Mr. Pot Bangs Head Against Mr. Kettle

Let's do this FARK style:

Blogger makes fun of Michelle Malkin's name. He's a Crook. Irony tag asplodes.

But wait! It gets better. In comments, he goes on to make fun of Asian-Americans. Kinda makes ya wonder what he says about other non-white people when they're not around....

The kids at The Flypaper Theory got all goobered up over the Bob Corker "bimbo" ad, claiming racism for weeks. They hammered at the Commercial Appeal and Jake Ford for racism during that race. One of their own bloggers makes a blatantly, pointed racist comment and the head of the blog, Chris Davis, nods along.

By the way Chris, her last name is Maglalang. Don't go there. As she says, "I think my brother beat you up in third grade when you used the same dumb taunt."

FRIDAY THE 19TH UPDATE: Well, the kids at Flypaper Theory finally noticed the post and boy howdy! Chris was all "Nuh-uh!" and then Jeff went "Huh?" and "Aw, hell naw!" Read the comments thread. Chris does clarify one point (re: the "bimbo" ad; see comments to this post for more from kibitzer) but Jeff just keeps digging and digging, proving my point all over again.

Look how angry Chris gets, too. Lawyers may now become involved.

AND THEN! Not satisfied -- nor wanting to go to moderated comments on his blog so he can control debate and always win the arguments -- and wanting to Shut Me Up Forever, Chris deployes his NUCLEAR OPTION. It's his way of Putting Me Beyond the Pale of Decent People.

Never mind that he and I went through this a year ago. (Related post here.) Chris wants me Silenced.

He's been a regular reader here. He knows I'm a registered, voting Libertarian with a deep distrust of government in anyone's hands. He also knows I'm not prejudiced against blacks. Anyone who's read my posts on life on Monroe Avenue, as he has, knows that. I'm initially supporting Herman Morris for Memphis Mayor, for heaven's sake. I worked for almost a decade at a drug treatment center. I'm the guy who's been trying to find Memphis' black blogosphere for four years now.

But no. He's on a Search and Destroy Mission, so things he knows to be true must be hidden from the reader, context must be erased, so as not to deflect his effort to make me an EVIL NAZI.

He couldn't win the earlier debate on points. He is psychologically incapable, it would appear, of just saying, "Let's end it here, OK?" or of just dropping it. Instead, like a petulant child, he lashes out.

I'm actually kinda tickled I've gotten under his skin and into his head so much! Obviously, I've pushed a button somewhere. I mean, he uses GREAT BIG FONTS TO EMPHASIS THE HORROR! Really. Go see.

Those of you on the left have gotten your marching orders from the Big Cheesy Pouf himself: I am now Radioactive Man! Sweeeet.

SUNDAY THE 21ST UPDATE Wow, Chris is growing unhinged. He's given up even attempting to refute anything and has just gone straight to vilification and deliberate mischaracterisation. He seems to want to win at all costs, and so is now painting me as some kind of David Duke.

Of course he can't tell me why I'm wrong because then he'd have to address the points I've been making. He can't do that, or won't, but same result. So he goes with what he knows: bile and venom. Lots of it, escalating. And then he claims he's going to be "busy for a while." How convenient for him.

He keeps editing and changing the post, so I'm going to quote him in full below for posterity. Screencaps have been saved as well, just in case.

UPDATE: Mr. Mike justifies his batshit crazy views by saying he's a Libertarian and the son of immigrants. He says this "breed the young white women before the browns overtake us" discussion is a discussion we should all be having. So folks, if you've got the stomach to read his views, click his links, and examine his "science," let's have this discussion. Others will have to jump in first because I'm gonna be busy for a while.

Notice all the code words and phrases he's using: breed, white women, browns, got the stomach, "science". That last in scare quotes, no less. I never talk science on this because it's not a scientific topic, it's a cultural and political discussion; that's just his way of nudging his readers into viewing me as a eugenecist. Nothing froths up the Left like Nazis, after all, and guarantees reams of spewing incoherent hate. He's hoping for wide currency for his deliberate smears so he can discredit me in general and in particular. Lame, yes, but typical and sad.

Except for one unfortunate word choice (which I regret but cannot change at this late date; it's still right where I made it, shaming me every day), I'm not having a race discussion. It's not about race, since Western liberal democracy is found in every color around the world. Asia, India, South America, Africa, and of course Europe and North America and Australia. He knows that and will not confront what I'm really talking about which is the threat to Western liberal democracy from a religion that does not share many of our fundamental values (personal freedom, religious liberty, freedom for women, freedom of expression, abhorrence of violence, etc.). He can't address that since he's staked himself to an all-out anti-war position. Folks with his position can't admit there might be any possible good coming from the war in Iraq. That post is a threat to his position. He might have to think and that might screw up his sloganeering.

It's a little frightening, sure, to have a moonbat loon decide to go full-bore after me. He's only concerned now with winning and shutting me up. There's no telling how far he might think is fair since he seems, like so many loons out there, morally certain of his righteousness. As C.S. Lewis wrote, "The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." Not that he's tormenting me; he just seems to believe that he's allowed to do whatever he feels is necessary.

Like I said over there, go back and reread my blog. Read his posts on his blog, and his comments to his cobloggers' posts. I'm just some guy in Midtown posting thoughts and opinions. He's the paid, professional journalist. Decide for yourself.

Exchange of the Day

Jimmy Neutron: I've always been into prestidigitaion!

Sheen: Ow! Ow! Six syllable words make my brain hurt!

The Telling Difference

It's instructive to look at the difference between the Republicans' loss this year and the Democrats' losses in 2000 and 2004.

You don't hear Republicans demanding the world stop while every single ballot is scrutinised. You don't see Republicans demanding that every single possibility be studied to death until someone's suspicion is confirmed.

There's no talk of secession. There's no talk of moving to ... well, anywhere. No talk of PelosiLand, or "Light Fingers Harry" stealing elections. No wailing that the Republic is ended in an orgy of drugs and sex from those insane Democrats. No filthy language or crude epithets.

Just a sense that "We lost, but we'll try again next time." A recognition of what likely went wrong and a willingness to fix themselves, instead of eviscerating the Democrats to place the blame in them.

If anything, I'm picking up a strong sense of opportunity from Republicans. A chance to get new leadership that will address core issues meaningfully. A sense of a watershed, even.

No screaming for heads. No bloodthirsty mobs demanding sacrifice. In fact, the two most prominent victims (Hastert and Rumsfeld) went down before the election results had even become completely clear! Fell on their own swords, quickly and without fuss, in the morning light.

To be fair, inasmuch as I've paid attention, the "nutroots" crowd seems to have shut up, at least for now. Their big moment -- the Lamont insurgency -- came to a crashing close. Lieberman is truly in the catbird seat thanks to them. Most of the Democratic freshman class of '06 is decidedly centrist/moderate/conservative. The Kossacks have demonstrated their electoral impotence and irrelevance to the Democratic Party.

Will they continue the useless fighting? Recalibrate after reflection? Set their sights on the Green Party? Start a Progressive Party? Who knows.

But it's clear: the aftermath of the loss of '06 is a staid and tidy affair compared to the threats, rancor and acrimony of '00 and '04. Words and behavior say a lot and say it clearly. It's instructive to compare.

Democrats Make Little Girl Cry

Oh, come on. You know you were thinking it too.

Rumsfeld Resigns

Check your favorite news outlet. It's the BIG STORY of the day now. Couple that with yesterday's Democratic win and ... well, I don't know.

If he'd resigned last Friday or even Monday, would it have blunted the losses yesterday? By resigning today, are Rumsfeld and Bush hoping to cut Pelosi's House investigations off before they even begin? The timing just stinks.

And he's already announced Bob Gates as his nominee! (And the Widipedia entry has already changed to reflect this!) Talk about stealing thunder. And yet they wait until it's too late to announce it? I dunno.

And now the press is only asking Bush about the Rumsfeld matter, not pelting him with "After yesterday's defeats, why are you a loser?" questions.

Gotta Love the Commercial Appeal

They stick by their buddies to the bitter end. After yesterday's win by Bob Corker, how do they headline it this morning?

Ford falls just short with good numbers in Nashville: Close Senate contest reflects dead-heat polls statewide

With free campaign support like this, how could Ford have lost?

WEDNESDAY NIGHT CORRECTION: As Lindsey pointed out in comments, what I said only applies to the online edition. The paper version does have an enormous headline: Corker conquers and a huge picture that straddles the fold.

Am I being petty if I note that the picture is positioned and cropped (or not cropped at the top) so that, in the paper I saw, Corker's head is cut off just below his nose. It looks like he's too short to see over the fold and his hand is up to get folks to notice him. A subtle comment, maybe? Who knows....

And to be fair, who chose the Ford picture? Could you make him look any swishier?

