Mitt Throws It Away

Offered an opportunity to differentiate himself from Pr. Obama on a Constitutional issue, Mitt Romney instead brought up the Massachusetts “assault weapons ban” and the bi-partisan effort he lead to pass that piece of legislation. He’s proud of it and clearly wants to pass something similar on a national level. It was the reason I wasn’t going to vote for him a year ago and he rubbed my nose in it.

So go ahead. Vote for Mitt. I’m going to vote for a 3rd Party candidate. If Mitt loses by one vote, I will proudly say it was mine. It isn’t just the Bill of Rights, on many of the core issues the two of them are just big-government, big spending liberals.


6 thoughts on “Mitt Throws It Away

  1. Im guessing neither Mitt or Barrack own guns or have even shot one before. If someobody looked at the stats, what they call “assault rifles” are rarely used illegally. TV and movies use them all the time, but most criminals want a small cheap gun— the kind I hope they keep using.

    • Yep – even in kalyfornia when they had their doj analyze crime statistics they found that so called ‘assault weapons’ (their definition btw) were used in something like .16% if all crimes involving firearms – which were only about 20% of all crimes. The hoplophobes promptly tried to bury the research.

      I have to wonder if mittens truly understood how polarizing his signing the MA legislation would prove to be – after all he probably viewed it as a ‘reasonable’ compromise vice a denial of rights.

    • Unfortunately, that’s true. It proves how badly broken our system for selecting candidates is that we have these two to choose from. I could say the same thing for most of the candidates over the last 30 years.

  2. I got so pissed, I went and had a beer. The ONLY advantage of Mittens getting elected is the rank and file Pubs will NOT go down the AWB road again… They know better!

  3. Let’s be realistic; Mitt has the Republican base at this point, and has to pander slightly to acquire as many of those magical “undecideds” as possible. Mitt isn’t ideal on gun rights; no Republican president since Teddy Roosevelt has been. He’s a damned sight better than Obama, though, and the next 4 years is going to be crucial in terms of the Supreme Court, with at least 2 picks and possibly more to make, one of them to replace a liberal (Ginsburg) with a conservative (the other two possible retirements, Scalia and Thomas, would weaken the court on conservative issues no matter who Mitt picked; you don’t get much more conservative than Scalia or Thomas).

Comments are closed.