IntenseDebate - longrange

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Alvin Greene's Jo... · 1 reply · +1 points

Have you actually listened to this guy in an interview?

It really hard to believe that he's serious. I keep waiting to see if there is some kind of magazine or news paper article about how he fooled the Democrats in S Carolina.

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - John LeCarre Couldn�... · 0 replies · +1 points

Beak said:

"Hang the Chavez spies.

Works foe me!

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 0 replies · +1 points

PT said:

"I just don't have the money right now to be donating to anybody, unfortunately, other than auto mechanics and home repair people of various stripes. Maybe some day."

I totally understand. The same thing keeps me an annual dues paying member instead of popping for a lifetime membership.

15 years ago @ Big Government - Dispelling Moral Relat... · 0 replies · +1 points

I've had this argument at least 50 times.

If all outcomes are equally valid and the truth is unknown and unknowable, why the hell are you arguing with me?

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 2 replies · +1 points

had to split the comment

"In 2004, Sen. Reid voted against efforts to reauthorize the Clinton ban on "assault weapons" and ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, which are standard equipment for many rifles and for most modern semi-automatic pistols designed for defensive use. Early last year, he flatly stated he would oppose any effort to reinstate an "assault weapon" and magazine ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future. In 2005, Sen. Reid was instrumental in Senate passage (and eventual enactment into law) of the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" (PLCAA). That law shut down reckless lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers, which attempted to hold them liable for the misuse of firearms by criminals. Sen. Reid also cosponsored the PLCAA in the previous Congress and voted against the Feinstein Amendment to ban "assault weapons" and "large" magazines, and the Kennedy Amendment that would have banned most hunting ammunition.

Sen. Reid voted for legislation, which became law in 2006, to prohibit gun confiscation during states of emergency. He also voted for legislation to allow commercial airline pilots to be armed in the cockpit to protect their passengers and crews .

In the last two years, Sen. Reid voted for the Ensign Amendment to repeal the Washington D.C. gun ban and restore self-defense rights in our nation's capital. He cosponsored similar legislation -- S.1414 -- in the 108th Congress. He also voted for an amendment to allow law-abiding citizens to carry firearms for self-defense in national parks and wildlife refuges. This federal policy change took effect on February 22. In addition, Sen. Reid voted last year for the Thune-Vitter Amendment to provide national reciprocity for state Right-to-Carry permits. Sen. Reid also voted twice for the Wicker Amendment allowing Amtrak passengers to include firearms in their checked luggage. In his capacity as Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid made votes on all of these amendments procedurally possible. And these are but a few examples of Senator Reid's support and leadership on Second Amendment issues.

All of which leads to a very serious question for all NRA members and gun owners who oppose Sen. Reid to contemplate: who would take Reid's place if he loses his race--and his critically important position as Senate Majority Leader? Remember, the Senate Majority Leader is the gatekeeper who decides which legislation will be considered on the Senate floor. If Sen. Reid loses, the next candidate for Majority Leader is very likely to be Charles Schumer of New York or Dick Durbin of Illinois --two of the most anti-gun U.S. Senators in history!

It is critical to the defense of the Second Amendment that we have pro-gun majorities in the U.S. Congress.

While no endorsement has yet been issued in this race, nor any other U.S. Senate race for the November general election, rest assured that we will make all of these announcements at the appropriate time and in light of our election policy.

Thank you for contacting us and please keep an eye out for our grades and endorsements as the election nears."

It may be wrong, it may be wrong headed but I don't think anything shady is going on here. I'll wait until they endorse Reid before I start raising hell.

BTW, are you a member?

I've been a member for a lot of years and its been the NRA and the members that have almost singlehandedly fought for gun rights for all those years. I've also been a member of the Second Amendment Foundation but not nearly as long."

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 3 replies · +1 points

PT, the NRA just isn't set up that way.

There are about 75 board members, (typically.)

This is the NRA position:

"Thank you for contacting the NRA-ILA regarding recent reports that the NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) has endorsed U.S. Senator Harry Reid for reelection.

For the record, the NRA-PVF has not yet made an endorsement in the Nevada U.S. Senate race. In fact, there have been no announced endorsements for any U.S. Senate seat for the November general elections--period.

For several reasons, we generally do not announce ratings or endorsements until closer to the elections. There are still votes to be graded and other information to be evaluated prior to issuing an accurate grade as Election Day nears.

The NRA-PVF looks at the entirety of a candidate's record. We start with the candidate's voting record (if any), along with answers to questionnaires, statements and floor speeches the candidate makes on Second Amendment issues, as well as any action the candidate may have taken as a committee member or leader.

Our endorsements are not given lightly, nor are they issued in every race. An NRA-PVF endorsement is something that has to be earned. As we do every election year, we wait until all the votes are taken and evaluate a candidate's entire record. Making a decision prematurely, before votes are taken, risks giving politicians a "free pass"--something we can't and won't allow.

It is important to note that the NRA is a single-issue organization. Our ratings and endorsements are based solely on a candidate's support for, or opposition to, our Second Amendment rights. Other issues, as important as they may be to many people, do not and cannot play any role in those decisions. NRA represents a broad coalition of American gun owners, who are bound together by their support for the right to keep and bear arms.

For us to factor non-gun-related issues into our ratings would foolishly divide our unified base of support on the Second Amendment. This policy has served NRA and gun owners well over the past three-plus decades, making us the nation's pre-eminent pro-Second Amendment advocacy group.

We fully understand that voters must take into account a variety of issues when deciding for whom to vote. We respect that. It is our responsibility, however, to provide voters with information solely on a candidate's position on gun-related issues so that they may factor that consideration in addition to other issues.
Admittedly, Senator Reid's record is not perfect; few politicians' records are. For a number of years (primarily in the 1990s) Sen. Reid had some problematic votes on our issue. But in the last five years, he has dramatically improved his record on our issue, so the NRA-PVF would be irresponsible if it did not give due consideration to those recent votes and actions. There is no doubt that, as Senate Majority Leader, Reid has supported efforts to protect Americans' gun rights, both by voting FOR pro-gun measures AND preventing anti-gun legislation from reaching the Senate floor.

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 5 replies · +1 points

I'm not defending their actions. Its just the way that the NRA has worked since it became necessary for it to endorse political candidates.

The Democrats, as a national party, didn't become anti-gun until after the JFK assassination. Gun control was racial before 1968 as Democrats were keeping the guns out of the hands of blacks and Italians. After 1968 it became about expanding government control over everyone.

Although it might be possible to bribe individual NRA board members but I don't believe that its possible to bribe the NRA itself. Its books are open to the public, members elect the board.

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 7 replies · +1 points

The NRA is a "single issue" organization. Basically you could eat babies and still get an A+ rating from the NRA. They endorsed Congressman John Dingell for years because he was a reliable gun rights vote and authored several gun rights bills. Except for gun rights, he is about as "progressive" as they get.

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 1 reply · +1 points

See!

No place is safe for you, they will follow you and torment you with their "witty" rejoinders.

ROTFLMFAO

I've got an idea for your shadow, 'Fightingidiots". Why don't you take those tissues and wipe your ass. We won't be able to see and make up our own minds now that his "Diary" is deleted and as far as I'm concerned, "you" are just another troll that sounds amazingly like one of the Kos kids or a denizen of the DU slime pit.

15 years ago @ http://bastpagantemple... - Red State-A Sorry Stat... · 1 reply · +1 points

Little red stateballs?

Erik will pick whom you support and his band of yes-men will keep an eye on you!

Troublemaker.

LOL

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with longrange

People I'm following

longrange