Skip to comments.
"Running Against the Right Hillary ": Reagan likes Romney's and Rudy's Chances
Michael Reagan Column (at REAGAN.COM) ^
| 12/26/06
| Michael Reagan
Posted on 12/26/2006 9:03:55 PM PST by Jeff Fuller
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 last
To: Jeff Fuller
If you check out all Republicans POTUSs, they were all nationally known figures. Eisenhower, Nixon (veep), Reagan, Bush(veep) GWB. Unknowns make it as democrats, but not as Republicans.
61
posted on
12/28/2006 3:55:48 AM PST
by
tkathy
(Sectarian violence? Or genocidal racists? Which is a better description of islamists?)
To: Jeff Fuller
I never claimed his name was on it. I used the bill as an example of the sort of thing that HAS NO PLACE in the USA. If Romney was craven enough to sign it, I've got to question his qualifications as a republican candidate.
62
posted on
12/28/2006 5:49:01 AM PST
by
SWAMPSNIPER
( LET ME DIE ON MY FEET IN MY SWAMP)
To: SWAMPSNIPER
I looked into it, Swampsniper, and he did not sign it yet. It was voted on in 2005, I think it passed both houses (according to the link I posted)- but if you search the Mass General Laws site for "machete" there is currently no such law on the books, so I assume Romney has not signed it yet.
He did sign the Massachusetts version of the Federal "assault weapon" ban, though, and made a speech about how these deadly weapons have no use except to kill people (so he knows nothing about rifles, competition, caliber, power, RKBA, etc, just repeats the Brady line). Most of his Second Amendment comments have been in relation to hunting. Given that history I'd believe that he'd ban deadly machetes too (but he apparently has not signed that bill yet).
There were a number of machete attacks in Ma and NYC and here and there, apparently gang related. The bill may have been an attempt to "get machetes off the streets" by allowing cops to confiscate "unregistered" machetes, but that makes little sense since according to the MGL site there are plenty of restrictions on knives already.
63
posted on
12/28/2006 8:16:13 AM PST
by
DBrow
To: DBrow
Massachusetts suits him perfectly, he should stay there.
64
posted on
12/28/2006 8:46:58 AM PST
by
SWAMPSNIPER
( LET ME DIE ON MY FEET IN MY SWAMP)
To: SWAMPSNIPER
I think he'd make a great Chief of Staff to a conservative president.
He's smart, bright, articulate, and has a proven track record as manager and entrepreneur. The Utah Olympics shows that he's quick on his feet and can get complex stuff done. He's pretty good at managing the media, too, he did get elected as governor in a socialist police state.
65
posted on
12/28/2006 8:51:54 AM PST
by
DBrow
To: Radix
Sam Brownback is backed by The Lord Jesus Christ and yours truly.
Are you pro life,pro The Lord etc etc etc
Get on board!!! Calling all Christians to support Brownback.
A liberal Republican will give the liberal democrats the judges they want.John McCain can`t be trusted to name a Pro life justice either.He would cave in on the slightest pressure from the MSM,TRUST ME,I KNOW!!!
To those that say,,we need Rudy to protect us and all Christian issues should go out the window???? To you folks I say...nothing matters if we turn the court over to liberals/moderates!!
God Loves GW Bush and Sam Brownback!!!!
To: DBrow
I'll be perfectly content if he just stays in Massachusetts. Why should I concern myself with finding a job for him?
67
posted on
12/28/2006 9:03:20 AM PST
by
SWAMPSNIPER
( LET ME DIE ON MY FEET IN MY SWAMP)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson