“I’ll let you skip the self-reflection bit and make it plain – how could you, as President, allow somebody that rates an “F” that marks him as an anti-gunner, on your Board?”
Ah yes, Alan Rice of the NH Firearms Coalition (“NHFC”) is starting to feel some heat. Like I said before, if you want to judge candidates for office (either newbies just running for the first time or those that have proven voting / legislative histories) simply because they won’t bother with either your questions or you survey in toto, you deserve a continued beat-down. What a schmuck!
So, one person complained – and got this in return. I’ll let Alan Rice figure out what a fisking is – I’m not sure he understands the phrase “self-evident” either. I will clue him in that the items I’m talking about by putting them in bold them; I’m sure that even he might “get it”.
From: “Alan M. Rice, President, NHFC Inc.” <arice=nhfc-ontarget.org@mail182.sea22.mcdlv.net> on behalf of “Alan M. Rice, President, NHFC Inc.” <arice@nhfc-ontarget.org>
Reply-To: “Alan M. Rice, President, NHFC Inc.” <arice@nhfc-ontarget.org>
Date: Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 5:05 PM
To:<redacted>
Subject: Acting like the DC swamp and they’re not even there yet…
Does he even know how this comes off? The slander and venom is already there from the get-go. For an advocacy group that needs people to be at least sympathetic to their cause (if not members), certainly those that can do things for 2A Rights, one would thing he could summon up at least a modicum of niceness. Just be nice. Instead, he makes it clear that you are already guilty – there is no resumption of innocence before even getting started with the “Acting like the DC swamp” crap. It is one thing to be “stalwart to the cause” – its another thing altogether with “eye rolling” prose. If you are looking to persuade a candidate, you don’t auto-slam them; this is not how you make friends. However, it’s a wonderful tactic if you want to have more enemies and those that will just toss your message and your group into the circular file.
Let me ‘gunsplain this to you, Alan Rice – you are representing an advocacy group. You WANT to have more people on your side. Let me ‘gunsplain this to you – it ain’t working. You are ticking people off instead of having them cross onto your side of the the line in the sand. Not a good reputation to have and not a good place to be.
That is, if that is what you are looking for. If you are just looking to be a self-assured nincompoop, well, you’re doing just fine. Continue on, and continue on long enough, and you’ll just be viewed as just another long winded blowhard. Or a tick. Pick one.
Dear <redacted>,
I asked if I could use their name but I decided I wasn’t going to use it before hearing back – Rice seems to be of the nature that he’d just be a hang-fire over it. So, let’s get to the beginning of his email – trust me, you’ve already read the nice part.
It has come to our attention that there is some confusion about our decision to score candidates, who do not respond to our survey, with a grade of F (RS) which means, REFUSED SURVEY FAILURE TO RESPOND. The grades are posted here.
No, dough-boy, there is absolutely no confusion at all. And with your uppercase shouting, you made it quite clear you think the rest of us are deaf. Let me remind you of your earlier letter where you made it quite clear:
Let me respond in kind:
IF YOU DON’T PAY ABSOLUTE ATTENTION TO ME AND MY GROUP AND MY SURVEY, YOU ARE SCUM! AND WE WILL TELL EVERYONE ABOUT WHAT A SCUMMY PERSON YOU ARE!
There, I hope there’s no confusion with a ‘Grok interpretation of what you said. A bit longer than “will be considered an anti-gun response“, but rather plainly put. Your survey wasn’t about carefully gaining insight into how candidates think about the Article 2A – it was a bullying tactic, pure and simple. The problem is that we are now telling you to go screw – you’ve worn out your welcome.
Which means the same for the NH Firearms Coalition. You shot your wad this time and if the Exec Board would get out of its bubble and started to simply talk to people, they’d be hearing the same thing I’m writing here. They have one just one job to do now – I hope they figure it out. But I digress…
A few points are in order, first, over 30 years of experience has taught me that those who truly support Second Amendment Civil Rights enthusiastically answer candidate surveys.
When I read this, the phrase that came to mind was “it isn’t what you practice, it is what you practice correctly”. Then it was “really?”. And then it was back to “practice correctly”. Let me say this with simple words, Mr. Rice – your premise is wrong. Completely. Candidates don’t answer surveys just because they believe in the Second Amendment. At this point, to make you smarter, they answer surveys that will advance their chances to win their elections. That’s their job du jour. Get one more vote than the other guy. Yes, this still holds sway, however:
Winning is only a precusor; what you do afterwards is of the most importance
They actually worry about what surveys to respond to and how to answer them. And with a dolt like yourself, well, many more are thinking “why let myself get picked apart? Most of them, especially of they are ‘Grok readers, get that meme. They understand that there is a purpose to winning. Sure, there are going to be those that aren’t going to fill out your survey. But automatically assuming the flawed premise of “who truly support Second Amendment Civil Rights enthusiastically answer candidate surveys” tells the rest of us that you are a mind reader. You know, I’ve been trying to do that to my kids; having “over 30 years of experience has taught me” one thing – I don’t have a clue and that there is no way to be such.
And it is obvious that you haven’t gotten over the clueless part. Let me spellz it out for you – ASS-U-ME. I am hoping at least for some understanding on your part of how I spelled that. If not, let me know and I’ll use smaller words. You can reach me at Skip@GraniteGrok.com. And trust me, I AM an enthusiastic supporter of Article 2A (which is far better worded than the Second Amendment, but being in Massachusetts and all, I bet you never bother with that, did you?). And because I AM an enthusiastic supporter of Article 2A, I’d never, EVAH fill out your survey – and I have over a decade of writing about it in my body of work here at GraniteGrok. But again, like with candidates that have voting/legislative track records, it’s obvious you’re too lazy to do proper research.
And then he show a demonstrable lack of clarity, wit, and knowledge when it comes to someone we have endorsed. Now, I have said that GraniteGrok will defend anyone we know to be an Article 2A supporter but since Alan Rice decides to take on Steve Negron, well, we’re happy to cross-swords.
Second, while a candidate may have held state office (as a Representative or Senator); the issues facing the US Congress are markedly different than those that are considered by state office holders. We have heard that some folks are claiming that State Representative Steve Negron is “on our side”. Sadly, Negron failed to vote for HB 1749 to prevent cities and towns from banning guns and he has not completed his NHFC Candidate Survey.
Part of doing your homework for a survey is, well, to do your homework. As I said earlier:
- Let’s start with yet another false premise: are markedly different than those that are considered by state office holders. No, Alan Rice, they are not markedly different. While their influence/power is only in-state, it is as valid and strong as it is in DC. Have not the gun-grabbers in California taught you anything? They have and will continue to make gun owners’ lives miserable. They have been trying, for years, to do the same kinds of things here. In fact, the Socialist Democrats (but I repeat myself) have made it quite clear that they intend to roll back every reclamation of our Rights that have been gained lately. So for you to insinuate otherwise Is. Just. Plain. Stupid. On a stick.
- And on to “some folks are claiming that State Representative Steve Negron is “on our side”. Let me explain / remind of this to you simply – Steve Negron not only voted the same way that JR Hoell did, he voted even more and in the right way:
2017
| SB12 | ||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Yea |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Yea |
| HB201 | ||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Yea |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Yea |
| HB350 | ||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Yea |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Yea |
2018
| HB1313 Special Order |
||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Nay |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Nay |
| HB1313 Adopt Amendment |
||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Absent |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Nay |
| Burt, John | Republican | Hillsborough | 39 | Nay |
| Valera, John | Republican | Hillsborough | 38 | Nay |
| HB1313 OTP | ||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Absent |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Yea |
| Burt, John | Republican | Hillsborough | 39 | Yea |
| Valera, John | Republican | Hillsborough | 38 | Yea |
| SB500 | ||||
| Party | County | District | Vote | |
| Hoell, J.R. | Republican | Merrimack | 23 | Yea |
| Negron, Steve | Republican | Hillsborough | 32 | Yea |
So, Alan Rice, if Steve Negron rates an “F” simply because he refused to return a survey, how do you account for his voting record? Are you ALSO saying that your Corporate Secretary, JR Hoell, also rates an “F”? Kinda puts you in a bind, doesn’t it? I’ll let you skip the self-reflection bit and make it plain – how could you, as President, allow somebody that rates an “F” that marks him as an anti-gunner, on your Board?
In an effort to be fair to all candidates, I have personally called candidates and urged them to respond. Most did. I personally spoke with Steve Negron; he promised me that he would respond… as of the date and time of this email we have still not heard from Representative Negron which is why he earned and received a grade of F (RS).
A final point, at least one NHFC Member spoke with Rep. Negron. Both Rep. Negron and his helper, Roger Wilkins were nothing short disrespectful and rude. You can reach Rep. Negron’s scheduler, <redacted> at (XXX) XXX-XXX and politely tell her to remind Rep. Negron to complete his NHFC Candidate Survey. Firearms owners are entitled to know his views on important issues OR you can email the campaign by clicking here to urge Rep. Negron to complete and return his NHFC Survey.
Well, not only do I Get Stuff but People Know Me. I’m checking out your claim, Alan Rice, that “I personally spoke with Steve Negron” and the promise. Or, you’re just making it up. Either way, I will find out. Let’s continue.
I actually have to laugh at Alan Rice, though – he may have gotten the response and didn’t even realize it. I’m wondering if he has the brain matter to realize that he probably got the same response as Obama did from the US Senate on his last SCOTUS nomination. After all, while Rice is demanding an affirmation, an “I’m walking away” is also a valid response (e.g., no answer at all). I wouldn’t be surprise if that’s the response that Negron gave to Rice – and Rice can’t see beyond his self-puffery to understand that people won’t kow-tow to his demands of only the response(s) he wants.
To the next point “at least one NHFC Member spoke with Rep. Negron. Both Rep. Negron and his helper, Roger Wilkins were nothing short disrespectful and rude.” I haven’t known Steve Negron long at all but he does impress me, thus far, as being a Happy Warrior type. That’s not to say he can’t turn into Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde, I’ve just not seen it nor have I heard of it. Quite sure that it can happen, if provoked – we almost all have that duality about us.
Roger Wilkins – a different story. I’ve known Roger for over a decade and have worked with him on a number of things. If he turned “short disrespectful and rude“, I know he was provoked – as a political operative, he can’t afford to be otherwise unless there is a real good reason. My understanding is that, indeed, an NHFC member (I know who it was, when this happened, and where) did approach Roger and basically said (paraphrased) “you need to make sure Negron does our survey”. That’s a demand, not a request. If Roger had been “short disrespectful and rude“, I would have heard about it because there were a LOT of people around and if Roger had been rude, he also would have been LOUD and as I said, there were plenty of people around that would have heard it and let me know. Roger is far more well known in the Conservative Community than Rice is so it would have made a significant splash in the tight political activist world that is NH.
BTW, I read HB1749 and RSA 159:26. The only effective thing that the former does for the latter is to add teeth towards public officials that disobey the current code. Now, I like teeth – I wish there were more “teeth” for RSA 91-A for when officials decide they make the law and not the Legislature. But to declare that someone that didn’t vote for HB1749 is anti-gun is ludicrous; you can’t get from point A to point B unless you have a well distorted sense of logic. Not voting for HB1749 didn’t relax what the law states – the State already and continues to be the sole authority and arbiter of who gets to put gun regulations into force. The changes by HB1749 were on the periphery of that main thrust – anything else is pretty much stays the same – a gun business must be handled like any other business (and many businesses get denied for any kind of reasons). To state that a gun business is now to be viewed as a “protected class”, I find that to be rather objectionable as I would any extension of Democrat Identity Politics that only exists for more and more “protected classes”.
With all that, would Alan Rice and company judge me now to be anti-gun? If they do, they’ve just made my point for me.
And once again, Alan Rice make a real big rhetorical boo-boo: “Firearms owners are entitled to know his views on important issues”. Don’t you just hate that word “entitled” and how overly used it has become today? It conveys a lot of nuances that just don’t exist yet Alan Rice wants to make sure that you believe they do. Entitled? No, not really. Entitled (and entitlement) really means some believes that they are due something from someone else that they did not earn. That said, yes, a smart politician is going to be as open and transparent as they can with voters because HE wants something from THEM. Voters aren’t entitled as they are the product – the candidate is wooing their vote. The candidate needs to give them information or promises to receive said vote. However, voters aren’t entitled to anything; they only get to either vote for or against a candidate based on what they learned about the candidate during the campaign.
