June 28th, 2010 02:30 PM
NRA Issues Gag Order to Its Board Members on Anti-Gun Elena Kagan Hearings
Internal Senate emails confirmed by NRA Board Members are highlighting just how far the National Rifle Association has fallen.
The organization recently collaborated with the left to obtain a carve out of the DISCLOSE Act, legislation designed to silence bloggers and outside interest groups like tea party activists. This was a first amendment issue and the NRA gladly took a position and campaigned for its members to take a position on the DISCLOSE Act.
One of the NRA’s chief arguments was that it needed the carve out to be effective in its advocacy of Second Amendment issues. But here’s the problem: these internal Senate emails confirmed by NRA Board Members show that the National Rifle Association’s management team has explicitly and directly told the NRA’s board they are prohibited from testifying about second amendment issues during the Elena Kagan confirmation hearings.
That’s right: the foremost gun rights lobby in the nation is prohibiting its board from testifying in the Elena Kagan confirmation hearings about the second amendment.
The NRA did issue a statement on Friday after the internal Senate email began leaking out informing people of the gag order. The statement noted Kagan’s problematic record on guns, but that’s just smoke and mirrors. Don’t believe them when they say they are working with Senators to investigate her record. If they were really working with Senators, they would have accepted an invitation to testify on the Kagan nomination when they were invited. The gag order on board members is not limited to providing testimony, but it prohibits board members from coming out against Kagan in their individual capacity.
If the NRA is really working with pro-guns Senators and Kagan is really hostile to Second Amendment rights, which she is, they will score her confirmation vote and actually make the score count this time, unlike they did on the confirmation of Sonya Sotomayor. With Sotomayor, they waited until several days after RedState began demanding a score and then, in effect, announced they’d score it and ignore it.
First they collaborated with the left to get the DISCLOSE Act through the House, now they are blocking their own from speaking out against Elena Kagan. Is this the deal the NRA cut with the left? They get a carveout and shut up their board?
NRA Issues Gag Order to Its Board Members on Elena Kagan | RedState
Certifed Sig Classic Pistol Armorer
Lawdog: 1980 to ???
Soldier of Christ: January 2000 to Eternity
A Sheepdog who has found the Shepherd
June 28th, 2010 02:59 PM
I'm a 50 year NRA member. NRA board members are elected by the vote of five year or longer and lifetime NRA members. The NRA cannot tell a board member what to do or say. This is pure unadulterated BS from the NRA haters.
June 28th, 2010 04:54 PM
NRA Discourages Board Members From testifying Against Kagan
NRA Discourages Board Members From testifying Against Kagan
On the eve of confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan -- and for the second time in two weeks -- the National Rifle Association (NRA) is under fire from conservatives.
According to RedState's Erick Erickson, a prominent conservative blogger, "internal Senate emails confirmed by NRA Board Members show that the National Rifle Association's management team has explicitly and directly told the NRA's board they are prohibited from testifying about second amendment issues" during the Kagan hearings.
It turns out that during the confirmation hearings for then-Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, the testimony of former NRA President Sandy Froman angered current NRA leadership, because she didn't obtain permission to appear at the hearing – and because she appeared as former President of the NRA (she's also a Harvard Law grad a practicing attorney). The situation worsened when several members of the NRA board of directors also signed a letter opposing Sotomayor.
As one prominent board member (who asked not to be named) told me, Chris Cox, the executive director of the association's lobbying arm, NRA-ILA, "was livid because he didn't 'authorize' them to speak directly to Congress." After the Sotomayor hearings, a letter was sent to all NRA board members reminding them they did not speak for the NRA or the board.
Of three NRA board members I contacted, only one confirmed "explicitly and directly" receiving any sort of directive that could be interpreted as a "gag order" regarding Kagan. But all three sources confirmed that NRA board members actively opposed to Sotomayor's confirmation have been severely chastised "to the degree that they would not speak out against Kagan" (as one board member – who requested anonymity – told me).
Because most members of the NRA's board of directors are also heavily involved in numerous other conservative organizations, it seems unusual the NRA would expect board members to remain silent on the Kagan nomination (in fact, many have already spoken out).
More likely, the NRA, which is heavily involved in lobbying in Washington, does not want board members representing themselves as speaking for the organization without its approval. And it's reasonable to assume that testifying in a Senate hearing against Kagan would be frowned upon more than simply writing a column that does not mention any affiliation with the gun group.
But even that explanation is not likely to satisfy a growing number of conservatives who believe the gun group should vehemently oppose Kagan's nomination based on the fact that as President Obama's Solicitor General, she did not weigh in on what they consider a landmark Second Amendment case involving the constitutionality of the city of Chicago's gun ban.
These conservatives also see the NRA as having become too much a part of the "Washington scene" in recent years.
It is also important to note that it was only after pressure from conservatives that the NRA agreed to "score" the Sotomayor vote. Deciding to score a vote is important because it means Senators who voted for confirmation received a lower grade on the powerful gun lobby's scorecard.
And this perception was reinforced just a couple of weeks ago when the NRA came under heavy public criticism from conservatives – including a member of their board of directors -- for working with Democrats on a "carve out" exempting the NRA from proposed campaign finance disclosure rules that conservatives view as limiting free speech. The conservative critics say the NRA protected itself but left other, smaller advocacy groups subject to the law because the exemption applies only to groups that have been in existence 10 years or more and have more than a million members.
Regardless, it appears obvious a major schism has developed between the NRA-ILA executive director and several members of the board of directors. As one board member told me, "The bottom line is Chris (Cox) wants to have all decisions go through him and have no board involvement in decisions about or communications with Congress. He was the problem with the DISCLOSE Act. He's the issue re the SCOTUS nominees."
"Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18
Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
Paramedics With Guns Scare People!
June 28th, 2010 07:04 PM
Who ever the confirmed new justice is....the split will stay 5-4. And I don't know about the rest of you but that split on the 2nd Amendment is not good long term. Just one retirement at the wrong time can make us UNgun owners with a 4-5 split. I don't like it one bit.
"Improvise, adapt, overcome."
June 28th, 2010 07:34 PM
Originally Posted by Sig 210
And they are on here as they are on ALL the firearms sites. Divide and conquer.
June 28th, 2010 09:33 PM
Just because a columnist writes it does not make it true. Where is the source? Where are these letters that went to board members? Until I see those, I won't put any truth into this story.
June 28th, 2010 09:40 PM
This is another fine example of the pure unadulterated baloney being spread by the NRA haters and gun owners who have not bothered to educate themselves on the issues. This NRA board member says it is untrue.
NRA Issues Gag Order to Its Board Members on Elena Kagan: FALSE: OP Notified - AR15.COM
Brother, I am on the NRA BoD.......
This is nonsense and untrue.
Last edited by HotGuns; June 29th, 2010 at 02:30 AM.
Reason: wirty dord
June 29th, 2010 01:08 AM
There are 75 elected members on the Board. Members such as Tom Selleck and Ted Nugent. They are elected, not appointed so they are under no control of the NRA, as far as I can tell.
I would guess that a lot of them will do as they please.
June 29th, 2010 12:03 PM
I don't have anything to do with the NRA anymore since their Disclose Act deal with the left. They have lost my faith and trust and I hope their membership goes down. I am gonna remain with the GOA all the way. I hate to be blunt but it's the way I feel.
June 29th, 2010 12:17 PM
gag order/no gag order I do not know one way or the other.
what it does look like is that they tried to sell part of the first amendment for the second amendment.
I do not agree with that.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.
June 29th, 2010 10:35 PM
The NRA staff cannot tell the NRA BOD to do anything. The staff, including LaPierre, works for the NRA BOD. Last time an NRA executive vice president president tangled with the BOD he found out very quickly what unemployment is all about.
The Brady bunch are always happy to see the gun lobby tear itself apart.
From a closed thread on another website:
NRA Gag Order Angers Membership - TheFiringLine Forums
"NRA Members of New York,
There are a myriad of rumors regarding the NRA cluttering the internet but one in particular is causing me personal anguish. That rumor reports that the NRA staff has issued a gag order to the NRA Board of Directors regarding comments on the nomination of Elena Kagen to the Supreme Court. Let me explain something about the structure of the NRA; authority to do anything within the NRA comes from you the members of the NRA. That authority is delegated to your elected Board of Directors who in turn elects officers and formulate policy that is then issued to the Executive Vice President/CEO who then turns that policy into action through the professional staff. Gag orders for the Board of Directors do not exist.
Friends; those of you close to me should know by now that telling me I can’t speak up on an issue of vital importance to the 2nd Amendment is going to get you into a war. I spoke vociferously regarding the nomination of Sonya Sotomayor to the Supreme Court; in fact I joined a number of national 2nd Amendment leaders protesting the appointment and urging through a nationally published letter she not be confirmed. I did that because of her ties to New York State and the position she took, on then recent, anti 2nd Amendment decisions. I have not taken a position on Elena Kagen’s nomination to the Supreme Court because I find it absurd that anyone with no judicial experience would be nominated to the Supreme Court and fervently hope the Republican Senators will block this nomination.
The 2nd Amendment protects all the rest. Why would the NRA, the protector of the 2nd Amendment, attempt to limit the 1st Amendment rights of its’ own Board of Directors? It does not but if you think the Board members you voted for could be gagged then you voted for the wrong guys.
NRA Board of Directors
June 30th, 2010 05:30 PM
NRA's Cox calls RedState report 'a lie'
NRA's Cox calls RedState report 'a lie'
June 30, 11:14 AM
Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea
The head of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action denies that NRA has prohibited its directors from testifying during the Kagan hearings. Appearing on NRA's "Cam and Company" program, ILA Executive Director Chris Cox dismissed a report claiming a "gag order" as "just outrageous, it's a lie."
Here's the claim from RedState.com's Erick Erickson:
Internal Senate emails confirmed by NRA Board Members show that the National Rifle Association’s management team has explicitly and directly told the NRA’s board they are prohibited from testifying about second amendment issues during the Elena Kagan confirmation hearings.
...[T]his is one of those internet rumors that is simply not true.
Let's watch the entire exchange:
Cox did allude to an official policy, in fairness not unlike those adopted by most organizations:
But when we do communicate an official position of the National Rifle Association, it's important for us to speak with a united voice.
Is such a policy what Erickson's sources were referring to, and did ILA issue a specific reminder with the Kagan hearings in mind?
Mr. Erickson would do well to clarify, because as it stands, we have a he said/he said situation with credibility in question and much confusion in between.
And Mr. Cox would do well to take concrete action to show us his denial has meaning beyond damage control.
Adopting a "wait and see" attitude on the Kagan nomination hardly helps--especially since the perception is NRA was reluctant to take a stand during the earlier Sotomayor hearings. No one can seriously think Kagan will be protective of gun owner rights, and Monday's 5-4 Supreme Court decision ought to make it clear how foolhardy it would be to not strongly oppose such a nominee, who will assume lifetime power to rule on future Second Amendment cases if confirmed.
I see no good reason for NRA not making its objections known before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The "political capital" apologia does not wash--if there was ever a time to take a firm stand, it is now. If only certain authorized individuals can speak on behalf of the Association, why isn't Cox appearing? NRA presents itself as the leader, but the battle has begun and they're absent from the field, telling us their role is to be observers, not combatants.
At this point, we don't even know if they will formally oppose Kagan's confirmation and score it. And just to clarify, will Mr. Cox specifically tell us how he intends to keep NRA's commitment to score Sotomayor votes, which he repeated in this interview?
Will we see any lowering of letter grades? If we don't, what good is it, and how is that any different from no scoring at all? And if we do, will they be equally weighted across the board or selectively assigned? That is, will we see a standard scoring impact that reflects the gravity of putting an anti-gunner on the Supreme Court? Will NRA tell us what it is? Why haven't they to date?
Without these questions unequivocally addressed, the posturing is just words. NRA has been raising a lot of hackles lately with McCain, DISCLOSE, this, and lots more, and these are just recent disconnects with much of the gun activist community. It's past time for Fairfax to look at how their actions and attitudes have contributed to the perception.
Also see: Is NRA squelching dissent on Kagan?
I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.
I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.
Veni, Vidi, Velcro
June 30th, 2010 08:53 PM
I dont believe this. When have you ever heard Sweaty Teddy in a "no comment" mode. If it is true, and I doubt it, then they know something the masses dont. Just my .02 worth....
Originally Posted by Rabbitcreek
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
By DaveH in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: October 25th, 2010, 08:34 PM
By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: July 22nd, 2010, 03:14 PM
By jfl in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: July 1st, 2010, 10:38 PM
By Thanis in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
Last Post: December 19th, 2008, 10:51 AM
By ELCruisr in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: March 26th, 2008, 07:22 AM
Search tags for this page
nra gag order
nra orders gag aginst it's own members, kagan
what are the 120 named firearms
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors