Skip to main content

View Diary: NRA fighting to keep domestic abusers armed and dangerous (20 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In DC terms... (8+ / 0-)

    while the discussion is about efforts at the state level. Nice try.

    You know from reading the article and citations that the NRA does not want to have the conversation that you purport to begin here. So, I dismiss the notion that they have a point in need of a solution. That's why you can't point to a solution from the NRA. They desire no solution. The status quo is fine with them.

    Anyway, please insult me some more about my emotional ranting.

    We demanded a plan to reduce gun violence. Now it's time to demand a vote.

    by tytalus on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 01:48:45 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Sure (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      theatre goon

      If you think I am trying to deflect things from the state level by using "DC" in my comment, I eagerly await the results of your research to show that my comparison of relative lobbying dollars and campaign contributions does not hold up at a state level. Oh wait, you didn't actually check that out to see if it was true, did you?

      hint: according to, the total campaign contributions by the NRA (and its PAC's) at a state level averaged over the past ten years is about one-third of that of just Bank of America's contributions. The ratio also holds for just the 2012 election cycle. Then there is Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc., etc.

      And I never said that the NRA wanted a solution. I just pointed out that one of their criticisms might have some legal basis.

      But apparently the notion that the NRA might be partially correct on one part of something is just too much for you to handle, judging by your continued lack of response on it. The NRA said something, so you automatically oppose it, even if it is something I would have expected you to believe in, like civil liberties and equal rights under the law and due process and all those other terrible, terrible things where groups like the ACLU join forces with the NRA.

      So, it seems you have a knee-jerk opposition to something just because someone you don't like proposed it, even if it is something you yourself supported in the past. Sounds familiar, but I just can't seem to remember who or what it is you remind me of.

      So, to your unwillingness (or inability) to address the basic liberal issues I mentioned, I give the traditional tytalus response:

      Have a good day.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site