Bill Haslam at TFA meeting last night

[gregintenn]

Money talks. It would have looked hypocritical had they shunned him at a grand opening of a very nice range in which he was instrunmental in getting built. They are a one issue group. I think Harry Reid should be deported or tried hand hung for treason, but he did put the NRA in a tough spot.

Edited October 21, 2010 by gregintenn

[RobertNashville]

Well...I think the NRA could have found a way to not "shun" him without having to go so far as to officially endorse him. It was, in my always humble opinion, a very stupid move on their part and one of the reasons I'm an annual rather than a life member.

[gregintenn]

Oh, I understand. I'm not saying they made the best desicion. I do think that was a no win situation. They do plenty to pi$$ me off. Sadly however, they're all we've got.

[RobertNashville]

They aren't all...they are the largest but that may change...that's why I'm a member of the GOA and TFA.

[Wrangler]

Below is my email thread with the Haslam campaign (I removed my name):

Dear Mr. XXXXXXX,

Yes. He supports the current system we have now. Mr. XXXXXXX, if there is any confusion on this issue, I would be happy to call you or our phone number is 615.254.4799.

Thanks,

Bill Haslam for Goveror campaign

From: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:59 PM

To: Bill Haslam for Governor

Subject: Re: New Contact Notification - Contact Bill

Thank you but that does not answer my question. I want a governor to that will support the laws that are on the books. What happens if a anti-gun state legislature comes into power while Mr. Haslam is governor? Will he still stand up for my rights to own and carry a firearm? This is very troubling to me as a voting republican. I am having a hard time believing that he will stand up for all my rights under the Bill of rights and the constitution. If he sways on this issue will he sway on Healthcare or income tax?

So here is my direct question. Will Mr. Haslam support my right to to obtain a Handgun Carry permit?

Thank you,

XXXXXXXXX

On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:54 PM, Bill Haslam for Governor wrote:

Dear Mr. XXXXXX,

Mayor Haslam is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, and during a recent meeting with gun rights enthusiasts he was asked about Tennessee's concealed carry permit law. Mayor Haslam responded as he has when this issue has come up in the past by expressing support for the current law, which has made it easier for the legislature to expand the rights of gun owners by creating more opportunities for carry permit holders to legally carry their guns.

When asked if he would sign legislation passed by the General Assembly that would do away with the permitting requirement for individuals to carry, he acknowledged that he would if through the legislative process it was determined to be the best course. We apologize for any confusion and hope you understand that Mayor Haslam is a staunch supporter of gun rights.

Sincerely,

Bill Haslam for Governor campaign

From: Kintera Inc. [eventemail@kintera.com]

Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 6:00 PM

To: Bill Haslam for Governor

Subject: New Contact Notification - Contact Bill

New Contact Notification

Contact Information

Event ID: 308912

Event Name: Contact Bill

Supporter ID: 310668433

First Name XXXX

Last Name XXXXX

Email XXXXXX

Comment I was reading an article in the tennessean today and I would like to know whether or not Mr. Haslam supports my right to have a Handgun carry permit. Would he remove it or would he support my second amendment rights? I am a long voting republican and would support Haslam but I am not convinced. Please clarify. Thank you, XXXXXX XXXXX

I am waiting on a phone call now. My biggest concern is what if the state legislature wants to remove completely our right to carry a firearm. Would he sign that or fight it. I need clarification. Should be interesting.

[Mike.357]

By not voting for Haslam you are casting a defacto vote for McWherter.

thats flat out BS. I will be casting a vote for a person not against a person. If your guy loses because I vote my conscience then so be it.

I will never again hold my nose and cast a vote. The last POTUS election showed me the error of those ways.

[RobertNashville]

thats flat out BS. I will be casting a vote for a person not against a person. If your guy loses because I vote my conscience then so be it.

I will never again hold my nose and cast a vote. The last POTUS election showed me the error of those ways.

I understand where you are coming from; in fact, I share your feelings, but the fact of the matter is that every vote NOT cast for Haslam and/or cast for someone with no chance to win makes it that much easier for McWherter to win...there is no getting around that.

