NRA spending on elections, 100% goes to repubs

[safeinOhio]

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/15/nra-plans-6-75-million-in-campaign-ads/


However, when it comes to money, that’s a different story altogether.  Earlier this week, the Washington Post reported on the expenditures of outside political-action groups and where their campaign dollars went in the previous week.  The NRA came in sixth on the list, and 100% of their money went to the GOP:


I had noticed here in Ohio, all NRA ads are for Portman and none for Strickland. While many here give credit to the NRA for it's endorsement of some Democrats, please note that all the money that you donate to them goes for repub ads and none for Democrats. Yes they are a one issue org. They are also a one party supporter. Even the National Chamber of Commerce donates 15% to Democrats.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

1. And how many Democrats have taken

guns away from anyone?

[MineralMan]

4. Yabbut...you know they want to. I read it in an NRA magazine.

It must be true...

[slackmaster]

6. On the federal level, none. The "assault weapons" ban plank should be removed from our platform.

That would go a long way toward deflating the idea that Democrats would take anyone's guns.

[safeinOhio]

8. The governor race in Ohio

is very tight and they have spent on other repub candidates for governors in other states. Your dues only go to repubs.

[slackmaster]

9. I'm not now nor have I ever been a member of the NRA. Please retract your statement.

I regard it as defamatory. Thanks in advance.

[safeinOhio]

10. Retracted.

Now, since Stricklands opponent did vote for AWB when he was in congress and got an F ranking for it, please retract your comment about how they are against that issue, as they are not supporting the Democratic candidate with an A rating.

Just follow the money.

[slackmaster]

12. All I said was that the AW ban plank should be removed from our party's platform

My opinion stands.

Now, since Stricklands opponent did vote for AWB when he was in congress and got an F ranking for it, please retract your comment about how they are against that issue, as they are not supporting the Democratic candidate with an A rating.

I don't dispute any of that. The NRA is indeed a hypocritical organization.

[Chulanowa]

15. No it wouldn't

First off, anyone who's convinced the Democrats are going to come after their guns is going to keep thinking that until those Democrats become Republicans.

Second, contrary to popular gun mythology, the term assault weapon actually has a legal definition, in every example of the term's use. This involves reading, and it's not found in the Rifleman or Hustler, so I understand why this myth is so persistent among the gun culture.

Third, maybe the gun bunnies could just try a little honesty, and admit "hey, we like shooting at shit!" Swear to god, it's like the people who are for pot legalization but who claim to have no interest in the recreational uses of pot.

"I only collect guns, because I like their artistic value and craftsmanship!"
"Oh yeah? I'm only interested in pot legalization because of its medicinal value!"
"And I only buy porn for research!"

[Callisto32]

21. Okay....

I like guns because I like shooting shit....Happy?

I appreciate guns as items of recreation, utility, and craftsmanship.

I would like to see cannabis legal for both recreational and medical purposes.

Yes, "assault weapon" may have a "legal" definition in what-ever-the-hell-statute you are talking about. However, if you actually READ statutes (Especially federal ones) you would know that going to those folks for proper grammar, word use, and denotation is about the dumbest possible thing one can do. All day long I watch lawyers and law students say "what the hell does THAT mean?"

[slackmaster]

25. The facts that it was bad law and did nothing to improve public safety are sufficient reasons...

...for striking it from the platform.

[Chulanowa]

28. Well, make that argument

Instead of nudging each other and chuckling about them dumm libruls what is skeered of gunz n' whutnot.

[slackmaster]

30. I have never done any of the things you seem to be accusing everyone but yourself of doing

Which is pretty ironic, considering the depth of stereotyping you are indulging in.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spin]

31. The assault weapons ban increased the sale of those weapons exponentially ...

Before the ban I can't remember a single shooter who owned a "black rifle. These rifles were considered underpowered and not as accurate as a good bolt action rifle.

But then the ban came along. A couple of years later, 75% the regular shooters that I knew had "assault weapons" or semi-auto rifles that looked like full auto or select fire assault rifles used by the military of nations all over the world.

When someone bought a semi-auto pistol with only a 10 round magazine, they just had to obtain one or more "high cap" magazines. These magazines were always readily available but extremely expensive, the only requirement was that they had to be manufactured before a certain date. The companies that made these magazines had worked 24/7 to produce as many of these magazines as they could before the cut off date.

The assault weapons ban was a foolish law conceived by people with little or knowledge of firearms and a lack of understanding of human nature. Attempt to ban anything and it becomes more popular and desirable.

[Chulanowa]

43. Well then it's a boon for the gun industry

So why the bitching? Seriously, from the sound of it this "ban" is unenforcable anyway. And even if it were, yes, it would pretty much only impact silly decorative shit rather than the weapons themselves.

But apparently this is the gun-lovers' existential issue, their prime directive, the single most pressing issue at hand with regards to their liberty.

And it's piddly little shit. Give me folding stocks or give me death!

