Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NRA President shilling for gun banner Romney ^ | June 13, 2011 | Tom Hoefling

Posted on 06/13/2011 11:52:36 AM PDT by EternalVigilance

National Rifle Association President David Keene is predicting a Mitt Romney victory in the 2012 Republican presidential nominating process , and working to burnish the credentials of the liberal former Governor of Massachusetts.

Here's the problem:

As Governor, Mitt Romney banned guns. 

From July, 2004:

Governor Mitt Romney has signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that he says will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on these guns.

"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1 with legislators, sportsmen's groups and gun safety advocates. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."

Like the federal assault weapons ban, the state ban, put in place in 1998, was scheduled to expire in September. The new law ensures these deadly weapons, including AK-47s, UZIs and Mac-10 rifles, are permanently prohibited in Massachusetts no matter what happens on the federal level.

I'm thinking that perhaps NRA members, and anyone else who cares about the protection of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, might want to ask Mr. Keene how much money he and/or the organizations he represents have received from Mr. Romney and his closest allies.

Because, the way I see it, such considerations are the only thing that can explain why the head of the nation's largest gun organization would be shilling for someone who banned exactly the sort of weapons that in 1775 the British went to Lexington and Concord to seize.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: 2012gopprimary; antisemites4romney; banglist; criminals4romney; gunvote; illegals4romney; keene; mexicans4romney; nra; nra4911mosque; nra4cair; nra4gungrabbers; nra4illegals; nra4islam; nra4obamacare; nra4rinoromney; nra4romneycare; nravsisrael; nravspatriots; rino; rinoromney; romney; romney2012; romney4911mosque; romney4iag; romney4islam; romney4mccain; romney4romney; romney4sharia; romneyvsisrael
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-156 next last
To: from occupied ga

In my experience, the desire not to serve in the military says something about a man.

101 posted on 06/13/2011 9:24:41 PM PDT by ansel12 (Bachmann/Rollins/Romney=destruction for Bachmann, but it sure helps Romney. WHY?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: max americana

“And how many Freepers donate to this RINO organization which gave so much money to the Dumocrats? The NRA is a Dem org.”

It sucks when blowhards jump in with BS statements like this. NRA is a 2nd Amendment, single issue org, not a political party. I have personally lambasted them for stupid endorsements like Reid, and they subsequently dropped their endorsement of him and became more circumspect. If you’re bound and determined to bitch about them, at least drop the blatant lies, OK? It makes you (and the rest of us Freepers, by association) look stupid. The NRA-ILA has an e-mail address that they monitor almost 24/7 and even answered me Saturday a week ago with an info request I submitted on Friday afternoon late. They were a bit slow on the “Gunwalker” scandal, but now are also fully up to speed, so give credit where credit is due!


102 posted on 06/13/2011 9:32:16 PM PDT by cracker45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
David Keene? How did this complete phony mole become the president of the NRA????

Palin-bashing CPAC/ACU Chair donated $2,000 to Arlen Specter, endorsed Romney

This bum shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a conservative group of any kind. I'll be tearing up my membership card.
103 posted on 06/13/2011 9:35:53 PM PDT by Antoninus (Fair warning to the GOP--nominate a RINO and I'm going 3rd party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cracker45

Google “the NRA supports Dems” and maybe you would eat your words, right NRA stooge?

What’s the use of handing out money to defend 2nd AR when most of the money just funds Dem re-election chances? So basically, in order to defend the 2nd amendment...

it’s perfectly alright to fund Dem re-elections as long as the 2nd AM IS PROTECTED, eh? (hear the cuckoo clock?)

Actually, now that we are “name calling mode with the word stupid”, maybe you are the “stupid’ one and cannot even look at the big picture.

104 posted on 06/13/2011 9:42:14 PM PDT by max americana (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: max americana

You’re a moron! I apologize to the rest of you for wasting bandwidth on this bloviator!


105 posted on 06/13/2011 9:52:14 PM PDT by cracker45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Time to withhold money from the NRA the way we’ve been withholding money from the RNC.

106 posted on 06/13/2011 9:54:52 PM PDT by Abundy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cracker45

the NRA whine box is in another forum...

107 posted on 06/13/2011 9:55:11 PM PDT by max americana (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

As a WWII vet I have off and on had membership in the NRA. I was debating recently whether to rejoin or not because of NRA people supporting Harry Reid in Nevada. I ended up signing up for another year. However, with NRA executives supporting Romney there will not be another year.

108 posted on 06/13/2011 10:08:33 PM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

“I’m guessing you’re not a member of the NRA, never read who they endorsed/did not endorse last year and are speaking out of ignorance. Educate yourself before making false statements and bashing the NRA.”

Former member here. Membership expired in Jan. The Keene statement speaks for itself. I also have my copy of the American Rifleman where Chris Cox defends the NRA support of sleazy Dems. Agree they didn’t endorse Reid, but they didn’t endorse Angle either. Like the AARP, they are becoming too political, in the wrong way, ie “go along to get along.”

109 posted on 06/13/2011 10:20:24 PM PDT by secondamendmentkid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

AAABEST Wrote: “it does raise an eyebrow that there are six men (the father and five sons) in the family, yet not a single one of them served their country in any capacity whatsoever. It makes me wonder if there couldn't some issue at hand - like Dad/Grandad advising against it or perhaps them having some other type of compunction. A mindset of thinking it's beneath them? Not saying that's the case, but it seems odd to have an entire prominent family of American men shun military service.”

None of what follows should be misunderstood as saying Romney would make a good president. At one point during the last election campaign I liked Romney because of his business background and his claim to affirm traditional family values, which was at least better than the positions of McCain and some of the other Republican candidates. The more I learned about Romney, the less I liked him, and I eventually voted for Mike Huckabee. At this point I don't trust Romney, period.

However, let's be honest — military service today is rare, and becomes even rarer at the upper echelons of income. Show me the son of a wealthy man who joins the military, and he'll probably either be from a family with a long heritage of military service or someone who got really mad after 9/11 and decided to do something that had never entered his mind before we got attacked by Islamofascists. Good for them, but they are rare. Even at West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy, how many cadets are from upper-class families like Romney? There was a day that all the Kennedy sons joined the military, and both Bushes served, but the day of upper-class people viewing it as their duty to serve in the officer corps is long past.

Furthermore, most people with enough experience to be president would have been of military age during Vietnam or the years immediately following Vietnam when our military was being gutted by Congressional funding cuts, and that wasn't exactly the era of long lines of people thanking veterans for their service.

Given how incredibly unpopular the military was during the late 1960s and the 1970s, I'm happy to give “extra credit” to a person who chose to join the military during that period who is now running for office, but I am not at all sure that lack of military service, especially during the Vietnam and post-Vietnam eras, is something we should hold against people if they're otherwise pro-defense.

That being said, it troubles me that apparently nobody from the Romney family has **EVER** served in the military. AAABest may be on to something about a history of being opposed to military service. In the early days that's probably explainable because of the anti-federal attitudes in the Mormon Church, and maybe that applies as late as World War I, but I'd like to see a good biographical explanation of what the Romney family was doing during World War II. (Yes, I already know that during Vietnam, Mitt Romney was doing the standard tour of Mormon mission work and obtained a legitimate religious worker deferment.)

I realize the Mormons place a high priority on young men doing their mission work after high school and that's probably part of the low rate of enlistment cited by people here about Utah. On the other hand, I know that the Defense Language Institute gets a fair number of Mormons who decide to learn a foreign language for future mission work courtesy of Uncle Sam, and I think we need to respect Mormons who choose to serve their country in that way, even if I cannot in any way endorse what they plan to teach after getting out of the military.

110 posted on 06/13/2011 11:26:49 PM PDT by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
In my experience, the desire not to serve in the military says something about a man.

Well I wondered how long you'd last before you'd resort to a slur. I can always tell who the people are who have no logic or facts - nothing to back up their feelings. When challenged they quickly resort to insults. That would be you. You going to answer my question sonny boy? (That is with something that supports your position)

111 posted on 06/14/2011 4:16:19 AM PDT by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Gator113
"If what you say is true, you could have corrected me without being a rude a$$hole."

I get tired of hearing the same ole mantra over and over again. The NRA endorsed Reid. When people say this, it shows that they are lazy in doing their research. If you are an NRA supporter, you should research your facts before you go out and bash them. If you want to be a true 2nd amendment supporter, get the facts straight. Isn't that what we always tell our progressive opponents? To get their facts straight?
112 posted on 06/14/2011 4:24:12 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
"So, do you support the gun banner Mitt Romney?"

No and I'm p'oed that no one went after him last night in the debate. Pawlenty had a prime opportunity and did not go after him on Obmneycare. If I were a candidate I would be repeating that mantra over and over again. Obamneycare..
113 posted on 06/14/2011 4:26:13 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Jim Scott
"I don't wish to denigrate the NRA. However, if members like you disagree with what the president of your group is putting out there, you might want to make that known to him."

Oh, I'm sure it will be. Just like last year when the rumours abounded about them possibly endorsing Reid. I know there were people in the higher ups that wanted to endorse him, but pressure from the membership prevented it. I didn't know that Keene was the one who replaced Schmeits. He just got elected at the beginning of May. That's my fault for me not being up to date on who replaced Schmeits.
114 posted on 06/14/2011 4:29:15 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Gator113
"Having now completed a very limited search on the net, it appears that the NAR had certainly considered it, but backed out after all the heat. I guess I never read about their change in public position."