Granted, Haslam has enough of a lead that it probably won't make a difference but after meeting and listening to both candidates, there is simply no doubt in my mind now that Haslam is a decidedly better choice than McWherter; as such, I don't want to risk a win by McWherter by not voting for either one or by voting for a candidate that can't win.

The only way we will ever get better candidates to vote for is to get involved and work on getting better candidates to run (and perhaps change Tennessee's antiquated and questionable rules so that we don't have people with nominations who didn't even get 50% of the votes cast). That kind of work must happen in the primary...it's too late now to cry about choices we don't like. Not voting for either major candidate doesn't help. It may make you feel better but it won't send a message to anybody (at least, not a message that anyone will hear or care about).

[Guest Tiki Jane]

We're all weary of voting for the "lesser of two evils" (which is still evil). Way back in the early 1900s the progressives touted their innovations such as direct primaries and the direct election of US senators. We were taught that these 'reforms' would democratize the election process and make both those who ran and those who were elected more accountable to 'we the people' and we bought the argument. However, while we can vote in primaries and we do vote directly for US senators, we really don't have much more control over who chooses to run in the first place. To encourage the sort of candidate we would all like to have elected, we will have to go back to the 'starting spot' that is most accessible: the precinct and local elected positions. Until we secure the most local elections (including such beasts as school board and utilities, and sheriffs' departments) and begin to wrest control from the machines of both national parties and their state counterparts, nothing will improve. It's a daunting task to be sure, but until we downsize the leviathan politics has become, "evil", however mild it may seem, will prevail.

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

I won't vote for him, I'll probably vote for myself.

I'm sick and tired of professional "politicians".

I did just that today after standing at the machine for nearly a half and hour. I looked at all the other numerous canidates but did not know a thing about any of them. So I ended up writing myself in for Gov.

Haslem will most likey win anyway and this way if he does and is a bum I can at least know I was not part of the problem in putting him there. Same goes if Ned jr wins.

I simply refuse to "hold my nose" to vote for anyone again.

It felt good to vote for myself and I only wish I had actually been in the race. Some may say I wasted my vote and in reality I did, but like I said at least I wont be kicking myself if Billy goes bust.

[Worriedman]

Ramsey was my pick, and i worked hard to get his name out and to educate people, but the sheep would not hear.

We are living the nightmare that is the Obama administration, McWherter would be no different, except Ned's boy is nowhere near as intelligent.

Saying "no" to voting for the lessor of two evils would be akin to not taking medicine that would kill off a bad bacterial infection with fore-knowledge. When one took that last ragged breath, and the Dr. shook his head and wondered aloud how anyone could know what was coming and refuse to do anything about it, how principled they would feel!

[gregintenn]

I watched part of one of their debates last night. No way I could stomach all of it. As bad as I hate to, I will vote fot Haslam. McWherter began every thought with the preface of how he wante to follow the lead of Illinois on this, that, and the other. If I wanted Illinois, I'd move north. Illinois gave us Obama!

[mikegideon]

I watched part of one of their debates last night. No way I could stomach all of it. As bad as I hate to, I will vote fot Haslam. McWherter began every thought with the preface of how he wante to follow the lead of Illinois on this, that, and the other. If I wanted Illinois, I'd move north. Illinois gave us Obama!

Me too. The ONLY other possible outcome is ugly.

[daddyo]

No, any candidate who wants to turn us into something other than what we are is simply not worthy of residing in the governor's mansion.

[mikegideon]

Somebody is gonna get the gig. It's gonna be one of two guys. We have two choices. Influence the outcome, or not.

[styx]

I watched part of one of their debates last night. No way I could stomach all of it. As bad as I hate to, I will vote fot Haslam. McWherter began every thought with the preface of how he wante to follow the lead of Illinois on this, that, and the other. If I wanted Illinois, I'd move north. Illinois gave us Obama!

^This.

[JAB]

Saying "no" to voting for the lessor of two evils would be akin to not taking medicine that would kill off a bad bacterial infection with fore-knowledge. When one took that last ragged breath, and the Dr. shook his head and wondered aloud how anyone could know what was coming and refuse to do anything about it, how principled they would feel!

