Dahlia Lithwick has a Slate piece on how the National Rifle Association worked feverishly to oppose the nomionations of Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan -- despite the fact that both seem to fall well into the NRA-approved mainstream on Second Amendment issues. Lithwick doesn't like the lies the NRA tells its members:
The NRA has never had it better—which goes a long way toward explaining why it has never been so bereft. It's the most powerful lobby group in Washington, and five members of the Supreme Court have actually signed off on its constitutional worldview. Yet it needs enemies to thrive, so it is responding by finding more and more lethal enemies where none exist. Today it's Attorney General Eric Holder and Elena Kagan, tomorrow it will be Phineas and Ferb. Don't look for reason or rationality in the NRA's continued involvement in evaluating and lobbying against future judges. This is an exercise in pure fantasy, and it's performed in the interest of pure power.
Yet this story is not just about how conflict is good for an institution's fundraising and relevance. The one thing missing from Lithwick's story is a view of the broader field that the NRA plays in as one of the most powerful right-wing interest groups. Sure, the NRA had no actual beef with Sotomayor or Kagan, but the rest of the right wing wasn't pleased with their stances and presumably center-left judicial views. The NRA saw an opportunity to help push its broader agenda, and I'm sure the Chamber of Commerce or anti-choice groups will find a way to be on the NRA's side of a gun-control battle somewhere down the line.
The question is whether this is a smart strategy or not. Matt Yglesias and I have touched on this in the past -- certainly solidarity in a political movement is a powerful tool, but lying to your base could be a dicey proposition. The NRA's strength comes from very real and widespread grassroots support, but I have to wonder what a gun owner who sends his dues in to fight Kagan or Sotomayor is going to do when the justices (likely) continue their moderate stances on Second Amendment issues.
Will that gun owner notice and feel like his organization isn't doing right by him, and thus hold it accountable? Or will that gun owner not even hear what happens because all of his news comes from Fox and the NRA? A strategy where elites lie to their grassroots supporters can only work in an environment of -- say it with me -- epistemic closure, and perhaps that's what we have today. Whether or not political groups can continue to create energy and fundraising opportunities by lying to their members (and it happens on the left, too!) is an important sign of whether or not our political culture is at all effective.
-- Tim Fernholz
