TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote:Frankly, the NRA played the best hand they could on Disclose, and they probably are doing the best they can given that the US elected a bunch of idiots to run the country.

An insightful analysis, ELB. "Justice Daley" has a frightening ring to it. I don't know if he's a member of the Illinois Bar or not, but people forget that there is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice have any judicial, or even lawyerly for that matter, experience in order to be appointed to the bench. A president can appoint whomever he wants, and if the Senate approves him/her, then that person is now a Justice.

By the way, that quote about political capital was mine, although I share credit for the thought with Purplehood. Could you please talk to my son for me? I'm not sure he thinks I'm wise yet.

Well, then I nominate TAM for SCOTUS! Long Live TAM!!

sjfcontrol wrote:Well, then I nominate TAM for SCOTUS! Long Live TAM!!

Oh Lordy, you don't want me. I used to smoke dope in the '60s and '70s.... ....and, well, maybe a little bit in the '80s too.

What were we talking about?

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:Well, then I nominate TAM for SCOTUS! Long Live TAM!!

Oh Lordy, you don't want me. I used to smoke dope in the '60s and '70s.... ....and, well, maybe a little bit in the '80s too.

What were we talking about?

That may no longer be disqualifying.

LarryH wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:Well, then I nominate TAM for SCOTUS! Long Live TAM!!

Oh Lordy, you don't want me. I used to smoke dope in the '60s and '70s.... ....and, well, maybe a little bit in the '80s too.

What were we talking about?

That may no longer be disqualifying.

Under the current regime, it may become a requirement.......

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:Well, then I nominate TAM for SCOTUS! Long Live TAM!!

Oh Lordy, you don't want me. I used to smoke dope in the '60s and '70s.... ....and, well, maybe a little bit in the '80s too.

What were we talking about?

But did you inhale? And did you have sexual relations with that woman?

Mention the above as a funny gag, of course, but also to seque into this frightening scenario ...

If another SCOTUS judge retires/dies during Obama's term I could honestly see him nominating Bill Clinton as a way to bring back all the left-wing Democratic nuts who think he's gone "too far right" or "hasn't done enough for the left" ... if he did this during an election year he would cement the overwhelming support of his "base" and only really upset people who would never vote for him in a million years anyway. And Clinton is exactly the kind of egomaniac who'd probably ask for an appointment, or even demand it as quid pro quo for helping Obama get re-elected.

And you want scarier than that? Let's say Obama loses re-election, then you have relatively VERY YOUNG man who is a former president. Would he try to get elected again some day? Or, after some time has passed, and another Dem wins the White House, would an "older, wiser" Obama be nominated for SCOTUS? He was a Constitutional law professor, after all.

Heck, if his defeat in two years looks like a forgone conclusion, could he nominate himself if another justice retires?

The Annoyed Man wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:Well, then I nominate TAM for SCOTUS! Long Live TAM!!

Oh Lordy, you don't want me. I used to smoke dope in the '60s and '70s.... ....and, well, maybe a little bit in the '80s too.

What were we talking about?

Hmmm, sounds like you'd fit right in! At least the "4" part of the "5 to 4" decision MUST be smoking something!

Via Snowflakes in Heck

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2010/06 ... gag-order/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Guess this director didn't get the email either...

From Tom King, President of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, and also a member of the NRA Board.

NRA Members of New York,

There are a myriad of rumors regarding the NRA cluttering the internet but one in particular is causing me personal anguish. That rumor reports that the NRA staff has issued a gag order to the NRA Board of Directors regarding comments on the nomination of Elena Kagen to the Supreme Court. Let me explain something about the structure of the NRA; authority to do anything within the NRA comes from you the members of the NRA. That authority is delegated to your elected Board of Directors who in turn elects officers and formulate policy that is then issued to the Executive Vice President/CEO who then turns that policy into action through the professional staff. Gag orders for the Board of Directors do not exist.

Friends; those of you close to me should know by now that telling me I can’t speak up on an issue of vital importance to the 2nd Amendment is going to get you into a war. I spoke vociferously regarding the nomination of Sonya Sotomayor to the Supreme Court; in fact I joined a number of national 2nd Amendment leaders protesting the appointment and urging through a nationally published letter she not be confirmed. I did that because of her ties to New York State and the position she took, on then recent, anti 2nd Amendment decisions. I have not taken a position on Elena Kagen’s nomination to the Supreme Court because I find it absurd that anyone with no judicial experience would be nominated to the Supreme Court and fervently hope the Republican Senators will block this nomination.

The 2nd Amendment protects all the rest. Why would the NRA, the protector of the 2nd Amendment, attempt to limit the 1st Amendment rights of its’ own Board of Directors? It does not but if you think the Board members you voted for could be gagged then you voted for the wrong guys.

Tom King
NRA Board of Directors
President
NYS Rifle & Pistol Association
Μολὼν λαßέ

austinrealtor wrote:He was a Constitutional law professor, after all.

That's one of the lies that the media repeats over and over again until a lot of people who haven't spent much time around universities begin to believe it.

Obama was never a professor of Constitutional law. My parents were both tenured professors (Caltech). My dad had two Ph.D.s.

Obama was a lecturer, not a professor. Calling him a professor is like saying a Major was a General. Furthermore, he was not a lecturer on Constitutional law. He was a lecturer on the law, generally, who occasionally lectured on constitutional matters.

The shame of it is that academia is full of people who darn well know the difference between the two things, and yet they want to believe the myth so badly that they will ignore an inconsistency of fact for Obama that would cause them to tear the flesh off an academic rival's bones at any other time.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:He was a Constitutional law professor, after all.

That's one of the lies that the media repeats over and over again until a lot of people who haven't spent much time around universities begin to believe it.

Obama was never a professor of Constitutional law. My parents were both tenured professors (Caltech). My dad had two Ph.D.s.

Obama was a lecturer, not a professor. Calling him a professor is like saying a Major was a General. Furthermore, he was not a lecturer on Constitutional law. He was a lecturer on the law, generally, who occasionally lectured on constitutional matters.

The shame of it is that academia is full of people who darn well know the difference between the two things, and yet they want to believe the myth so badly that they will ignore an inconsistency of fact for Obama that would cause them to tear the flesh off an academic rival's bones at any other time.

For reasons unknown and unrecognized by me, Obama has been given a "Pass" on just about everything. Perhaps its some sort of guilt complex perpetrated on the white folk by the media? I dunno'...

The Annoyed Man wrote:there is no constitutional requirement that a Supreme Court Justice have any judicial, or even lawyerly for that matter, experience in order to be appointed to the bench. A president can appoint whomever he wants, and if the Senate approves him/her, then that person is now a Justice.

Consider the current nominee.

More over at SIH:

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2010/06 ... lly-false/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now, I figured some people reluctant to take Chris at his word, because no doubt many know he’s been secretly keeping the NRA Board members in the dungeon at HQ (it’s located in the space right next to the NRA range, for those who don’t know). So today I had Bitter digging around, and talking to Board members. Scott Bach was willing to go on the record and say there’s been no “gag” order, or even a polite request. Tom King you’ve already heard from. Joe DeBergalis is saying the same story over at AR-15.com. If there’s been a gag order, it would seem none of the NRA Board members got the memo! Perhaps Chris Cox’s e-mail was broken that day. Or perhaps they were afraid to talk with the .45 ACP held to their heads. Who knows!

Sebastian points out this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VHHpEpl ... r_embedded" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; where Chris Cox directly addresses the "gag" rumor. Key quote: "That's just outrageous, it's a lie. Just the reality of trying to put a gag on Ted Nugent..."

Oldgringo wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:He was a Constitutional law professor, after all.

That's one of the lies that the media repeats over and over again until a lot of people who haven't spent much time around universities begin to believe it.

Obama was never a professor of Constitutional law. My parents were both tenured professors (Caltech). My dad had two Ph.D.s.

Obama was a lecturer, not a professor. Calling him a professor is like saying a Major was a General. Furthermore, he was not a lecturer on Constitutional law. He was a lecturer on the law, generally, who occasionally lectured on constitutional matters.

The shame of it is that academia is full of people who darn well know the difference between the two things, and yet they want to believe the myth so badly that they will ignore an inconsistency of fact for Obama that would cause them to tear the flesh off an academic rival's bones at any other time.

For reasons unknown and unrecognized by me, Obama has been given a "Pass" on just about everything. Perhaps its some sort of guilt complex perpetrated on the white folk by the media? I dunno'...

I wish I could buy the "white guilt" concept because it would be much less disturbing than the alternative.

Since the media is indisputably no longer functioning in its former watchdog role that used to help keep politicians less dishonest by shining light on their actions, could it be that Obama and the media are both working on the same agenda from their own arenas? Just askin...

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I guess I'd better check my email address at NRA HQ; I didn't get the gag order email. On the other hand, perhaps the article is spreading false information.

Chas.

You know what's funny...Did anyone anticipate the reaction at the Board of Director's level on this issue??? Y'all had to have seen this coming??? Right???

Finding out the motovations of the article's source and who penned it might be a clue...Maybe someone can investigate this...I have a bunch of alligators nipping at muh ankles right now...I need to deal with that first...

Much to my relief, the gag order rumor has been thoroughly discredited by Charles and other Board members. Here's the response I received from my request for information from the NRA:

Thank you for contacting NRA-ILA. Please read the following statement issued by NRA-ILA on June 25th.

In addition, please view responses from two of our board members.



There are a myriad of rumors regarding the NRA cluttering the internet, but one in particular is causing me personal anguish. That rumor reports that the NRA staff has issued a gag order to the NRA Board of Directors regarding comments on the nomination of Elena Kagen to the Supreme Court. Let me explain something about the structure of the NRA; authority to do anything within the NRA comes from you the members of the NRA. That authority is delegated to your elected Board of Directors, who in turn elects officers and formulate policy, that is then issued to the Executive Vice President/CEO, who then turns that policy into action through the professional staff. Gag orders for the Board of Directors do not exist.



Friends; those of you close to me should know by now that telling me I can’t speak up on an issue of vital importance to the 2nd Amendment is going to get you into a war. I spoke vociferously regarding the nomination of Sonya Sotomayor to the Supreme Court; in fact I joined a number of national 2nd Amendment leaders protesting the appointment and urging through a nationally published letter she not be confirmed. I did that because of her ties to New York State and the position she took, making anti-2nd Amendment decisions.



We fervently hope the Republican Senators will block this nomination.



The 2nd Amendment protects all the rest. Why would the NRA, the protector of the 2nd Amendment, attempt to limit the 1st Amendment rights of its’ own Board of Directors? It does not, but if you think the Board members you voted for could be gagged then you voted for the wrong guys.



Tom King
NRA Board of Directors
President
NYS Rifle & Pistol Association



“None of us have been given instructions to not testify. There is a standing policy decided a long time ago by the Legislative Policy Committee and approved by the entire Board of Directors that matters such as this will be handled by the ILA division of NRA, but I don't view that as a "Gag Order". Having ILA handle matters this important just lends itself to good operations.”



NRA Board Member

John Burtt

Thanks to all who provided the real story on this.