search
top

It’s That Big Bad NRA Again

AHSA is apparently blaming NRA for Cooper’s ouster.  First I heard anything from NRA on this one was Andrew’s comment in the USA Today article I linked to that mentioned me.  It continues to amaze me how much these groups think NRA is capable of.  Even if NRA were handing us marching orders, it would have to go through six different lawyers and layers of approval, to make sure no campaign finance laws were broken, and various other things, before it even got to us.  Those of us in the blogosphere saw this, and brought attention to it.  The rest was entirely grass roots:

Today, on behalf of the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA), I condemned the actions by the NRA and its cronies forcing Dan Cooper out.

The gun lobby’s attempt to destroy a good man and small business owner, a loyal member of the gun fraternity, again reveals the desperate Joe McCarthy-like politics of fear that the NRA leadership and others put first.  They are trying to scare America’s hunters and shooters into voting against Barack Obama — but we have one thing to say: vote hope and not fear.

We’re not the “gun lobby.”  We’re people who care about the Second Amendment, and when it comes to Barack Obama’s record on that issue, we’re not spreading fear, we’re spreading the truth.  Who are you going to believe?  Those of us who actually hunt and shoot, or a guy who runs a supposed “Hunters and Shooters” group who has donated $5000 to Handgun Control Inc.

48 Responses to “It’s That Big Bad NRA Again”

  1. DirtCrashr says:

    They can’t stand the fact that the NRA really isn’t the one involved – that regular gun-owners are – and they have to prop-up their favorite villain because they can’t handle the truth.
    They’re afraid that they will be exposed as frauds – and it can happen to them and all their fakery.

  2. Carl in Chicago says:

    And Shoenke’s site doesn’t even allow for comments.

    The NRA has chosen to remain silent, as they should have. Quite obviously, they have nothing to do with any of this.

  3. Sebastian says:

    It’s nuts. The gun blogosphere has a friendly relationship with the NRA. We know some of their people who deal with media. I’ve met a few board members through blogging. But our relationship with NRA mostly involves getting advance copies of press information, and various other media benefits. I’m not an insider. I don’t have access to big secrets. NRA doesn’t share their plans with me. I don’t get marching orders. Sometimes I’ll ask them questions about certain issues that come up. The idea there is some kind of conspiracy involved between the NRA and bloggers is utterly laughable.

  4. Tom says:

    The only connection is that there are bloggers who ARE members of the NRA, as opposed to the american horse shit association.

    People don’t associate with people who abuse and lie to them as AHSA does, hell this is a perfect case to illustrate that. This guy Cooper gives an anti-gun candidate money (and I have to speculate here on his motives, but they sure as hell make sense to me) to get Obama the openly anti “assault weapon” guy into office…when those get banned he stands to make more money as people will still want guns and in a market with fewer choices he stands out. Well, we folks who MAKE UP the NRA are tired of two faced back stabbing people like him.

    I WISH there was some kind of NRA-blogger conspiracy, maybe it’d shut up the anti gun AHSA asshats once and for all.

  5. Thirdpower says:

    Ray’s DailyKos site allows comments. 45Superman and I have already posted.

  6. And Shoenke’s site doesn’t even allow for comments.

    Actually, if you go to the link Sebastian provided (here it is again), and scroll down to the bottom, there’s a place to comment.

    I actually joined the DailyKOS (where Schoenke has posted the same lies), just so I could refute Schoenke’s sputterings (I think it gets much more readership than AHSA’s site).

  7. Thirdpower says:

    “Your comment has been queued for moderation by site administrators and will be published after approval.”

    Yep.

  8. Carl in Chicago says:

    “Your comment has been queued for moderation by site administrators and will be published after approval.”

    Yep. Same here.

  9. Ahh–hadn’t considered the possibility that they were fans of Brady Bunch-style “Reasoned Discourse.”

  10. Dock says:

    Serious question.