Most laws are pretty damn foolish, when you consider them from the proper angle. But there are a lot of them that are much more foolish - and much more harmful to liberty - than the one the gun lovers get up in arms about. Seriously, it sounds to me like you're bitching about not getting enough packets of ketchup in your happy meal as you walk past a soup kitchen.

[spin]

46. I don't give a shit about the profit margin of the gun industry ...

It may have been a boon for them but not for gun owners. Hi-cap magazines were selling for enormous amounts, supply and demand drove up the price of "black rifles" to ridiculous levels.

To be honest, I am the only regular shooter that I know who didn't run out to buy a semi-auto military style rifle or a bunch of high cap magazines for my semi-auto pistols.

I own an old Swedish Mauser for long range shooting, a 12 gauge coach gun for close up self defense and a number of revolvers for carry. I do own two .22 semi-auto target pistols and three Colt .45 autos which see time on the pistol range.

But I agree that the assault weapons ban is probably the most stupid gun law that was passed in the last couple of decades. It was supposed to reduce the number of assault weapons but instead made them extremely popular. Obama's election and the Democratic take over of Congress caused the rumors of another gun ban to sprout leading to another increase in price and shortage of "black rifles" and a stockpiling of ammo.

If I wanted to reduce the number of firearms in citizens hands, the last thing that I would do is to ban certain firearms. Instead I would focus my efforts on more proactive law enforcement and target criminals and criminal gangs. As the streets became safer, the demand for firearms by the average citizen would drop. Regular shooters and hunters would continue to buy firearms for personal use, but in reality such gun owners are not a significant problem.

[AJAX22]

101. The AW Ban did change three things

It radically altered the priorities of the NRA, the focus of gun activism in the USA, and it made the AR15 the most common rifle in the united states.

[SteveM]

66. On "piddly little shit:" Do you support an "assault weapons ban?"

Really, you should help us lead the charge to rid the Platform of this position. I mean, being piddly with too much ketchup and all.

[SteveM]

65. Sounds like another straw man, here. nt

[aikoaiko]

49. Yes, it would help. It would also help if our Democratic legislators said, No Federal Weapons Bans!

And then backed up the rhetoric with voting.

[SteveM]

64. Some corrections...

The Democratic National Platform STILL has a call for an "assault weapons ban," and a permanent one at that.
President Obama has called for gun prohibitions, and hasn't retracted his positions.
Attorney General Holder has called, as recent as last year, for yet another assault weapons ban.

I can't speak for those who are "convinced," but it is hard to persuade anyone with this kind of Democratic record.

What is your definition of "assault weapon?" This might be illuminating in light of MSM's more recent changeover from using "assault weapon" to the more technical "assault rifle," the latter of which denotes, among other things, full-auto capability. BTW, I don't read Hustler, Rifleman or WaPo.

Who is a "gun bunny?" You know some here? BTW, I don't know of anyone here who has spoken against "shooting at shit." I love shooting at "shit;" more specifically, targets and game animals.

There are those who collect guns for their "artistic value and craftsmanship!," and there are those who are interested in pot legalization because of its medicinal value!" Do you have a point?

You seem rather interested in porn, since you mentioned Hustler (a magazine I don't read). Why do you read Hustler? "Research?"

[Rhiannon12866]

11. My Democratic congressman got an A rating from the NRA.

He made a point of mentioning it during his most recent debate on Tuesday and it's a question I've gotten from one-issue voters when I made calls for him. here in the NY North Country... And my former congresswoman got the same rating, and she's now the junior senator from NY, also a Democrat. :shrug:

[krispos42]

42. How many Democrats want to sharply narrow my options for owning guns?

Hmmm... I think it's a number somewhat greater than zero.

[spin]

47. The number of Democrats who oppose RKBA is steadily dropping ...

but some of the prominent Democrats who have held office for many years still would love to impose draconian gun law.

[MineralMan]

2. What a surprise, eh? Yes, indeed...I expected support for

many Democrats from the NRA. :sarcasm:

[safeinOhio]

5. But they only care about one issue

and the party does not matter. I read that right here.


:sarcasm:

[MineralMan]

7. Yeah, I read that here, too. That's why I'm so surprised that they're

not supporting Democrats. I'm shocked, really...yes...that's it...shocked.

[X_Digger]

20. Psst, hate to burst your grr with facts..

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00053553&cycle=2010

[spin]

32. Well your sarcasm was misplaced and the Republicans and Conservatives...

are pissed off at the NRA because (despite the misleading article in the OP) the NRA has endorsed Democrats and contributed to their campaigns.

NRA backs Democrats in key races, frustrating GOP
Wednesday, October 6, 2010; 10:49 PM

Not a lot of things have gone the Democrats' way this year, but dozens of their House candidates are getting a late boost from an unusual source: the National Rifle Association.

So far this year, the NRA has endorsed 58 incumbent House Democrats, including more than a dozen in seats that both parties view as critical to winning a majority.

The endorsements aren't the result of a sudden love for a party with which the NRA is often at odds. Rather, the powerful group adheres to what it calls "an incumbent-friendly" policy, which holds that if two candidates are equally supportive of gun rights, the incumbent gets the nod.

