personal support for Tim Walberg is unchanged. I stand by my personal (and I emphasize, personal) endorsement of Tim. I speak only for myself.

David Coy

----- Original Message -----
From: David Coy
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: [MCGO] Dave B's reaction ??


I think you mean me, Dave C(oy).

I'm certain that NRA-ILA has considered their decision very carefully. They are highly professional, and they do not do things rashly. They do a fine job (miraculous work, against incredible odds, in many cases). I greatly respect NRA-ILA and all of their personnel. They have my complete confidence. I'm glad we have them, and I shudder to think where our gun rights would be without them.

With this said, my personal support for Tim Walberg is unwavering, and I stand by my personal endorsement of his candidacy.

I know Tim personally. Walberg is an NRA Life Member, an avid hunter and a shooter. It is a part of his lifestyle, and not an affectation or posture assumed merely to get votes. In the video on his website, www.walbergforcongress.com, that is one of his personal shotguns, and he wears his own hunting coat. The golden lab in the video is his hunting dog, who will greet you when you pull into Tim's driveway (as the dog did earlier this week with me when I stopped by Tim's house).

Tim was a staunch supporter of the RTKABA, especially concealed carry, during his 14 years in the Michigan House. He had an A Plus rating from NRA-ILA for all of these years, which, in my experience, is not something NRA-ILA hands out casually.

I still personally believe Tim Walberg will be a superior advocate for RTKABA, upon comparison with Mr. Schwarz. I am mindful of Mr. Schwarz's excellent pro-gun voting record since he went to DC. However, on a personal basis, I can't get past the fact that he voted against concealed carry in the when he was in the Michigan legislature, and I can't forget all of the unkind things Mr. Schwarz said about those of us who want to carry a sidearm for personal defense. In contrast, and in the face of tremendous pressure from Governor Engler and Republican Leadership, Tim never wavered in support of concealed carry. I do not personally believe Mr. Schwarz has the same visceral and intensely personal courage of conviction regarding RTKABA that Tim Walberg does.

I have balloted already, via absentee ballot, as I will be at the Grand American Trapshoot in Sparta, IL, on primary day, Tuesday, August 8. My personal vote was for Tim Walberg.

I specifically note that these are my own personal opinions and representations. I am solely responsible for them. I speak only for myself.

David Coy
Click to expand...
 
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!!!
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Michigan 7th District US House Race - Vote 8/3!
Replies
3
Views
639
Barbara
B
B
  • Locked
More pro-gun folks to vote for in Michigan's Primary 8/3.
Replies
12
Views
1K
Barbara
B
B
  • Locked
MI - 7th District Gun Owners
Replies
2
Views
898
Barbara
B
F
  • Locked
GOA says block Sen. Spector.
Replies
7
Views
671
Bubbles
B
D
  • Locked
(VA) NRA-endorsed Republican smears "extremist" gun owners
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Tom B
T
Back
Top