We have been following the discourse on the Disclosure Act and NRA on this site with great interest. But, it seems the argument has moved from what the intent of the bill is, to bashing NRA because of the exemption granted to the organization by the bill’s sponsor.

Let’s understand who put this bill out in the first place. The author is Representative Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat from Maryland and co-sponsor of H.R. 1022, a bill that would reinstate the so-called assault weapon ban at the federal level. He is vehemently anti-gun. He’s no friend to gun owners.

On the U.S. Senate side, Senators Chuck Schumer, Russ Feingold and Patrick Leahy have started a campaign to push the Disclosure Act into law. They have set up a special website called “CosponsorDisclosureAct.com” to push the bill through the Senate, assuming it makes it out of the House.

The act requires donors to organizations who advertise for or against a specific candidate to be made public. Why is that? It’s not enough that the organizations running the ads are required to disclose who they are. But politicians want a list of donors to the organization? Again, it needs to be asked. Why?

Well my friends, it’s called political intimidation. If you are a person of means, an anti-gun advocate, a well-known blogger who supports Second Amendment rights, a senior executive of a corporation who believes in gun rights, a small advocacy group for gun rights that donates to the larger organization in support of the cause, Joe Blow from Sheboygan who runs a gas station or small store, basically anyone who donates now becomes fodder for a politician. Your name can be used locally or in national politics during a campaign to discredit you and your business by pointing out your affiliation with the NRA. Now, some people don’t have a problem with that. However, some may find their career in jeopardy, or their business damaged because they are located in a decidedly anti-gun community like San Francisco or Washington D.C. It’s called intimidation through legislation.

Some people could care less. But if you’re an employee of a company whose management is vehemently anti-gun, and they find you are donating to NRA, gosh, despite the questionable legality of their actions, they could make your life a living hell in an effort to drive you out of the organization. The bottom line is this: Organizations you and I donate to is our own personal business, not the business of politicians.

Oh look, you can’t disagree with some elements of the bill. Foreign companies advertising on behalf of a candidate is a bit much. That’s a legitimate area of concern. However, when American organizations whether the Sierra Club, AARP or NRA, are told they cannot exercise their free speech rights on behalf of their membership unless they disclose who donated to the organization, that’s just muzzling free speech, and nothing more.

That’s the essence of this bill. This is about politicians who don’t like criticism on how they vote, what they stand for and who they associate with. This is about running for office with the least amount of resistance as possible to their re-election campaign. This isn’t about keeping the voice of the ordinary American from being drowned out. Hell, we don’t have a voice now other than our vote, that’s why over 70 million Americans belong to advocacy groups, so we can be heard about the issues that matter to us. You and I as individuals can’t muster enough money to make our voice heard prior to an election, but an advocacy group can. And that’s what the politicians want to stamp out. This isn’t about NRA, the Sierra Club or the other organizations that earned the exemption. This is about stamping out free speech and retaining power. And it certainly shouldn’t surprise anyone that leading the pack to stifle free speech are lefties Schumer, Feingold and Leahy. And, the timing of this bill couldn’t be better. How convenient to implement this law leading up to the fall elections. The courts will spend two or three years trying to sort it out, but meanwhile the damage is done. Free speech will have been stifled.

The other contentious element of this debate is the NRA’s position, and no doubt other organizations exempted as well, who have dropped their opposition to the bill because of the exemption. And why wouldn’t they? Do you think as an NRA member you want your donations fighting a bill on behalf of anti-gun organizations so they can be exempted as well? Do you want your money helping anti-gun groups like Brady Campaign, Violence Policy Center or the Southern Poverty Law Center? NRA can put its money into a lot of things, but if this bit of info is news to you, let’s be very clear, they are a one issue organization and they don’t hide that fact from anyone. NRA can easily get hooked into tangential issues that squander money away on nonsense that has virtually nothing to do with Second Amendment rights. I for one would not be keen on that silliness. They get involved in free speech issues like this one because without free speech, they are no longer an advocacy group on behalf of its members. Their job is to service their members, not members of other organizations. They, along with other groups, pressured members of congress by saying they would oppose the bill the whole way unless this bill was modified. So the Democrats modified it, the very same Democrats that now use their modification to vilify the NRA, and only the NRA, aided and abetted by the left-stream media in this country.

This bill is dirty politics and the left-stream media has stepped up to the plate to do the dirty work of politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike. What is so alarming is how some so-called Second Amendment advocates have criticized NRA, most notably pro-gun groups not exempted by the bill. They didn’t meet the criteria to be exempted. It isn’t right, but to use NRA as fodder to build membership in an alternative organization is hitting below the belt and doing nothing but weakening the pro-gun movement. The Democrats meanwhile sit back, pat themselves on their backs, and gleefully laugh at the whole escapade. If other pro-gun organizations and advocacy groups want to be excluded, then fight the fight with congress and in the courts. Politicians created this mess, not NRA. NRA did what it should have done, just as all the other organizations affected by the Disclosure Act did, by sending a letter to members of congress in opposition to the bill. But, don’t get fooled when the Democrats and media use NRA as their whipping boy because this is a well choreographed effort to discredit NRA, split the opposition and ultimately weaken the pro-gun community.

In a nutshell, politicians suck, they are not trustworthy and they will stab you and I in the back every opportunity that presents itself. They’ve done it again with the Disclosure Act and they will continue to do it running up to the elections this fall and then once again for Obama’s reelection campaign in 2012. Despite their best efforts, NRA has not turned un-American, and no, NRA doesn’t run congress. Scumbags run congress.