Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32251444/ns ... itol_hill/

Beginning of the end of another antiquated, unnecessary, brutal, diseased Conk institution.


WASHINGTON - The National Rifle Association's threat to punish senators who vote for Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor has been met with a shrug by Democrats from conservative-leaning states and some Republicans who are breaking with their party to support her.

The gun-rights group is used to getting its way by spooking lawmakers about the political consequences of defying its wishes. But it never before has weighed in on a Supreme Court confirmation battle. It was cautious about breaking that pattern, and it looks like a losing fight to defeat President Barack Obama's first pick for the court.

Sotomayor is expected to easily win confirmation in a vote this coming week that could deflate the long-accepted truism in Washington that you don't cross the NRA.


Ha ha. Piss off.

Bad fight for the NRA to pick...

Fu*k the NRA

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Fu*k the NRA

As a gun owner, I could not agree more...

and jon, spot on....bad fight to pick...

Col Hogan wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Fu*k the NRA

As a gun owner, I could not agree more...

and jon, spot on....bad fight to pick...

I have been asked to join many times and don't. I'm curious why you guys object to the organization as well???

Bullies. Shadow government. General Conklike sh*t.

They like all power political lobbying and action organizations feel they must take the radical POV in order to settle on an acceptable compromise. Too bad that most of the time their politics is just plain bad. When I feel compelled, which I have not for about 6 years, I will send them a little and read the American Rifleman mag on them. While firmly believing in the right to own a firearm for law abiding citizens I do not feel I need to own an Apache Gunship.

Next!

bobbythekidd wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
As a gun owner, I could not agree more...

and jon, spot on....bad fight to pick...

I have been asked to join many times and don't. I'm curious why you guys object to the organization as well???

For me, it was when they opposed banning "Cop Killer" or teflon-coated bullets...that was the final straw...

Wedgebuster wrote:They like all power political lobbying and action organizations feel they must take the radical POV in order to settle on an acceptable compromise. Too bad that most of the time their politics is just plain bad. When I feel compelled, which I have not for about 6 years, I will send them a little and read the American Rifleman mag on them. While firmly believing in the right to own a firearm for law abiding citizens I do not feel I need to own an Apache Gunship.

Next!

You might be surprised, Wedgie. My Apache gunship has come in VERY handy multiple times.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Wedgebuster wrote:They like all power political lobbying and action organizations feel they must take the radical POV in order to settle on an acceptable compromise. Too bad that most of the time their politics is just plain bad. When I feel compelled, which I have not for about 6 years, I will send them a little and read the American Rifleman mag on them. While firmly believing in the right to own a firearm for law abiding citizens I do not feel I need to own an Apache Gunship.

Next!

You might be surprised, Wedgie. My Apache gunship has come in VERY handy multiple times keeping little niggra kids and Mexicans outta my yard.

FIFY.

I propose airdropping Wayne LaPierre and company into South Central LA or North Philadelphia or Baltimore without an arsenal, and see if they change their tune.

Ivytalk wrote:I propose airdropping Wayne LaPierre and company into South Central LA or North Philadelphia or Baltimore without an arsenal, and see if they change their tune.

Wouldn't that bolster their position? I assume you're talking about dropping them into areas that have many illegal weapons correct? I'm not following you here Ivy?

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:I propose airdropping Wayne LaPierre and company into South Central LA or North Philadelphia or Baltimore without an arsenal, and see if they change their tune.

Wouldn't that bolster their position? I assume you're talking about dropping them into areas that have many illegal weapons correct? I'm not following you here Ivy?

Yeah, Ursus, I admit that it's an ambiguous post. What I meant was that they'd get riddled with AK-47 and Uzi fire and, if they survive and see the error of their ways, see the need for reasonable regulation of really bad guns.

Ivytalk wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Wouldn't that bolster their position? I assume you're talking about dropping them into areas that have many illegal weapons correct? I'm not following you here Ivy?

Yeah, Ursus, I admit that it's an ambiguous post. What I meant was that they'd get riddled with AK-47 and Uzi fire and, if they survive and see the error of their ways, see the need for reasonable regulation of really bad guns.

Reppies for IvyTalk.

Ivytalk wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Wouldn't that bolster their position? I assume you're talking about dropping them into areas that have many illegal weapons correct? I'm not following you here Ivy?

Yeah, Ursus, I admit that it's an ambiguous post. What I meant was that they'd get riddled with AK-47 and Uzi fire and, if they survive and see the error of their ways, see the need for reasonable regulation of really bad guns.

Yeah its working for Pot and cocaine etc.....

Great idea.

You can never keep weapons from the wrong hands so the only logical idea is to arm everyone else. Heavily.

bobbythekidd wrote: I have been asked to join many times and don't. I'm curious why you guys object to the organization as well???

They only have one tactic
They intentionally instill fear in their constituents and members...

1) Fear that registering a gun eventually leads to total government removal of personal rights a freedoms
2) Fear that Liberal politicians have only one goal - to take away their guns
3) Fear that land management is actually "anti-gun"

and now fear that a supreme court justice nominee actually gives a hairy sh!t about the NRA's agenda

and people give them money... seriously it's hysterical

Ivytalk wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Wouldn't that bolster their position? I assume you're talking about dropping them into areas that have many illegal weapons correct? I'm not following you here Ivy?

Yeah, Ursus, I admit that it's an ambiguous post. What I meant was that they'd get riddled with AK-47 and Uzi fire and, if they survive and see the error of their ways, see the need for reasonable regulation of really bad guns.

OK I got ya. The thing of it is that it wouldn't stop the guys that have the AK's anyway. Those folks don't seem to care about going through obtaining their weapons legally and getting a CCP.

.

grizzaholic wrote:snide remark...posted edited

Welcome back - we almost missed you

No seriously... actually no we didn't

No just kidding no... actually I'm not

grizzaholic wrote:snide remark...posted edited

Knew this one would flush him out!

We need your perspective big R, get to swinging!!

Cap'n Cat wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
You might be surprised, Wedgie. My Apache gunship has come in VERY handy multiple times keeping little niggra kids and Mexicans outta my yard.

FIFY.

Well...I thought that went without saying...

AZGrizFan wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:
FIFY.

Well...I thought that went without saying...

That's what most guns is for, shootin' cans. Mexi-cans, Afri-cans, and PuertoRi-cans.

Z and GrizGoddess welcomed Alex to their home, served him dinner, and didn't ask him to do any landscaping...