Posted on 02/26/2012 9:25:48 AM PST by VU4G10
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Sunday defended Mitt Romney against criticism that his wealth complicates his ability to connect with everyday folks, saying Romney’s wealth should be a positive factor in the race.
“I think that’s what we want in a president of the United States,” Christie told host Bob Schieffer CBS’s “Face the Nation,” saying that Romney's wealth is a reflection of his success.
His defense came after Romney noted in a Michigan speech Friday that his wife Ann drives “a couple of Cadillacs.”
“So the cat’s out of the bag, Bob, on the fact that Governor Romney’s wealthy,” Christie said. “So he has a number of cars, many people who’ve made a lot of money over time do. I think this is just something where, to be candid, folks are looking for him to make trip ups.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
You dont get more pro gun than I.
It is so presumptuous of you to take it upon yourself to tell people to leave this site.
ROTFL.
You want more gun laws, you want to ban some of the most popular and best selling rifles in America.
You want liberal Democrat police chiefs to decide what the Bill of Rights says, you are an anti-gun nut.
I did not say anything about a police chief deciding anything about the bill of rights. The “nut” comment reflects badly on you, not me. And no one who knows me would describe me as anti gun. You are going off the deep end instead of having a debate or discussion. You just jump on insulting people. I wont play that game.
You are a liar. I din’t take it on myself to tell people to leave FR, I said that a lefty, anti-gun nut like you doesn’t belong here.
We had to fight hard to roll back those radical anti-gun laws that you people pushed through, we don’t need DU people here trying to bring them back.
"A 44/40 lever action Winchester saddle gun..Big difference between that and an assault weapon that law enforcement does not want to see on the street."
"They said the military and law enforcement does not want military weapons in the hands of civilians for two reasons. "
Since Democrat Chiefs are usually the leaders of the anti-second amendment agenda people, I assumed they are who you wanted to decide the second amendment for us, which "law enforcement" did you mean, if not them?
Well, there you go. You know what they say about the word “assume”....you just proved it true. And you were so wrong.
Since you steadfastly refuse to compare the weapons in the so-called assault weapons (SCAW) ban to your grandmother's vintage rifle, I'll do a simple comparison.
Grandma's ammo - 44 cal. SCAW - .223 to .308. More powerful weapon - grandma.
Speed of fire - comparable between a good lever action Winchester and a semi-auto.
Ammo capacity - Grandma's rifle = 14 rounds, SCAW 30 rounds, but note that the assault weapons ban found fault with both weapons, limiting magazine capacity to 10.
So in other words, you are extolling one weapon that is either more powerful or at least comparable to the weapons you are decrying.
Which shows your ignorance, both of the SCAWs in question and the motives of those pushing bans on such.
Check out post 16 and subsequent posts, we got a live one here.
Let me see. I am a ...”liar”...a “nutjob”....and “ignorant”...You guys I know have no interest in talking to me I am sure. Who wants to talk to an ignorant, lying nutjob???
Check out post 16 and subsequent posts, we got a live one here.
Well, when you refuse to factually support your position, and instead rely on emotional-type calls right out of the Brady Center playbook, well, what else can you expect?
And do you care to address the points I raised in comparing the lethality of grandma's rifle to yours? A Winchester 1873 in its day was a fine military weapon.
No, you don’t. This “live one” is going to go prepare dinner. Have fun.
Christie is a liberal pig.
Post and run coward.
Check out post 73, we have a coward here.
I have been here for over an hour..Not exactly posting and running. And even a dog knows when to bury a pork chop bone for heavens sakes. You are rude. I want to talk to you, why? I have friends and family with all kinds of different political opinions. We are never rude to each other. No need to be.
Now that you realize I have been here for over an hour, you are going to apologize for calling me a coward, right? Surely you would. We will let the lying, nutjob, oh shoot, I have lost rack of the insults.
Being rich is fine. Being an unethical, soulless corporate predator is not fine.
Let me see - you have made posts on a pro-gun conservative website calling for liberal restrictions on gun ownership. When asked to provide factual (as opposed to emotional) support for your contentions - including your support of ownership of a weapon that was military grade in its day and has comparable lethality to the weapons you want banned, you refuse.
I can't imagine why anyone would be rude to you emulating the Brady playbook on FR. /amused sarcasm.
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.