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

NRA Grassroots Leads “Pro-Gun†Charge for McClintock!(Unbelievable!)

Discussion in 'Legal' started by 2dogs, Sep 17, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 2dogs

    2dogs Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,865
    Location:
    the city
    Hey, I got a nice photo of Charlton Heston yesterday in the mail.:cool:


    http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/Item.asp?ID=3609

    NRA Grassroots Leads “Pro-Gun†Charge for McClintock!
    (Unbelievable!)

    by David Codrea
    codrea4@adelphia.net

    September 17, 2003

    KeepAndBearArms.com -- Under coordinated leadership from professional NRA Grassroots staffers, California’s activist gun owners have blanketed the Golden State in a blitz designed to get out the vote for proven Second Amendment champion Tom McClintock.

    “We’re angered by California’s Republican establishment throwing it’s weight behind anti-gun Arnold Schwarzenegger, and view it as a betrayal†read an NRA Political Victory Fund new release, accompanied by a substantial “seed money†donation to help McClintock buy much-needed media time.

    “We have been faithful and long-time supporters of the GOP, both in California and nationally, and they seem to think they can repay us is by offering a candidate who supports a ban on semiautomatic firearms and .50 caliber target rifles, mandatory trigger locks, magazine indicators and gun disablers, and a host of other Second Amendment infringements,†the communiqué stated. “We are disgusted that Arnold Schwarzenegger’s positions are fundamentally identical to those of Gray Davis and Cruz Bustamante.â€

    In a three-pronged approach, utilizing volunteers from NRA Members Councils and the California Rifle and Pistol Association, and joined by the Fifty Caliber Institute, which was galvanized to action by the threat to their firearm of choice, the organizations have employed their extensive telephone, fax and email alert networks. Members of these groups have been mobilized to staff tables outside gun stores and shooting ranges throughout California to ensure that gun owners are registered to vote before the Sept. 22 deadline, and informed about the profound differences the two candidates have on gun rights.

    A contingent of several dozen representatives converged on this past weekend’s Republican Convention in Los Angeles to present their demands to the GOP leadership, and to let assembled party loyalists know that subverting gun owners’ rights will not be rewarded. Additionally, the gun groups’ paid lobbying staffs have been working around the clock to educate the public and inform the media…except…

    Except NONE of this stuff has happened. I made it all up. These groups have been silent on the race. They haven’t taken a stand. At this writing, there’s not even any mention of it on their respective NRA Members Council, CRPA and FCI websites.

    Unbelievable.

    Even if they involved themselves NOW, it would be too late for a voter registration drive. Every day these groups delay makes it harder for McClintock to compete with his better-funded opponents. Do they want McClintock to fail?

    These are the people who pass themselves off as our leaders? What in the world have gun owners been sending them money for? If they won’t involve themselves in this critical struggle to protect the last vestiges of gun rights in California—indeed, if they continue avoiding the struggle altogether—what the hell good are they?

    Epilog:

    As this is being released, a 3-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has halted the recall election. Depending on how this development is resolved, the election will either go forward on October 7, or be delayed until March of next year.

    Either way, it is past time for NRA, CRPA and the Fifty Caliber Policy Institute to start acting like the leaders their fundraising appeals tell us they are. If they won’t, it’s past time gun owners shifted their support to those who aren’t afraid to lead.
     
  2. MuzzleBlast

    MuzzleBlast Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Like....who, exactly? Have GOA, JPFO etc. made much noise out there?
     
  3. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    GOD I wish I could explain certain things. I really, really, REALLY wish I could.

    Sigh.

    There's some sneaky stuff going on. Not all of it bad.
     
  4. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,083
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    THE NRA IS FIGHTING BACK NOW?!?! WHEN DID THEY START DOING THIS?

    It's about time! If this is true, I may have to start sending money again.
     
  5. gun-fucious

    gun-fucious Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,977
    Location:
    centre of the PA
     
  6. OF

    OF Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,988
    Read the whole article, Tejon. The NRA isn't doing squat...unless Jim knows something he can't say - and it looks like he does.

    - Gabe
     
  7. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,083
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    GRD, I throwing a flag on myself. 5 yards for misuse of sarcasm and delay of bandwidth.:)
     
  8. OF

    OF Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,988
    :) Heheh.
     
  9. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    Arnold needs to quit this nonsense and go put the jeweled crown of Aquilonia upon his troubled brow.
     
  10. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Moot point: the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals has put in the Democratic (sic) party fix—but it's still sad the N.R.A. hasn't taken a stand.
     
  11. Danimal

    Danimal member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Location:
    Tigard, Oregon
    The NRA has to back a winner. I hate to say it, but that is their bottom line. The NRA needs credibility and political credibility comes from associating yourself with those who win. Tom seems like a great guy - and great on all our issues right down the line - but he can't win in California. That's not a criticism of McClintock, but a realistic assessment of his chances. For the NRA to invest a lot of time and effort supporting a candidate who can't win is a waste of time and money (from the NRA's perspective, not the grassroots). The NRA is no different than any other big lobbying firm or special interest. They try to fight the fights they can win. In the eyes of the NRA, this isn't about principle, it is about political capital.
     
  12. Brett Bellmore

    Brett Bellmore Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    979
    Location:
    Capac, Michigan
    This is one of those occasions when the right guy COULD win in California. With that many candidates on the ballot, you don't need 51% of the vote to become governor. Let Busty have the hard left, Arnold the middle, and with enough get out the vote, the right could prevail with 25-30% of the vote.
     
  13. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Well I can say two things:

    1) My own group, the CCRKBA, isn't set up as a PAC and therefore CAN'T endorse a candidate. We can lobby, but not back a candidate.

    For our mission, which is basically to try and convince and cajole, avoiding being seen as too partisan is actually a good thing. We're doing the best we can with limited resources. (Remember that we're deeply connected with (yet with separate financing from) the Second Amendment Foundation, so backing/arranging court moves and merging that with the political strategy is part of our mission. That's how we operate in Ohio, and how we're going to start functioning in California.)

    2) As to the NRA...well yes, they do have a PAC (NRA/PVC). But...there's a complication: there's two pro-gunners in the race. And one is deliberately staying stealthy as hell about it, to the point where I can't tell you which. Wish to hell I could, but it ain't my play. And who it is might surprise the heck outta y'all.
     
  14. C.R.Sam

    C.R.Sam Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    2,632
    Location:
    Chino Valley, AZ., USA
    Since I am bout to hit the sack....
    I am really sorry I read this thread.
    Not good for the digestion.

    Sam
     
  15. Shamaya

    Shamaya member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    83
    Location:
    Arizona
    Finally!

    Jim March:
    Finally, we have an explanation for your brown eyes, Jim. You're full of shinola. Surely you're not talking about Schwarzennazi. So we're supposed to believe some other pro-gunner is going to materialize and take the lead in this race?

    Sell it to third graders. NRA, CRPA and FCI are AWOL. Period.

    If this smokescreen horsebiscuit is your new CCRKBA strategizing, I'll give 'em six months before it's their turn in the barrel.

    As to the jester who said NRA has to pick winners when NRA hasn't picked anyone, here's a newsflash for ya: Adolf Hitler was a winning candidate. Do you need that explained to you?

    A winning candidate who'll gut your rights is not a winner. When he's on "our side", according to the fascists in the "GOP", but he promises to grossly and passionately violate our rights, he's a bigger threat than Boot-On-Your-Neck Party A. If a multi-million-dollar organization puts "winning" with a loser above sticking to their own charter defining their reason for existence, that group needs to die.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2003
  16. NIGHTWATCH

    NIGHTWATCH Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    870
    Location:
    Ground Zero
    " A winning candidate who'll gut your rights is not a winner. When he's on "our side", according to the fascists in the "GOP", but he promises to grossly and passionately violate our rights, he's a bigger threat than Boot-On-Your-Neck Party A. If a multi-million-dollar organization puts "winning" with a loser above sticking to their own charter defining their reason for existence, that group needs to die."



    AMEN TO THAT! :mad:
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2003
  17. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    I didn't say it was Ahnuld. And I didn't say I agreed with what's going on. I'm not happy.

    Somebody thinks they can't win in California without being labeled a grabber. Personally, I think they're wrong.

    Second, this is NOT CCRKBA's doing!!! Got that? It wouldn't matter because they're not set up in a fashion that ALLOWS them to comment on the race, no matter what any or all of them (well, "us" now!) think.

    I personally favor McClintock by a mile.

    Should the NRA be directing their grassroots muscle in McClintock's direction? Probably. They see things differently.

    Now lookit: when they really, seriously screw up, I'm willing and able to call 'em on it. You KNOW that now.

    In this case? Hmmmm. It's a tough call.
     
  18. Shamaya

    Shamaya member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    83
    Location:
    Arizona
    Then you are saying there's another better candidate -- one that more closely resembles the positions McClintock takes.

    And you actually want people to believe that this mysterious private entity is going to materialize and has a snowball's chance of rushing on the scene to save the day?

    Smurfs are real, too. And they have feelings.
     
  19. Gray Peterson

    Gray Peterson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,548
    Location:
    Lynnwood, Washington
    Angel, THR Rule Number 1: Attack the argument, not the arguer.

    What Jim is talking about is a stealth candidate. The anti-gunners do this all the time: They run a candidate who talks like a pro-gunner, but then they flip flop after the election. Remember Ohio Governor Bob Taft? He won the election as a pro-gunner, and guess who's the guy who's put up the biggest roadblocks in CCW reform there, it's Bob Taft.

    Jim is not asking you, or anyone else, to not vote for McClintock. Take it how you will...
     
  20. Shooter 2.5

    Shooter 2.5 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    476
    Oh, sure. An endorsement from the NRA will really help a Conservative in a Liberal State. :rolleyes:

    Everyone should go back to their politics 101 class.
     
  21. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    No, we're talkin' about somebody in the race now, who can possibly win it.

    And no, I can't say who. Somebody tells me something in confidence, I don't talk. Remember, I'm the guy people write to to help fine-tune their CCW statements, you REALLY want ME to be able to keep my mouth shut when appropriate.

    Lonnie Wilson has it exactly right. I'm not saying I *agree* but...it ain't my call.
     
  22. Shamaya

    Shamaya member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    83
    Location:
    Arizona
    Lon said:
    The only candidates with a snowball's chance are Bustamexicoinvasion, Schwarzennazi and McClintock. Two of them are avowed gun banners. Or would you have us believe that the Austrian actor is lying when he says he wants to ban guns and force other unconstitutional nonsense down our throats? Are you telling us -- and telling us that Jim is telling us -- that Arnie's lying about his position? If so, do you believe in the tooth fairy, too?
     
  23. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Angel, if you lived in Salem around 1650 or so, you'd be the first to scream out "APOSTATE WITCHES!" every time you disagreed with anybody else.

    Sigh.

    You go IMMEDIATELY from "I disagree with you" to "you must be a TRAITOR!!!" with zero stops in between. :uhoh:

    God only knows the NRA screws up now and again :). But...jeez, man, take a chill pill or something! You're going completely nuts here trying to change something (the NRA) which you CAN NOT possibly affect, and getting ever more strident about it.

    :confused:
     
  24. Secret Master

    Secret Master Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    31
    Location:
    Midian Ranch, Nevada
    Shamaya:
    If you think about it, Jim has pretty much answered your question. I find it hard to believe, but hell, maybe he got some Trotsky in with his Marx back in college.
     
  25. Shamaya

    Shamaya member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    83
    Location:
    Arizona
    Jim, I remember when you told us on TFL that the Busch/Ashban administration's opposition to Emerson being granted cert was a brilliantly sneaky scheme that was setting up a major victory. :D (I didn't follow your chatter when they screwed Bean, but I'm guessing you were on the same wavelength then, too.)

    There are two candidate besides McClintock that have a chance of winning. They are both gun banners. If you want to try in vain to wiggle out of that fact, at least do it with something besides evasion and smokescreens. You're telling us that either Bustaborder or Schwarzennazi are friendly toward gun rights, and that's not true.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page