It would help if the republicans would show the establishment old men (Grahamnesty, Christi, kasick, McCain, Romney, bushes and their spoiled little boys like Ryan and Rubio) the door or at least get them to quit acting like leftists or being scared of leftistsmojo84 wrote:It is still my hope.Oldgringo wrote:There it is, the crux of the matter!mojo84 wrote:
{snip}
I am not taking sides in this. I just hope infighting within the republican party doesn't cause us to end up with another Clinton as president.
Notice how the progressives do not seem to have as much dissection and bickering among themselves.
Search found 3 matches
Return to “NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention”
- Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:15 pm
- Forum: Federal
- Topic: NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention
- Replies: 49
- Views: 12477
Re: NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention
- Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:24 pm
- Forum: Federal
- Topic: NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention
- Replies: 49
- Views: 12477
Re: NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention
I just did. Honestly, it sounds like a "guilty by association" argument. Whether the NAGR statements are true or not is irrelevant to Paul being allowed to participate. I am an NRA member but I support other Gun rights groups to equal or lesser degrees. We are all supposed to be fighting for the same thing.Charles L. Cotton wrote:Read my prior posts and you'll see why he was not invited. He aligned himself with a prolific liar who repeatedly makes false allegations against the NRA so he can ask gullible people for donations. When one lays down with dogs, one gets up with fleas.Doug.38PR wrote:Given that every other pro second amendment candidate was invited, I'd say YES he was entitled. It's a political forum for candidates that support a particular issue in a public campaign. To single Paul out and not include him is...frankly petty isn't the word I'd use, I'd call it almost insulting. In excluding Paul, the NRA is giving the impression of acting like a bunch of grumpy old Republican establishment men that don't like the constitutional conservatism that Paul's support represents (whether they are real conservatives or libertarians or just young people who are conservative and appreciate the sincerity that accompanies a Paul campaign (honestly I don't like Rand as much as his father. His father is a little more solid and delivers his message better)Pawpaw wrote:How can it not be petty? Do you think he was entitled to an invitation?mojo84 wrote:TexasCajun wrote:His wordmojo84 wrote:I don't know the reasons but I don't see him commenting on it as being "petty". The NRA and it's support is extremely valuable and the stakes in a presidential election are huge.
I also hope this isn't an indication of a big rift between the two.
http://tinyurl.com/ogzpnjh" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Again, my point was missed. A poster said it was " petty" of Rand Paul to call out the NRA publicly. I was saying I didn't agree with that. It helps to read comments in context.
Being disappointed about not being invited is one thing. Publicly calling out the one that did not invite you is petty... period.
Chas.
Honestly, even though I support the NRA and they serve a good purpose along with other gun groups, they do occasionally say and do things that raise my eyebrows and disappoint me. The more gun groups we have active, the better and the more pro gun candidates we have the better (not just as a fighting force, but to hold each other accountable both ways)
- Sat Jan 09, 2016 11:55 am
- Forum: Federal
- Topic: NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention
- Replies: 49
- Views: 12477
Re: NRA excludes Rand Paul at national convention
Given that every other pro second amendment candidate was invited, I'd say YES he was entitled. It's a political forum for candidates that support a particular issue in a public campaign. To single Paul out and not include him is...frankly petty isn't the word I'd use, I'd call it almost insulting. In excluding Paul, the NRA is giving the impression of acting like a bunch of grumpy old Republican establishment men that don't like the constitutional conservatism that Paul's support represents (whether they are real conservatives or libertarians or just young people who are conservative and appreciate the sincerity that accompanies a Paul campaign (honestly I don't like Rand as much as his father. His father is a little more solid and delivers his message better)Pawpaw wrote:How can it not be petty? Do you think he was entitled to an invitation?mojo84 wrote:TexasCajun wrote:His wordmojo84 wrote:I don't know the reasons but I don't see him commenting on it as being "petty". The NRA and it's support is extremely valuable and the stakes in a presidential election are huge.
I also hope this isn't an indication of a big rift between the two.
http://tinyurl.com/ogzpnjh" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Again, my point was missed. A poster said it was " petty" of Rand Paul to call out the NRA publicly. I was saying I didn't agree with that. It helps to read comments in context.
Being disappointed about not being invited is one thing. Publicly calling out the one that did not invite you is petty... period.