With the catastrophic collapse of Herman Cain's presidential ambitions, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has clawed his way back to national relevancy in the GOP primary process. But while Cain was mocked for a profound ignorance of world events and his inspirational speeches quoting Pokémon, former House Speaker Gingrich has been called a "one-man think tank," a politician of considerable "intellectual prowess," and even a "historian."
Some very good minds on both ends of the political spectrum, however, have pushed back against this idyllic portrait. Conservative columnist George Will went so far as to call Gingrich a "rental politician" whose "ideas" are based on who is paying his tab (also see recent commentary by Maureen Dowd). Interestingly, some in the right wing gun lobby are making similar accusations. One group, the National Association for Gun Rights, has targeted Gingrich with robocalls in Iowa, attacking him as weak on the Second Amendment because he supported a version of the Brady Bill and voted for another piece of legislation that prohibits domestic violence offenders from possessing/purchasing firearms.
Sensing his vulnerability, Gingrich has worked hard to "evolve" his position to get right with the NRA--the one player in the pro-gun movement that matters in a Republican presidential primary. In recent speeches, Newt has parroted the NRA line so effectively that he sounds more like a self-appointed militia leader than an erudite intellectual. Speaking to the organization's members in April, he said:
The right to bear arms is not about hunting. It's not about target practice. The right to bear arms is a political right designed to safeguard freedom so that no government can take away from you the rights that God has given you and it was written by people who had spent their lifetime fighting the greatest empire in the world and they knew that if they had not had the right to bear arms they would have been enslaved and they did not want us to be enslaved.
Gingrich has even suggested to the NRA faithful that the District of Columbia's current gun laws--and some federal gun laws--legitimize the use of political violence:
The Founding Fathers were very wise and experienced people. After all, [they] had risen to rebellion out of desperation because they had seen a tyrannical, imperialist government using its judges and its bureaucracy with its corrupt politicians and so they knew what was possible ... And they said you as a citizen have the right to bear arms and the government has no business trying to stop you as long as you're a legal and law-abiding citizen from being able to protect yourself ... These were tough people in a tough time in a tough country doing tough things and the idea that they would allow some D.C. city government or some Washington federal bureaucrat to get between them and their constitutional rights, they would have said in Jefferson's terms was the legitimate justification for a political revolution in every generation.
As I've noted before at the Huffington Post, this "Insurrectionist Idea" is now the ideological foundation of the modern pro-gun movement in the United States. Furthermore, the NRA's leadership has not been squeamish about experimenting with the use of political violence. Over the past 35 years, several of their board members have provided material support to some of the most horrific dictators and paramilitary insurgents the world has ever seen.
Gingrich was likely aware of this fact when, on December 7, he tapped Neoconservative Iraq War architect and NRA International Affairs Subcommittee Chair John Bolton as his presumptive Secretary of State. Not content to simply burnish his gun credentials with a radical political idea that would have horrified our Founders, he was doubling down on his efforts to schmooze the gun lobby by paying tribute to one of their own.
You will remember Bolton as the man whose worldview is so hostile that he could not be confirmed by a Republican-controlled Senate as President George W. Bush's United States Ambassador to the United Nations in 2005. He undoubtedly did not help his cause with remarks like, "There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United States." While Bolton eventually received a recess appointment from President Bush, his Senate confirmation battle offered a disturbing preview of what the world might look like with Bolton calling the foreign policy shots from Foggy Bottom.
Members of Congress alleged that Bolton had distorted intelligence for political purposes a number of times while serving as Undersecretary of State from 2001-2005. In once instance, Bolton was accused of exaggerating Cuba's weapons capability while trying to terminate the position of an intelligence officer who corrected Bolton's misstatements. Government officials told TIME that Bolton frequently pressured the CIA to produce reports confirming his own views. One CIA official stated, "Whenever his staff sent testimony, speeches over for clearance, often it was full of stuff which was not based on anything we could find." This type of behavior led then-Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) to call Bolton "the poster child of what someone in the diplomatic corps should not be."
When National Rifle Association President (and former American Conservative Union chairman) David Keene appointed Bolton as chairman of the NRA's International Affairs Subcommittee in September, he explained his decision as follows: "He may not be in the State Department anymore, but he's as dedicated to preserving the Second Amendment as any NRA member and will be advising us on strategy as we confront our opponents in this newly dangerous forum." The forum Keene was referring to is the United Nations. The NRA has promoted the conspiracy (and fundraising) theory that a small arms treaty being considered by the UN is designed to "destroy private gun ownership" in the United States. Bolton himself has touted this nonsense, suggesting that the Obama administration is seeking to "use an international agreement as an excuse to get domestically what they couldn't otherwise."
In January, Bolton called for the revolutionary People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) to be removed from the Department of State's list of foreign terror organizations at a conference hosted by MEK in Brussels, Belgium. According to the Department of State, "During the 1970s the MEK staged terrorist attacks inside Iran and killed several U.S. military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran." MEK was also responsible for other acts of terrorism, including atrocities against Iraqi and Kurdish civilians while the group was allied with Saddam Hussein. One New York Times investigative reporter described the group as a "totalitarian cult." Why would Bolton stand with such a group? It might have something to do with MEK's attempt to buy its way off of the State Department's Foreign Terrorist Organization list. Bolton is one of a number of U.S. officials to receive money from the organization. While Bolton refused to disclose how much he was paid, former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania Ed Rendell admitted to receiving $20,000 for an 11-minute speech. Perhaps Bolton, like Gingrich, is just trying to pay his tab. But his involvement with MEK raises serious questions about the type of leadership he would bring to the State Department.
Shortly before the election of George W. Bush in 2000, then-NRA First Vice President Kayne Robinson boasted, "We'll have...a president where we work out of their office." Apparently, the NRA would do even better in a Gingrich presidency. Not only would they have an office at the White House, but at Foggy Bottom as well. For those who care about sound foreign policy and sensible gun regulation, however, such an outcome would be utter disaster.
This is the fifth in a series of articles I have written profiling the rogues gallery that makes up the leadership of the National Rifle Association (NRA). Learn more at www.MeetTheNRA.org.
Follow Josh Horwitz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CSGV
Stewart J. Lawrence: Rumors of Newt Gingrich's "Demise" Are Greatly Exaggerated
Newt Gingrich suggests Ron Paul unprepared a threat
Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman agree on many issues in foreign-policy debate
Gingrich's Foreign Policy Words Summon the Cold War, but Enemy Is Iran
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
http://www.inetours.com/New_York/Pages/photos/UN-gun-sculpture.html
May we have strengthened background checks prior to all gun purchases.
May American gun owners speak out against the NRA leadership extremists.
May we stop the violence by gun in America that kills more than 30,000 each year.
Peace.
http://www.dailydemocrat.com/ci_19607168
That is an action of a group that sees themselves as better than you, an elite class that should be exempt from the laws that govern the unwashed masses. So much for being a nation of laws and not of men.
Will the Brady Campaign, VPC, CSGV or MAIG publicly oppose this measure? All support the banning of 'assault weapons' for civilians since they claim the ONLY purpose in owning one is to kill as many people as possible. I doubt it.
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2011/12/guns-for-me-but-not-for-thee-pt-ii.html
The NRA is not a single-issue organization. The NRA is part of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council. The National Rifle Association was corporate co-chair of the committee for Public Safety and Election issues.
Along with Koch Industries, corporations fund ALEC to ghostwrite legislation behind closed-doors; which right-wing politicians deliver in all the nation’s capitols, including D.C. This agenda-driven legislation favors corporations and the wealthy with tax loopholes, corporate subsidies; while gutting public health, safety, and environmental issues.
See links below for resolutions in SUPPORT of the USA PATRIOT ACT, and a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, among many other actions.
7K8 Resolution in Support of the USA PATRIOT Act Exposed
7K9 Resolution on Fourteenth Amendment Exposed
http://alecexposed.org/wiki/Bills_related_to_Guns,_Prisons,_Crime,_and_Immigration
http://alecexposed.org/wiki/About_ALEC_Exposed
Double standards are fun.
You are starting to sound like the next thing you'll claim is that Roswell is the center of of world stops, hosted by very short and very green guys.
CSGV intro, 2004
But remember, they only endorse 'reasonable, common-sense' regulation
If you haven't noticed, here in the USA we have more than enough guns that happen to kill more than 30,000 people each year, and every year.
Why import? Aren't these numbers high enough? Horrific enough?
To answer your first question, there are firearms manufactured in other countries that I would like to own. That's why they're imported. I'm quite fortunate that my rights and the free market aren't subject to your approval, eh?
Seriously the NRA gets treated like some super-villain rather then a group of concerned gun enthusiasts who dislike gun control for personal and Constitutional reasons.
Clearly the NRA. They ridicule and laugh at the other three as clowns, but they can't do that to the NRA, so instead they portray the NRA as all-powerful and evil. It helps to distract the anti-gun nuts from the reality that their lack of success at pushing their anti-gun rights agenda is due to lack of public support http://www.gallup.com/poll/150341/record-low-favor-handgun-ban.aspx Instead, they delude themselves by blaming the evil, all-powerful NRA for their failures. "If it wasn't for the evil NRA owning Congress, we could pass all of these wonderful, sensible, reasonable gun control laws that everyone really really wants".
The language of the Second Amendment prohibits the federal government from “infringing” on this right of the people. There is nothing ambiguous about “shall not be infringed."The language of the Second Amendment is as clear as the First Amendment’s prohibiting Congress from infringing the right to freedom of speech, press, and religious expression. There is no logical reason to read the Second Amendment as a weak statement, while treating the First Amendment as a strong protector of rights. And that you continue to hide behind the First Amendment Josh, all the while spreading false assumptions and false facts to support your cause, and yet ignoring the fact gun control is a failed experiment, Josh if you still insist on promoting your cause and want to enjoy your utopia of gun control I suggest you move to Mexico and enjoy the rules of gun ownership there that you wish to impose on all of America here, then maybe you will have a grasp on reality
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
So exactly how does your version of the 2nd Amend protect the state in such an eventuality? I can tell you exactly how my version would work and has worked in such an eventuality.... such as when the feds totally destroyed and eliminated the militia and such destruction was upheld by a unanimous decision of SCOTUS.
ECS
Media Matters: http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201108190008
NRA: The U.N. Is Coming For Your Guns, Send Us Your Money Today!
CALLER: Do you think it's okay for the U.N. to be on American soil attacking our gun rights?
DAVID: I mean, I really don't know that much about it, what are they trying to do?
CALLER: Hillary Clinton has teamed up with countries like North Korea, Iran and Cuba to draft this arms trade treaty that could have a drastic impact on civilian gun ownership. The U.N. wants us to believe this treaty is about automatic weapons and dirty bombs, but the fact is all hunting rifles, shotguns and pistols can be on the table.
[...]
CALLER: Normally five years of annual membership would cost a $175, but because this represents such a major threat to our gun rights and freedoms, today we discounted that all the way down to $125.
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/p/anti-gun-primer.html
Supporting efforts to protect the Great Lakes, to reduce poverty and violence in the region, and to ensure its residents good schools, decent jobs, a strong democracy, and a diverse and thriving culture.
(They are working against their own best interests. But you cannot tell that crowd anything they don't want to hear.)
And that it is you who is working against their best interests. You want to disarm the law abiding citizen with a means of defense against the criminal by passing and enacting more and more laws making it harder for the law abiding to defend themselves. All the time ignoring the fact that the criminal does not obey the laws. Making in fact easier for the criminal to have more victims.
Pass a law that says guns are banned. Criminals don't pay attention to the law, aquire guns anyway. Criminal goes on the prowl looking for victims. Criminal finds victims everywhere because the law states that guns are banned. Law abiding citizens follow the law, give up guns. Have no defense asgainst criminal with guns. Result, more violent crimes, murders, rapes, gun violence. The very thing you say you want to stop. Those are the facts you so willingly refuse to even see.
That's some serious paranoia going on there DW. Do you have evidence of this or is it your personal belief?
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2010/02/not-just-bigots-but-ignorant-bigots.html
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2008/09/were-not-nra.html
What would happen with Newt in charge to the separation of church and state?
More like a one man septic tank if you ask me. He's certainly full of it.