Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: JohnPierce

Romney will do what is best for Romney.

What is best for Romney is to support gun rights.

This was not true in MA.

It is true, now.


5 posted on 09/02/2012 8:15:11 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Kansas58

Yap, simple politics. One can’t get rich swimming against the current.


7 posted on 09/02/2012 8:18:29 PM PDT by entropy12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Kansas58

When all is said and done I think you pegged it. And in far fewer words than I used. :)


9 posted on 09/02/2012 8:20:06 PM PDT by JohnPierce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Kansas58

Whatever Romney does is better than what Hillary and Obama plan by giving our gun rights to the UN.


10 posted on 09/02/2012 8:23:33 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Kansas58

“Romney will do what is best for Romney.

What is best for Romney is to support gun rights.

This was not true in MA.

It is true, now.”


There isn’t really any evidence that Mitt Romney supports gun rights. He also claimed to be pro-life, and one could say being pro-life to maintain his support and office “is true, now.” But then, either last Monday or Tuesday, he came out and essentially gave the pro-abortion talking point that the Democrats give. “I’m pro-life,” they all say, “But I won’t ban abortion for the health and life of the mother, or for rape.” Hillary has used the same language claiming she had never met anyone who was “pro-abortion,” and Obama echos with his excuse for voting against the partial birth abortion ban “there was no exemption for the health of the mother.” The health of the mother, as defined by the courts, includes mental and emotional problems. That’s the loophole that essentially negates any pro-life law that it infects.

Now, this is a pretty clear 180 for people who understand the pro-life pro-abortion battle. So if Romney is willing to turncoat on this, what makes you think Mittens isn’t going to say “I’m in favor of the second amendment. I think we all have the right to hunt!” (Which isn’t the point of the 2A.) but then turn around and justify more hurdles and restrictions on the 2A in the name of something moderate sounding and mushy?

There is no evidence that Mittens really has ZERO principles. There IS evidence that his principles are leftwing principles, and that what he has ZERO of is really a hesitance to lie for political purposes, and he has 100% of an obsession with how people view him. IOW, he behaves like a lefty narcissist.


21 posted on 09/02/2012 8:50:37 PM PDT by RaisingCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson