Posted on 05/15/2007 4:25:06 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
“He didn’t understand how much saying he supported the assault weapons ban hurt him tonight”
The guy is so feeble he couldnt cotton onto that?
Further proof he is not fit to be POTUS
Ron Paul got one thing wrong.
If Jimmy Carter had stood by the Shah of Iran, and continued our previous meddling in the Middle East, we would not have been attacked on 9/11.
Romney’s got a good anti-islamic stance, but we know Tancredo really has it better. There’s just something ‘slick’ about romney that is unappealing.
Hunter and Tancredo looked really good on the 2nd tier, VP choices.
Rudy and McCain did well. There’s no doubt.
Fred and Newt need to either S#@$ or get off the pot within the next few months.
I’ve done no such thing, notwithstanding the spinning from the Romney camp. And no amount of throwing dirt up in the air to obscure things by them is going to change that.
So true! LOL. (definitely better legs!)
Nah he just thinks that we brought Pearl harbor on ourselves like we did 9/11.
What pisses me off is the growh of Gov.
I can do a better job than some Gov Boob that I pay in taxes You can too. We are citizens after all
You’re trying to confuse a philosophical statement with a legal statement. Government infringe on God given rights all the time. Our nation is doing that right now with abortion. Just like the states administer laws against murder of adults they too need to administer the laws against murdering children. (FYI, in case you weren’t aware, there is nothing preventing a state from legalizing regular old murder if it wanted to)
Like I said, I disagree with Ron Paul’s isolationism and the conclusions he draws from it.
It’s you that is confused. The right to life is unalienable, and is protected by the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments. The problem is that a bunch of lawyers in the judicial, legislative and executive branches have basic reading comprehension skills, and/or are being dishonest about the plain meaning of words.
Romney’s pro assault weapons ban nonsense really hurts him, btw.
The Marine Corp Hymn doesn’t sound all that isolationist, does it? When was it written? It’s referring to 19th century conflicts.
Wish we had a really good candidate with a chance of winning.
Sigh.
Reducing crime in NYC was good and Rudy gets some credit for it. But not all the credit. As Mayor, Rudy may have shown some fiscal restraint by NYC standards, but he was no fiscal conservative. he left NYC with a huge deficit and debt. Under Rudy spending went up 36%.
You obviously believe in the mythology that has been built up around Rudy. Sorry, Rudy is no hero.
Have the faith of your fathers, Patricia.
-—I’ve done no such thing, notwithstanding the spinning from the Romney camp. And no amount of throwing dirt up in the air to obscure things by them is going to change that.-—
And the following from the NRA is just spinning on behalf of the Romney camp?
-—On June 24, 2004 at approximately 11:20 AM , the Senate took the last legislative vote on S.2367 and sent it to Governor Romney`s desk for his consideration. Representing the greatest set of firearm law reforms since the passage of the Commonwealth`s worst in the nation gun laws, S.2367 is a breath of fresh air for law abiding gun owners. Governor Romney is expected to sign the bill into law later this week.
While not perfect by any means, this bill represents a step forward for gun owners in Massachusetts. The bill was passed in the Senate by a vote of 36 - 1 in favor and the House passed it with no amendments or debate on a “voice” vote. This represented by far the broadest support a reform bill has ever seen in the Massachusetts State House. Only one legislator in the entire building voiced opposition to the bill.
S.2367 does the following:
* Instructs the Executive Director of the Criminal History Systems Board to make the Firearms Identification Card and the License To Carry a Firearm the same size as a driver`s license;
* Changes the term of a Firearms Identification Card and a License to Carry to six years;
* Creates a grace period of 90 days, if the Firearms Identification Card or License to Carry holder applies for renewal before the expiration date, and if the application for renewal is not denied;
* Creates a Firearms Licensing Review Board. Applicants disqualified by a misdemeanor record, from obtaining a License To Carry or Firearms Identification Card, may file a petition for review of eligibility with the board, five years after conviction, adjudication, commitment, probation or parole;
* and in the case where an officer is confiscating the guns of a person with an expired license, requires the officer to provide a written inventory and receipt for all guns.
(emphasis added)
Despite the efforts of some (including The Boston Globe) to spin this bill as an extension of or creation of a new “Assault Weapons” ban, the bill makes no net changes to the Commonwealth`s laws regarding those types of firearms. The three sections referencing them merely dealt with re-affirming the definitions of what an “Assault Weapon” could be.
Here are just some of the points that the media (including The Boston Globe) got wrong.
Myth: Some headlines claimed that the legislature voted to expand the ban on the sale of the same 19 guns that the federal government has banned.
Fact: The guns are already banned in Massachusetts . The legislature only voted to clarify the definition of so-called “assault weapons,” but made no changes to the number of guns included.
Myth: The gun ban was extended.
Fact: Our state`s gun ban was not due to disappear, nor will it become invalid if the federal ban sunsets in September.
Myth: The legislature somehow “won over” gun-rights supporters by including reforms.
Fact: NRA and Gun owners` Action League (GOAL) had made it very clear to the legislature that we would not give up any ground. NRA and GOAL supported this bill because it did not ban any guns, and because it made much-needed reforms.
Myth: Those legislators that wanted to expand the semi-auto gun ban claimed that they “spearheaded” S.2367.
Fact: Credit should be given to Senator Stephen Brewer (D- Barre) and Senator Richard T. Moore (D - Uxbridge) for the reform language.
Myth: The Massachusetts House approved a new version of the ban that would decouple the state definitions from the federal ones.
Fact: The bill merely takes the existing state references to federal law, and fixes the language to a point in time in 1994. Because that is the federal language is currently in effect, the net effect on Massachusetts gun owners is zero. No new gun bans are banned. Keep in mind that the state language in effect before this bill was NEVER set to expire.
With that in mind, NRA members should be very pleased in knowing that their efforts to educate and work with their local representatives and senators resulted in a successful reform action.
Thanks to you and the Gun Owners` Action League, lawful gun owners can now take advantage of this first set of real reforms in over five years.-—
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1832674/posts
Ironically, that is the exact intellectual end point for the poor reasoning of everyone who claims that the right to life is a states' rights issue. You're one of the few I've seen admit it, though.
But, you're dangerously wrong.
I remember several times I think where he refered to himself as being Libertarian or Hannity refered to him as such but I stopped watching the show. As for Rush? LOL even Rush says his show is for entertainment value only. Of course that was years ago. Rush bellows and yells but in the end he's always ready to fall in line with party. Many more have done much more for Conservatism than Rush. One such person passed away today.
Of course, with a missle and the atom bomb, Hitler would not have cared if Nazi beliefs appealed to us.
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.