Here, Rice is trying to do a slight of hand – he’s substituting. He’s merely using “Firearms owners” as a proxy for him and his group. Frankly, there are a lot more firearm owners out there that don’t belong to his group than are in his group. I’m not part of his group and after seeing this, I have no intention of ever joining while he’s the head of it or has any influence in or over it.
Another candidate whose rhetoric doesn’t match his actions is Eddie Edwards. You can contact the Edwards campaign by phone: XXX-XXX-XXX OR XXX-XXX-XXXX or by clicking here to send an email urging Mr. Edwards to return his NHFC Survey.
Hmm, two Congressional candidates refusing to play along. I wonder if there are others? Again, to belabor the point – I have my own ideas of how Mr. Edwards views Article 2A but that doesn’t automatically give rise to “actions vs words”. Rice is conflating the two and doing it in such a way, as shown by the comparison of Steve Negron and JR Hoell, that it doesn’t include actual track records. True, Edwards doesn’t have one which means using Occam’s Razor can only mean one thing when also joined with Negron’s having a track record:
“Actions” means giving Rice what he demands. Nothing more, nothing less. His way or the highway.
Let me clue you in, Alan Rice – you nor the NHFC ain’t that powerful to be making such demands. Do not do what the Progressive gun-grabbers do which is to twist the common language to fit your agenda. You are not allowed to redefine “actions” in that “rhetoric doesn’t match his actions” – “refusing only means responding to you and the NHFC and not, by definition anti-gun. They may well be anti-NHFC but that doesn’t make them anti-gun.
To the rest of us, “actions” means “what you do afterwards is of most importance“. Words are one things – actions count for more and Alan Rice has lost sight of that. If you fail to account for actual “action history”, your survey, as I said before, is meaningless.
Firearms owners deserve specific answers to questions about nationwide concealed carry, federal gun and ammunition taxes, federal regulations of certain caliber firearms, magazines. We need to hear all of the candidates views on other such important topics like resolving longstanding problems with the instant check as well as their opinion on changing federal law so dealers in tax free New Hampshire can sell handguns to anyone from any state. Under current law people must purchase handguns only in their state of residence.
We should know the answers to these above items. I would like to know them. Unlike Alan Rice and the NHFC, however, I’m not going to label them anti-gun just because they refuse to answer to us. Alan Rice refuses to understand that – he is so petty that he believes EVERYONE he targets should be held responsible to him. Life doesn’t work that way – and there are plenty of times we ask questions and don’t get answers. In such cases, we acknowledge that we didn’t get an answer. Being bloggers, however, we may have a few choice words upon receipt of a “walked away” response. However, it is clear that NONE of the Groksters would even label someone “anti-gun” simply because they refused to respond back like Steve Negron and Eddie Edwards did to Rice.
Rice is part of the “entitlement mentality” by his own words. So sad when he runs out of other peoples’ money answers.
Many candidates for public office claim to support Second Amendment Rights, however, their unwillingness to put their views in writing is often an indication that the campaign rhetoric is far from their real position. Please call and urge them to respond!
As I was writing this alert I learned that Eddie Edwards, (possibly due to poor advice from the same party who advised Rand Paul not to debate), is refusing to participate in tonight’s debate. This is but another example of Eddie Edwards refusal to say where he really stands on the important issues of the day; especially the Second Amendment. Please don’t wait, contact him now and demand he complete and return his NHFC Survey!
Oh, Alan Rice! Let me leave you with this:
GraniteGrok knows EXACTLY where Eddie Edwards AND Steve Negron stand on Article 2A and the Second Amendment – we spent over two hours interrogating interviewing both of them separately – and they did it willingly and with smiles (mostly) on their faces.
They aren’t anti-gun. You see, they see us as honest brokers so were willing to talk with us and let us ask them LOTS of questions. Which means that you and the NHFC should undergo some self-introspection. And we don’t always keep panhandling either:
P.S.: T…please consider contributing to the effort by chipping in $15 or $20.
