The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The NRA Has 10 Reasons To Worry About BHO Re-election

Posted on | March 16, 2012 | 22 Comments

by Smitty

It’s all good that the NRA is on about 2nd Amendment concerns associated with BHO.

However, 2010 called, and reminds us that Sharron Angle sure could have used some support to unseat arguably the Worst Senator in American History.

Thanks for all that ‘support’, NRA; you really know how to focus on one tree at the expense of the rest of the forest. When we grow up, let us consider that liberty is not a one-dimensional topic, and join the full-court press to restore it.

Update: Bill Quick offers something of a defense of the Narrowed Retinal Aggregation. I see the point, and maybe a mix of organizations with varying focus has the best overall effect; however, seeing the Sharron Angles, Joe Millers, Doug Hoffmans, Les Phillips and Christine O’Donnells die on the beach of being ignored by nominally patriotic organizations is an idea to which I’ll never warm. Sorry.

Update II: I’m looking rather an ass in the comments, over the general question of where/when to be pragmatic. The argument I’m getting at here is that we should support reformer candidates, and not support diabolical tools like Reid.
So how much is too much “deal with the devil”, if there is a need to make a tactical call that goes against the strategic principle? Is Harry Reid worth keeping Chucky Schumer out of the Senate Majority slot?
Too, if attacked on a variety of fronts, is it silly to hold onto just one or two (though Amendments One and Two are pivotal) and then get flanked and overwhelmed from a different side?
Let me get right out front here and point out that there is simply no final, provable, repeatable correct answer on any of this. We all have our little pet compromises.
I do submit that, overall, what’s key is that people chew on these matters, online and off, so that the overall quantity of compromise is held to a minimum.


22 Responses to “The NRA Has 10 Reasons To Worry About BHO Re-election”

  1. Quartermaster
    March 16th, 2012 @ 8:00 am

    NRA has long been a weak sister, to be charitable. GOA, and JFPFO are not. You don’t have to be Jewish to belong to JFPFO either. And GOA is uncompromising. When NRA canned Neil Knox as director if ILA it should have been a message to everyone in NRA that it was headed down the drain.

  2. SDN
    March 16th, 2012 @ 8:23 am

    SAF (Second Amendment Foundation) does a better job too.

  3. ThePaganTemple
    March 16th, 2012 @ 8:52 am

    So Mr. Smitty, just how do you propose that the NRA go about garnering support from what few Democrats they are able to get on board-like Reid-if they don’t stand by their commitment to reward with their support those elected officials of both parties who support the NRA? And how does the NRA maintain Reid’s support should they stab him in the back?

    Reid for all his myriad faults kept gun laws from coming to the floor of the Senate. I don’t know about you, but I thank him for that. What do you imagine would have happened if Reid had lost his re-election bid and Chuckie Schumer became Senate Majority Leader?

    Reckon the NRA could have cultivated Chuckie like they did Reid, if they had stabbed Reid in the back?

    See, sometimes you guys need to take a deep breath. And sometimes by God you need to take several of them. The NRA is not in business for the purpose of protecting baby Democrats in the womb, no matter how badly you think they should. They are about one thing and one thing only. Second Amendment issues. And by God I hope they stay that way.

    The last thing I want is to see the NRA marching hand in hand singing Kumbaya with every right wing group with a chip on its shoulder while on some imaginary mission from God. Keep that fucking shit out of the NRA and we’ll be fine.

  4. Yeah, They’re Sort of Gutless, But…. | Daily Pundit
    March 16th, 2012 @ 9:10 am

    […] They’re Sort of Gutless, But…. Posted on March 16, 2012 6:10 am by Bill Quick The NRA Has 10 Reasons To Worry About BHO Re-election : The Other McCain Thanks for all that ‘support’, NRA; you really know how to focus on one tree at the expense of […]

  5. smitty
    March 16th, 2012 @ 9:37 am

    Yeah, I guess if the ship sinks a bit more slowly, that’s better.
    Less sarcastically, it is historically true that the U.S. teamed up with Uncle Joe Stalin against the Nazis.
    Pretending Harry Reid is any friend of liberty is like pretending the Commie threat ended with the founding of the United Nations.

  6. Hobbes
    March 16th, 2012 @ 9:51 am

    Well said, Smitty!

  7. ThePaganTemple
    March 16th, 2012 @ 10:01 am

     Again, that’s their mission, to support the Second Amendment, and to reward any and all politicians who support them in that mission, regardless of what other issues any given one of those politicians does or does not support. That’s what’s made them successful. They even supported Howard Dean as Governor or Vermont. And rightly so, because, yep, Dean supported them, and the Second Amendment as Vermont Governor.

    So no comment on Reid keeping gun control bills off that Senate floor? You do know that was at least largely due to the NRA and their support of him, right?

    That’s why they’re called the National Rifle Association, not the National Conservative Association, or National Democrat Fetus Saviors Association.

    The next time you’re at a rifle range in Virginia, look around you and wonder how many of your fellow gun owners there happen to be both Democrats and NRA members. Maybe more than you think.

  8. Benefactor Member
    March 16th, 2012 @ 10:40 am

    Gun ownership is not a political issue. There are plenty of Democrats who own guns, and a fair number who are NRA members. I know this because I’m one of them. And I’d abandon the NRA in a heartbeat if they attempted to turn it into a lobby for the right-wing nut-jobs.