    I first heard of AHSA through the NRA’s Cam & Friends show, featuring the Bitch Girls. It was the very first I’ve ever heard of AHSA (and the BGs which led me here, actually.)

    Suddenly AHSA is showing up on almost every liberal-leaning broadcast that has to do with guns. (I never thought I’d say this but thank God for CNBC not having a mention of AHSA in their gun issue story!)

    My question is – is AHSA a real actual organization (and here I mean, at all… in any way) with real members, or is it a completely holographic shill group with no real membership?

    If AHSA has any kind of actual thriving membership, honestly THAT scares me about as much as the election projections.

  11. Good question, and it raises an interesting point. They actually offer a way to join (I think that’s new–I don’t remember that before), but good luck finding any numbers on their membership.

  12. Thirdpower says:

    Dock:

    Noone knows. Ray Schoenke has claimed up to 25,000 members at one point but best estimates put it at a few thousand. The majority of their funding comes from their directors, all of home have significant anti-gun pedigrees.

    They were set up as a front to endorse anti-gun Democrats like Obama. The only things they actually do is shill for Obama and blame the NRA for everything from global warming to Ray’s favorite TV shows being cancelled.

  13. mack says:

    this ridding of Mr. Cooper is so wrong.this kind of stuff usually happens in dictatorsips. nobody’s gonna take your precious weapon away. nobody’s even said that they will. Usae all this angst for something positive and let democracy reign damnit

  14. . . . let democracy reign damnit

    Democracy, my punctuation, capitalization, spelling, and grammatically challenged friend? And here I was thinking we lived in a republic, in which 51% of the population can’t vote away the rights of the other 49%.

  15. Carl in Chicago says:

    Mack:

    And democracy shall reign, as we want it too. But our system isn’t “pure” democracy. Ours is a constitutional republic, is a political system where the head of state and other officials are democratically elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government’s power over citizens, thus preserving those citizen’s authority from which government’s power ultimately arises. Under this system, there are certain things, often specifically stated in the constitution, that the government simply cannot do. Infringing the right of the people to own and carry guns is one of those things, yet that is something that Barack Obama, in particular, has supported at almost every opportunity.

    These are just very basic principles of our government, and it’s truly a tragedy that so many fail to understand these issues.

  16. So if the people through their elected representatives say that at gun shows that buyers have to go through federal registration, then what is the harm?

  17. The harm is that “people through their elected representatives” will have hammered the final nail into the coffin of firearm ownership confidentiality–and thus we will have reached the precipice . . . and then stepped off.

  18. Carl in Chicago says:

    Hershel Daniels Junior says:
    So if the people through their elected representatives say that at gun shows that buyers have to go through federal registration, then what is the harm?

    Because that is something outside the authority of the people through their elected representatives. The mandate is that the right to own and carry guns shall not be infringed, and federal registration of arms violates that clear mandate.

  19. Matt says:

    Hershel Daniels,

    And it would violate existing Federal gun laws. 18 USC 926(a) explicitly forbids the establishment of a firearm registry for guns or their owners by any political entity of the United States. Federal, State or local.

  20. Dock says:

    Oh my.

    Through my girlfriend (a rather successful political fundraiser) we managed to unravel much of the AHSA mystery for ourselves. Yes… we’ve been working on this for the last few hours.

    OK. AHSA is a PAC. And being a PAC, they have to submit paperwork to the FEC.

    Wanna see it?

    http://herndon1.sdrdc.com/cgi-bin/fecimg/?C00430074

    This table should give you a set of links on the right to open copies of AHSA’s filed documents. These should all be pored over carefully. You’ll be able to see a lot of what they actually do… unvarnished facts here.

    There are some names that crop up in the docs that led to further investigation.

    Searching opensecrets.org for the following folks (using the search for individual names in certain states) was similarly revealing. Search for:

    John Rosenthal – Newton, MA

    He of Meredith Management and a board member of the Center to prevent Handgun Violence. Look him up and check out his donation history. For extra credit, look up Meredith Management. LOVELY stuff.

