Anti-gun Romney as VP?

I think Romney favored being elected in the Democratic bastion of Massachusetts. I'm not sure that he honestly holds any strong convictions about firearms one way or the other. But I'm fairly certain that running in a national election he would not advocate banning semiautomatics.

As for me, I would love to see some business sense in Washington. I think Romney put it best when he pointed out that much of his Republican competition, as well as Clinton and Obama, have never so much as run a corner store.

He's likely open to much of the same flip-flopping arguments as Kerry was, but in reality not any more so than Obama or McCain. If this election is to be based on judgment, I'd much rather see Romney in the hot seat, but given the choices, I'd vote for him to be as close to there as possible.
 
To be fair with Romney, Massachusetts already had some of the strictest gun laws in the nation before he became Governor. What he did was raise licensing fees by $75, and sign a revised AWB (their was a state AWB since 1994). Actually the most pro gun legislators in that state are Democrats. The Republicans tend to be big brother, anti-rights, who also happen to believe in making money. Romney is a two face liar. Just ask anyone who lives in Mass, they will tell you about his backroom deals, and back stabbing. I am in the know since I still have family in the state.
 
All I need to know about Romney is that the people of Massachussetts elected him governor.

If the same people that keep voting for Kennedy and Kerry can vote for Romney, then there has to be something wrong with him.
 
I will not vote for McCain with Romney on the ticket. I was on the fence whether to hold my nose and vote for McCain or just not vote but if Romney is on the ticket I will be voting for Obama.
Click to expand...

No offense, but that makes absolutely no sense......none at all !!!

It is quite obvious to anyone who is paying attnetion that Sen. Obama is a Marxist. That is the reason not to vote for him, no matter who Sen. McCain picks as a running mate.
 
Last edited:
Don't you think calling...

Obama a commie is just a little over the top?

Perhaps leftist socialist might better describe BHO's political leanings. It's a slightly more PC term to use while Obama, the anointed one, is on the Euro leg of his presumptive coronation.
 
xrocket

Don't you think calling Obama a commie is just a little over the top?
Click to expand...

I didn't call Sen. Obama a "commie". I called him a Marxist, which he is. A Marxist and a "commie" are two quite different things, politically speaking.
 
No offense, but that makes absolutely no sense......none at all !!!
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense. I do accept the ideas Romney brings with him and find them more dangerous and damaging than anything I see in Obama. I firmly believe whoever is McCain's VP stands a good chance of becoming the president due to McCain's health.

Romney is anti-choice, Romney is pro-government funding of religous organizations, Romney is against funding vital medical research based on religious beliefs.

The most dangerous thing that can happen to any government is to allow religion a foothold. Just look at all the governments of our enemies to see that. To somehow think it is ok as long as it is our religion is absurd.
 
Romney is pro-government funding of religous organizations
Click to expand...

If you are so enthralled with Sen. Obama, perhaps you should pay more attention to some of his platforms, such as his desire to expand on President Bush's faith-based initiatives. Not just continue them, but expand them.
 
Romney is anti-gun.
Even after the DOJ statistics came out disproving that the Federal AW ban reduced crime he not only showed his pro gun-control stance but also how dumb he is by supporting extending law that doesn't work.

I'm a one-issue (2nd Amendment) voter and have been an activist in favor of our RKBA. I know and have followed these scumbags voting and legislative records for many years.
Romney as a VP would seal the deal for me not to vote in the Presidential category at all.

I would rather spend my votes and effort in what really matters: Congress.

Democrats possess a field advantage in 2008, needing to defend only 12 seats, while Republicans must defend 23. In addition, five Republicans, but no Democrats, have announced that they are retiring. The open seat gap between the parties is the biggest in 50 year.
 
Do you really think that Romney would prioritize his time to promote a ban on semi-autos (or any other national gun restrictions) when there are so many other problems to address; our ailing economy and energy problems? Please.
 
