Posted on 01/22/2008 3:22:24 PM PST by Checkers
It was right the first time. But you knew that.
My wife saw it. Said it was double-coyote ugly.
Do we want to let Mitt graduate from a professed gun-grabber to an actual gun-grabber once he is in a position of power to make that transition?
Like I've said before, Romney will say anything to get elected. Care to try again?
Cheers!
“Specifically, which gun did Mitt grab from you?”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1940625/posts
Host Tim Russert asked Romney about his earlier support for strong gun control laws, noting that in his 1994 Senate race againt Ted Kennedy, Romney backed two gun-control measures — the Brady Bill with its waiting period on gun sales; and the renewal of a 1994 ban on “assault” weapons.
At the time, Romney said he didn’t “line up with the NRA.” But when he decided to run for president, Romney signed up for a lifetime membership in the National Rifle Association.
Romney on Sunday admitted that he did support the assault weapon ban. But he hedged on whether he’s still for it: “Let me describe it,” he said to Russert, as Russert pressed him to say whether he still supports the assault weapons ban.
“I would have supported the original assault weapon ban,” Romney said. “I signed an assault weapon ban as Massachusetts governor because it provided for a relaxation of licensing requirements for gun owners in Massachusetts, which was a big plus. And so both the pro-gun and the anti-gun lobby came together with a bill, and I signed that.
“And if there is determined to be, from time to time, a weapon of such lethality that it poses a grave risk to our law enforcement personnel, that’s something I would consider signing. There’s nothing of that nature that’s being proposed today in Washington.” But Romney said he “would look at weapons that pose extraordinary lethality.”
Russert tried again: “So the assault ban that expired...because Congress didn’t act on it, you would support?”
Romney noted that President Bush said he would have signed the bill if it came to his desk — “and so would I.”
Hmmm... he said all that stuff when he was running for the GOP nomination.
Now, perhaps you would be so kind as to post the comments from the Romney Administration when they were entralled with judicial diversity. You know, the mindset that got soft-on-crooks judges appointed to the Massachussetts bench.
Romney on Guns
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#guns
Governor Romney: “Americans should have the right to own and possess firearms as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. I’m proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms.”
(Ted Novin, “Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney Visits Firearms Industry’s Trade Show,” National Shooting Sports Foundation, 1/12/2007)
Hasn’t Gov. Romney been against the right to bear arms?
No. Governor Romney has always supported the individual right to keep and bear arms. The firearms bills that Governor Romney signed into law (see below) were all endorsed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and/or the Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL), which bills itself as “The Official Firearms Association of Massachusetts.”
The NRA gave Mitt Romney a rating of ‘B’ in the 2002 election race for Governor of Massachusetts.
(Scott Helman, “Romney retreats on gun control,” The Boston Globe, 1/14/2007)
Craig Sandler, former Director of General Operations of the National Rifle Association and former Nashua Police Chief, endorses Governor Mitt Romney for President.
In endorsing Governor Romney, Craig Sandler said, “Throughout his career in both the public and private sectors, Mitt Romney has demonstrated exceptional leadership ability, integrity, and commitment to principle. As a New Hampshire resident, former law enforcement officer, and avid sportsman, I am supporting Governor Romney because he is the candidate who will protect our Constitutional rights and strengthen our nation.”
Governor Romney On Parker v. District of Columbia:
Governor Romney: “It is my hope that the Supreme Court will reaffirm the individual right to keep and bear arms as enshrined in the Bill of Rights and protect law abiding gun owners everywhere. To further guard this fundamental liberty, as President, I will take care to appoint judges who will not legislate from the bench but will instead strictly interpret the Constitution.”
(Romney for President, “Governor Romney On The U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision To Review Second Amendment Case,” Press Release, 11/21/2007)
More here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#guns
Are you saying you don’t find this a credible source?
It’s been verified and I can track down that these are indeed Romney flyers from 1994.
But I will only bother if you care. Would it matter to you? I was only pointing out the fact that Romney has been a consistent fiscal and law-and-order conservative since his 1994 run.
As for guns, Romney is far from perfect, and maybe that’s enough reason for you to not vote him in the primary, but here are a few points ... he believes in individual RKBA and knows it is more than about hunting:
Governor Romney On Parker v. District of Columbia:
Governor Romney: “It is my hope that the Supreme Court will reaffirm the individual right to keep and bear arms as enshrined in the Bill of Rights and protect law abiding gun owners everywhere. To further guard this fundamental liberty, as President, I will take care to appoint judges who will not legislate from the bench but will instead strictly interpret the Constitution.”
(Romney for President, “Governor Romney On The U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision To Review Second Amendment Case,” Press Release, 11/21/2007)
Question for Romney from Human Events editor Jed Babbin: Do you view the second amendment as vesting an individual right to keep and bear arms? I know the Supreme Court is about to consider the Parker v. District of Columbia case. Aside from the legalities: as you personally look at the Second Amendment, do you think that’s the right of the state or is that the right of the individual gun owner?
Governor Romney: “It’s the right of the individual. I believe that our Constitution vests in the citizens of the United States the right to bear arms, to have weapons for their personal protection, for hunting and for any legal and lawful purpose. I’d like to see our gun laws enforced, to see people who use guns in the committing of crimes in jail for a long time, but I believe that individuals have the right to bear arms, and any incursion on that right, I would find in violation of the constitution.”
(Editors of Human Events, “Romney’s Four Wedge Issues,” Human Events, 11/21/2007)
http://www.freerepublic.com/~UnmarkedPackage/#guns
“He’s a panderer”
yeah how *dare* he try to get your vote! (sarc)
Did it occur to you that if you dont vote for the guy who is *trying* to win your vote, you are telling the candidates “DONT EVEN TRY”.
So they wont.
And your issues/desires will get lost as Hillary panders to unions,gays, nannystaters and socialists and govt workers and wins on that.
So consider this: At least his is pandering to US for a change!
So explain to me yet again why his record prior to the run for said nomination was so absent of solid support for gun rights.
Going back 14 years is a pretty lame way to attack any candidate. Get a life.
Yeah, how DARE we compare his rhetoric now, when he needs our vote, to the past when he did not.
“Going back 14 years is a pretty lame way to attack any candidate. Get a life.”
Oh pox.
That means we should go by what they said last week, vs what they did when they had a chance to make a difference, as a fully formed adult?
No thank you.
I don’t buy his last-minute conversion for the candidacy, and I’ don’t buy your shilling for him.
You sure spend your time in the dirt boy.
Why are you comparing Mitt with a guy not in the race?
“He only changed his position on abortion.”
You left out gun control.
Yeah, imagine that. Going back to the past, when he was running for a different office, and seeing if what he was saying to voters was different than now. Excuse us for daring, no, having the utter TEMERITY, to think that he would say ANYTHING to win votes, as opposed to expressing actual core principles and seeing if that wins an election. Silly us.
Who is your candidate?
And amnesty - he thought McCain-Kennedy was OK just a few months ago. Now he pretends to be an immigration hawk.
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.