Why Romney WONT get my vote...
It's not religion (although he and I share the same faith), it's not his morals (although for the most part he appears to be the antithesis of Bill Clinton), it's his view on the Second Amendment.
"The Manchester GOP fundraiser is planned for next month at the Pelham Fish and Game Club. Those who attend will get the chance to shoot Uzis, M-16 rifles and other automatic weapons. But Romney said using a weapon is different from the owning one."
"I support the Second Amendment. I support the ban on (automatic weapons). They're not connected with a fundraising event where they're using weapons not available to the public."
And he's going to take an oath to uphold the Constitution???
Just an FYI (and no I'm not going to turn this into a religious discussion blog) - the LDS (Mormon) faith teaches that the United States Constitution is inspired by God - that includes the Second Amendment - so obviously Romney isn't that faithful in his beliefs (of course the same could be said of Reid). Just my opinion...
I guess that all the "wanna-be" presidential hopefuls obviously can't read English as not a one of them seems to understand the Constitution.
...and it's very plainly written...
posted by Garrett @ 10:06 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
Romney's inability to make a cohesive intellectual stand on the 2nd amendment is this election's equivalent of the abortion arguments in previous decades.
Trying to pander to both sides, Romney is no different than the typical politician that said "I personally detest abortion, but I always support a woman's right to choose it." What a farce. Take a stand - one way or the other.
You can't have it both ways, Mitt - either all weapons should be banned or people should be allowed maximum use of their constitutional rights.
This "only some guns" garbage has to go. And I don't want to hear any more blatherskite about reasonable restrictions on the 2nd amendment. There are already reasonable restrictions on the 2nd amendment without banning weapons. Reasonable restrictions like unjustified homicide is illegal, armed robbery is illegal, etc.
Romney is a two-faced weenie. Most of the LDS I know won't vote for him.
True conservatives have been facing the same problem that classic liberals have had to face. A choice between "the lesser of two weevils" to quote Capt. Jack in Master and Commander. Most Americans are middle of the road and are distressed by the fringes of their respective parties and the hypocrisy of elected officials. Most of my liberal friends don't want Clinton, who they see as a fake, or anyone else that's a front runner. The second tier isn't respected much either. And my conservative friends feel pretty much the same way about their choices as well. Our vote then boils down to voting against the worst choice or the most damaging candidate. To be sure, it's sad, but to not vote that way becomes a vote for the worst candidate. And that could be disasterous for our rights. As far as I am concerned, voting for gridlock ( a Repub for pres if there's a Dem congress) makes sense. Please respectfully tell me if my thinking is wrong.
Post a Comment
<< Home