And no, I didn't buy a paper copy of the CA. After all, when you can get the specific dairy items you want online, why buy the cow?

Crashes?

I've been trying to find Shelby County election numbers, but anyone working off the Shelby County Election Commission feed (nearly every newspaper and television station, unfortunately) is missing all kinds of numbers. Many races are still reporting zero precincts at 9PM.

Anyone know what's up?

And the WMC/5 site appears to have gone down under the Internet load. I'm getting a "server busy" error message.

On a tangential note, late this afternoon -- around 5PM -- CNN started reporting that "exit polls" showed that corruption (Paula Zahn hit that word with incredulity) was the main voter concern. "And that's bad news for Republicans!" she declared. Sheesh....

What appears clear is that conservatism is winning. Lamont -- poster boy of the far-left, anti-Bush crowd -- was handily defeated. Lieberman wins and Chafee (most "moderate" of Republicans) loses. Most of the electoral turnovers are to Democrats who are sharply more conservative than their leadership. Ought to make for an interesting first few weeks for the Democrats when the next session starts up.

Can't wait to hear Democrats start crowing about "mandates for change." Remember, most of these races are being decided on narrow 51/49% margins. Hardly "mandates." But they will crow. Oh yes they will.

Icicles in Memphis

What with all the dreary weather and the voting and the mishigas, let me provide you with a little bit of happy.

Meet The Icicles!

Sometime in the past few months you've likely heard them as the soundtrack to this Motorola KRAZR ad. Strong, clear female vocals over a classic, jangly pop song. They remind me of English, female-fronted bands like The Primitives or The Darling Buds.

It took me a while to track down the band and song, but I did. "Sugar Sweet," by The Icicles. It's even better outside the commercial! Listen to the other free track and you'll hear a similar formula, but the better production of "Sugar Sweet" gives it a more muscular sound and presence that makes it winning. That's always important with otherwise frothy pop confections like this.

I haven't been this charmed by a song since, well ... "Evil" by Interpol. Gretchen DeVault's winsome, joyous singing and the Farfisa organ-like counterpoint totally win me over. So give yourself a little bit of sunny, breezy pop fun and check out the song. It beats listening to "... and I approved this ad" all day!

Nothing to See Here

So I voted today at my usual precinct -- the old Brotherhood of Man building at Poplar and Willett. It was early afternoon, not many people there. I was in and out in minutes. I asked the precinct captain how turnout was and he said quite heavy, despite the lull while I as there.

As I post, you've still got four hours left to vote. (More if you're in a Ford precinct!) Make sure you do.

What's the Choice?

This editorial, from the Washington Examiner points out the simple truth. Democrats and their allies in the media have refocused the debate in the country from defense against the terrorists who would attack and kill us, at home and abroad, and out allies, to a simple question on the President. As the editorial points out, it's a lot more than that.

If we give the Democrats power, we are left with a famous Englishman's plea: "You say you want a revolution. Well you know, we all wanna see the plan." The only things I've heard are to leave Iraq or redeploy troops elsewhere. Maybe slice the country up into provinces, a la the former Yugoslavia. You can see what a success that's been. Or you could, if there were any news from that part of the world at all. Pretty hard to find; it takes looking.

As the editorial notes, the two most important figures in the supposed election debate, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, are MIA. Haven't been seen or heard from in months. It's rather odd for the supposed leaders to be rallying the troops from the shadows.

Do the Republicans have problems? You betcha! But the Dems have nothing but a burning desire to make the last six years go away, with prejudice; to "reclaim" what is "theirs." If given power tomorrow I have no doubt that Congress will be turned into a Bush Investigation Machine intended only to make political hay of anything and everything it can, trying to destroy Bush.

The War on Terror? Our ongoing mission in Iraq? Clearly, not so important to Democrats.

But life or death to Americans.

Corker: 50 / Ford: 38

According to the latest Mason-Dixon polls Corker is now running a 12 point lead over Harold Ford: 50/38. I tried locating the actual data on the M-D site, but no luck. Even with a 2-to-1 breakout for Ford among the Undecideds (based on a breakdown of data from another, Survey-USA poll), Corker still wins.

If this is true -- and another poll from the weekend repeats something like this gap -- this is incredible. Corker will become a legend.

If it's true. We shall see....

SUNDAY AFTERNOON UPDATE: Found the link to a deeper look into the numbers and the methodology. For starters, the poll sample size is just over 600 people, which is small.

The poll also asks about the famous bimbo ad and the results pretty much put the kibosh to Democratic efforts to call it "racist."

Have you seen the television advertisement that mentions Harold Ford’s attendance at a Super Bowl party that featured Playboy bunnies and ends with a blonde-haired woman saying “Harold, call me?”

YES 81%

NO 19%

(IF “YES) Would you describe your opinion of the ad as favorable, unfavorable, or neutral?

FAVORABLE 4%

UNFAVORABLE 67%

NEUTRAL 29%

(IF “YES) Would you say that the ad makes you more likely to vote for Bob Corker, more likely to vote for Harold Ford, or does it have no real effect on your vote?

FORD 10%

CORKER 23%

NO EFFECT 67%

Take a look at the levels of support found in the poll across the three Grand Divisions of the state and you'll see that the conventional wisdom is true. Corker's support is very strong in the East (61%) and falls as you move West (to 39%) whereas Ford's is strongest in the West (49%; not even a majority!) and falls precipitously going East (to an incredible 26%!) Bear in mind, though, the large unreliability factor in these numbers.

And in all three of the "Who do you think would best handle ...?" questions (Iraq and the War on Terror; energy; the economy) Corker holds decisive leads where Ford struggles around 1/3 of the polled.

Just to add some confusion to the mix, according to the latest (this weekend) Rasmussen poll, it's still a statistical dead heat: Corker at 51, and Ford with 47. (Box at top right of page.)

And from our WTF? files, comes a real outlier poll, from Hamilton-Beattie that has Ford leading 46 to 40! If I remember correctly H-B is the firm that does internal polling for the Ford campaign, so deep skepticism is needed. This result matches no other polls I know of at this stage.

Observation for the Day

Bob Corker's "Call Me" ad is provoking the strangest partisan reaction. Some folks refer to it as I just did. Most call it the "bimbo ad." Why? Because the "bimbo" is the most notable thing in it, the one that catches the attention and sticks in the memory.

But visit leftist/Democratic blogs and the ad is almost invariably referred to as the "racist bimbo ad." Why the extra modifier? Because the Democrats want you to believe their contention that the ad had some secret racist subtext.

They figure if they repeat it ad infinitum then it will be true. They figure if it's everywhere that history will record their version of events as "truth." They figure if they keep pounding the point home, folks will quit arguing with them and they win by default.

Harold Ford's Soliloquoy

I posted this eighteen months ago but I figure it bears repeating at this late date. Hamlet as re-imagined for Harold:


To run, or not to run, that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler for the candidate to suffer
The slings and arrows of campaigning
Or to take refuge against a sea of troubles in a safe House seat,
And by ducking again avoid them? To run: to campaign;
Once more; and by running to say we welcome
The heartache and the thousand political barbs
That candidates are heir to, 'tis a falsehood
Devoutly to be put forward. To run, to campaign;
To campaign: perchance to win: ay, there's the rub;
For in that endless campaign what difficulties may come,
When we have shuffled to yet another press conference,
Must give us pause. There's the "gotcha"
That makes calamity of political life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of Republicans,
The grand jury's wrong, the proud uncle's contumely,
The pangs of early polls, the national committee's delay,
The insolence of voters, and the spurns
That patient merit of unwashed crowds takes,
When I myself might my legacy make
With a safe House seat? Who would cable show hosts bear,
To blather and sweat under a hot light,
But that the dread of life as a private citizen,
The anonymous country from whose shadow
Few politicians return, puzzles the will,
And makes me rather bear those perks I have
Than work for others I might not earn?
Thus does indecision make wafflers of us all;
And thus the native hue of Harold Ford
Is made even paler with this endless uncertainty;
And campaigns of great and lofty platitudes
With this regard their volunteers turn awry.
And lose the name of Senator.

Fun With Numbers: Media Bias Dept.

I know, I'm not supposed to be blogging, but this story really got me. It's a sleazy effort to make FOX News look bad by selectively using numbers, or not using them.

The author frontloads the story with lots of hard numbers showing FOX's supposed decline; then he goes on:

But Fox's problems go deeper than that. If it was just the dearth of big stories this year, all the other cable networks would be down as well. Two were actually up in October.

CNN has also been down steeply this year in total viewers and 25-54s but not as much as Fox, and in October its 25-54 primetime audience was essentially flat at down 1 percent.

And both Headline News and MSNBC were actually up in that demo last month, by 18 percent and 19 percent.

