Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is going to be a problematic primary for Rs & could get ugly. Let's face it, Romney probably is the guy with the best shot against Obama. But unfortunately Romney is even to the left of McCain, at least going by his track record. Perry is a little better but not all that much. My litmus test for both is that both were big 'green jobs' backers as governors. Those who want to see Obama retired would like to gloss over that stuff, understandably.
Since Reagan we have put up one after another of 'big government' conservatives--HW Bush, Dole, Bush, and McCain. It has not worked out. Win or lose, gov't keeps expanding, and the debt keeps growing. I'm willing to roll the dice with a Herman Cain even though he'll have a tough time in the general, and has a few deficiencies. Barone had a good column about Cain last week that covered the pluses & minuses pretty well. Is Herman Cain a Contender? - Michael Barone - National Review Online
Romney has proven he is willing to sign legislation that directly contradicts the US Constitution's 2nd Amendment. He supports large government and government run health care. If that isn't a RINO then what qualifies?
That just shows how little you know about the constitution. What does the second amendment have to do with legislation on the state level? Maybe you should study up on that before you call someone out.
That just shows how little you know about the constitution. What does the second amendment have to do with legislation on the state level? Maybe you should study up on that before you call someone out.
The Second Amendment has a great deal to do with state level legislation. Recent Supreme Court rulings confirm this.
However, given this comment from you on an earlier thread I'm not surprised you continue to dismiss the relevance of the Second Amendment;
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7
Romney is not 'notoriously' anti-gun. He was only for the ban on assault weapons as they should be banned.
I am not sure why anyone needs a machine gun to hunt with, but I am sure you will tell me that is not really what an assault weapon is.
The Second Amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting. As someone who is telling others they should study the Constitution before citing it you should know that.
As to your machine gun comment; Yes, I will tell you the semiautomatic rifles banned by Romney were not machine guns. I'm sure it's been explained to you before.
Possession of automatic weapons in the US was already stringently regulated long before Romney's assault on civilian possession of weapons that shared little other than a cosmetic resemblance with their military counterparts.
You're certainly entitled to have no respect for the provisions of the Second Amendment. By the same token, those of us that cherish it's protections have an equal right to call you out on your lack of regard for our freedoms.
Last edited by outbacknv; 10-16-2011 at 03:50 PM..
This is going to be a problematic primary for Rs & could get ugly. Let's face it, Romney probably is the guy with the best shot against Obama. But unfortunately Romney is even to the left of McCain, at least going by his track record. Perry is a little better but not all that much. My litmus test for both is that both were big 'green jobs' backers as governors. Those who want to see Obama retired would like to gloss over that stuff, understandably.
Since Reagan we have put up one after another of 'big government' conservatives--HW Bush, Dole, Bush, and McCain. It has not worked out. Win or lose, gov't keeps expanding, and the debt keeps growing. I'm willing to roll the dice with a Herman Cain even though he'll have a tough time in the general, and has a few deficiencies. Barone had a good column about Cain last week that covered the pluses & minuses pretty well. Is Herman Cain a Contender? - Michael Barone - National Review Online
Reagan wasn't "big government?" Please, this revisionist history of Reagan is a little ridiculous. If Ronald Reagan ran today the Tea Party would skewer him. I can only imagine how they'd paint him as a "quasi liberal ex New Deal Democrat flip flopper." Reagan increased the size of the federal government and ran up record deficits. Was he a good President? Yes, but he wasn't the rock ribbed uber conservative that so many Tea Partiers make him out to be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Dixiegirl7 is a RINO herself so it is no surprise that she supports progressive RINO's for POTUS.