    Lee Fikes – Dallas TX

    Make sure you search for “all cycles.” Also notice the donation history.

    Ray Schoenke – MD

    Again with the donation history.

    I strongly suggest doing these searches. I have no doubt (and neither does my girlfriend) that AHSA is funneling money to the Democrats and the gun grabbers exclusively.

    They also serve to represent an “organization” that the liberal media can count on as the “voice of gun owners” and who can be counted on to denounce the NRA at every turn and support literally every gun control measure proposed as “sensible.”

    Oh and apparently Schoenke does go out and occasionally hunt and shoot… as publicity opportunities to stump for Obama. Non-partisan indeed.

  21. David Young says:

    A CALL TO ARMS
    Sebastian where are you getting your information on Obama’s current positions on arms?
    Obama’s latest position seems to be based on his being a constitutional scholar and his understanding of law and settled law.
    The Supreme Court has spoken; The 2nd Amendment is a RIGHT that is NOT up for a vote. Chill out don’t get distracted by the bullshit. These guys McCain or Obama aren’t going to take your gun as long as you understand the meaning of the rights given to you under the 2nd. It is the right to protect the freedom we enjoy, with your arms if necessary. It is not the right to kill Bambi, target practice or even protect your home, what it says is “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” Everybody wants to forget that part- what it means is that the people can organize into militias (even a militia of one, truly an individual right) to protect the governed from the government and if necessary by the force of arms, kind of one of those inconvenient truths. This is a right we need for liberty to survive, too call it a right to hunt or even a right to self protection does give the not give it the significance it deserves. The right to bear arms is not about you it is about yours, your successors and this countries freedom. The sooner we face that fact that our founding fathers knew how tenuous our hold on liberty is and how easy it is lost to tyrants that we will understand why they gave us these rights. Government is not your friend regardless if it is controlled by the Republicans or Democrats they only care about power, and you should only care about the power of the governed. Voting for a candidate due to his position on the guns is a waste of time and insular in the extreme. Nobody can take your gun unless you give to them; just keep your hand on it and keep it loaded. Voting on your economic and personal freedom is what matters today. I am still voting Obama. Why aren’t you publishing my rants, to off the edge for you?

  22. Tom says:

    “as long as you understand the meaning of the rights given to you under the 2nd.”

    The so -called bill of rights DOES NOT GIVE RIGHTS! If you can’t grasp the power structure we are supposed to have…God>citizens>government then I guess you can’t grasp that the constitution is a LIMITATION IN VERY CLEAR TERMS OF WHAT THE GOVERNMENT CAN DO LAWFULLY AND WHAT THEY CAN NOT DO LAWFULLY.

    The often forgotten 9th amendment

    “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

    and the other that you should become familiar with, the 10th.

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    You keep pushing your messiah here, but EVERY SINGLE STATEMENT slithering forth from his lips stands 180 degrees out of line with what you claim it does. You are an obama troll pretending to be a “republican”

    Just out of curiosity, are you the David Young of “Dave Young’s Gunsmithing Services”? Just want to make sure anyone reading knows who their friends are up there in Terrebonne, OR

  23. David Young says:

    Tom

    You are right, you are born with these rights but they are not recognised by the constitution as given by god. The constitution doesn’t even mention God.

    I also agree with your quotes from the constitution funny how the republicans (RINOS) have ignored them for over eight years.

    Obama is not my Messiah I don’t think the messiah has even returned. I do trust my intution that he is the most honest politico I have heard since Goldwater. I do not agree with him on lots of issues but I do believe he is genuine.

    By the way if you wish to wager if I am a Republican I will gladly take your money over your slithering mouth. I have been a Republican for 40 years for a old politically active Republican Family. Also point in fact a very close relative of

  24. David Young says:

    Tom

    You are right, you are born with these rights, but they are not recognized by the constitution as given by god. The constitution doesn’t even mention God.

    I also agree with your quotes from the constitution, funny how the republicans (RINOS) have ignored them for over eight years.

    Obama is not my Messiah; I don’t think the Messiah has even returned. I do trust my intuition that Obama is the most honest politico I have heard since Goldwater. I do not agree with him on lots of issues, but I do believe he is genuine.

    By the way if you wish to wager if I am a Republican, I will gladly take your money over your slithering mouth. I have been a Republican for 40 years from an old politically active Republican Family. Also point in fact a very close relative of mine appeared in the NRA campaign “I am the NRA”. So keep guessing or wager me, after watching my retirement tank we should make the bet for some real $$ how about $10,000. We can meet in Reno, Vegas or Atlantic City to keep it legal. I am a retired Airline Transport Pilot (another hint keep googling) so wherever you want go is just fine with me. If you don’t take the bet and wimp out shut the fuck up and don’t ever call me a liar again.

    Finally I am not Dave Young of Dave Young’s Gunsmithing Service so do not go after the wrong guy, we all know how tolerant you are of dissent.

    My blog handle is a nom de plume.

  25. Dock says:

    I managed to find a reference to both God and a Creator, and the rights of mankind that are derived thereof, in a Founding document. You may have heard of it.

    For your perusal:

    The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies
    In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776

    The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

    When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

  26. David Young says:

    Dock

    You are absolutely right the Declaration of Independence not the Constitution refers to our creator and our unalienable rights. It also lays the foundation for why the second amendment is so important. “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”
    Jefferson also understood that in order for power to flow from the governed that the governed had to be in a position of power. That’s why we have that right guaranteed, not the right to go hunting or for personal protection even those probably fall under the right of life and the pursuit of happiness.

    “What country can preserve its liberties,
    if its rulers are not warned from time to time that
    this people preserve the spirit of resistance?
    Let them take arms.” Thomas Jefferson

    Thanks for making my point clearer.

  27. Tom says:

    “If you don’t take the bet and wimp out shut the fuck up and don’t ever call me a liar again.”

    I see you support the first as well as the second. Maybe when my obamadollars™ role in I’ll take you up on that, in the mean time I’m just a guy working on movies with hazardous chemicals and no healthcare and content with that fact. Hell, should Obama get in maybe I’ll just kick back and collect some of your cash, you seem to have more then me and I’d be more then happy to take some and put it to good use.

    “Finally I am not Dave Young of Dave Young’s Gunsmithing Service so do not go after the wrong guy, we all know how tolerant you are of dissent.”

    Well then, it’s either a coincidence you pick that name and come here peddling all kinds of BS or a ploy to try to bring down some unwarranted heat on the guy…or just more lies.

  28. Sebastian says:

    David, I got my information about Obama’s record from his own votes and statements. And also the Democratic platform. Look up what the NRA is saying about him. All their statements about Obama’s record are cited so you can look up, you know, his actual record.

  29. Sebastian says:

    What makes you so sure Obama supports the Second Amendment, David? What in his record gives you any indication of that? You’re believing what a politician is saying to get elected.

  30. Sebastian says:

    Obama is endorsed by the gun control group The Brady Campaign. Also by the Humane Society of the United States, who’s goal it is to ban hunting species by species. Look what gun people in his own state say about him.

    See this too. It’s all cited, you can look it up.

  31. Carl in Chicago says:

    David Young says:
    Finally I am not Dave Young of Dave Young’s Gunsmithing Service so do not go after the wrong guy, we all know how tolerant you are of dissent.

    My blog handle is a nom de plume.

    A nom de plume is a pseudonym adopted by an author to conceal their real identity. That’s fine.

    I just wanted to mention that this is NOT the second amendment history scholar “David E. Young” that some of us know … the one who published the books “The Founders’ View of the Right to Bear Arms: A Definitive History of the Second Amendment” and “The Origin of the Second Amendment: A Documentary History of the Bill of Rights.”

  32. David Young says:

    My Self Defense is also an unalienable right

    Well Tom, I do support the First and the Second, I believe you just need to be able to defend both. Since you cannot meet my wager amount what can you afford? It should be enough to hurt you when you lose, otherwise why bother. I would challenge you to a dual for besmirching my honor but it seems that is frowned upon these days.

    If you read Obama’s tax plan looks like I will be getting more money back also, I make under $250,000 a year.

    I had no intention of causing heat to come down on Dave Young’s Gunsmithing in fact I didn’t even know about him until you pointed him out. Carl’s post is closer to the point on the nom de plume.

  33. Linoge says:

    Ok, I am calling bullshit.

    You say you believe you need to be able to defend the First Amendment. So, I suppose, your definition of “defending” the First Amendment is telling someone you disagree with to “shut the fuck up”?

    And I suppose your definition of “defending” the Second Amendment is voting for a Presidential candidate who has a demonstrable and recorded history of being one of the most anti-firearms, anti-firearm-rights, and anti-rights-in-general politician in recent history?

    Well, the two certainly make sense when taken together – Obama has tried to silence anyone dissenting with him, and he has always said he was pro-Second-Amendment… while he constantly strived to undermine it.

    Maybe you two really are suited for each other…

  34. DirtCrashr says:

    Herschel must live here in California already.

  35. In response to Schoenke’s rant about the ouster of Dan Cooper (which he blames, incomprehensibly, on the NRA), this comment was left:

    i admit…
    if i were a boss putting together a list of employees to lay off…i would first survey the parking lot for cars with mccain/palin bumper stickers…and factor those findings into my decision on who to axe. just sayin’

    Compare and contrast that to our public proclamation of refusal to spend money in a way that could very well be used to suppress our rights, and suggesting that other like-minded folks to do likewise.

    Who are the “fascists,” again?

  36. David Young says:

    My Rights

    Linoge’s bullshit

    I will defend your right to call me whatever you want under the First Amendment, then I will kick your ass for calling me a liar, because that is personal and not really a constitution question.

    I believe that our second amendment rights are settled law, kind of like Roe V Wade. It will take a hell of a lot to change that in the future. Besides since I know that my guns are my constitutional right I ain’t given them up, period. .

    If you are really interested where I am coming from as a Libertarian Republican and why I support Obama I invite you to follow the posted link from the Economist Magazine, http://www.the37thframe.org/ I am not alone.

  37. Sebastian says:

    David,

    What makes you think it’s as established as Roe v. Wade. Roe itself was built on other cases, and it’s been upheld numerous times in numerous circumstances. We really only have Heller which was ruled on just this year. Heller really just settled that it was an individual right, and that a total ban on handguns was a violation of that right. It settled little else.

    The Second Amendment is hardly settled law. It is, in fact, far more vulnerable than abortion.

  38. Linoge says:

    Ah, so you have no problems “kicking my ass” for daring to disagree with you, but when it comes to us boycotting a company for the political views of its president, you are all over that like stink on shit. You may or may not be a liar, but you are most assuredly a hypocrite.

    And if you think our firearm rights are as settled as Roe V. Wade, you obviously have not been paying attention. There are, unfortunately, many end-runs, round-abouts, and evasive things people like Obama can do to further infringe upon our Second Amendment rights, even accounting for Heller. And given Obama’s stance on firearms in the past, I have no doubt, whatsoever, that he will try.

    Just because you are not alone does not make your actions any less idiotic… it just means you have other idiots to keep you company on the way down.

    So… a blind, hypocritical idiot… you may not be a liar, but you certainly are something.

  39. David Young says:

    Linoge, like I said before I wouldn’t kick your ass for disagreeing with me I would more upset if you didn’t, I think debate his healthy. It was when I am called a liar I take it personally;”Blind hypocritical idiot …” I can live with.

    I don’t believe Obama will take on Heller and the folks like you who are represented in this blog, for one simple reason there is no political up side in doing so and as we’ve seen Obama is a pragmatist. Maybe in his second term when he has nothing to lose, remember the game is about power and taking on the second is one way to lose it. So do not worry, not now.

  40. Sebastian says:

    I don’t believe Obama will take on Heller and the folks like you who are represented in this blog, for one simple reason there is no political up side in doing so and as we’ve seen Obama is a pragmatist.

    I hope that’s true, David. But the fact is, the guy’s record doesn’t indicate that’s the case. He will likely confirm justices that are not going to support the Second Amendment as actually meaning anything. He might even get enough votes on the Supreme Court to overturn Heller. Obama might not be thinking about screwing gun owners when he does it, but he will most decidedly appoint justices who want to unbind the government from the limits imposed on it by the constitution.

  41. David Young says:

    I understand your concern about the court. I have really mixed feelings about Obama’s possible choices for the court.

    I think the present justices have sold their souls when it comes to states rights “Medical Marijuana” Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy,for example. I just do not trust the conservative justices anymore. These guys have voted all over the map.

    I, like you worry about Obama’s choices for the court, it very well not bode well for the second amendment, and at the same time this is the court that subverted the will of the voters by anointing George W.Bush, talk about a subversion of states ’ rights.

    I just can’t in good consciences vote on one issue and I more scared of Sarah Palin and her lack of mental capacity than anything else in this election. This woman is so unqualified to be President it makes me doubt the intelligence of the Republican Party, to nominate that women created more doubt about the Republican Party then anything they have ever done.

    George Carlin’s quote keeps ringing in my ears “Imagine how dumb the average American is, and then realize that half of them are even dumber than that!”

  42. Sebastian says:

    I think the present justices have sold their souls when it comes to states rights “Medical Marijuana” Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy,for example. I just do not trust the conservative justices anymore. These guys have voted all over the map.

    Raich was an abomination, but I would point out that the dissenting justices there were Thomas, O’Conner, and Rehnquist, all of which are conservative. Scalia’s concurrence hurt though. A lot. I thought he was willing to take federalism where it needed to be, and he wasn’t.

  43. Sebastian says:

    Well, O’Conner wasn’t strictly conservative, but she was a committed federalist, and was put on the bench by Reagan. It would be interesting to know how Alito and Roberts would have voted on that. The liberal justices will almost never vote to limit the power of the federal government, even if they might personally agree with medical marijuana.

  44. David Young says:

    Sebastian you really are one of the smarter McCain supporters I have had the pleasure to engage.

    Is it only about the second amendment for you or there other issues agree with McCain on?

  45. Sebastian says:

    Generally, I agree with him on fiscal issues. There might be some issues here and there I disagree, but I appreciate his efforts to keep government from wasting money, and to keep taxes low. But that’s not to say I think McCain is a small government conservative. He has numerous statist tendencies.

    I’ll be honest, I’m not a huge fan of McCain. I’m supporting him because as much as I would prefer someone else, it’s either him or Obama, and I find the thought of McCain winning to be less revolting. McCain will do things that will piss me off. That’s a guarantee. But so did Bush. I do think that McCain is an improvement over Bush.

  46. Besides, McCain just looks presidential ;-).

    Sorry–couldn’t resist.

  47. David Young says:

    Nah

    McCain just looks like a grumpy old man on the campaign trail, he looked pretty good on SNL though.

    Maybe he does have future after today.

  48. Carl in Chicago says:

    I am pleased to see this reasoned and respectful discourse.

    Because I live in Illinois, it is possible for me to vote without affecting the general election race. That said, I am no huge fan of McCain but would prefer him over Obama. Generally, I tend to be libertarian in philosophy. Strongly conservative fiscally, and “liberal” when it comes to social issues. Basically, a “free choice” kind of person, and I automatically defer to the position where individual liberties are favored.

top