NRA endorses Blackburn, Bredesen touts A rating as governor

Republican Senate candidate Marsha Blackburn speaks at a business forum in Nashville on Aug. 15, 2018 (Erik Schelzig, Tennessee Journal)

The National Rifle Association has endorsed Republican Marsha Blackburn in the U.S. Senate race and is lashing out at Democrat Phil Bredesen for pointing out his A rating from the gun rights group when he was a candidate for governor in 2006 and 2002.

“Tennesseans know they can count on me to be consistent in my support for their rights and freedoms,” Blackburn said in a release.

Bredesen promptly released a new TV ad in which his discusses being a lifelong hunter and gun owner.

The NRA called on Bredesen to retract the ad, though it’s unclear what exactly is untruthful about it (the group says Bredesen has a D in its current ranking, but Bredesen speaks only about his time as governor when he had the A). The NRA’s Chris Cox said: “Phil Bredesen opposes the constitutional freedoms of law-abiding gun owners and would be a rubber stamp for Chuck Schumer’s gun control agenda in Washington, D.C. He can’t be trusted to defend our Second Amendment rights.”

 

16 Responses to NRA endorses Blackburn, Bredesen touts A rating as governor

  • Jim Perry says:

    I call foul on NRA for trying to chastise Bredesen regarding his NRA rating as Governor of TN for two terms. Bredesen is a gun owner and according to a friend of mine who has been on dove hunting trips with him said “Bredesen is a good shot too”. Just more of Blackburn’s campaign tactics to undermine Bredesen. I’m laughing at NRA’s demand for Bredesen to pull a rebuttal of something that is true.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      “I call foul on NRA for trying to chastise Bredesen regarding his NRA rating . . . .Just more of Blackburn’s campaign tactics to undermine Bredesen.” For those of you going to take the SAT/ACT in the near future, that’s just Jim’s way of giving you an example of a non sequitur.

      • Jim Perry says:

        Stuart I. Anderson you caused me to have to Google non sequitur. After reading the definition I’m still confused as why you are calling me out on my post. As I read the release NRA has endorsed Opioid Marsha. Bredesen said he had a NRA A rating when he was Governor and now NRA wants him to retract that ad/statement. Did I misread the release? Btw, I may not know the definition of non sequitur but as a 79 year old I know who I’m voting for and it’s Bredesen.

        • Stuart I. Anderson says:

          A non-sequitur is “a statement that does not follow logically from anything previously said.” Your complaint is with the actions of the NRA, you then suddenly refer to Marsha’s “campaign tactics to undermine Bredesen” as if Marsha’s campaign tactics are responsible for the action of the NRA that you condemn which of course they are not.

          Far more troubling Jim is your intention to vote for Bredesen and thus doing your part to give the liberal Democrats control of the U. S. Senate. What a terrible thing to do to your children and grandchildren. Did they treat you badly and now you are looking for a way to get back at them? By all means cut them out of your will if you think they deserve it but please don’t harm the rest of us by voting for a liberal like Bredesen.

          • MarLE says:

            Jim…what you wrote is not a non-sequitur. Dictionary definition are not always sufficient in determining the appropriate word. Your point was valid. Stuart needs to put the thesaurus back on the shelf and concentrate on the message. Bird dogging a non-sequitur (and incorrectly to boot)…whoa! Hard to believe that he accuses others of using distraction; but you do what you can when there is so little to work with, I suppose.

    • Cannoneer2 says:

      See the recent Tennessean article. Phil only buys a hunting license at election time.

  • Christina Norris says:

    The NRA has receiving money from Russians, whose goal is to divide us and disrupt our elections.

  • Christina Norris says:

    Correction: has received money

  • William Upton says:

    I don’t think it’s the Russians that are dividing us. As for Bredesen’s claims as Governor, there’s a lot of difference between being the Governor and being a Senator. As Governor he didn’t take orders from Shumer.

  • Timothy Skow says:

    Just as Alabama DEM Senator Doug ”Schumer” Jones has totally fallen into line with Chuck Schumer … fellow NY native Phil ”Schumer” Bredesen will fall into line with NY DEM Chuck Schumer too. Doug ”Schumer”’ Jones voted against confirming Justice Gorsuch joining the Supreme Court and will do so on Kavanaugh as well. Phil ”Schumer” Bredesen will be no different than Doug ”Shumer” Jones.

  • Carroll Gene says:

    If the NRA, who gives out its ratings, says that former Governor Bredesen has a “D” rating, who is anyone to say that is not correct. If you get a grade on a test, it is your grade. NRA has rated Governor Bredesen with a “D”. That’s a “D”. Prove the NRA incorrect with facts.

  • Michael Lottman says:

    Unfortunately a typical 2018 campaign debate: the original issue, gun control or gun safety, gets totally lost in whether Bredesen was lying although what he said was literally true or whether he will “fall into line” with Chuck Schumer. As a Democrat, I would expect Bredesen to vote like me on the issues that really matter, such as public education, health care, the Paris agreement on climate control, Trump’s ruinous trade war, pulling out of the Iran nuclear agreement while still expecting Iran to follow it, and so on. I don’t give a damn how Chuck Schumer votes or tells others to vote, and I know Bredesen is not going to fall into line with what Schumer or anyone else tries to tell him to do–not even as much as I might sometimes want him to. I just want him to be a Democratic member of the Senate rather than an Independent.

    • Stuart I. Anderson says:

      There is order in this mad world of politics. I agree Michael that Bredesen will vote almost exactly the way you would vote as a Democrat and the way Chuck Schumer will vote and there is no “falling in line” about it. You will all vote together on issues because you are all liberals and that’s the glue that binds. That’s why the Senate Democrats have a Heritage score of 7% which has them voting liberal 93% of the time in a lock-step that we conservatives can only envy insofar as the Republican’s score is a feckless 71%.

      You only have one problem, as a liberal Tennessean you are a member of an ideological minority, and a small minority at that. As the election draws closer most of the 60%+ of the voting Tennesseans who voted for Trump will see how foolish it is to vote for Bredesen who will oppose Trump most of the time when they can vote for Marsha who will support him most of the time so Bredesen will lose and we will finally have a conservative Senator.

  • Phil Lassiter says:

    Haslam, Ron Ramsey (late in his career) and Harwell the entire time as Speaker were much more anti gun than Bredesen

  • Pingback: Friday, September 21

  • Charles Morehead says:

    If the NRA gives him a D that is all we need to know! Patriots cannot vote Bredesen!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *