With the GOP controlling both the House and the Senate and sitting in the chair of the POTUS, the NRA is still running ads about people trying to strip away Second Amendment rights. Talk about fear tactics, false information and just outright begging for money. That's all it has always been about. Give us your money or you might lose your rights. I think they are worse than tele-evangelists.
Advertisement
- Thread starter countryroads89_rivals
- Start date
The NRA Appoints Itself Leader of the Trump ‘Counter Resistance’
https://www.thetrace.org/2017/02/donald-trump-counter-resistance-nra-wayne-lapierre/
The National Rifle Association is vowing to defend Donald Trump from “the forces who conspired” against his candidacy.
The new president “will need every ounce of energy we can muster,” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre declares in an ad released this week. “And he has no more powerful ally than the NRA.”
The ad begins with an ominous score and apocalyptic imagery, including shots of angry protesters and video footage of a random fire captured by Russia Today, the Kremlin-sponsored TV network. There are text cards that read, “We won the battle. They couldn’t handle it. So they started a war.” There is a sound bite from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who says the words “a white supremacist” — not in reference to Trump, as is implied, but about Steve Bannon, the president’s chief strategist.
On Twitter, the video was accompanied by the hashtag #counterresistence, marking the start of the NRA’s latest messaging campaign.
“Wayne LaPierre leads the fight,” viewers are informed toward the end of the video, followed by a plug for LaPierre’s upcoming speech at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday, which will stream on NRATV.
The “counter resistance” banner is an update to a narrative the NRA has deployed for decades, as the gun rights group has sought to cast itself as a leader not just on Second Amendment issues, but more broadly as a defender of American freedom. What is different now is how closely the NRA’s broader agenda, which leans heavily on fears of violent crime, illegal immigration, and terrorism, aligns with that of the current administration.
Never before in the NRA’s history has the group so openly boasted about its close relationship with a president, and never before has a president been so eager to openly embrace his close relationship with the NRA. Even President George W. Bush, a staunch defender of gun rights, sought to put distance between himself and the organization after an executive was caught on tape bragging about exceptionally close ties to the administration.
But as with so much else with Trump, conventional wisdom no longer holds. The NRA proudly endorsed his presidential bid when no other major conservative organization would, and then proceeded to spend over$30 million—more than any other outside group—to help catapult him into the Oval Office. Along the way, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, was given a speaking slot at the Republican National Convention, a first. And now Cox has been assigned the duty of introducing Vice President Mike Pence at CPAC on Thursday.
The NRA clearly sees the Trump presidency as a chance to go on the offensive. At the federal level, for example, the group is lobbying to deregulate silencers and pushing legislation that would make a concealed-carry permit obtained in one state valid in all states.
Those priorities, however, are likely to take a backseat to more pressing objectives of the administration and the Republican-controlled Congress, including healthcare and tax reform. Appointing itself leader of the “counter resistance” may be a way for the NRA to maintain its voice, and keep its five million claimed members mobilized, at a time when the group’s ideology is ascendant and the risk of new, national gun regulations is practically nonexistent. In simpler terms, it may represent a bid for increased influence in the rightwing movement that has now dominates the Republican party and American conservatism. While only 22 percent of U.S. residents own guns, according to thedefinitive surveyon the subject, polls show Trump’s approval rating averaging45 percent.
The extent to which the NRA advises the president on matters of policy, and how much it is benefiting from its relationship with the White House, remains opaque. But a recent White House meeting was telling: On February 1, a day after Neil Gorsuch was nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, Trump and LaPierre sat next to each other at a meeting of conservative leaders in the Roosevelt Room. The president asked each person present to introduce him or herself, and then singled out LaPierre with a flattering comment that acknowledged the NRA leader’s influence in conservative circles.
“Wayne,” Trump said, “I would say they know you. Perhaps they know you better than they know me.”
https://www.thetrace.org/2017/02/donald-trump-counter-resistance-nra-wayne-lapierre/
The National Rifle Association is vowing to defend Donald Trump from “the forces who conspired” against his candidacy.
The new president “will need every ounce of energy we can muster,” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre declares in an ad released this week. “And he has no more powerful ally than the NRA.”
The ad begins with an ominous score and apocalyptic imagery, including shots of angry protesters and video footage of a random fire captured by Russia Today, the Kremlin-sponsored TV network. There are text cards that read, “We won the battle. They couldn’t handle it. So they started a war.” There is a sound bite from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who says the words “a white supremacist” — not in reference to Trump, as is implied, but about Steve Bannon, the president’s chief strategist.
On Twitter, the video was accompanied by the hashtag #counterresistence, marking the start of the NRA’s latest messaging campaign.
“Wayne LaPierre leads the fight,” viewers are informed toward the end of the video, followed by a plug for LaPierre’s upcoming speech at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday, which will stream on NRATV.
The “counter resistance” banner is an update to a narrative the NRA has deployed for decades, as the gun rights group has sought to cast itself as a leader not just on Second Amendment issues, but more broadly as a defender of American freedom. What is different now is how closely the NRA’s broader agenda, which leans heavily on fears of violent crime, illegal immigration, and terrorism, aligns with that of the current administration.
Never before in the NRA’s history has the group so openly boasted about its close relationship with a president, and never before has a president been so eager to openly embrace his close relationship with the NRA. Even President George W. Bush, a staunch defender of gun rights, sought to put distance between himself and the organization after an executive was caught on tape bragging about exceptionally close ties to the administration.
But as with so much else with Trump, conventional wisdom no longer holds. The NRA proudly endorsed his presidential bid when no other major conservative organization would, and then proceeded to spend over$30 million—more than any other outside group—to help catapult him into the Oval Office. Along the way, the NRA’s chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, was given a speaking slot at the Republican National Convention, a first. And now Cox has been assigned the duty of introducing Vice President Mike Pence at CPAC on Thursday.
The NRA clearly sees the Trump presidency as a chance to go on the offensive. At the federal level, for example, the group is lobbying to deregulate silencers and pushing legislation that would make a concealed-carry permit obtained in one state valid in all states.
Those priorities, however, are likely to take a backseat to more pressing objectives of the administration and the Republican-controlled Congress, including healthcare and tax reform. Appointing itself leader of the “counter resistance” may be a way for the NRA to maintain its voice, and keep its five million claimed members mobilized, at a time when the group’s ideology is ascendant and the risk of new, national gun regulations is practically nonexistent. In simpler terms, it may represent a bid for increased influence in the rightwing movement that has now dominates the Republican party and American conservatism. While only 22 percent of U.S. residents own guns, according to thedefinitive surveyon the subject, polls show Trump’s approval rating averaging45 percent.
The extent to which the NRA advises the president on matters of policy, and how much it is benefiting from its relationship with the White House, remains opaque. But a recent White House meeting was telling: On February 1, a day after Neil Gorsuch was nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, Trump and LaPierre sat next to each other at a meeting of conservative leaders in the Roosevelt Room. The president asked each person present to introduce him or herself, and then singled out LaPierre with a flattering comment that acknowledged the NRA leader’s influence in conservative circles.
“Wayne,” Trump said, “I would say they know you. Perhaps they know you better than they know me.”
I am about as staunch a 2nd Amendment person as you can be. Want to see the Hearing Protection Act passed and signed, want a SCOTUS appointee that will rule in favor of cases like Heller, protecting our rights. I'm also an on and off member of the NRA and attend a yearly NRA banquet.
I CAN'T STAND all the damn emails and phone calls I get from them, where they're looking for more money.
Anymore my personal email inbox is filled with either NRA junk mail, DNC junk mail (because of the contributions I've made to Democratic candidates in the past) and RNC junk mail (because of the contributions I've made to Republican candidates in the past).
Works with the snowflakes as well.
Example?
The relationship between gun remarks made by presidents (regardless how innocuous they were) and upticks in gun sales is legendary. Completely driven by primal fear and emotion.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/frankm...own-158-since-obama-took-office/#ba68f7b7f4e5
The gun industry published a report saying it’s not only doing just fine, but has actually grown by 158% since 2008. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for firearms manufacturers, reported that the total economic impact of the firearms and ammunition industry in the U.S. increased from $19.1 billion in 2008 to $49.3 billion in 2015. The NSSF also reported that, in that same time period, the total number of full-time jobs related to gun making in the U.S. rose from about 166,000 to almost 288,000.
I’ve noted before that this growth in gun sales began long before President Barack Obama first won the White House in 2008, but his politics have certainly prompted a lot of Americans to buy guns.
The gun industry published a report saying it’s not only doing just fine, but has actually grown by 158% since 2008. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for firearms manufacturers, reported that the total economic impact of the firearms and ammunition industry in the U.S. increased from $19.1 billion in 2008 to $49.3 billion in 2015. The NSSF also reported that, in that same time period, the total number of full-time jobs related to gun making in the U.S. rose from about 166,000 to almost 288,000.
I’ve noted before that this growth in gun sales began long before President Barack Obama first won the White House in 2008, but his politics have certainly prompted a lot of Americans to buy guns.
obamapuppet: From Peace Prize to the World’s Biggest Arms Dealer in Eight Short Years
http://www.globalresearch.ca/barack...gest-arms-dealer-in-eight-short-years/5542025
On Thursday, the U.S. State Department approved the sale of more military equipment, valued at around $1.15 billion USD, to the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This sounds like a lot of money to most of us, but the most frightening aspect of the sale is that it represents a continuation of an arms-dealing relationship between Washington and the Saudi regime, which has been worth over $50 billion USD in arms sales to date.
It is not an understatement to say Obama’s tears over gun violence are disingenuous considering his administration has enacted a policy of systematically arming the entire world with all manner of warcraft. According to the Department of Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), during his first six years in office, the Obama administration entered into agreements to sell more than $190 billion USD in weaponry worldwide. As the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy, William D. Hartung, states, this figure is higher than any U.S. administration since World War II. Perhaps that is why the Nobel secretary has voiced serious regrets about awarding the Peace Prize to the president.
While there are a number of companies who are making an absolute killing from these sales — like Lockheed Martin and Boeing — the fact remains that the U.S. government actively facilitates this industry in more ways than one.
In 2013, the Obama administration loosened controls over military exports so military equipment could be sent to almost any country in the world with little oversight. U.S. companies began to enjoy fewer checksthan they had in the past. For example, thanks to the Obama administration, weapons manufacturers can now send military parts to most regions of the world without a license, which makes it easier for companies to extend their market — even to countries that are on the U.N. arms embargo list. This is because, according to Colby Goodman, an arms-control expert with the Open Society Policy Center, once an item is approved for that exemption, there may no longer be any ongoing, country-specific human rights review as had been conducted previously.
As Mr. Hartung observed, all of this raises a number of issues when dealing with global security:
“36 US allies—from Argentina and Bulgaria to Romania and Turkey—will no longer need licenses from the State Department to import weapons and weapons parts from the United States. This will make it far easier for smuggling networks to set up front companies in such countries and get US arms and arms components that they can then pass on to third parties like Iran or China. Already a common practice, it will only increase under the new regulations.”
The expansion of this industry is already well under way, and the U.S. is at the helm. According to Vice News, as of February of this year, the U.S. had sold weapons to nearly half of the countries in the world. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found American exports reportedly made up a third of the global trade. A congressional report found that for 2014 alone, the U.S. made $36.2 billion in arms sales.
The Middle East region, hardly known for its peace and security, accounts for approximately 40 percent of U.S. weapons exports. Nearly ten percent of U.S. arms exports between 2011-2015 were sent to Saudi Arabia, and a further 9.1 percent went to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), who are primarily responsible for the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Yemen. But Obama is not merely turning a blind eye to the atrocities in Yemen — his policies are enabling its destruction.
The Obama administration is also doling out weapons elsewhere. In May of this year, the White House lifted its arms embargo against Vietnam — a country once ravaged by the United States — and is set to become a rising recipient of U.S. weaponry. The target of the move is China, as Vietnam has been one of the countries participating in a stand-off with China over tensions in the South China sea.
The current U.S. arms industry is worth more than $70 billion a year but no major news outlet is talking about it. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are not talking about it, except as far as to state how much more fantastically militaristic they can make the U.S. government.
In spite of politicians’ and weapons companies’ enthusiasm for an arms industry that generates over $70 billion per year, the glut of sales has not provided the world with security. As CNN has reported, the State Department’s 2017 budget request is likely to include more funding for African armies in places like Mali, Somalia, and Nigeria. The U.S. already has a long history of meddling in these nations — and actually helped create the very terror threat they supposedly want to fight there.
Where will this end?
Providing countries with arms so they can confront a nuclear power like China is not going to provide the world with security. There are many who paint China to be the aggressor in the region, however, even if that is the case, provoking these conflicts and making billions of dollars in the process only benefits a select few — none of whom will ever have to feel the pain they inflict on the rest of the world.
This isn’t a case of companies making a profit because the government has little to no say in regulating what goes on. In any given arms sale, the U.S. government is involved in the entire process. Yet this is the same government that claims to passionately care about gun violence domestically while enabling chaos and destruction around the world.
They can hardly be said to be leading by example with their current track record.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/barack...gest-arms-dealer-in-eight-short-years/5542025
On Thursday, the U.S. State Department approved the sale of more military equipment, valued at around $1.15 billion USD, to the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This sounds like a lot of money to most of us, but the most frightening aspect of the sale is that it represents a continuation of an arms-dealing relationship between Washington and the Saudi regime, which has been worth over $50 billion USD in arms sales to date.
It is not an understatement to say Obama’s tears over gun violence are disingenuous considering his administration has enacted a policy of systematically arming the entire world with all manner of warcraft. According to the Department of Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), during his first six years in office, the Obama administration entered into agreements to sell more than $190 billion USD in weaponry worldwide. As the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy, William D. Hartung, states, this figure is higher than any U.S. administration since World War II. Perhaps that is why the Nobel secretary has voiced serious regrets about awarding the Peace Prize to the president.
While there are a number of companies who are making an absolute killing from these sales — like Lockheed Martin and Boeing — the fact remains that the U.S. government actively facilitates this industry in more ways than one.
In 2013, the Obama administration loosened controls over military exports so military equipment could be sent to almost any country in the world with little oversight. U.S. companies began to enjoy fewer checksthan they had in the past. For example, thanks to the Obama administration, weapons manufacturers can now send military parts to most regions of the world without a license, which makes it easier for companies to extend their market — even to countries that are on the U.N. arms embargo list. This is because, according to Colby Goodman, an arms-control expert with the Open Society Policy Center, once an item is approved for that exemption, there may no longer be any ongoing, country-specific human rights review as had been conducted previously.
As Mr. Hartung observed, all of this raises a number of issues when dealing with global security:
“36 US allies—from Argentina and Bulgaria to Romania and Turkey—will no longer need licenses from the State Department to import weapons and weapons parts from the United States. This will make it far easier for smuggling networks to set up front companies in such countries and get US arms and arms components that they can then pass on to third parties like Iran or China. Already a common practice, it will only increase under the new regulations.”
The expansion of this industry is already well under way, and the U.S. is at the helm. According to Vice News, as of February of this year, the U.S. had sold weapons to nearly half of the countries in the world. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found American exports reportedly made up a third of the global trade. A congressional report found that for 2014 alone, the U.S. made $36.2 billion in arms sales.
The Middle East region, hardly known for its peace and security, accounts for approximately 40 percent of U.S. weapons exports. Nearly ten percent of U.S. arms exports between 2011-2015 were sent to Saudi Arabia, and a further 9.1 percent went to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), who are primarily responsible for the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Yemen. But Obama is not merely turning a blind eye to the atrocities in Yemen — his policies are enabling its destruction.
The Obama administration is also doling out weapons elsewhere. In May of this year, the White House lifted its arms embargo against Vietnam — a country once ravaged by the United States — and is set to become a rising recipient of U.S. weaponry. The target of the move is China, as Vietnam has been one of the countries participating in a stand-off with China over tensions in the South China sea.
The current U.S. arms industry is worth more than $70 billion a year but no major news outlet is talking about it. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are not talking about it, except as far as to state how much more fantastically militaristic they can make the U.S. government.
In spite of politicians’ and weapons companies’ enthusiasm for an arms industry that generates over $70 billion per year, the glut of sales has not provided the world with security. As CNN has reported, the State Department’s 2017 budget request is likely to include more funding for African armies in places like Mali, Somalia, and Nigeria. The U.S. already has a long history of meddling in these nations — and actually helped create the very terror threat they supposedly want to fight there.
Where will this end?
Providing countries with arms so they can confront a nuclear power like China is not going to provide the world with security. There are many who paint China to be the aggressor in the region, however, even if that is the case, provoking these conflicts and making billions of dollars in the process only benefits a select few — none of whom will ever have to feel the pain they inflict on the rest of the world.
This isn’t a case of companies making a profit because the government has little to no say in regulating what goes on. In any given arms sale, the U.S. government is involved in the entire process. Yet this is the same government that claims to passionately care about gun violence domestically while enabling chaos and destruction around the world.
They can hardly be said to be leading by example with their current track record.
He didn't do anything to infringe on second amendment rights.
You are proof that rubes swallowed NRA's offering, hook, line and sinker.
Really? Just browse Facebook for a few hours and you'll see plenty of.... "Trump is going to lock up Muslims.... Trump is going to be impeached.... Trump is going to take away rights from gay people (or any other group non-white straight male).... Trump is going to poison our rivers.... Trump is going to give away the country to the Russians.... the Russians.... the Russians....."
Honestly. Their idiocy almost makes it worth him being President.
I mean.... come on....
The obvious example is when an obvious terrorist attack occurs, that friggin dolt took to the podium to talk about gun violence and how we need to make a change to our laws. That was honestly the apex of agenda driven liberal stupidity and tone deafness
Every president had that. Obama, Dub, Clinton all had some fear mongering in opposing populous. This is different. Literally every time there was talk of anything related to guns, there was a spike in gun sales, and you can see dollars spent. This goes way beyond facebook posts.
Really? Just browse Facebook for a few hours and you'll see plenty of.... "Trump is going to lock up Muslims.... Trump is going to be impeached.... Trump is going to take away rights from gay people (or any other group non-white straight male).... Trump is going to poison our rivers.... Trump is going to give away the country to the Russians.... the Russians.... the Russians....."
Honestly. Their idiocy almost makes it worth him being President.
I mean.... come on....
Last edited:
No ****. It was the first Dem since Clinton. Clinton enacted that useless AWB in 94. Obama was far more liberal than Clinton and he didn't tone down the rhetoric re: firearms. Moreover, the subtle attacks from the establishment and shoehorning anti-gun rhetoric into movies etc.
He didn't touch it because he would have no chance of passing something and he knew that. Moreover, I'm told he and the administration were privately told by the manufacturers that if he fvcked around and started something, A. They would stop all supplie to the LEOs and military, and B. Stop all ammunition supplies as well, and C. Move the facilities out of Dem controlled states.
C was absolutely going to happen in Maryland.
I would have enacted A and B already in states like California, New York and New Jersey. Let the NYPD find 1000 lb trigger pull handguns from outside the US.