Telemarking Ploy: Using Clinton and Palin to Get a Response
November 11, 2009
by Optixmom
|This morning I received a call from the NRA. Just in case you forgot, I am a Republican, have been my entire life; so you can imagine that I am on many call lists of organizations that are supported by my party. The woman on the other end of the call was very polite, she told me that she was an NRA member and asked me if I wouldn’t mind listening to a message from Wayne LaPierre, the Executive Vice President of the NRA, and then participate in a quick opinion poll. I had the time to participate so I told her I was happy to help.
LaPierre talked about initiatives that are happening at the United Nations where other nations are negotiating an agreement [behind closed doors] with the United States to ban our right to own guns. He gave a very passionate description of what was happening (from his perspective) and that we cannot let Third World leaders dictate the rights of American Citizens.
I listened as I was asked and felt the feeling of patriotism wash over me as the NRA was hoping it would. How dare they…those Third World Nation nameless leaders.
After the soundbyte was over another very nice woman who introduced herself as an NRA member came on the line and asked me if I was ready to answer the polling question. I told her to go ahead and ask (I was going to tell her “shoot” but I didn’t think that was appropriate). The polling question she asked me was this:
Do you believe that Third World Nation leaders and Hillary Clinton should have the power to eliminate our right to own a gun?
I first said, “what?” and then asked her to repeat the question. She did.
I asked her, “What does Hillary Clinton have to do with this?” The woman replied, “Well, she is Secretary of State and she hates guns.” I said, “no she doesn’t.” (Apparently this woman must have been living in a cave during the Pennsylvania Primary when Secretary Clinton was referred to as Annie Oakley.) I told her that I didn’t understand why Secretary Clinton’s name was associated with that polling question and I wouldn’t answer it until they removed her name from it. I continued that her name had absolutely no relevance to the question being asked regarding the soundbyte I had been listening to. The woman then thanked me for my time and I am guessing she put me down as an “undecided”.
This ticks me off because using Secretary Clinton’s name in this fashion is pure bull-hockey. Just as many liberal lobbying groups use Sarah Palin’s name to revoke the same response. They get you all riled up, angry, ready to protect your rights with gusto then…WHAM! They throw in a powerful woman’s name so you will associate your anger with them. Get over yourselves and find a new telemarketing plan.
Powerful women are scary! This is where people need to learn (on both sides) to cut the hysteria and calmly discuss facts. The NRA can have an honest discussion about Secretary Clinton’s position on guns without dragging her out as the boogiewoman and the face of all things “evil and liberal.” It’s the members of these organizations who have to make them cut it out.
I think the NRA doesn’t even HAVE to have an honest discussion of Clinton’s position on guns. I’m a gunowner myself, and I couldn’t care less about her position on guns. She’s freaking Secy of STATE, what does that have to do with anything about domestic gun policy? How many MEN in the house and senate have a lot more impact on firearm ownership, and why aren’t THEY being bandied about as scary boogeymen?
There is ZERO reason to single out Clinton, aside from the fact that as a woman, she makes a better Scary Boogeyman, which I resent like all hell.
Despite being a gunowner and very much in favor of the second amendment, I have never joined the NRA. Garbage tactics like this are why. If they straightened their crap out about women and shut up about ANY policy issue other than second amendment rights, I might join up. Translation: I don’t want to hear any junk about gay marriage or abortion from anyone in the NRA, and I’m not going to sit still for women politicians being singled out unfairly for their opinions on ANYTHING including the second amendment, when there are hundreds of anti-second-amendment MEN around who in a position to do a lot more damage to me and my rights.
I was sent this link from an NRA member friend of mine. She called NRA headquarters to ask them why they mentioned Clinton’s name in the message. Here is the link they gave to her:
http://www.state.gov/secretary.....130573.htm
I know that we have many peeps from both sides of the aisle so I will let you all form your own opinions on the weight of this link to the detriment of our second amendment rights.
Janis you are right. There are sooooooooooooooooo many men that can do more damage to our second amendment rights, but since they may not be high profile, they don’t rally the troops if their names are mentioned. For this reason, high profile women will have their names used for the purposes of marketing.
Either I’m completely missing the boat or someone in the NRA is. That link refers to international transfer of weapons and international arms control. It has nothing to do with my gun rights unless it’s about me selling them abroad.
Optixmom, they ARE high-profile, but they are just not as useful as a Scaaaaary Woman with scaaaaary ladyparts as a boogeyman.
It’s like when I was little and Geraldine Ferraro was running on the ticket as VP. The exact same oily, scraping priests who would run one another DOWN for an opportunity to wring Teddy Kennedy’s sweaty palms for a camera would rip her to shreds for her stance on abortion … that was identical to his stance. They used her as a rallying point not because she was high-profile; compared to Teddy, she wasn’t so much. But she was a WOMAN.
I still remember one priest (not even part of our parish) giving a guest homily where he was flat-out attacking her. He was Irish — he wasn’t even American and that old coot was telling US how to vote. I could hear the steam whistling out of my mom’s ears. That old bastard would probably have sold his mom for a photo op with anyone named Kennedy.
People hate women. That’s why they use Clinton’s name to rally the second amendment supporters. Not because she’s high-profile; lots of high-profile men are also anti-private-firearms-ownership. But since they haven’t got vaginas, they don’t frighten the horses as usefully.
Leave your Response
Supporting women.
Ending sexism.
Finding common ground.
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Blogroll
Find the New Agenda Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...