Soros & Leftists to spend $175 Million to Attack Second Amendment

[Midwest]

Soros & Leftists spend $175 Million to Attack Second Amendment

Saw this on the GOA Facebook alerts. George Soros and other Leftists will spend $175 to attack the second amendment through donations to other organizations.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/billionaire-leftists-attack-your-gun-rights/


"Soros and other progressive plutocrats plan to send upwards of $175 million to leftist organizations this year to push gun control and the rest of the Left’s agenda, according to documents left behind at a recent Democracy Alliance meeting in Chicago."

Democracy Alliance was founded by a Clinton administration official Rob Stein. What I am reading here is going to make Bloomberg's $30 million seem like pocket change compared to what these guys have planned.

There are a whole litany of organizations, groups, companies and individuals that will donate money to this disgusting cause.

"The goal is to The Democracy Alliance, a donors collaborative of well over 100 far-left venture capitalists, heirs and heiresses, Hollywood moguls, and unethical bankers, is throwing millions of dollars at left-wing gun-control groups in hopes of preventing the increasingly likely Republican takeover of the U.S. Senate this November."

This appears to be an coordinated effort, I noticed hit pieces in the media and from politicians in the last few days...and now this.

.

 

[Red Wind]

$175 million. A drop for Soros. But all for nothing. Forgotten by the next 24 hour news cycle.

 

[Midwest]

$175 million. A drop for Soros. But all for nothing. Forgotten by the next 24 hour news cycle.

So....we should not have the least concern about this? Maybe I should have put this in activism?

 

[Cump]

Not saying that it isn't of concern, but this spending appears to be more focused on the 2014 elections than gun control specifically. Of course, gun control is part of the dem platform. But Soros' pac donations are indirect anti-2a spending, compared to Bloomberg's organizations. The writer's emphasis of the gun control threat is a rhetorical choice, showing awareness of what motivates his audience. But Soros' money is going to organizations that advocate for other "progressive" positions.

On the upside, the Democrats are in a tough position in the senate, which this spending is indicative of. IMO unlikely for the senate to be more amenable to gun control after this fall, with several vulnerable red state dems.

Of course, we need to get to the polls.

 

[Midwest]

Of course, we need to get to the polls.

That is the ultimate answer...

Maybe this really belongs in the Activism Sub Forum

 

[hso]

Yeah, that's a pretty lame spin to get us frothing at the mouth when the $175,000,000 amount isn't focused just against us.

 

[Midwest]

If this isn't a concern, then please close the thread.
.

 

[Bob M.]

Nevertheless, thanks for posting this Midwest. .....Always good to be informed.

 

[12131]

Nevertheless, thanks for posting this Midwest. .....Always good to be informed.

I agree.

 

[AlexanderA]

A case of GOA beating the drums for contributions. Read it carefully -- there's essentially nothing to this story.

 

[dom1104]

I am getting fed up with this crap. The NRA, the GOA, its all about $$$$. Lets scare the flighty gun owners to give us more money and buy more guns. Its so transparent.

 

[Drail]

Unfortunately this how politics works in the U.S. today. The ones who spend the most money usually win. They do not care what "we the people" actually believe.

 

[SilentStalker]

^^^That's because this gov is no longer for the people, by the people. There is too much outside influence from big biz or people like Soros. Anyone that thinks the gov still serves the people is, well crazy. I don't see it that way at all, but this is getting political so I rest my case there.

 

[Skribs]

If every gun owner in America donated $3 to pro-gun organizations like NRA-ILA or NAGR, we'd easily surpass this by a significant amount.

Or if every gun owner donated 60 cents per gun they own, we'd easily surpass it.

It's something to keep in mind, but I don't think anything to worry about. The most important thing is vote vote VOTE. And I hate to say "vote party lines", but it's pretty clear that no matter what they say, there's a very good chance a dem is going to vote party lines on gun control when it comes up in congress.

 

[Geno]

Skribs said:

If every gun owner in America donated $3 to pro-gun organizations like NRA-ILA or NAGR, we'd easily surpass this by a significant amount.

Or if every gun owner donated 60 cents per gun they own, we'd easily surpass it.

or, if every gun owner in America voted against the anti-gun politicians, we would not have to donate a single penny.

Geno

 

[Skribs]

That's a fair assessment.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

If they are hoping to prevent a Senate takeover, spending $175 million to push gun control is the wrong way to do it. They will get their junk stomped on whether they are successful or not with gun control.

 

[piece of meat]

Bartholomew Roberts was the greatest pirate of the golden age. Big fan lol

 

[kwguy]

For the folks that complain about the various pro 2a organizations asking for donations: these organizations are simply being realistic. There are plenty of rich, quasi fascist individuals that donate these huge sums of money to try to push a gun control agenda. Their tools are money, political influence, and playing on the emotions of the ignorant. The pro 2a groups are simply playing by the same rules, because there is really no other way to do it.

Of course we have logic, reason, and the constitution on our side, but that's not enough in our current 'political' environment. Look at how many times logic and reason have actually won out over history versus selfish, fascist, illogical behavior.

It took a revolution and a war to give us the society and form of government we now have. It was difficult to attain that, and it will always be difficult to maintain. The only way to keep it nowadays is to continue to fight in our current political climate.

That takes money and political influence. We don't have a soros or bloomberg. We have ourselves, and our donations.

 

[230RN]

Boy-howdy, those guys really, really, really don't want "us" to have guns.

Kinda puts a crimp in their dictatorial ambitions, I suspect.

Even if the money is supposedly just for individual progressive organizations.


Terry, 230RN

 

[DoubleMag]

123

 

[12131]

That takes money and political influence. We don't have a soros or bloomberg. We have ourselves, and our donations.

Very important point.

 

[rdhood]

Boy-howdy, those guys really, really, really don't want "us" to have guns.

Yep. These things usually fall flat when someone points out the guns on the guys standing behind <"progressive" rich guy touting gun control>.

 

[mljdeckard]

it's not really anything he hasn't done repeatedly, or wasn't planning on doing again. He is driven by a lot more than gun laws. (and if I was him, I would save my money. No investment on his part would prevent the dems geting poop-hammered in the coming election.)

 

[ACP]

What he heck are 'frontpagemag", and "The Washington Beacon," the sources for this information?