Notice the comparison of year-to-year trends with last month numbers. Notice how, if the point of rebuttal is that 2005 was an anomalous year, he doesn't go back to 2004 to compare trends without the anomaly! (I tried to find the 2004 numbers, but without luck.) Also, notice the lack of hard numbers for the other networks.

Curious what those numbers might be? Try looking here or here. What you see is that FOX is still smoking the competition. Even with downward drifts, they still are far ahead.

Which is a point the author seems afraid you'll realise. Hence hiding the numbers. Pathetic.

And lastly, notice how the author states a political thesis:

As the network most identified with conservative America and in particular the Bush White House, Fox News is suffering the most from the disenchantment among conservatives over the war and the political scandals.

The news formula that worked for so long is now working against it, they say, as fewer of those disenchanted viewers bother to tune in to watch the news.

... and then quotes from three "independent" scholars who support it.

Another reporter taking the facts of a situation -- which ought to be bricks, immutable -- and using them isntead as clay to mould a thesis not entirely supported by those facts.

INSTANT UPDATE: Ah hah! Found some 2004 numbers here (scroll about halfway down), which undercut the author's thesis for certain.

CABLE NEWS RATINGS

August 11, 2004

FNC: Total day: 915,000 / Primetime: 2,058,000 / O'Reilly: 2,666,000 / H&C: 1,793,000 / Greta: 1,714,000

CNN: Total day: 412,000 / Primetime: 730,000 / Zahn: 554,000 / King: 985,000 / Brown: 652,000

MSNBC: Total day: 205,000 / Primetime: 363,000 / Olbermann: 383,000 / Norville: 372,000 / Scarborough: 333,000

CNBC averaged 139,000 in total day and 177,000 in primetime. Dennis Miller had 293,000, McEnroe had 66,000 viewers. This is the 14th night in a month where MacEnroe has averaged less than 100,000 viewers a night.

So, when we compare those numbers, we get this:

2004 2006
FOX 915 1002
CNN 412 501
MSNBC 205 313
CNBC 139 222

Hmmmm.... Viewer growth all around, and FOX is still beating the pants off CNN. (Though you can have "Fun With Numbers" by pointing out that CNN had 20% growth over the two year period vs. FOX's 10%. Wow! Double the growth!)

Half the viewers.

Terrorists Say: Vote Democrat!

Aaron Klein has spent two years developing sources and contacts inside Palestinian terrorist organisations. He interviewed those leaders for their opinion of who should win the election is month. Overwhelmingly, they say, =Vote Democrat.

"Of course Americans should vote Democrat," Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity, told WND.

"This is why American Muslims will support the Democrats, because there is an atmosphere in America that encourages those who want to withdraw from Iraq. It is time that the American people support those who want to take them out of this Iraqi mud," said Jaara, speaking to WND from exile in Ireland, where he was sent as part of an internationally brokered deal that ended the church siege.

Jaara was the chief in Bethlehem of the Brigades, the declared "military wing" of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party.

Together with the Islamic Jihad terror group, the Brigades has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing inside Israel the past two years, including an attack in Tel Aviv in April that killed American teenager Daniel Wultz and nine Israelis.

Muhammad Saadi, a senior leader of Islamic Jihad in the northern West Bank town of Jenin, said the Democrats' talk of withdrawal from Iraq makes him feel "proud."

"As Arabs and Muslims we feel proud of this talk," he told WND. "Very proud from the great successes of the Iraqi resistance. This success that brought the big superpower of the world to discuss a possible withdrawal."

Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas' military wing in the Gaza Strip, said the policy of withdrawal "proves the strategy of the resistance is the right strategy against the occupation."

"We warned the Americans that this will be their end in Iraq," said Abu Abdullah, considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, Hamas' declared "resistance" department. "They did not succeed in stealing Iraq's oil, at least not at a level that covers their huge expenses. They did not bring stability. Their agents in the [Iraqi] regime seem to have no chance to survive if the Americans withdraw."

Abu Ayman, an Islamic Jihad leader in Jenin, said he is "emboldened" by those in America who compare the war in Iraq to Vietnam.

"[The mujahedeen fighters] brought the Americans to speak for the first time seriously and sincerely that Iraq is becoming a new Vietnam and that they should fix a schedule for their withdrawal from Iraq," boasted Abu Ayman.

Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Video Sought

I'm trying to find the video of the Clinton/Ford event yesterday. Both WMC/5 and WREG/3 had the full videos up all day yesterday but seem to have already taken them down in favor of much briefer stories.

