Tuesday, July 04, 2006


Ford is Pro-Gun Like I am Pro-Chick Flick

In other words, you support it when it means saving your bacon.

Harold Ford, Jr. knows that he can't win Tennessee as an anti-Second Amendment candidate. Al Gore proved as much in 2000.

The problem is that he has this illustrious record of voting to suppress and/or extinguish the Second Amendment rights of all Tennesseans.

So, what's a candidate to do? Vote against your normal patterns during the run-up to the Senate election in an attempt to muddy the waters and create a smattering of pro-gun votes to point to during the general election.

Is it working?

Well, it may be.

Check out the guest post from self-admitted "gun nut" SayUncle on Michael Silence's KNS site. I answered SayUncle in the comments (probably too harshly, as such things do happen), but I have included my response below, as well.


Uncle Say -

I know you have something against the NRA, but here's their election year grades for Ford, Jr.:

2000 - F
2002 - F
2004 - D-

Since you don't like the NRA, how about...

1999-2000 - Gun Owners of America - F-
1999-2000 - Coalition to Stop Gun Violence - 100%
2001-2002 - Gun Owners of America - F-
2002 - Brady Campaign - 87%
2002-2003 - Gun Owners of America - 0%
2003 - Brady Campaign - 77%
2003-2004 - Gun Owners of America - 0%

Yeah, friend of all gun owners...

Ford has begun to support select pro-Second Amendment bills during the lead up to the Senate race in an effort to muddy his anti-Second Amendment past, but the "gun nuts" are supposed to be smart enough to know an election season chameleon when they see one.

Bryant's record by the interest groups?

1999-2000 - Coalition to Stop Gun Violence - 0%
2000 - NRA - A
2002 - Brady Campaign - 0%

Looking at individual votes amongst the thousand of votes each legislator makes each session leads to skewed results, something that amateurs like Mickey White and con artists like Bob Corker are constantly doing in an effort to pull the wool over the eyes of Tennesseans.

Is it working? You tell me...




OK, in re-reading it, I was too hard on SayUncle. My apologies. He is certainly a true friend of the Second Amendment, and I shouldn't have been so condescending. (While I didn't respond in the posts, I have to query SayUncle - what has Bob Corker done in his lifetime to demonstrate his commitment to the Second Amendment so that you don't see him as a threat?)

It's Ford (and, to an extent, White) who is the source of my ire.

Between Ford pretending to be pro-gun and Corker pretending to be pro-life and anti-tax, I feel as if I have stepped into bizarro world.

Rob, sorry about the ire. I spoke with Ed about the vote, he back paddled and said he 'meant' to vote the other way. My problem with Ed is that he supports the UN big time, I spoke with him about this also. And as you see in your own www page, the UN wants our guns. Why support the UN if you are pro-Second Amendment?
Mickey -

I do not support the United Nations.

From my discussions with Ed, he doesn't support the United Nations, either.


Rob what makes an "amateur"?
Anyway, Ed lied to you. He was here in Memphis at The Dutch Treat Luncheon and said that he supported the U.N., so which is correct. Well... let's look at his voting record (and if he made 'a mistake' voting the gun thing, then how many 'mistakes' will he make as senator?)... he voted NO on the Get US out of the UN bill; he voted YES to create the Global Criminal Court; he voted NO to eliminate funding for the UN, more than once; he voted to keep us in the WTO; and,to expand NATO.
Ed may say what you want him to when it comes to Globalizaton, but, his votes are in Congress are on record.
Oh, he was here on Jan.14,2006, so did he lie to us or to you?
Mickey -

With all due respect, I have never seen Ed Bryant lie to anyone. EVER. In the meantime, your comments on various cites often come off like rantings. When it comes down to my experiences with the two of you, I will place my bets with Ed Bryant on the trust issue.

As for specific votes regarding the U.N., let's see:

Sept. 1994 - Voted NO to putting U.S. troops under U.N. command

May 2002 - Voted YES to prohibiting funds from being used to "assist, cooperate with, or provide any support to the International Criminal Court"

May 2001 - Voted YES to discontinuing funding to the United Nations until the U.S. seat on the Human Rights Commission was restored

That's just for starters. (By the way, Ed couldn't have voted to create the ICC - he has never served as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.)


Creation of a Global Criminal Court, Motion on H. Con. Res. 137.
This non-binding resolution would urge the President and the Secretary of State to “work actively and urgently within the international community for the adoption of a United Nations Security Council resolution establishing an International Criminal Court for Iraq.” The orders of this new UN court would likely be enforced by risking the lives of American servicemen, and the court could easily be expanded into a general global criminal court, which could try Americans. Opposing the measure, Rep Ron Paul (R-TX) asked: “Where is it the authority of the Constitution for us to police the world?” (November 13, 1997 Congressional Record, pages H10916-17, roll call 637)
Ed Bryant voted for this motion
Mickey -

The Clinton Administration was pushing ahead with the ICC way before Congress even voted on the NON-BINDING and technically unconstitutional instruction.

Congress only controls the purse strings, and Bryant voted against any funding, encouragement, or jurisidictional granting to the ICC.

And picking apart multilayer bills and citing non-binding resolutions - that's what I mean by the term "amateur."

I'm sure that Ed didn't give a one-minute on National Meningitis Month, either. Would you like to be the first to call him pro-meningitis?


Visit my blog and see the Bad votes Ed has cast.
"non-binding resolutions"
if it is not important, then why do they keep score?
Mickey -

I don't know. They keep score in spring training baseball, the Orange & White game, and the WNBA, too, and those don't count either.

Maybe it's for the fans?


Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?