The policy has been in place for some time, and the NRA has always backed a number of Democrats, but the group's choices have become especially contentious this year because control of Congress is at stake and because so many gun-supporting Democrats were elected over the past four years.

***snip***

Overall, the NRA has endorsed many more House Republican incumbents than Democrats, and the cash has followed. The group's political action committee has doled out $350,000 this election cycle to Republicans and $170,000 to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. emphasis added
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

[baldguy]

3. NRA=GOP

Always has, always will.

[PavePusher]

34. And you have repeatedly been demonstrated to be... wrong.

Always have, always will.

[baldguy]

35. I refer you to the OP.

[X_Digger]

36. Check post 18. OP is demonstrably false. n/t

[baldguy]

37. Try actually reading the article instead of automatically disregarding it

Just because it doesn't support your increasingly precarious preconceived dogma. The NRA gives a few pennies to Dems (actually DINOs), the GOP scolds them for it, so they happily shell out another $6.75 million to appease the fascist party of America.

And from Oct 4-Oct 10, 100% of the NRAs campaign expenditures - and additional $8.3 million - went to the GOP.


They are the worst of the worst of the worst.

[X_Digger]

38. Reading fail. Try harder.

I quote, "NRA spending on elections, 100% goes to repubs"

That? Up there? ^ ^ ^ ^ ? The title of the thread?

Demonstrably false. His interpretation, not what the article actually says. The article adds, '- this week.' The OP doesn't.

[PavePusher]

40. One week = all the time.

Now I've heard it all.

[SteveM]

67. Gun-controllers: They made the modern NRA. Still doing it.

[onehandle]

13. The NRA is just another pro-Republican slush fund. nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

53. Demonstrably false. Don't bring faith to a discussion of fact, mmmkay?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00053553&cycle=2010


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x343931

[SteveM]

68. Gun-controllers: The gift to the GOP that keeps on giving. nt

[doc03]

14. You know I never really thought about it but you are right

I Have received some mailers and calls from Strickland touting his A+ NRA rating. I haven't received anything from the NRA for Strickland but have received several from the NRA telling me Lee Fisher (D) is a gun grabber.

[safeinOhio]

22. and Portman is way ahead.

The governor race is about tied. Spending members money to support an A rated candidate over an F rated repub makes to much sense. The repub even voted for the AWB when in congress. If they only ran half the ads the do for Portman, Ted would be in.

Follow the money.


NRA has a "secret 10 point plan" to install a right wing, corporate government. Details to follow.
:puke:

[Ian David]

16. They've endorsed Democrats but not donated to any? n/t

[spin]

19. The NRA has donated at least $170,000 to Democrats ...

NRA backs Democrats in key races, frustrating GOP
Wednesday, October 6, 2010; 10:49 PM

Not a lot of things have gone the Democrats' way this year, but dozens of their House candidates are getting a late boost from an unusual source: the National Rifle Association.

So far this year, the NRA has endorsed 58 incumbent House Democrats, including more than a dozen in seats that both parties view as critical to winning a majority.

The endorsements aren't the result of a sudden love for a party with which the NRA is often at odds. Rather, the powerful group adheres to what it calls "an incumbent-friendly" policy, which holds that if two candidates are equally supportive of gun rights, the incumbent gets the nod.

The policy has been in place for some time, and the NRA has always backed a number of Democrats, but the group's choices have become especially contentious this year because control of Congress is at stake and because so many gun-supporting Democrats were elected over the past four years.

***snip***

Overall, the NRA has endorsed many more House Republican incumbents than Democrats, and the cash has followed. The group's political action committee has doled out $350,000 this election cycle to Republicans and $170,000 to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. emphasis added
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

[spin]

17. Misleading! Democrats do get money from the NRA ...

NRA backs Democrats in key races, frustrating GOP
Wednesday, October 6, 2010; 10:49 PM

Not a lot of things have gone the Democrats' way this year, but dozens of their House candidates are getting a late boost from an unusual source: the National Rifle Association.

So far this year, the NRA has endorsed 58 incumbent House Democrats, including more than a dozen in seats that both parties view as critical to winning a majority.

The endorsements aren't the result of a sudden love for a party with which the NRA is often at odds. Rather, the powerful group adheres to what it calls "an incumbent-friendly" policy, which holds that if two candidates are equally supportive of gun rights, the incumbent gets the nod.

The policy has been in place for some time, and the NRA has always backed a number of Democrats, but the group's choices have become especially contentious this year because control of Congress is at stake and because so many gun-supporting Democrats were elected over the past four years.

***snip***

Overall, the NRA has endorsed many more House Republican incumbents than Democrats, and the cash has followed. The group's political action committee has doled out $350,000 this election cycle to Republicans and $170,000 to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. emphasis added
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

NRA Lends Its Firepower to Vulnerable Pro-Gun Democrats
By Jessica Roberts on October 12, 2010

The National Rifle Association — a perennial top donor to Republican candidates — has endorsed a number of House Democrats facing tough reelection fights in this year’s election, according to the Christian Science Monitor.

***snip***

Since 1989, 85 percent of campaign contributions from gun-rights groups have gone to Republicans. However, donations to Democratic congressional candidates have jumped from 12 percent in 2008 to 20 percent for this year’s election.

***snip***

Now the NRA is rallying behind moderate Democrats who favor gun rights — a move that may save some of them from defeat. The Democrats endorsed by the NRA are among the most vulnerable in the Republican quest to take back the House.
http://www.fairwarning.org/2010/10/nra-lends-its-firepower-to-vulnerable-pro-gun-democrats/

House Democrats Take NRA Cash, Block Disclosure
Blog by Brady Campaign
(June 22, 2010) in Society / Guns

By Paul Helmke

A funny thing happened on the way toward shining a light on big money’s influence in political campaigns. Apparently, the 53 House Democrats who get money from the NRA decided to stand in the way. Not on principle. They’ve got no problem with disclosure rules for big corporations, small corporations, unions, or advocacy groups in general.

The 53 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives who have taken money from the NRA this year are:

Jason Altmire (PA);
Joe Baca (CA);
John Barrow (GA);
Marion Berry (AR);
Sanford Bishop (GA);
John Boccieri (OH);
Dan Boren (OK);
Leonard Boswell (IA);
Rick Boucher (VA);
Allen Boyd (FL);
Bobby Bright (AL);
Chris Carney (PA);
Ben Chandler (KY);
Jerry Costello (IL);
Henry Cuellar (TX);
Lincoln Davis (TN);
John Dingell (MI);
Joe Donnelly (IN);
Chet Edwards (TX);
Brad Ellsworth (IN);
Bart Gordon (TN);
Gene Green (TX);
Deborah Halvorson (IL);
Martin Heinrich (NM);
Brian Higgins (NY);
Baron Hill (IN);
Tim Holden (PA);
Steve Kagen (WI);
Paul Kanjorski (PA);
Larry Kissell (NC);
Frank Kratovil (MD);
Jim Marshall (GA);
Jim Matheson (UT);
Mike McIntyre (NC);
Mike Michaud (ME);
Alan Mollohan (WV);
Scott Murphy (NY);
Glenn Nye (VA);
David Obey (WI);
Tom Perriello (VA);
Collin Peterson (MN);
Earl Pomeroy (ND);
Nick Rahall (WV);
Mike Ross (AR);
Tim Ryan (OH);
John Salazar (CO);
Heath Shuler (NC);
Ike Skelton (MO);
Zachary Space (OH);
Bart Stupak (MI);
Gene Taylor (MS);
Timothy Walz (MN);
Charlie Wilson (OH}
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/house-democrats-take-nra-cash-block-disclosure

The difference many be found in the article in the OP...

Earlier this week, the Washington Post reported on the expenditures of outside political-action groups and where their campaign dollars went in the previous week.

[X_Digger]

18. Was that for that single week, though?

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00053553&cycle=2010

Boccieri, John A (D-OH) $1,150
Ryan, Tim (D-OH) $3,000
Space, Zachary T (D-OH) $4,950
Wilson, Charlie (D-OH) $1,150

Seems a bit disingenuous the way you phrased the headline.

[spin]

23. The entire article is misleading...

The NRA has donated at least $170,000 to Democrats in this election cycle. As documented by several of my posts in this thread.

The OP lists an article from hotair.com which might be an accurate name for the website.

It's conceivable that the NRA endorsements and donations might save many "at risk" Democrats and that fact is really pissing off the Republicans and the conservatives.

There was a recent thread on this topic in the Gungeon"

Hee Hee Hee! RedState is having a meltdown over the NRA endorsing Democrats.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x343931

The NRA actually supports Democrats who support RKBA and some website tries to make them look bad based on the results from one week. This is the kind of crap that angers me in politics today and both sides play this game.

[safeinOhio]

24. They may have given small amounts, but

have ran no ads. Spent no money on tv ads in Ohio. The governor race is my example. As the article has stated they have for repubs in other states. The amounts you listed would hardly buy a couple of tv ads in major markets.

[spin]

26. Your title insinuates that the NRA donates 100% to Republicans...

which is false.

That fact may be true for a single week but ignores the fact that the NRA has donated $170,000 to Democrats and $350,000 to Republicans during this election cycle. (See my posts above.)

Slamming the NRA unfairly may be great fun but the fact that they were honest enough to endorse and contribute to 58 Democrats running for reelection in the House may help our party in the midterms.

[X_Digger]

27. Yet they're comparable to other donations made to house candidates.

Austria, Steve C (R-OH) $1,000
Costello, Jerry F (D-IL) $1,000
Crenshaw, Ander (R-FL) $1,000
Cuellar, Henry (D-TX) $1,150
Culberson, John (R-TX) $1,000
Davis, Geoff (R-KY) $2,000
Davis, Lincoln (D-TN) $4,950

And if you look further-

Shuler, Heath (D) North Carolina District 11 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Skelton, Ike (D) Missouri District 04 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Ross, Mike (D) Arkansas District 04 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Altmire, Jason (D) Pennsylvania District 04 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Rahall, Nick (D) West Virginia District 03 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Postage
Taylor, Gene (D) Mississippi District 04 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Boren, Dan (D) Oklahoma District 02 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Boyd, Allen (D) Florida District 02 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Dingell, John D (D) Michigan District 15 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Childers, Travis W (D) Mississippi District 01 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Davis, Lincoln (D) Tennessee District 04 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Cardoza, Dennis (D) California District 18 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Matheson, Jim (D) Utah District 02 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Halvorson, Deborah (D) Illinois District 11 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (D) South Dakota District 01 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design
Holden, Tim (D) Pennsylvania District 17 $531 Federal Capitol Communications Corporation Supported 10/19/10 Graphic Art Design

They're doing graphic design and sending mailers for (D)s, too.

[kelly1mm]

29. Facts? We don't need no stinkin facts! OP has been proven FALSE

and needs to be acknowledged. It is simply false that 100% of NRA $ even in the one week indicated went to Repubs. May not fit with your idea of the NRA and RKBA Democrats but it is the truth.

[spin]

33. It may be false, but some here prefer to believe the purposely misleading article. (n/t)

[Katya Mullethov]

51. I wonder how much they spend a week

On people that request membership info for no other reason than to cost the NRA money ? Not unlike keying someone's car or Monty Python , it's an acquired taste , but THEY think it's funny as hell .

[larwdem]

39. national Republican association

FUCK THE NRA

[PavePusher]

41. I might follow your lead...

about a year after the groups who profess to be so concerned with safety start giving the same level of training as part of their movements.

Needless to say, I'm not holding my breath.

Want the NRA to appear more even-handed? Bull-whip your Democratic pols to support the Second Amendment as vigorously as they claim to support the rest.

Until then, shove your invective back into your bloated colon.

[lawodevolution]

50. Gun control groups depend on gun accidents and violence to maintain membership

Levels and to bring in money which is why they try to block gun safety programs designed by the NRA. Gun control groups get very happy when they see a mass shooting in the news and they are crossing their fingers for increased violent crime rates in 2010.

[Paladin]

52. Prove It. (n/t)

[friendly_iconoclast]

55. I'll start- Seems you lot prefer "abstinence only" gun safety education:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=319516

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=319549#319589

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=311988

[Paladin]

56. Unpersuasive. (n/t)

[jazzhound]

57. self-delete NT

[friendly_iconoclast]

59. To you, perhaps. But you already had your mind made up, didn't you?

Nothing wrong with that, in and of itself. The gun controllers problem, however, is the same as with teabagger politicians:

They do an excellent job of persuading people who already agree with them.

[SteveM]

70. Best support for GOP: Democratic gun-controllers who won't give up.

[friendly_iconoclast]

54. The facts don't agree with your religious beliefs:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00053553&cycle=2010

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x343931

[SteveM]

69. Gun-controllers made the modern NRA...

And those Democratic gun-controllers keep giving gifts to the GOP by supporting -- you gussed it -- gun control.

Why not join us in dumping the assault weapons ban from the Party platform? Why not oppose any further federalization of gun policy?

[Glassunion]

45. BS... Misleading information and intiontionally inacurate information.

This is kind of funny... An organization that you do not donate any money to, is doing something you don't like. So what? You post a very misleading article, and flat out lie.

Good job! Give yourself a cookie.

[aikoaiko]

48. ....you spin a tale

[Ter]

58. Lies

n/t

[oneshooter]

60. A complete crock of shit. n/t

[safeinOhio]

61. Seemed valid to me.

Every day I see political ads for Portman for senator by the NRA. He already leads by 20%. On the other hand, no ads for Stickland, rated A, who is in a neck and neck tie with Kasich, who is rated F and voted for the AWB while in congress.

No one has explained this to me. Yes the NRA has given small amounts to Democrats, just like the Chamber of Commerce has. Yet, in a heated race they support the Republican by not spending on the Democrat.

Looks like a "secret 10 point plan" to elect right wing repubs.

[jazzhound]

62. I find the linking of the NRA to the GOP quite amusing

given the fact that the poutrage doesn't extend to the Brady Bunch.

Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Center and Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, was the Republican mayor of Fort Wayne Indiana. He also ran as a Republican to replace Dan Quayle in the House when he became VP. Helmke's dad ran the Indiana Republican Committee and his brother was a Richard Lugar staffer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Helmke

Of course hypocrites that the controllers will always be, they have absolutely no problem with the fact that the founder of the Brady Bunch as well as it's current president are Republicans.

[eallen]

63. Which is one reason I don't belong to the NRA.

:hippie:

[SteveM]

71. I don't either...

Why would anyone give the GOP more "ammunition" by supporting gun-control? This is the gift that keeps on giving.

[spin]

72. If you bother to read through the replies ...

you might notice that the article is a smear.

The article in the original OP uses a report from the Washington Post to prove their point:

However, when it comes to money, that’s a different story altogether. Earlier this week, the Washington Post reported on the expenditures of outside political-action groups and where their campaign dollars went in the previous week. The NRA came in sixth on the list, and 100% of their money went to the GOP:
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/15/nra-plans-6-75-million-in-campaign-ads/

I took the time to counter with this article once again from the Washington Post.

NRA backs Democrats in key races, frustrating GOP
Wednesday, October 6, 2010; 10:49 PM

Not a lot of things have gone the Democrats' way this year, but dozens of their House candidates are getting a late boost from an unusual source: the National Rifle Association.

So far this year, the NRA has endorsed 58 incumbent House Democrats, including more than a dozen in seats that both parties view as critical to winning a majority.

The endorsements aren't the result of a sudden love for a party with which the NRA is often at odds. Rather, the powerful group adheres to what it calls "an incumbent-friendly" policy, which holds that if two candidates are equally supportive of gun rights, the incumbent gets the nod.

The policy has been in place for some time, and the NRA has always backed a number of Democrats, but the group's choices have become especially contentious this year because control of Congress is at stake and because so many gun-supporting Democrats were elected over the past four years.

***snip***

Overall, the NRA has endorsed many more House Republican incumbents than Democrats, and the cash has followed. The group's political action committee has doled out $350,000 this election cycle to Republicans and $170,000 to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. emphasis added
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

I can understand that many who post here do not like the NRA, but in all fairness they are backing Democrats who support RKBA. They are taking a lot of heat from conservatives because of this. In the end the NRA might just save Democratic seats in Congress in the midterm election.

[Major Hogwash]

73. The NRA endorsed Joe Miller in Alaska over Murkowski, even though they previously endorsed her

When she was the official Republican Senator for that state.

That's all you need to know about the NRA -- the nuttier the Republican, the faster they will endorse them!!

Murkowski was no liberal, by any stretch of the imagination.

[friendly_iconoclast]

74. And what about the races where they endorsed Democrats?

Do they not exist in this dojo?

[Major Hogwash]

76. I was talking about how the NRA stabbed Murkowski in the back.

Of course, that would be too hard for you to follow, huh?

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Major Hogwash]

82. Blah, blah . . . blah blah blah. That's just more of the same crap as last time.

You've never said anything worth reading here, Digger.

Honestly, that's why I hardly ever read what you have to say.

[X_Digger]

83. Aww c'mon.. I need a chuckle.. sally forth and dazzle (or at least amuse) us. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

88. Why, because I own guns and hunt? I don't need an NRA sticker to do that.

Most of my posts get deleted in the Gungeon.
Because I'm a real liberal and the DU mods just can't stand that.
Seriously, I don't call anyone names, but lose posts talking to people here just the same.
So, what's it worth?
Nothing.
7 years of arguing about gun rights and laws at DU is a long time.
You'd think the DU mods would figure that out by now and quit deleting my civil comments.

If I really put down what I think of all of the rightwingers that post here in the Gungeon, I would be banned.

I'm voting tomorrow and will be at the polling booth most of the day, carting Democrats who need a ride back and forth to the polls.

[friendly_iconoclast]

89. But the rightwingers are pissed at the NRA for supporting Democrats

See posts #17, #32, and #75 for examples and links

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x343931


Regarding the link above-

People who own guns proclaiming what the NRA does is politically unacceptable? Looks like it's an endemic condition

amongst the ideologically rigid, whether here at DU or at a nest of reactionaries like RedState.


And just an aside:

"Disagrees with me" is not synonymous with "rightwinger", no matter how often and how loudly proclaimed....

[X_Digger]

91. "So, what's it worth? Nothing." -- truer words were never spoken. n/t

[Ter]

99. Miller is absolute on guns

Do you blame the NRA? He's simply better than her on the issue.

[friendly_iconoclast]

75. Shouldn't that read: "This is what I'd like you to believe about the NRA?"

Turns out, things aren't quite as you portrayed them:


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100603363.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010100604725

NRA backs Democrats in key races, frustrating GOP


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x343931

"Hee Hee Hee! RedState is having a meltdown over the NRA endorsing Democrats."


Redstate quote from the OP:

....The sad thing is that the NRA is endorsing Democrats in the very districts that we must win in order to obtain 39 seats. Here is a list of some of the Democrats who the NRA is endorsing that could cost us the majority:


AL-2: Bobby Bright
AR-4: Mike Ross
Ca-18: Dennis Cardoza
CO-3: John Salazar
CO-4: Betsy Markey
FL-2: Allen Boyd
Ga-2: Sanford Bishop
Ga-8: Jim Marshall
Ga-12: John Barrow
IA-3: Leonard Boswell
IL-11: Debbie Halvorson
IL-12: Jerry Costello
IN-Senate-Brad Ellsworth
IN-2: Joe Donnely
IN-8: Trent Van Haaften
IN-9: Baron Hill
KY-6: Ben Chandler
MD-1: Frank Kratovil
MI-1: Gary McDowell
MN-1: Tim Walz
MS-1: Travis Childers
MS-4: Gene Taylor
MO-4: Ike Skelton
NC-7: Mike McIntyre
NC-8: Larry Kissell
NC-11: Heath Shuler
ND-At Large: Earl Pomeroy
NM-1: Martin Heinrich
NM-2: Harry Teague
NM-3: Ben Lujan
NY-20: Scott Murphy
NY-23: Bill Owens
NY-24: Mike Acruri
OH-Gov. Ted Strickland
OH-6: Charlie Wilson
OH-16: John Boccieri
OH-18: Zack Space
OK-2: Dan Boren
OR-5: Kurt Schrader
PA-4: Jason Altmire
PA-10: Chris Carney
PA-11: Paul Kanjorski
PA-12: Mark Critz
PA-17: Tim Holden
SD-At Large: Stephanie Sandlin
TN-4: Lincoln Davis
TN-8: Roy Herron
TX-17: Chet Edwards
UT-2: Jim Matheson
VA-2: Glenn Nye
VA-5: Tom Perriello
VA-9: Rick Boucher
WI-3: Ron Kind
WI-8: Steve Kagen
WV-Senate: Joe Manchin
WV-3: Nick Rahall

There are a total of 53 Democrats in competitive/semi competitive districts that the NRA has endorsed. There is simply no pathway to the majority without winning most of these seats. Let me pose the following question. What would be a more effective advertisement in these districts, an endorsement from the Sierra Club or from the NRA? I think that it is quite clear that the NRA is one of the most effective organizations that are helping to preserve the Democrats majority....

[Name removed]

77. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AtheistCrusader]

80. I was encouraged to see the endorsements, but this re-affirms my decision not to be a member.

[spin]

85. Yes, but the fact is that the article is misleading ...

The NRA has donated money to Democrats in this election cycle, just not in the one week time frame the article discusses.

This has been discussed in many posts above.

To save time just visit this link:http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00053553&cycle=2010

[Kolesar]

84. Democrats need to find an issue &build a constituency, instead of trying to run on a RW issue

The RW message machine is about fear and that citizens need weapons or a war to protect them. Democrats win on the message of community and nurture.

[Kennah]

86. I'm a life member of the NRA ...

... but their Republicanism--other than it's historical origins--has never set well with me.

In 2006, Bob Ehrlich (R-MD) lost his re-election bid for Governor. He was pushing a game with gunowners, while trying to get re-elected, of essentially saying, "You gun guys have to vote straight Republican." That play didn't work for him in 2006, and he's about 10 points down behind O'Malley this go around for Governor of Maryland.

This could be a sign that the NRA is growing cojones enough to endorse candidates individually based on the gun issue rather than factoring in how the party overall treats the issue.

OTOH, the NRA tends to make safe bets, so maybe the overwhelming number of Dems in political trouble is good sign for tomorrow.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA9) has a safe seat, but the wife and I voted for him. Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) also got both of our votes, and I know she's no friend of gunowners.

[spin]

87. The NRA ha been fair in their endorsements for a while ..

For example they endorsed Bill Richardson the Democratic Governor of New Mexico in 2006. If you want their endorsement, you have to have a record of backing RKBA and if the choice involves an incumbent, the incumbent gets the nod. The party you belong to is not important.

Obviously for years, the Democratic Party has favored gun control as envisioned by the Brady Campaign (oddly enough a group run by people with a strong Republican background).

Now that we are finally realizing that supporting draconian gun laws is like shooting ourselves in the foot, the NRA can be a force to help Democrats win and stay in office.

[safeinOhio]

90. In the Ohio governor race

The repub, Kasich, who voted for the AWB while in congress had his NRA rating boosted to a B from an F in time for the election. The Dem, Strickland with an A rating, get zero NRA tv ads. In the Senate race Portman, way in the led, gets lots of NRA ads. The governor race is neck and neck.
Would appear that the NRA gives lip service to being fair, when it actually does more for repubs at the expense of the Democrats. I really think the NRA has a secret 10 point plan to get repubs elected because they are repubs
Perhaps you can explain all of this to me, in regards to Ohio?

Are there any Democrats that vote for the AWB in congress that have had their ratings raise from F to B?

[one-eyed fat man]

92. Are you saying you want all

those fifty some House Democrats who took either endorsements or that "tainted NRA money" to lose today?

[safeinOhio]

93. No, and I don't see where I said that.

Of course you NRA donators want your dollars going to all those Teabaggers so they can beat Democrats. Because, geewiz, they gave 15% to Democrats and then change their ratings on repubs that voted for AWB from F to B just before the elections.