I know, I know, "bandwidth costs money." But still, taking it down the same day? Sheesh....

Anyway, I'm specifically looking for the segment where Harold the Lesser introduces and thanks some of his family.

Thanks for the help.

What Harold Ford Jr. Really Meant

From Harold's own animated lips comes the truth: "He spent millions of dollars of his own money telling the truth about my record. That's wrong.... I approved this message because I won't let them make me into someone I already am."




Just watch it. Low-key and devastatingly funny.

Via John Harvey's Voting in Memphis blog, which also notes that Memphis is on track to have a 25% turnout in early voting. That's incredible, especially for a midterm election.

And We Want a Democratic Senate Why?

Harold Ford Jr, Congressman from Tennessee, and John Kerry, Senator from Massachusetts, have little in common but a party name. But putting Ford into the Senate will empower people like Kerry who say things like this:



Kerry makes it worse by clarifying his comments thus:

If anyone thinks a veteran would criticize the more than 140,000 heroes serving in Iraq and not the president who got us stuck there, they’re crazy. This is the classic G.O.P. playbook. I’m sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did.

John McCain, former POW, is already demanding a clear apology, to no avail. Of course Kerry, as a returned soldier from Vietnam said this to a Congressional committee:

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command....

They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

And so we must ask: Do we really want a Democratic Senate? Do we really want to give them power by giving the open Tennessee seat to Harold Ford Jr?

Thought for the Day

Via Jerry Pournelle:

I would rejoice greatly if the election were between Libertarians and Burkean Whigs, for I would not fear the outcome.

Junior, Jesus, Guns, Taxes, Marriage and Babies

The sloppy description of Harold Ford Jr as "conservative" is, of course, just plain wrong. You might could make an argument for "conservative Democrat" but I think he's a disciple of Clinton's DLC, finding where most Tennesseans are and then moving himself into that position. Sometimes he does what his party tells him and sometimes -- like voting for the Bankruptcy Bill which will hurt his constituents -- who knows why he votes that way.

But he has voted in the past, and a lot of single-issue partisan groups have tracked and ranked his votes over the years. Via Free Republic comes an enlightening list:

Harold Ford, Jr. On Guns

1999-2000 Gun Owners of America assigned Representative Ford a grade of F-

1999-2000 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 100 percent in 1999-2000.

2000 the National Rifle Association assigned Representative Ford a grade of F

2001-2002 Gun Owners of America assigned Representative Ford a grade of F-

the National Rifle Association assigned Representative Ford a grade of F

2002 On the votes that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered to be the most important as of 2002, Representative Ford voted their preferred position 87 percent of the time.

2003 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 77 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).







2006 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 78 percent in 2006.

2005-2006 Representative Ford supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 22 percent in 2005-2006.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 60 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 25 percent in 2003-2004.

2003-2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Democrats for Life of America 33 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Representative Ford supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 30 percent in 2003.

2001-2002 Representative Ford supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 19 percent in 2001-2002.

2001 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 75 percent in 2001.

2001 Representative Ford supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 100 percent in 2001.

2000 Representative Ford supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 75 percent in 2000.

1999-2000 Representative Ford supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 6 percent in 1999-2000.

1999 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 88 percent in 1999.

1995-2004 On the votes that the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Assocation considered to be the most important in 1995-2004, Representative Ford voted their preferred position 82 percent of the time.

1995-2003 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood (House) 78 percent in 1995-2003.





2006 In 2006 Sierra Club endorsed Representative Ford.




2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Family Research Council 23 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Children's Defense Fund 56 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Family Research Council 25 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Children's Defense Fund 73 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Family Research Council 15 percent in 2003.




2003-2004 On the votes that the U.S. Border Control considered to be the most important in 2003-2004, Representative Ford voted their preferred position 10 percent of the time.


Representative Ford supported the interests of the American Immigration Lawyers Association 83 percent from 1995-2004.



2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 69 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 75 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 75 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 71 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 73 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker 83 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the American Postal Workers Union 86 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 86 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Communications Workers of America 100 percent in 2004.

2004 Representative Ford supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 87 percent in 2004.




2006 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Secular Coalition for America 60 percent in 2006.

2006 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Population Connection 71 percent in 2006.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby 67 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Population Institute 50 percent in 2005.

2005 Representative Ford supported the interests of the Population Connection 83 percent in 2005.