Romney and Guns

[eagleeyes]

Romney and Guns


During his 2002 gubernatorial campaign, Romney had been a supporter of the federal assault weapons ban, and had also said he believed "in the rights of those who hunt to responsibly own and use firearms."[91] On July 1, 2004, Romney signed a permanent state ban on assault weapons, saying at the signing ceremony for the new law, "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."[92] The law extended a temporary measure that had been in effect since 1998 and covered weapons such as the AK-47, Uzi, and MAC-10.[92] The same law also modified some other aspects of general firearms licensing regulations.[92] (from wikipedia)

 

[fnsmoak]

And ignoring facts just like these, the American sheeple have allowed the liberal media to pick the candidates for POTUS.

A people get the Government they deserve.

Only one candidate running WAS/IS making the same statements, using identical facts that he was making/using for the last THIRTY YEARS.

I say again: ...And ignoring facts just like these, the American sheeple have allowed the liberal media to pick the candidates for POTUS. A people get the Government they deserve.

 

[Shoobee]

This is one area where Romney has flip flopped so much that you don't know what he is going to do next.

Same with Romney Care.

Same with abortion.

You need a score card and even then the past or his statements are no indication of what he might do next.

It doesnt really matter though. Neither guy can do very much if anything for the economy.

I would like to see more dams and roads built as a long term stimulus. I do not think either one is in favor of that however.

All the president needs is to look good and give great speeches.

Ask yourself, whom would you rather listen to a speech from?

One of them has really great humor, while the other is dry as a bone.

And when was the last time you donated $10 thousand to anything?

 

[kelcarry]

Pick him apart all you want. He is not a moslem piece of lying miserable garbage and is not a socialist/fascist determined to undermine this country, rot it out from the inside out, have us become a second rate pile of crap under control of the UN and those pieces of garbage. Want to call voting for him a deal with the devil? Fine. We already know what the devil looks like--just look at the whitehouse. Yes we have a very sad state of affairs in this country. Repub, dem, they are all the same right now--looking for their own sense of power and entitlement and leaving the scraps for the rest of us. How many repubs or dems are willing to forego their retirement and medical plans and go with the crap the rest of us have to wallow in? Heck they cannot even make a decision on reducing the debt, which, is really not hard if you make the "hard" and "politically uncorrect" choices. At least with literally anybody but the present joke in the whitehouse who at least has a resume that is american, not moslem, that is a capitalist and not a socialist, that is a businessman and not a pot/drug smoking pile of garbage, that has actually held a real job----shall I go on?

 

[rdm6680]

I'm voting for obama because it really doesn't matter. I like biden.

 

[fstroupe]

I am not condoning Romney's past actions in any form or fashion, I am also pissed off that the liberal media once again chose the Republican candidate. Of the original candidates, Romney would not have been over halfway up my list.

But it is what it is.

Silver spoon people have no real identification with guns. Bottom line. Oh, they may have taken out some clay pigeons with a fowling iron, and as a kid they may have talked their bodyguard to let them hold his pistol, but that's about it. There were no Saturday afternoons down at the quarry or gravel pit, no mornings climbing into a tree stand or duck blind at oh-dark-thirty with sleet falling and the temperature hovering right around 32F. No looking with envy at some guy's brand new ____________. (fill in the blank with whatever gun you'd love to have but can't justify the cost)

Politicians say what will get them elected whether they believe it or not. Do you honestly believe that any of the original nine Republican candidates actually care whether or not you can own an AR? Or be able to CC or OC a handgun? Or any other weapon or action that pushes the envelope of the Second Amendment?

Face it, there are very few gun enthusiasts in the upper crust.

I said in another thread that I really don't trust Mitt Romney with my Second Amendment rights. I don't. Unless he happens to the the CEO of a gun manufacturer, I would prefer not to trust those rights to anyone with a seven-figure income.

But I damn sure don't want to trust my Second Amendment rights to anyone with a "D" beside their name, because I know exactly where they stand whether they admit it or not. Obama would take your gun faster than a cat can lick its azz.

 

[JimPage]

I'm voting for obama because it really doesn't matter. I like biden.

Wow! You haven't heard of gun control? If Obama wins you most certainly will. And I will blame you.

 

[eagleeyes]

just dont' go quail hunting with **** cheney lolz they deleted the name 'd i c k' heheh
heheh
i don't like bama or romney they both puppets of goldman sachs monsanto and both members of the cfr, another corrupt crown club hell bent on destroying all that is good for civilian life liberty and freedom
i'm voting for ron paul as i find he is not a puppet for such evil agendas as the rest are......which is yet another reason the media won't make his name well known they don't want the public to know about him or his platform so they deliberately downplay him .....media is a powerful tool and they know it and use it to push forth their agenda

 

[SR40c]

I'm voting for obama because it really doesn't matter. I like biden.

Oh well. Can't fix stupid.

 

[eagleeyes]

neither bama or romney are worthy of my vote
ron paul is my choice i like who he is and what he stands for

 

[BC1]

Well. There is an alternative. Barry Obama and Eric Holder. Like that better?

 

[BC1]

neither bama or romney are worthy of my vote
ron paul is my choice i like who he is and what he stands for

No vote is a vote for Obama.

 

[eagleeyes]

Well. There is an alternative. Barry Obama and Eric Holder. Like that better?

oh double puke ass punks they both should be given a one way ticket to kenya or fed to the lions one

 

[kelcarry]

Well. There is an alternative. Barry Obama and Eric Holder. Like that better?

No vote is a vote for Obama.

Is there anymoe that has to be said if you have any brains in your head?

 

[rdm6680]

No vote is a vote for Obama.[/QUOTE]

Non-sensical. Do explain please.

 

[eagleeyes]

ron paul on guns

he has my vote!

 

[BluesStringer]

To the "at-least-Romney-isn't-a-socialist" crowd, I'd like to ask, what real difference is there between a capitalist-globalist and a socialist-globalist? To my way of thinking, there is none. Great, Romney has held a real job. What is that going to mean to us if/when he signs the UN Small Arms Treaty, or takes no action to rescind it if Obama gets there ahead of him? What in Romney's record suggests that he will support and defend our nation's sovereignty? No candidate who supports amnesty and open borders can make that claim, and no one voting for such a candidate can either. I know that's harsh, and none of you want to believe that you are supporting gun control or open borders or UN influence in the running of our country, but sorry, it's the truth whether you like it or not.

No vote is a vote for Obama.

Is there anymoe that has to be said if you have any brains in your head?

As much as I usually agree with both of these posters, yeah, more needs to be said, and I'll put my brain up against anyone else's around here with confidence, thankyouverymuch.

One, a non-vote is just that. It expresses no support for either candidate, which is exactly what it is supposed to express. It doesn't require that a person put their conscience aside in order to follow like sheep those who are not only willing to, but demanding of others that they follow suit, lest they be ridiculed and have their motives impugned as being an active Obama supporter. No matter who you vote for in this election, you are voting for a globalist, and globalism will destroy this country just as surely whether it's achieved from the right or the left. I won't suggest that anyone who can't see that has no brains, or impugn their motivations by saying they are nothing more than stealth supporters of globalism, but I sure as heck won't hold back pointing out the shortsightedness it takes to deny the truth of the matter. Y'all are getting ready to vote for a globalist, and you think that justifies alienating, ridiculing and casting aspersions on the character of anyone who doesn't just get in line and follow you down that primrose path?

I have pointed out several times on this forum that, in my state at least, my non-vote will not matter a wit. The Alabama Electoral College delegation will go for Romney whether I vote or not. I imagine that's true for MS too. Not sure about SC, but I'm reasonably sure that NY will go for Obama no matter whether a relative few NY'ers follow their conscience and withhold their votes for Romney or not. Regardless, I have no criticism of anyone for making their own decision on how, or whether, they vote. Do whatever makes you feel good. Just be aware and honest with yourselves and the board; that's all you're doing is casting a feel-good vote, because it ain't gonna matter a wit in the end. This country is not going Republican or Democrat this election cycle - it's going globalist.

Blues

 

[BC1]

No vote is a vote for Obama. Non-sensical. Do explain please.

Let me make some sense of it. Mathematically, our vote virtually counts twice. It not only counts for the person we vote for, but opens the delta between the cadidates. When we refuse to vote we allow the worse of the two candidates to close the delta by one vote.

 

[BC1]

To the "at-least-Romney-isn't-a-socialist" crowd, I'd like to ask, what real difference is there between a capitalist-globalist and a socialist-globalist?

I think the difference is that, although in the interest of personal gain, the capitalist creates jobs, moves money and stokes the economy by providing economic means for others. The socialist feels a debt to society, such debt he intends to pay-off with someone else's money. It is not the government's job to fund industry or create jobs. Everything the government gets it's hands in seems to become an inoperable, expensive mess.

Coming from a capitalist mindset, I founded my own businesses, funded them through venture capital and put people to work (software engineers). Through their work experience those employees gained marketable skills for future employment, contributed to the economy by having the means to buy durable goods, purchased homes, secured retirement funds and a better future for their kids. I don't see this quality of life arising from socialism. The socialist mindset sees my success as theirs for the picking. Socialist candidates want everyone equal so they create a class separation between the have's and have-not's. They claim the 1% is screwing the rest of the country. The create a mindset of dependencey and vitimization by "us."

The simple truth is that when the capitalist is forced to provide more to the worker or increased taxes for the masses, s/he must get the funds from somewhere. There isn't money just lying around. So someone gets laid-off.

 

[rdm6680]

No vote is a vote for Obama. Non-sensical. Do explain please.

Let me make some sense of it. Mathematically, our vote virtually counts twice. It not only counts for the person we vote for, but opens the delta between the cadidates. When we refuse to vote we allow the worse of the two candidates to close the delta by one vote.

I'm voting for obama so that is two votes for obama.