Do you really think that Romney would prioritize his time to promote a ban on semi-autos (or any other national gun restrictions) when there are so many other problems to address; our ailing economy and energy problems? Please.
Click to expand...

I didn't imply that.

I just gave my opinion in what kind of judgement this guy will bring to the office. As well as, his views regarding our rights.
 
I will under no circumstances vote for the person from Illinois (I invite all here to stop using the name of BHO) but the crop of Rinos we keep getting pushed on us is intolerable. I hope there is some way of us purging them from the party or scrapping the GOP altogether after this election comes to an end.
 
and what state is Obama from?

If we are judging the candidates and VP's from the state they come from then Obama looses coming out of the gate. He lacks experience, character, and conviction. he comes from a very anti gun state. He is against the war, well the war in Afghanistan is OK with him. He is against drilling anywhere, he likes the high gas prices. He gives a great speech, he just tends to forget what his last position was in the last speech on the same subject. He intends to fund everything by raising taxes. He has not been able to have any opinion that the far left doesn't whisper in his ear.

McCain is at least in favor of all the good alternate energy plans, except drilling in ANWR. McCain has opinions that conflict with the far right at times. The key point is he is not lock step with either right or left like the other non qualified candidate is.

McCain has the character to stand up for what he believes in. He has already proven that. In the end it ALL comes down to character and doing what is right for the country, not the party. McCain has proven he will do that. He has my vote.
 
Sasquatch, of course your right ...

I didn't call Sen. Obama a "commie". I called him a Marxist, which he is. A Marxist and a "commie" are two quite different things, politically speaking.
Click to expand...

Politically yes, but realistically ....

Marx begot Lenin and Lenin begot the Communist Manifesto. My point was made "tongue in cheek".

Carry on.
 
I'm a Single Issue Voter

and that issue is Supreme Court Justices. We won Heller 5-4. Obama will appoint more judges like the "4". We need more on our side, so I'll hold my nose and vote for McCain. Think long and hard about the next 20+ years of SCOTUS and decide.
 
Playboypenguin said:
....The most dangerous thing that can happen to any government is to allow religion a foothold. Just look at all the governments of our enemies to see that. To somehow think it is ok as long as it is our religion is absurd.
Click to expand...

The logic of a secular progressive....it also shows a lack of understanding of the Federalist Papers, origins of the Constitution, and the purpose of the founding Fathers (who were of the Christian faith).

The Constitution was written to protect the citizens against a church state similar to England, not to persecute religious beliefs as you have done with Romney.

We can thank secular progressives for society's moral decay and political correctness.
 
I think McCain will surprise everyone with his selection. If he picks a young turk, that may not bode well in 4 years. McCain has said he will not run for a 2nd term, so the VP will be the horse that gets saddled. If the past is any reflection, young turk VP's don't win the presidency.

I think he'll pick an older hand, but younger than him, and someone who is cut from the same bolt of cloth as McCain as to politics; maybe a tad more liberal regarding social issues, but a hard line rightist with respect to the rest of it.

My choice would be Rudy, I like him even though I disagree with some of his views. He is on the side of state's rights vs fedgov; a federalist. That is good in some ways. Rudy can debate and ad lib with anyone. He could elevate McCain in the speech department. McCain could concentrate on national security issues while leaving the economy to Rudy who would do well.
 
The logic of a secular progressive....it also shows a lack of understanding of the Federalist Papers, origins of the Constitution, and the purpose of the founding Fathers (who were of the Christian faith).

The Constitution was written to protect the citizens against a church state similar to England, not to persecute religious beliefs as you have done with Romney.
Click to expand...
I am not persecuting Romney. I feel he can be whatever religion he likes, but when he starts declaring that his religious beliefs take precedence and are what will shape his political decisions that is a step towards a church state that I am unwilling to take.
 
Romney won as a republican in a dump like Assachussetts. Why would anyone with two brain cells to rub together think he would be good for the rest of the country?

He and Obama would compliment each other quite well. They're kindred spirits. :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top