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

NRA Board Members Told Not to Testify Against Kagan

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by bskillet, Jun 28, 2010.

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

    bskillet Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    42
    Story is available here.

    Partial text of article:

    I just joined the NRA about a month ago. I am going to send them a very strongly worded email, telling them I will not renew my membership next year if they do not change their ways. After the DISCLOSE disaster, it is now clear to me that they have been infiltrated by liberals and are closet supporters of the Obama-Pelosi agenda.
     
  2. auschip

    auschip Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,032
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    "More likely, the NRA, which is heavily involved in lobbying in Washington, does not want board members representing themselves as speaking for the organization without its approval. And it's reasonable to assume that testifying in a Senate hearing against Kagan would be frowned upon more than simply writing a column that does not mention any affiliation with the gun group."

    From the article.
     
  3. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    Let me ask you 2 questions, and please answer them honestly, ignoring any NRA, etc biases.

    Do you believe that Obama would nominate someone to the Supreme Court who had pro 2A leanings, no matter who they might be?

    Do you believe that the current makeup of Congress could stop the confirmation of anyone Obama might nominate?

    If you answer those honestly then why should the NRA expend political capital for a fight that cannot be won?

    Politics is a dirty business. Favors, back room deals, it all happens. Save the deal making for times it matters.

    Unfortunately, this one is a done deal no matter how much screaming and yelling there may be.

    She is replacing Stevens. Go read Stevens in today's MacDonald opinion. You really think she could be any worse?
     
  4. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    48,752
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    Firstly, Kagan's approval to the Supreme Court is a foregone conclusion. There's literally nothing short of a smoking gun in her background that will stop it. By this afternoon she'll get Congressional approval.

    Secondly, the NRA is an organization that has an official position that comes from the organization. No individual gets to speak for the NRA whether they're a board member or not.

    Thirdly, railing against any nominee to the Supreme Court based on their political bias when there's no way to block their being passed on to the position is an absolute waste of time and only makes enemies when there's no return on the investment. As pointed out, any nominee put forward by the current President is going to have this president's bias. There are no surprises here except from the people that refuse to understand that some fights are won by not picking them.
     
  5. mbt2001

    mbt2001 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,902
    Location:
    Texas
    I grow tired of the NRA bashing and conspiracy nonsense that some members have.

    +1 everyone who has responded so far.
     
  6. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    Oh, auschip, what sort of a person are you, who would actually READ the article before engaging in ignorant, gratuitous NRA-bashing?:cool:
     
  7. auschip

    auschip Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,032
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    My bad, my handle flying techniques are a bit rusty. ;)
     
  8. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    It seems that a lot of people actually believe the media and the left when they claim that the NRA is all knowing and all powerful.

    Wish that were the case, but it's not remotely true.

    Saw a thread the other day where some guy was mad that NRA didn't introduce some new legislation :scrutiny:
     
  9. mbt2001

    mbt2001 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,902
    Location:
    Texas
    Rifleman,

    As has been the case now for years, I agree with you.
     
  10. Mudinyeri

    Mudinyeri Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Messages:
    628
    IIRC, the NRA just had one of their board members go "off message" a bit regarding the DISCLOSE Act. I'm guessing they're trying to prevent something similar here.
     
  11. fireside44

    fireside44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    746
    I feel your pain. I grew tired of watching them bilk decent gun owners of their hard earned money in exchange for selling out the 2nd amendment on a repeated basis.
     
  12. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,431
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    Another hate the NRA thread is re-born.
     
  13. fireside44

    fireside44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    746
    Can't imagine why.

    Contact David Olofson, he should be able to tell you more about it.:uhoh:
     
  14. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,431
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    I don't need to contact anyone to know that the NRA has gone on record as opposing the nomination of Kagan:

    http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=13980

    Yep, another fine article from politicsdaily. This one originated at redstates and Erick Erickson. Erickson is a far outer and NRA hater.

    I have belonged to the NRA for over 50 years. Anyone who knows anything about the NRA nows that the NRA leadership works for the board of directors. Buck the board of directors and find yourself out of a job quick. This happened to an NRA executive vice president some time ago.

    If this story were true it would be all over ABC, CBS NBC and CNN. The fact that the story is not all over the mainstream news media should tell the astute observer that it is all trash.

    The stark fact is that the opposition in the US senate does not care enough about their gun owner constituents to filibuster the nomination of Kagan. Nine opposition party senators voted to confirm the rabidly anti-gun Sotomayor to SCOTUS. 6-10 of the suckers will also vote to confirm Kagan.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2010
  15. rscalzo

    rscalzo Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    860
    Location:
    Epping, NH
    You have to love the internet. everyone, regardless of credibility automatically because a valid source of information....just because it was posted on the internet.

    I don't blame the NRA for taking action. Without some sort of control, you would have literally a hundred varied and probably conflicting opinions coming from the organization. Speak as a private citizen with no mention of the NRA and I doubt they would have a problem.
     
  16. Frank Ettin

    Frank Ettin Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    10,717
    Location:
    California - San Francisco Bay Area
    That's how it is in every corporation. It's basic to the corporate form. The board of directors is the top level of management -- the very top of the food chain. Staff doesn't tell the board of directors what to do. The board of directors tells staff what to do.
     
  17. DT Guy

    DT Guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,260
    It's easy for some people to find 'philosophical' reasons to not send the NRA money. Hmmm....

    Short story is that, like it or not, if there were no NRA, there would be no private ownership of firearms in the US. You'll never find an informed person who would contest that, IMHO. So if you don't agree with everything they do, fine-but they're the reason we haven't yet lost, and the primary reason we're sometimes winning now.


    Larry
     
  18. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,186
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    ^^^^^^^^

    I've never heard it put better than that.
     
  19. fireside44

    fireside44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    746
    This kind of thinking is what keeps snake oil salesmen like the NRA in business.

    The key phrase was "In my honest OPINION".

    1986 ring a bell? During the "conservative" Reagan administration no less. Brady bill anyone?

    Play both sides of the coin and you win regardless. Not exactly a brand new tactic.
     
  20. Deltaboy1984

    Deltaboy1984 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    6,369
    Location:
    Johnson County Texas
    I have no fears boys we are trading 1 liberal for a liberal. Lets use our time and energy to toss the rascels out in Nov. and handicap OB for the rest of his term.
     
  21. JohnKSa

    JohnKSa Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    12,793
    Location:
    DFW Area
    Isn't the NRA management team appointed by the board of directors? How would the appointees prohibit the appointers from doing anything they didn't want to?

    As far as not testifying (and assuming the story is true) if the NRA has found a way to negotiate something of value in return for not testifying in a proceedings with a foregone conclusion then that's pretty smart tactics.
    If you could get him to give you the straight story like he did over on arfcom before he was found guilty in his most recent scrape with the law then he could, indeed, tell you all about it. I especially liked his "strategy", which he claimed to have used before in his other court cases, of telling the federal government that they had no jurisdiction in the matter.

    I'm actually pretty pleased that the NRA is careful which cases it throws its support behind. Supporting the Olofson case would have been an abysmally poor use of NRA funds and effort.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2010
  22. cassandrasdaddy

    cassandrasdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,203
    wait!? is olofson trying to parley his screw up into a career as an activist? someone needs to tell him hes not the next randy weaver.
     
  23. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,431
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    What in hades does the NRA have to do with Olofson? According to the testimony of the man he loaned the rifle to; Olofson made that AR-15 into a full auto weapon. Then Olofson was dumb enough to loan that gun to his friend who took it to a public range and fired it full auto.

    You sound like your are mad that the NRA did not break their bank to defend Olofson? BTW: The SCOTUS refused to hear the Olofson "case".

    http://lagniappeslair.blogspot.com/2008/07/david-olofsons-off-to-jail-and-suns.html

     
  24. fireside44

    fireside44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    746
    You mean the new found "informant" aka the guy caught shooting the "machine gun" who was paid an undisclosed sum of money and probably saved his own skin from hanging in club fed in the process?

    Yeah, his testimony.

    Olofson wasn't the individual who was caught firing the rifle in "full auto" mode aka malfunction. Sounds like you are kind of sketchy on his case details. We could go in depth into his railroading but it's off topic and more than likely a waste of finger grease on my part.

    Let's just say it's all fun and games until some self important "authority" hears two reports that sound a hair to close together for their comfort.

    Well said. With their stellar track record I'm surprised they didn't jump all over it. If they were as good at their jobs as the ATF every man could have a pallet in every weapons cache and a machine gun in every safe.

    Fact of the matter is this is the age of information and nobody with a computer has an excuse for not realizing there are other gun rights organizations out there more worthy of your money.

    That's my two cents anyhow.
     
  25. alsaqr

    alsaqr Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    3,431
    Location:
    South Western, OK
    I am well versed on Mr. Olofson and his AR-15. Olofson loaned the gun to his neighbor who fired the gun on full auto at a public range. Not surprisingly, he was arrested. Olofson had two prior gun-related offenses. I will shed no tears for Mr. Olofson. The NRA was smart to not get involved in this case.

    http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0805/17/ldtw.01.html

    TUCKER: The sentence was consistent with what the prosecution wanted. A sentence they argued that Olofson deserved. The assistant U.S. attorney Gregory (Handstadt) noted that Olofson had two prior gun charges on his record and he does. But he doesn't have any gun convictions. Both charges concerned Olofson carrying guns in public. The first incident was at a park. The charge was dismissed. The second was a complaint that he was carrying a gun while trick-or- treating with his children. That complaint resulted in a conviction for disorderly conduct. Olofson's lawyers admitted that he had shown bad judgment but also noted that the behavior was within the law because in Wisconsin a person can openly carry a gun.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page