Comments on: Harold Ford, Jr. on guns

By: SayUncle » The Tennessee Senate Race - Part, err, a lot

SayUncle » The Tennessee Senate Race - Part, err, a lot — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:35:05 +0000

[...] So, Harold Ford, Jr. was on the radio again this morning. And he was again asked about two issues that were important to me. The first was guns. You may recall that I reported he told a little fib about his gun position a bit back where he claimed he ad a B rating from the NRA but the NRA reported he had a C. This time, he said he had a B rating from the NRA for the last two years, which is probably a true statement. I’m sure he may have misspoke the first time. Good for him as it was an honest answer. However, Mr. Ford was definitely anti-gun up until 2003, which I figure is when he decided he’d make a play for Senate. And in 1999-2000 he introduced the anti-gun Gun Industry Responsibility Act, which encouraged governments to sue gun makers in civil court for gun damages. He has since voted for the the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms act, which prohibits frivolous suits against gun makers. A near total turn around. [...]

By: SayUncle » The NRA Endorses Corker

SayUncle » The NRA Endorses Corker — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:20:30 +0000

[...] I don’t know that Corker has a record on gun rights, really. I’ve covered Harold Ford and guns before. I wonder what the NRA saw that they liked? Well, other than that he’s not Ford and there’s an R after his name. Perhaps they should have listened to Insty’s podcast, which Countertop summarized in comments as: Helen asked him about nationwide concealed carry – specifically, would he support legislation that allowed an individual with a permit in one state to carry their gun in another state. Very clear, straight up [question]. [...]

By: The Bitch Girls :: Gotta Be Anti-Harold Ford

The Bitch Girls :: Gotta Be Anti-Harold Ford — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:34:15 +0000

[...] He’s anti-gun and anti-porn. That’s just bad. [...]

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 18:27:21 +0000

#9:

I’m not necessarily sure that’s an entirely bad thing. Depends upon what you view the job of a senator or representative to be. If you think their job ought to be to carry out the will of the people, then there’s not much foul there, since the will of the people has been known to be subject to change.

Personally I’d prefer more principled candidates, but it’s possible to go too far in that direction, too.

I’ll bet a beer with Uncle that Corker beats Ford, Jr. If Uncle will take that bet. I just don’t see how Jr. can carry anything other than Shelby County and maybe Nashville.

By: #9

#9 — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 15:11:59 +0000

Corker for Senate. Like there is a choice.

Difficult to pull the lever for either of these candidates who have no foundation. They lick their finger and check to see which way the wind blows. Then align their issues to match the direction of the wind.

By: Bitter

Bitter — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:07:42 +0000

Not necessarily a passing grade. A �C� candidate may have cast some pro-gun votes in the past but has also recently cast key votes or made some statements contrary to NRA positions on key issues.

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 13:42:21 +0000

IIRC the NRA describes a C as not necessarily a passing grade. IL Gov. Jim Edgar maintained a C, when his only contributions to the issue were to oppose firearms preemption, sign a bill converting CCW from a misdemeanor to a felony, and lobbying unsuccessfully for a statewide ban on ugly guns. The biggest difference I see between a C and an F is how likely the guy is to lead the charge on the next anti-gun bill, not whether or not he’ll vote for it if it is introduced by anyone else.

By: Bitter

Bitter — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 13:29:00 +0000

Check your email.

He’s lying, at least based on the most recent published grades.