Podcast: Play in new window | Download
On Tuesday I interviewed NRA rep Alexa Fritts. We addressed the SCOTUS right to bear arms decision, and the NRA’s bizarre capitulation regarding the DISCLOSE Act. Let’s just say I’m not impressed with their position and it shows. Here’s the podcast for everyone, and TAMs, I have posted it the usual way for you as well.
If the NRA had spent their time fighting Kagan’s and Sotomayer’s nominations instead of obfuscating their members’ comcerns, they might have gotten a check from me. My second amendment money goes to Gun Owners of America-no money for you, NRA.
I am also certain there are other pro-gun groups that are worthy of support as well.
I’ve decided not to join the NRA. My father was a member, and actually has a tattoo of the American Eagle and the initials. But listening to this interview, we have a serious intellectual battle to fight. And that’s really what it boils down to. When organizations such as the NRA only focus on their concrete bound issue, without looking at the broader picture, their short term gain ends up costing us in the long run. It’s about principles and not compromising. Tammy excellent job. You made sure that the decision of the NRA was bad for freedom.
The NRA took advantage of the act for it’s benefit at the expense of other special interest groups and threw the first amendment under the bus. As stated in the interview, they still do not like the legislation. The shame lies not in the NRA making that decision, but having to be in that position in the first place. The legislation is ridiculous on it’s face, our anger should be at the legislators and not the NRA. The NRA, on the other hand, should have had enough professional lobbyists and PR folks to have maneuvered themselves to where they were never in that position. I think incompetence, greed and power has finally risen to the point in DC where the people are chomping at the bit to sweep them all out and start again.
erickson over at redstate writes that the NRA may be endorsing harry reid.
really? harry reid?
rick
the nra may certainly be a one issue organization- which is fine- but the second amendment does not exist in a vacuum- it depends on the rest of the constitution being upheld by all three branches of the government .
democrats are clearly more than ever now the anti-bill of rights ,anti constitution party. in any way supporting ie enabling them and their agenda even if you think you got yourself some magical exemption is naive at best, foolish and cynical at worst. the democrats and obama are filthy blanking liars. when the rest of those amendments go bye bye the nra is going to find itself with nothing left to defend. once they take away everyone’s free speech and right to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure and there is no longer a free press of any sort, the nra doesn’t think the liberals are going to come for them?
the nra is like that saying about the holocaust- first they came for the press and i said nothing and then they came for the the bloggers and free speech and i said nothing, then urkel shut down the internet for 4 months and i said nothing until finally no one will be left to fill the nra’s coffers with money and no citizen will be left with a voice or a gun to defend them. what do they think they’ll do then?