Around the BlogosphereJeff Soyer on 18 Sep 2007 08:52 am
Questions About F. Thompson’s Gun Rights Record
In a good post, Front Sight, Press examines Fred’s record on his votes that could affect gun rights. Good comments, too.
6 Responses to “Questions About F. Thompson’s Gun Rights Record”
on 18 Sep 2007 at 1:00 pm # countertop
oh come on Jeff.
That site is a crock of shit. Its put out by Kansans for Life. To try and smear Fred Thompson as being anti gun is complete and utter bullshit.
To try and mix gun rights with abortion politics is outrageous, and we gunnies need to scream from the tree tops on this.
on 18 Sep 2007 at 1:42 pm # Syd
Countertop, did you even read the article? The balance of my article is very pro-Fred. Further, it’s not “bullshit” if he in fact cast those votes. You may not agree with their agenda (I certainly don’t), but if he cast those votes he has to own up to them. They are fair game. If there are legislative skeletons in the closet, I’d rather find out about them early rather than later. If his voting record is being misrepresented, then it’s “bullshit,” but I believe they are being faithful to the record as far as I have been able to check.
Also, very few people are pure “one-issue voters.” They often care about a constellation of issues. One common link is pro-gun and anti-abortion, just as many liberals are anti-gun and pro-abortion. So, the political discussion usually proceeds around groupings of issues rather than just one.
Finally, why would an anti-abortion group be trying to torpedo Thompson? His statements on abortion have been unambiguously anti-abortion.
Honestly, I think you’re over-reacting just a bit.
on 18 Sep 2007 at 3:22 pm # Weebs
Including the Lautenberg ban is unfair. It was an amendment buried in a 700+ page Omnibus spending bill and practically no one read the entire thing.
The ban sucks, but saying he “voted for it” makes it sound like it was a stand-alone bill.
on 18 Sep 2007 at 6:04 pm # Gringo_Malo
He voted for the Lautenberg amendment? @#%! That it was buried in a big bill is no excuse. Any lawyer, Fred Thompson, for instance, will tell you that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Ignorance of the laws they’re voting into effect is no excuse for members of Congress.
on 18 Sep 2007 at 8:46 pm # tomWright
As Weebs indicated, the context of these votes, pro and con, is important.
DC is notorious for inserting totally unrelated riders and amendments into legislation in order to get the amendments passed, or to kill the original legislation.
Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a pro-porn-tax break amendment in the Dept of Education budget.
So even though I do not support Thompson, he should be judged fairly.
on 19 Sep 2007 at 12:22 pm # geekWithA.45
Before I even clicked in, I suspected that a significant component was a rehash of the “conservatives against fred” website.
I concur w/ Countertop: The Kansan’s recitation of Fred’s gun votes is fundamentally dishonest.