Skip to main content

This diary will be short, sour, and to the point.

Here's a list of Federal candidates who took money from the NRA in 2012. Now, most of them are Republicans or so-called "conservaDems", but that's not the point.

The point is, you took their money, the victims' blood is on your hands today. It's that simple.

You guys know what to do from here, right?

The larger problem in my eyes is that it's just not the NRA, our entire system of government is corrupt, and totally bought and paid for. I am not going to go into examples, I think the gentle reader gets the point, I don't believe any examples are called for, besides, it would just piss people off, as the truth usually does when it interferes with someone's belief system.

I wish I could say "more and better Dems", but it's really "just better public servants" period. The NRA, however, would be a good start.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Yup (7+ / 0-)

    this one does not cleave neatly down party lines.

    •  Pretty darn close though. (4+ / 0-)

      Only 1 Senate dem and in the House, less than 1/8 of NRA leeches were democrats.  

      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

      by Mark Mywurtz on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:32:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  26 House Dems, vs. 218 House Reps. (6+ / 0-)

      My blue dog, Jim Matheson is among the highest paid recipients:  $6,950.00.

      1 Senate Dem, vs. 7 Senate Reps (of course, Orin Hatch is one of the seven).  

      ~85K to Dems vs ~620K to Reps.

      No, the division is not perfect, but it is definitely there.

      "On their backs were vermiculate patterns that were maps of the world in its becoming. Maps...of a thing which could not be put back. Not be made right again."

      by middleagedhousewife on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:34:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  What a surprise! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larsstephens, Vinnie Vegas

      Josh "The Empty Suit" Mandel is #3 on the list. A man totally owned and controlled by special interests, but luckily they will not be controlling him in the U.S. Senate because he LOST. Number 2, sadly, is also from Ohio: Jim Renacci who defeated on of the best progressives in Congress, Betty Sutton, when Republican redistricting pitted the two incumbents against each other.

      It's pretty clear the NRA will never give a penny to my congresswoman. I was combing over her voting record one day and noticed she voted against a campaign finance disclosure bill. Since fair elections and controlling money in elections are among her passions, I called her office to find out what gave. It turns out the bill contained an exemption in disclosure for certain nonprofit groups — written so narrowly that the only group it applied to as the NRA. And she wasn't down with that.

      Jon Husted is a dick.

      by anastasia p on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 08:48:05 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for the list, (4+ / 0-)

    I see my local congresscritter (Fitzpatrick, TeaBag, PA-08) took $2000, as well as Mike Strahan's turnstile, Jon Runyan.

    "If you're a talented person and you're not successful there is probably something inside of you that is stopping you from being successful, and sadly, it might be your talent." -Marc Maron

    by Nona D Above on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:06:48 PM PST

  •  Sunshine is the best disinfectant (9+ / 0-)

    Thanks for the list

  •  Ugh! Once again, Jim Matheson is on the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vinnie Vegas, jan4insight

    wrong side.
    I will write to him yet again. :(

    "On their backs were vermiculate patterns that were maps of the world in its becoming. Maps...of a thing which could not be put back. Not be made right again."

    by middleagedhousewife on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:24:59 PM PST

  •  If I had my way in this wicked world, (6+ / 0-)

    pointing a finger at a politician and shouting "He takes money from the NRA" would be the same as saying that the politician took money from the Ku Kux Klan or NAMBLA. And just as toxic at the polls.

    The Republican motto: "There's been a lot of progress in this country over the last 75 years, and we've been against all of it."

    by Hillbilly Dem on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 04:25:24 PM PST

    •  I Wish (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Hamlet

      KKK might be a bad example, the Southern Strategy is the New Confederacy.

      I guess we're going to be like Lean-Luc Picard, and make it so.

      At some point, the people really need to take matters into their own hands and not rely on others. It's that sort of somnolence which has caused this mess to begin with.

  •  I Gotta Run (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight

    But I think the diary speaks for itself. I'm not looking for tips and recs, I'm looking for action.

    At what point becomes the tipping point, the point of no return? That's for the public to decide and act on.

  •  I think focusing on the NRA, which has kept the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jan4insight, SadieSue, Vinnie Vegas

    Country from any meaningful discussion of guns for years, should be the focus right now. All-inclusive gun control or banning assault rifles all come up against the same problem--the NRA. And their politics promote right wing policy while they cover for the weapons industry. I agree with the poster above who said that we need to make these politicians scared to have their name associated with that organization. Once they are somewhat controlled we could begin to have a reasonable and productive conversation. Until they are reined in...not so much.

    "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

    by stellaluna on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 05:03:33 PM PST

  •  Rep. Kurt Schrader (5+ / 0-)

    There are a lot of Kossacks in the State of Oregon, and Rep. Kurt Schrader of the 5th Cong. District took $3,000. from the NRA in the 2012 election cycle, so this needs some light. Perhaps it's time for him to make a choice as to what kind of values he, as a Democrat representing an area that is hardly a district in Alabama, is willing to represent.

    It's a somewhat conservative region of the state, but not that much, and publicly shunning this money will not cost him the next election; if he goes public and returns that money his constituents would honor the courage of speaking out at this terrible time of sorrow. Part of his district is close to, if not inclusive of the Clackamas Town Center where two were killed last week.

    "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

    by paz3 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 05:09:08 PM PST

  •  Great Diary, Hope It Gets Rec Listed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SadieSue, Vinnie Vegas

    I've worked in politics in DC for over a decade.

    I'm posting this comment based on anger, I haven't really thought it out, but I think the concept needs to be out there.

    I don't know if there are any gun regulation groups with a PAC, but if they don't have one, they need to start one immediately.  

    If I"m reading this correctly (http://www.opensecrets.org/...) the Brady campaign gives almost nothing.  You're not just playing the wrong game, you're not even in the game.

    Even MORE than constituent contacts (emails, phone calls, in-person meetings), Congresspersons care about fundraising dollars.  Yes, I said they care about money more than constituency. And yes, that's in general, but if you haven't been on the DC fundraising circuit, talk to people who are (contact TPM or Kos front pagers and ask them) and ask if I'm wrong.

    If you want to talk to a Congressperson in DC, the best, absolute best way to get their attention, and actually meet them and have their time is to give them money.  And the NRA gives a lot.

    Does this system suck?  Absolutely.  But it's the way it works.  Deal with it.  The gun control lobby needs to start fundraising and put more money into a PAC.  No more studies necessary.  Others will take care of that.  And it might be smart for gun control groups to consolidate the PAC--it will give them even more clout.  And give money to some Republicans too.  At the very least, you'll be face-to-face with many Congresspersons at their DC fundraisers (hopefully on multiple occasions).

    Money talks and bullshit walks in DC.  Gun Control advocates out there...pony up and start playing this dirty game better (and apologies for bluntness).  

  •  THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY DO! (4+ / 0-)

    On the OpenSecrets.org page linked to, under the 'Summary' tab for the National Rifle Association, it describes the NRA as...

    "The National Rifle Association goes to great lengths (and spends a huge sum of money) to defend the right to bear arms"

    THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY DO, they are a Trade Association, and as such they are defending their right to SELL FIREARMS, not bear firearms.

    Again, this is about SELLING FIREARMS, that's what the NRA is about, that's who they represent, gun manufacturers.

    That's an important distinction to make, people need to stay focused on the fact that this about GUN SALES, this is about money and greed.

    That's also what "gun control" (more sensibly called "gun laws") is about, it's about preventing the SALE OF GUNS to murderers.

  •  Please let's remind our politicians and everyone (2+ / 0-)

    that we have not forgotten what President Jefferson said about the constitution and amendments:  

    http://www.famguardian.org/...

        Amending the Constitution

        No work of man is perfect. It is inevitable that, in the course of time, the imperfections of a written Constitution will become apparent. Moreover, the passage of time will bring changes in society which a Constitution must accommodate if it is to remain suitable for the nation. It was imperative, therefore, that a practicable means of amending the Constitution be provided.

        "Whatever be the Constitution, great care must be taken to provide a mode of amendment when experience or change of circumstances shall have manifested that any part of it is unadapted to the good of the nation. In some of our States it requires a new authority from the whole people, acting by their representatives, chosen for this express purpose, and assembled in convention. This is found too difficult for remedying the imperfections which experience develops from time to time in an organization of the first impression. A greater facility of ammendment is certainly requisite to maintain it in a course of action accommodated to the times and changes through which we are ever passing." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:488

        "Time and changes in the condition and constitution of society may require occasional and corresponding modifications." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Livingston, 1825. ME 16:113

        The Right to Change a Constitution

        "We have always a right to correct ancient errors and to establish what is more conformable to reason and convenience." -- Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1801. FE 8:82

        "Happy for us that when we find our constitutions defective and insufficient to secure the happiness of our people, we can assemble with all the coolness of philosophers and set it to rights, while every other nation on earth must have recourse to arms to amend or to restore their constitutions." --Thomas Jefferson to C. W. F. Dumas, 1787. ME 6:295, Papers 12:113

        The Slow Process of Amendment

        "It will be said it is easier to find faults than to amend them. I do not think their amendment so difficult as is pretended. Only lay down true principles and adhere to them inflexibly." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:35

        "I am sorry [the federal convention] began their deliberations by so abominable a precedent as that of tying up the tongues of their members. Nothing can justify this example but the innocence of their intentions, and ignorance of the value of public discussions." --Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1787. ME 6:289

        "There is a snail-paced gait for the advance of new ideas on the general mind under which we must acquiesce. A forty years' experience of popular assemblies has taught me that you must give them time for every step you take. If too hard pushed, they balk, and the machine retrogrades." --Thomas Jefferson to Joel Barlow, 1807. ME 11:400

        "Governments... are always in their stock of information a century or two behind the intelligent part of mankind, and... have interests against touching ancient institutions." --Thomas Jefferson to Robert Patterson, 1811. ME 13:87

        "The functionaries of public power rarely strengthen in their dispositions to abridge it, and an unorganized call for timely amendment is not likely to prevail against an organized opposition to it." --Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:22

    Don't ever let a fool tell you the amendments cannot be change.  Tell em that is why our forefathers precisely called them AMENDMENTS.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site