For your consideration and comment

[sabot_round]

All I have to say is that you have to read between the lines. Those incumbents don't stand a snowball's chance in hell on getting re-elected.

Just my $0.02!!

[Birddog1911]

If you would read the NRAs information, you would see that they are a SINGLE topic group. Harry Reid does indeed have a good track record with gun rights; despite the fact that is pretty much against the rest of our rights. So they supported him against any democrapic opposition that he might have had; what have they said about his Republican opposition?

Edited to add: I'll have to do further research before I comment on the Colorado cantidates issue; until I see for a fact that the NRA is supporting an anti gun dem over a pro gun repub, I won't comment on that.

[funkfool]

Markey's record on gun rights is sparse...

http://www.votesmart.org/voting_cate...?can_id=106225

[BushMasterBoy]

It's not about protecting your rights...it's all about the money!

[theGinsue]

Okay, so I'm a life member but I'm inclined to believe that there is some validity to that last comment.

[buffalobo]

My point was how can they support a candidate who has no publically stated position over a candidate with good record on gun rights? Her position is not just sparse as previously stated, it is literally non existant. She did not even respond to the NRA's survey.

It appears to be some sort of lame quid pro qou for her vote on the Disclosure Act.

Too bad the NRA is more interested in playing politics for money and power than truly defending gun rights. They should stick to what they are good at, training, safety, certification, competition, kids programs, and stop squandering members money for politics and executive priviledge.

[theGinsue]

OT comment: Buffalobo, what the heck is in that avatar pic?