Voting for the least bad of two piss-poor candidates is still voting for a piss-poor candidate. Maybe some folks just don't want to further 'legitimize' a piss-poor candidate's win by voting for him. Maybe some folks want to vote for the person they really think would do the best job. Maybe some folks don't want to accept the defeatist idea that we have to vote for one piss-poor candidate or the other piss-poor candidate because no one else could possibly win. Hell, maybe if more folks decided to vote their conscience rather than accepting that a piss-poor Demuplican candidate or a piss-poor Repocrat candidate constitute the only real choices then maybe, just maybe, voting for a candidate outside those two parties would not be so 'futile' after all.

Unless, of course, you accept that our votes mean nothing, anyway, and we only vote to make ourselves feel like we have a say when, in reality, the fix is in and the winner of the race is, by and large, a foregone conclusion. If that is the case, why bother to vote, at all? Either a vote - every, single one of them whether cast for a major party candidate or not - means something or none of them mean anything.

I don't want McWherter to be governor. Neither do I want Haslam to be governor. The choice is sort of like asking me if I want you to kick me in the 'nads with the steel toed boot on your right foot or the steel toed boot on your left foot. It is a false choice and my 'nads won't know much difference. Forgive me if I would try for a third option even if there weren't much chance of getting it. Much as was the case with the last Presidential election, I think that each has the potential to be just as bad in some areas as the other would be in other areas and both might be equally bad in yet other areas. In other words, I am not convinced that either of them is the better candidate - Haslam just puts up a slightly better facade. Why should I vote for a candidate - any candidate - that I really don't want in the office?

Edited October 22, 2010 by JAB

[RobertNashville]

The only problem I see with your anger and disgust at our choices for the general election is that it's too dam late to do any good. The time to get involved and actually do something constructive about this process is well before the primary season.

To continue the "medicine" analogy, at this point you are faced with chemo that may or may not heal you but will cause you pain or not taking it at all and facing almost certain death...once you reach that point, worrying about the 4 packs/day of cigarette smoking all you life is pointless.

[JAB]

To continue the "medicine" analogy, at this point you are faced with chemo that may or may not heal you but will cause you pain or not taking it at all and facing almost certain death...once you reach that point, worrying about the 4 packs/day of cigarette smoking all you life is pointless.

The problem I have with that is that I don't believe it to be a valid analogy. Instead, I believe a better analogy would be that you are faced with a choice of dying from cancer in your right lung or dying from cancer in your left lung. It is still cancer and, either way, you will be just as dead - regardless of whether you are a smoker or not. The choice isn't really a choice, at all.

[Guest slothful1]

I don't want McWherter to be governor. Neither do I want Haslam to be governor. The choice is sort of like asking me if I want you to kick me in the 'nads with the steel toed boot on your right foot or the steel toed boot on your left foot. It is a false choice and my 'nads won't know much difference. Forgive me if I would try for a third option even if there weren't much chance of getting it.

I have used a somewhat different analogy to describe the Dem / GOP false dilemma -- Who would you rather have babysit your little boy, Michael Jackson or Jeffrey Dahmer? Yeah, he won't actually get killed and eaten by Jackson, but that is insufficient to make him an acceptable option.

[Punisher84]

McWherter: Gun lobby 'bullied' Haslam into 'most irresponsible act' » The Commercial Appeal

There's a poll about the permit issue on the left hand side FWIW

[mikegideon]

McWherter: Gun lobby 'bullied' Haslam into 'most irresponsible act' » The Commercial Appeal

There's a poll about the permit issue on the left hand side FWIW

Sooo, anybody still think it's not a worthwhile cause to vote against Son of Ned???

[mikegideon]

The NRA posted a link to this on Facebook

[Punisher84]

That was where I saw it at first was on FB. Take that CA lol like it'll matter to them.

[Mike.357]

The NRA posted a link to this on Facebook

I never pay much attention to gun polls us gun people stuff the ballot box.

[Punisher84]

I never pay much attention to gun polls us gun people stuff the ballot box.

I don't either but since the damn CA loves to have things go their way I enjoy skewing the results.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk