Ammo For Sale

« « Guns and sex | Home | While you were sleeping » »

NRA and Harry Reid

Reader Mike:

Iíll give you 4 words why NRA should support Reid.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.


14 Responses to “NRA and Harry Reid”

  1. Ian Argent Says:

    Essentially – what he said.

    The 2010 elections are vanishingly unlikely to return control of the Senate to the republicans. Only 1/3 of them are up, and many of the seats “in play” are republican. It’s not impossible, but given the choice between Reid and Schumer; I know who I’d want in the Big Seat

  2. DirtCrashr Says:

    My God! It’s like having Joe Biden (or Dick Cheney) as VP or something!

  3. kahr40 Says:

    Can’t argue that one.

  4. Diomed Says:

    I expect a lot of the people calling for Reid’s head on a platter (and flinging shit at NRA about it) will be crying bitter tears of regret in the coming years.

    He sucks on most everything but if you give a damn about guns you will miss him.

  5. Mike Says:

    Good point, but I’ve always felt that the direct approach works better. Trying to figure the odds and game out how things will go with the, “he’s good on guns, and the lesser of two evils”, point of view seems more likely to come around and bite us in the ass in the long run.

    I would rather have a senate with one less flaming liberal (Harry Reid) and one more conservative (Sharron Angle). That way even Majority Leader Schumer (spit-spit) would be less likely to have the 60 votes needed for cloture.

    Face it, there is no good outcome here until the current crop of scum of all parties is sent packing. But supporting a process that ends with standing in the bread line saying, “Gosh, at least the majority leader supports my right to own the guns I pawned to feed my family for one more week, and someday if everything goes right, I might even get a few of them back”, seems self defeating.

    This looks like a chance to throw a bum out and get at least a lesser bum in – if the NRA hurts those chances they can get stuffed.

  6. Bubblehead Les Says:

    Actually, it might not be Schumer, but Finestein or Inoye. Don’t they have to go to the most senior, then work their way down? Of course, if you get rid of Reid, Boxer, Blanche Lincoln, and a couple more, then the real power shifts to the New England Rino’s, ’cause they’ll be the one’s “showing the American People how the Senate can be BiPartisen”, as they throw us under the bus. Then add to the mix McCann and Graham….

  7. bob dole Says:

    In the senate, the majority leader matters a lot less than in the house. Also because of the filibuster rules and how they work, I would rather have 1 more pro-gun republican than a pro gun dem. Right now, at 41, the republican filibuster threat is tenuous at best, every one that is expanded by makes the threat far more credible and makes us not have to rely that every single RHINO won’t flake out at the last minute.

  8. straightarrow Says:

    That’s a horseshit reason to support Reid. Lack of principle is never excusable or justifiable.

  9. Sebastian Says:

    Ah, straightarrow… the master strategist and rhetorician.

    Let me let you in on a little secret, SA. I know you’ll find this hard to believe. 99% of all politicians lack principle. If you only worked with the principled ones, you’d be very lonely on Capitol Hill, or in any state legislature.

  10. Paul Says:

    I don’t like Dirty Harry any more than anyone else here. I won’t be sorry to see him go. However if it wasn’t for Reid, we would not have Carry in National Parks among other things.

  11. straightarrow Says:

    Ah, but Sebastian, let me let you in on a little secret. It is our fault that most politicians lack principle. Because we elect them and reelect them after their lack of principle has been exposed because they always promise to give us something for free that they stole from somebody else. Sometimes they even keep one or two of those promises of sharing the swag.

    If we, the electorate, elect only principled people to office, or turn them out once their status as unprincipled is revealed, one wouldn’t be so lonely trying to deal with only the principled politicians.

    As far as strategy goes, that appears far more attractive than trying to choose people you know can’t be trusted, but are less untrustworthy than others vyinng for the office. Or trying to find one bent in your direction. Bent is bent.

    Just what the Hell is so effective about a strategy that supports chicanery? What is so attractive about dealing with scum because he may be rented for a while as your scum? One look at the situation we find ourselves in now would tell even the dimmest among us that that is a loser’s game.

    Obviously you have taken dim to new level of dark.

  12. Andrew Says:

    And I will raise you one word.


  13. KSod Says:

    ALL Democrats have sold their souls to the Progressive movement and few if any are any better than Reid…they are all destroying our Charters of Freedom, including Republicans like McCain, Collins, Snowe and Graham.

    We MUST begin replacing these radicals one by one, We MUST take over control of at least one house, or this great Republic will never recover. These Progressives will believe they have a mandate and we WILL think we’re living under a Chavez/Obama dictatorship.

    FIRE HARRY REID! We will deal with Chuckie and rid ourselves of him when his time comes, but if we take over the Senate with strong Constitution supporting Conservatives, we choose the majority leader.


  14. Member Nomore Says:

    I just emailed the NRA and cancelled my membership. They are no better than all the other whores in Washington… Well, they will just have to sell their BS without my money!