...now what are we accusing the threepers of, again?

I more or or less agree with everything David Codrea said here, and I'm trying to think of a civil way to say what I'd like to say in addition to that, but I'm having trouble with it. But I'll give it the ole college try.
I find it ironic as hell that it's the much-derided 'threepers' who are agitating for political action on the organizational (NRA) level in regards to Constitution-hating U.S. Attorney General nominee Eric Holder, while the 'prags' are actually trying to justify the NRA sitting on its ass, considering a number of the 'prags' like to accuse the 'threepers' of wanting to shoot first and talk later. I really don't want to come off as an asshole about any of this or offend people reading this whom I consider to be friends (even if only virtually), but for the life of me I can't figure it out. It's like the NRA is the Republican Party and said 'prags' are the apparatchiks derided by so many of us. And I can't help but think the pragmatists are being more than a tad hypocritical. I see Sebastian was talking about the three-percenters being assholes...yeah, well pardon my french, but I think they fucking EARNED that right this go-round. Organized and united we stand, and disorganized and divided we will fall...and I can't help but think it's going to be anything but bad if the biggest gun-owner organization sits this fight out and doesn't help the folks who do take the time to write their reps on their own. One can't help but wonder what the point is. If the NRA sits this one out, what are they going to do down the road when the fight gets harder?