Well, not sure who the NAR is, but there were rumors that the NRA was planning on endorsing Reid. They didn't change anything because they never supported him in the first place. Once the rumors were out there, membership like myself were storming the Bastille so to speak and membership pressure is what made them not support Reid. However, they never have officially endorsed Harry Reid, ever. I believe he's basically gotten a B rating from them most of the time.

"All of that aside, it seems that you are most likely in agreement of their support of Romney."

Again, it is not their support of Romney but one man the President who made statements in an interview. It is not the official position of the NRA (to my knowledge) that they have come out in support of Romney. If you can find that, please share it with us.

"Although I don’t know it to be true, I do wonder if you intend to vote for Romney, sport."

I will not support Romney in the primaries. I havent' made up my mind who I will support. I originally wanted Haley Barbour but he fell by the wayside early. As for the general election, if Romney is the nominee yes I will vote for him over Obama. If your dog was the nominee against Obama, I would vote for your dog.
115 posted on 06/14/2011 4:39:08 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
I'll be tearing up my membership card.

I won't but I'll be doing some digging and voting for a few different people next elections.

You are/were a voting member, right?

You see, I'm not about to abandon the largest and oldest Civil Rights organization to the RINO types, the wafflers, nor those who would be overjoyed at fudding those 'ugly black rifles' out of existence in favor of something in a mannlicher stock.

You follow your own concience, but mine tells me to fight for an organization we expect to fight for us.

116 posted on 06/14/2011 5:01:37 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Article10
"Sorry to bring you back to reality, the NRA did nothing for Heller, in fact they attempted to scuttle the case."

Facts are stubborn things. Here is the Amicus brief that the NRA filed in support of Heller:

Initially the NRA was against this going to the Supreme Court because they thought this would be shot down and therefore set back our second amendment rights. Let's keep in mind when this suit was first contemplated. In 2002. At that time, Sandra Day O'Connor was still sitting on the bench. If it would have been brought while she was still on the bench, there's a good chance it would not have went in our favor.
117 posted on 06/14/2011 5:19:02 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: cracker45
NRA is a 2nd Amendment, single issue org, not a political party.

When they bought themselves an exemption to the proposed DISCLOSE law as a condition of supporting it (thereby selling all other gun rights groups down the river), they seemed to be getting a bit involved in first amendment stuff.

The Second Amendment Foundation seems to me the most important and effective gun rights group in recent times.
118 posted on 06/14/2011 5:19:31 AM PDT by publiusF27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: secondamendmentkid
" also have my copy of the American Rifleman where Chris Cox defends the NRA support of sleazy Dems. Agree they didn’t endorse Reid, but they didn’t endorse Angle either."

Yes, I was upset that they didn't support Angle over Reid. I mention that in one of my posts in this thread. As for the support of Dems. I agree with Cox and remember the article he wrote. Look, the reason that the NRA can move legislation on this issue is because they focus on this one issue. They get support from both sides. If they were only a schill for the Republican party, then Dems would feel free to vote against our 2nd amendment rights. We would have had an assault weapons ban enacted in the last Congress, magazine restictions et al. Instead, the Dems fear the second amendment and certain of them go out of their way to support our causes to get that endorsement.

I've never said that the NRA is the panacea for all things conservative. They are for the 2nd amendment. Look, everyone was cheering on the Small Business Association for taking on Obamacare, did you know they supported amnesty for illegals? A lot of these groups don't line up with everything we believe in. They usually only concentrate on one or two things. It's just that the NRA gets bashed for not being the conservative answer on everything.
119 posted on 06/14/2011 5:38:41 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

Yes, there it is as published in the NRA records, but it was filed late and is not part of the court record. Yes, the NRA is correct the brief was filed with the court, however it is not part of the court record.

Search the Supreme Court Records sunshine and you will not find the NRA Amicus in the official record for the Heller case, 9 other Amicus briefs are there, but due to not submitting on time or some other reason, the NRA brief is not in the official record, there for the NRA did not support the Heller case, other than making statement and giving out rather tainted ideas the NRA was a part of the Heller sucess. Do some research other than taking the Party Propaganda as facts..... You may actually learn something....such as the NRA is not the organization it represents its self to be.... Wow is that a surprise to you? Do you still think RINO’s don’t exist? Facts are stubborn things.

You can start here or go to any Law School Library:
United States Reports
Reporter of Decisions
Supreme Court of the United States
One First St, NE
Washington, DC 20543
Copies of recent bench and slip opinions
Public Information Office
Supreme Court of the United States
Washington, DC 20543
Phone: 202-479-3211
Copies of recent slip opinions, preliminary prints, and bound volumes
Superintendent of Documents
U. S. Government Printing Office
Mail: Stop IDCC
Washington, DC 20402-0001
Phone: 202-512-1800 or 866-512-1800
Fax: 202-512-2104
Project Hermes (bench opinions—by subscription only) Director of Data Systems Supreme Court of the United States Washington, DC 20543

120 posted on 06/14/2011 5:57:31 AM PDT by Article10 (Roger That)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-156 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson