Joe puts it very well, into a chess analogy:
I think the people that are upset with the NRA support of Harry Reid don’t really understand the trade-offs involved and what the NRA is trying to accomplish. To best support the members, the gun owning people of this country, they have to play a “chess game” where the can never take back a move, the pieces are clouding in smoke, the playing field is shifting, the rules are only partially known and subject to violation by the individual pieces at any time. Try thinking three or four moves ahead under those conditions and see how well you can do. The NRA plays that game very well. They are experts at it. Sometimes when an expert is at work you will be baffled at the moves they make.
Read the whole thing.
The NRA plays a good game of chess, but won’t let you finish the game because they smash the board up. Then you begin the chess game at the next legislative session.
Some states win or tie the NRA, but the NRA won’t admit it.
Even the NRA can lose a match, or concede for another game.
Let’s play global thermonuclear war. How about a nice game of chess?
Oh, and once Reid has consolidated support against the 2A and the voters are powerless Reid will kiss the NRA goodbye and we’ll all be left standing around wondering what the heck happened. Reid is another Gillibrand waiting to happen.
Every politician is a potential Gillibrand. The ones who stick to their principles, no matter what, eventually we end up calling losers. They have to have a reason to stick with you that benefits them keeping their seat.
The longer a politician sticks to his principles, the harder it is to abandon them without taking a hit
As much as I hate Reid, Sebastian is right…. Reid was in the catbirds seat and nothing anti-gun got passed…….
Frankly, I can’t believe this is even an issue. I have a tough time believing anyone who claims any knowledge of the issues and yet feigns surprise (or, even worse, outrage).