  9. William T Quick
    March 16th, 2012 @ 11:22 am


    Yeah, I guess if the ship sinks a bit more slowly, that’s better.

    So vote for Romney if he’s the nominee – cause he’s not as bad as Obama.

  10. smitty
    March 16th, 2012 @ 12:04 pm

    Sure, woohoo, yippee: the NRA held off all Second Amendment legislation.

    Pyrrhus, thy name is NRA.

  11. smitty
    March 16th, 2012 @ 12:06 pm

    Well, I certainly wouldn’t accuse Willard Mitt of being a Commie ideologue, if that’s your point.

  12. serfer62
    March 16th, 2012 @ 2:04 pm

    The GOP will win the House & Senate. They would have the power to stop OHbama completely.
    Unfortuneately the leadership is Boehner & McC…so The Won gets everything he wants.

  13. DaveP.
    March 16th, 2012 @ 3:23 pm

    It takes more to be my friend than jsut not being my enemy. Reid didn’t even manage that: he may have “kept gun control bills off the floor” (though what an accomplishment that was, after it became obvous even to Democrats that ‘Gun Control’ meant ‘Electoral Defeat’, is uncertain) but he certainly pushed for antigun justices to be appointed to Federal courts and to the Supremes and he certainly takes his party’s side on Gunwalker.
    It should’ve taken more than a nice bribe to Nevada NRA officials in the form of helping them get a range up for the NRA to support Harry Reid- but it didn’t.

  14. DaveP.
    March 16th, 2012 @ 3:28 pm

    And yet it’s the Democrats that have made gun control one of their standard planks for the past twenty years, have taken and given support-financial and otherwise- to the Bradys and every other antigun organization, have made gun bans a feature of every state and city they control- even in violation of local laws (Philadelphia)…
    And one more thing.
    Say it with me now. : “GUNWALKER”.

    Please- if you want to support gun banners- feel free to abandon the NRA. You’re not fooling anyone except yourself.

  15. ThePaganTemple
    March 16th, 2012 @ 4:50 pm

     I didn’t say you should like Harry Reid, or even necessarily that you have to agree with the NRA’s endorsement of him, but at least you should try to see the logic. The NRA is a one trick pony, but they don’t pretend to be anything but that. Naturally, any individual member can support or oppose any other cause they wish.

    But as an organization, the sole focus of the NRA is on the Second Amendment. For them to not back politicians who support them, and to instead back that person’s opponent based on some other irrelevant matter would be a gross form of incompetence and a betrayal not just of former political supporters but of the bulk of their rank-and-file members, to say nothing of a gross misuse of the funds received from said members. And that holds just as true for the Angle-Reid race as any other, actually given Reid’s leadership status more so.

    Again, if they had betrayed Reid’s support of them over the years in favor or Angle, and Angle had won, but the Democrats yet maintained control of the Senate, what could they do with a Senate Majority Leader Schumer? Or if Reid had pulled it out, do you think he would have brushed that betrayal off casually?

    Reid’s relationship with the NRA wasn’t hatched out of an egg the day before Angle became his opponent, they have a long-standing relationship, one which I’m sure goes back way before any supposed dirty deals for a rifle range.

  16. ThePaganTemple
    March 16th, 2012 @ 4:56 pm

     Pyrrhus is someone who gained a small victory at inordinate expense. How does that apply to the NRA? What have they lost, exactly? Aside maybe from a few disgruntled members who insist they should be something they’re not, that is. If anything, placating such members would be akin to a Pyrrhic victory, because you guys would ruin the organization in no time flat.

  17. smitty
    March 16th, 2012 @ 5:23 pm

    It is Pyrrhic to cheer for the lack of 2nd Amendment bills while the rest of the Congress is a debt-laden shambles as a result of Reid.

  18. DaveP.
    March 16th, 2012 @ 5:40 pm

    Sorry you missed the point.
    First, it takes more than just “not working against my interests” to make Reid a friend, especially when if he HAD supported gun control bills it would’ve been the end of his tenure in office.
    Second, I fail to understand how his support of the Holder ATF and Justice antigun programs is in any way favorable to the 2nd A. OR the NRA.
    Finally, I fail to see how his support for politicians and justices who are well-known for antigun stances is favorable to the NRA.
    Your arguement seems to boil down to saying that he isn’t as bad as he could be, so it’s better to allow him to corrupt the selection process than it is to try to replace him with something better.
    Allow me to disagree.

  19. Bob Belvedere
    March 16th, 2012 @ 6:05 pm

    The NRA has been hanging around with that slutty DC gal for too long.

  20. Bob Belvedere
    March 16th, 2012 @ 6:08 pm

    No, Willard’s just a Useful Idiot.

  21. Bob Belvedere
    March 16th, 2012 @ 6:09 pm

    Benefactor seems to be suffering from a classic case of Cognitive Dissonance.

  22. ThePaganTemple
    March 16th, 2012 @ 6:50 pm

    If you guys want an organization that will continue to work for the Second Amendment, then you should seriously consider supporting the NRA if you do not already do so, and if you do, you should continue to do so. That way, when one of the little Democrat fetuses you save from a surgeon’s scissors in his skull one day tries to “thank” you by breaking into your house with the intention of raping, robbing, and murdering you, you can then thank the NRA for protecting your right to put a bullet in the little fuckstick’s skull.