Think they'll change their rating of the half Irish President from F to B because he hasn't done anything anti-gun while President, only signed a bill to allow CCWs in Fed parks. You'd think civil rights leaders like the NRA would be all over that. :sarcasm:

[spin]

96. My NRA membership fees go to shooting related programs not politicians ...

I do not contribute to the NRA-ILA or the NRA-PVF/

Your basic NRA dues do NOT support political victory efforts.They support the shooting SPORTS/TRAINING in the USA. It is the NRA-Institute For Legislative Action (ILA) that is the official political arm of NRA which sends out the postcard alerts on legislation and maintains the NRA-ILA website for legislative action. They rate candidates. They do NOT make direct political contributions to campaigns.They support/oppose legislation by lobbying/political action. Also, there is the NRA-PVF (Political Victory Fund) this fund DOES contribute directly to political campaigns of our friends in mainly federal and state campaigns. They are authorized by the FEC (Federal Elections Commission) and thus they can contribute directly to federal political candidates.
http://go-pacdutchess.org/id4.html

In post #94, I pointed out that the "F" rating for John Kasich dates back to 1994 16 years ago. The NRA did not change the ratings "from F to B just before the elections".

It simply looks like another case of dirty politics in this election which has set a disgusting new low. Both parties engage in lies and unfair attack ads. While many experts consider such ads to be effective, they do irritate the hell out of potential voters and decrease turnout. Unfortunately, Democrats need a large turnout in this election.

[spin]

94. The ratings seem to be in dispute ...

Panel ends look at gun complaint in Ohio gov. race
Updated 11:22 AM Thursday, October 28, 2010

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The Ohio Elections Commission won't look deeper into a dispute over a gun-related claim in the state's hotly contested governor's race.

In a 2-1 vote, the commission's probable cause panel on Thursday declined further action on a complaint by GOP candidate John Kasich. He has claimed Democrats on behalf of Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland have falsely said the Republican has an "F'' rating from the National Rifle Association.

Kasich received the failing grade in 1994. His more recent rating is a B. Democratic attorney Don McTigue prevailed in his argument that the F grade has been referenced in the context of Kasich's overall record on gun rights.
emphasis added
***snip***

The former congressman from suburban Columbus has argued that Strickland and the Ohio Democratic Party misrepresent his record on guns by blazoning the big "F'' on campaign materials. He notes that he has received three A-level ratings from the group, won their endorsement at times while in Congress in the 1990s, and received NRA campaign contributions six times.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/ohio-news/panel-ends-look-at-gun-complaint-in-ohio-gov-race-988430.html

Strickland misled public over Kasich’s NRA rating
Published 10:44am Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Shame on Mr. Strickland for falsely stating in his comment about John Kasich having an “F” rating with the NRA. What year were you talking about, Ted? This is 2010.

John Kasich has come a long way since 1994 and you know it. John Kasich is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. He is a gun-owner, as well as his running mate, Mary Taylor.

For your information, Ted, John Kasich was given a “B” rating from the National Rifle Association and Mary Taylor was given an “A” rating.

***snip***

As a member of Congress, John received three “A” level NRA ratings, was endorsed by the NRA three times and received campaign contributions from the NRA six times.
http://www.irontontribune.com/2010/11/02/strickland-misled-public-over-kasich%E2%80%99s-nra-rating/

[safeinOhio]

95. Any others that voted

for AWB get their rating changed before an election?

"His more recent rating is a B"

Is there a more recent rating for the half Irish President who also supported, but didn't vote for the 1994 AWB? Any other AWB voters get $ from the NRA 6 times?

Looks like a secret 10 point plan by the NRA to get repubs elected over Democrats, while giving token support to Democratic candidates. This stinks.

[spin]

97. I tried to dig up the NRA ratings for previous years but ...

my Google-fu failed me.

But honestly, it does look like some dirty politics was being played when Gov Ted Strickland stated that John Kasich had an "F" rating from the NRA. He did 16 years ago.

Gubernatorial Candidates Battle Over Guns
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 9:01 PM

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Guns were blazing in the governor's race on Wednesday as both candidates claimed that they strongly support gun rights.

The issue is so important in the closing days of the campaign, that Republican John Kasich has filed an elections commission complaint against Gov. Ted Strickland, ONN's Jim Heath reported.

"The people are tired of having the facts distorted," said Kasich supporter, Sen. Jim Hughes. "That's what's so troubling about what the governor is saying. They should be saying he has a 'B', not what they're trying to say."

What Strickland said is that Kasich has an "F" grade from the National Rifle Association.

Kasich did get an "F" from the gun-rights group in the mid-1990s, when he voted in favor of an assault weapons ban.
http://www.10tv.com/live/content/onnnews/stories/2010/10/27/story-governor-candidates-gun-battle.html?sid=102

Perhaps you were unaware of the facts involved in this issue, or perhaps since you live in Ohio, you have more inside information than I do.

[PavePusher]

98. Was there a reason for the rating change?

Lack of context....

[aikoaiko]

100. He had pro-gun votes after tthe AWB vote and his rating was C+ and B before the end of the 1990s.

He redeemed himself in the eyes of the NRA long before the Governors race.

[AJAX22]

102. The NRA does change ratings

It is entierly possible that an anti-gun candidate can switch 180 degrees on an issue and get back on their good side.

I don't think they'll give you an A rating that way, but a c or b is do-able.