« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Romney’s 2nd Amendment Record in MA

By: kowalski (Diary)  |  April 13th, 2012 at 07:48 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Since this is becoming a minor issue today with Romney speaking before the NRA convention and the Washington Post using *democrats* who are opposed to his record to attempt to describe Romney’s record here in MA, it’s important to re-post this link.

Don’t believe the hype.  Romney was a pro-2nd Amendment governor during his tenure here in MA.  I have every reason to believe he will continue to be a pro-2nd Amendment President. 

http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

Romney’s 2nd Amendment and pro-sportsman record while he was *actually* the Governor in Massachusetts was very positive. 

Legislation: During the Romney Administration, no anti-Second Amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk.

Governor Romney did sign five pro-Second Amendment/pro-sportsmen bills into law. His administration also worked with Gun Owners’ Action League and the Democratic leadership of the Massachusetts House and Senate to remove any anti-Second Amendment language from the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006.

Please read the rest before you shoot your, um, mouth off.  Romney’s record with 2nd Amendment supporters and sportsmen here in Massachusetts was in excellent shape when he left office. 

This is from the *premier* 2nd Amendment and pro-sportsman group in the Commonwealth. 

There have been a lot of attempted distortions of Romney’s record – factual, rhetorical and simply incorrect distortions.  Outright lies in a lot of cases.  Before people believe the lies they should contact G.O.A.L. and ask what the real story was.

It gets complicated for people to understand because Massachusetts is such a universally Liberal state with supermajority liberal votes in both chambers of the legislature.  But  don’t be fooled.  Romney was one of the strongest 2nd Amendment governors MA has had and he’s *leagues* better than his successor. 

It’s relatively easy to be a pro-2nd Amendment Governor when you’re elected Governor of Montana, or Utah, or Texas or Kentucky, and even Georgia or Florida.  In fact it might be easier to be a pro-2nd Amendment Governor if you were elected in Maryland or New Jersey.  We all know there will never be a pro-2nd Amendment Governor elected in New York until the world ends, or well after the world ends, actually.  Barring that, Massachusetts in my view is – and has been for more than a decade now – the toughest place on Earth for a pro-2AM Governor to function successfully, and Mitt Romney did so.  If people are looking to find a “core” in his 2nd Amendment principles, you just have to look at his record here, and it speaks for itself very clearly.

It will *never* be good enough to satisfy the people who don’t live here and don’t understand this Commonwealth’s politics, I know.  In a sense you DO have to live here to understand what he was swimming against, but he swam very well and very skillfully, and left a strong legacy here.   On his 2nd Amendment record in the Commonwealth I’d take him back as governor *any day* and I’ve said that a few times now.

Let the twisted Op-Eds begin!

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • kowalski

    “Mandated that a minimum of $50,000 of the licensing fees be used for the operation of the FLRB so that the Board would not cease operating under budget cuts.”

    That wasn’t enough, it should have been a lot more. In Massachusetts it’s the usual practice to wait 3-6 months for a firearms license and the reason is that…if you can’t pay the people to fill out the forms, all those people just have to wait…

    • garfieldjl

      [quote]During his 1994 campaign for the United States Senate, Romney voiced his support for an assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill, which were both strongly opposed to by most gun-rights advocates. As a governor, Romney signed legislation to extend the existing assault weapons bans in Massachusetts.

      In a strategic move, Romney signed up for a lifetime membership with the NRA leading up to his 2008 presidential campaign. However, he has said on multiple occasions that, while he supports the work of the National Rifle Association, he doesn’t “line up” with them on every issue. Based on Romney’s history and own words, it seems the only thing that he and the NRA agree on is that the Second Amendment exists.
      [/quote]
      http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47940

      I also ran across McCain’s opposition research from back in 2008.
      [quote]In 1994 Senate race, Romney backed Brady bill and assault weapons ban, saying ?I don?t line up with the
      NRA? and ?that?s not going to make me the hero of the NRA.?
      ? Romney called Clinton crime bill ?a big step forward.?
      ? As governor, Romney quadrupled gun licensing fees and vowed not to ?chip away? at tough gun laws
      ? In 2004, Romney signed permanent state-level ban on assault weapons that was mirrored after federal
      assault weapons ban.
      ? In January 2006, Romney said he owned a gun ? then two days later admitted he did not and the gun
      belonged to his son.
      ? Romney bragged about being member of the NRA but later revealed he didn?t join until August 2006, just
      before launching his presidential campaign.
      ? Romney recently said he?s ?been a hunter pretty much all my life? but later admitted he hunted only twice in
      his life, later clarifying remarks by claiming he has hunted ?small varmints ? more than two times.?
      ? In 2006 press conference, Romney claimed he had been hunting ?many times? after returning from quail hunt
      in Georgia.[/quote]
      http://cdn2.dailycaller.com/2012/01/McCain-2008-Oppo-File-on-Romney.pdf

      Stop trying to fluff up Romney’s record, it’s not going to work because the media can and will deflate those attempts in the general.

      • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

        Romney’s going to be stopped. State by state please and where does the money come from to stop him.

      • kowalski

        In 1994, I supported the federal Assault Weapons Ban and the Brady Bill, and I did not own a gun, and the reason was that I had successfully propagandized myself – this despite having spent 3 years of my life in High School involved in the shooting sports. At that point in my life, I hadn’t realized how important the stakes were.

        It wasn’t clear to me at the time how serious the assault on the 2nd Amendment really was. I just assumed (mistakenly at the time) that it was in the Bill of Rights as a fundamental right and I had absolutely no concept that the real goal behind anti-gun legislation was to *erase* the 2nd Amendment by “…hammering guns on the anvil of a relentless legal strategy” in the words of Charles Schumer. I was terribly naive and I was a “useful idiot.” I think a lot of people were. It wasn’t until almost ten years later that I woke up after being shown the truth, at a law school in Chicago – that the liberal goal was to do exactly what Dianne Feinstein said.

        It wasn’t difficult to deceive yourself, or to allow yourself to be deceived by others. No less a person in the gun industry than Bill Ruger himself cut a deal during the Clinton Administration regarding magazine capacity, in order to save the Mini-14 .223 caliber rifle, which the Government was planning to put on the “Banned” list. That deal earned him widespread antipathy in the gun world and cast a shadow over his company that persisted even after he had passed away.

        The Clinton Administration had the political wind at their backs. You have to remember at the time, the world seemed like a much different place – there were far fewer “shall issue” permit states. The Heller decision didn’t exist. There were a lot fewer people who understood the real intention of so-called “sensible gun control legislation.” Moreover, we had a President in the Oval Office who was able to successfully frighten the Soccer Moms in America that blood was about to run red through the streets unless the Assault Weapons Ban was passed.

        Go to this link to watch the graph:
        http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Rtc.gif

        At that point in my young life, I was largely ignorant of all those things. I was a young lefty/liberal living in Baltimore and my involvement with guns was something from my past. I was unaware of the stakes involved and more importantly, I was prejudiced.

        Also, at least one of your points is incorrect: Romney raised the fee to $75 and the *legislature* raised it another $25, to $100. But Romney also extended the duration of the license from 4 to 6 years and made it easier to renew, by computerizing the system. Finaly, when you talk about 2004 – I think you’re partially confused. Romney did sign the law that extended the 1998 legislation enacted by Cellucci, but with several provisions that made it less onerous for gun owners here in MA. You can read about the 1998 Gun Control Act here in Massachusetts, signed into law by former governor Celluci, here:

        http://www.goal.org/newspages/decadeofdisaster.html

        I can tell you that in 2004, there was no workable support in the MA legislature for the repeal of that law. What Romney did, more than anything else, was to alter it to make it less onerous. Romney’s prior statements about supporting the AWB do trouble me in a rhetorical sense. One of my main beliefs about him as the Chief Executive is that we’re going to have to “keep him honest.”

        I’m not trying to “fluff up” his record. His actual record, composed by the membership of GOAL, is available at that link. Decide for yourself.

        • kowalski

          It’s something that I view as a slightly nauseating reality of American political life that Politicians make “Strategic Moves” all the time, particularly high-level State politicians and national politicians.

          The important thing is that people are fully aware of that fact, and that there are strong and competent organizations they can join and contribute to, in order to defend their rights.

          You won’t get anywhere (except maybe thrown in jail) in Massachusetts as a gun owner by waving your guns around in an angry and menacing way and trying to out-grandstand politicians here, when they’re often biased against you from the outset. You need organizations like GOAL MA who maintain relationships with legislators, who do their homework carefully, and who most importantly commit themselves to outreach, education, and civil discourse.

          One of the state senators I support here as a Republican is a Democrat – Stephen Brewer (you can read about his record at GOAL, also.) He gets my vote as a Republican every single time, because he has never wavered in his commitment to the 2nd Amendment and to the shooting sports in MA.

          Our task, if you want to put it a little flippantly, is to make sure that Romney really gets it this time and that he means what he says. That’s going to take work and involvement and good old-fashioned shoe leather. Am I 100% confident in him? No. More like 65%-70% and trending in the right direction when all things are considered.

        • kowalski

          As part of my support for Ruger (and particularly Ruger’s pistols here in MA), one of my handgun purchases was an SR-9 “1.1″, their new striker-fired 9mm introduced in late 2007. I didn’t buy mine here in MA until 2009 after the trigger had been changed. It’s an excellent pistol particularly at its price point and with the safety features it has, which include:

          1) A visible and tactile loaded chamber indicator
          2) A manual safety
          3) A center tongue block on the trigger that helps prevent the trigger from being swept rearward from the side, or unless the pull is coming from the center of the trigger. You have to postively depress the center tongue to unblock the trigger so it can move rearward and finish cocking the striker.
          4) A magazine disconnect safety that prevents the gun from firing if the magazine is removed, even if there is around in the chamber. If you want to render the gun instantly unable to fire, push the magazine release. Even if there’s a round in the chamber the gun cannot fire after the magazine is dropped.
          5) A fire control mechanism that actively blocks the forward movement of the striker unless the trigger is pulled fully to the rear of its travel. The striker physically cannot hit the primer through its own intertia even if you slam the gun down hard on its muzzle.

          In MA, of course I live with the 10-round magazine restriction because that’s still a fact of MA law, so my SR9 is an 11 round gun. For my intended use, I keep it loaded and chambered with the safety on whenever it is in my direct control. The gun itself is one of the most ergonomically designed pistols I’ve ever held and it shoots beautifully. Just as importantly, it’s actively and passively safe. I’d recommend one to anybody, particularly in the compact .40 caliber version which wasn’t available when I made my purchase.

          Some of these features don’t appeal to certain markets and there are differing, passionate opinions about each of them out there in the interwebs, but I saw all of them as desirable features for my purpose of use. Great gun, and it looks nice too.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_SR_series

      • kowalski

        Are you the media?

        I agree that the media distorts things, either inadvertently or deliberately, as the case may be.

        But the media also occasionally covers things fairly. I’ve resigned myself to the notion that where guns and gun ownership is concerned, we’re always going to face skepticism and even outright hostility in the media, but there are exceptions that shine through, because they pierce through the propaganda. Even here in Massachusetts.

        http://articles.boston.com/2012-03-21/opinion/31215570_1_gun-ban-ban-handguns-heller-decision

      • garfieldjl

        I have an extremely good memory, I recalled Romney getting hit over the head why he claimed he was Pro Gun back in 2008, figuring that people wouldn’t believe me unless I found sources, I did a short google search, and sure enough I remembered correctly.

        What I’m trying to do is stop you guys from helping Obama, if you want to build a case for Romney, it has to be completely on the facts. The MSM can and will dismantle any fluff arguments people make to oversell Romney.

        If I can find this information in under 10 minutes via google, it would be insane to believe that Axelrod and Team Obama, doesn’t already know about it. Romney is going to be facing someone that plays just as dirty if not dirtier than he did in the primary, on his opponent will get a pass from the media. Furthermore, I think Team Obama has more experience in playing dirty that Romney does.

        • kowalski

          I’m not trying to dispute the fact that Romney has made statements in the past that give pause to people on our side and give, ahem, ammunition to people from the other side.

          It’s water under the bridge at this point. We have the nominee we have. Obviously this is going to be a 2nd Amendment rhetorical battle in some quarters. Romney is going to have to present a clear difference not just from Obama but also distance himself from his past statements.

          I still don’t understand why you’re saying mine are “fluff” arguments that “oversell him”. They’re his actual record.

          • garfieldjl

            Fact is the only reason Romney joined the NRA was for his first attempt to run for President, he joined in August 2006, when he was getting set up to run in 2008.

            Now, from what I’ve looked at, one of his son’s happens to potentially be pro-Gun, however Mitt Romney only joined the NRA so he could claim to be pro-Gun. Mitt’s son is not the one running for office.

            If I can find this stuff, and McCain found this stuff, you can bet Team Obama knows this stuff. Chicago Politicians are not a bunch of incompetitent amateurs when it comes to digging dirt on opponents.

            Romney’s rhetoric doesn’t match his actions, and actions speak louder than words.

          • kowalski

            There’s no point in any further conversation between us. You’ve decided what you’ve decided, that’s very clear. And so have I.

          • gekster

            He is a liberal trying to disuade others from supporting Romney.
            He says he supports Gingrich, but 99+% of his posts are anti-Romney.
            He claims to be a conservative, but in the interwebby thing anyone can make any claim.

            I’m a rocket scientist cause I can shoot off bottle rockets.
            That’s my claim and I’m sticking to it.

          • kowalski

            We do try to be welcoming. I think his talking points are mostly invalid. He’s starting to get on my nerves, though, because basically he rolled himself out with a lot of fanfare in this thread by repeating talking points that contain utter misstatements of the facts, he hasn’t answered my questions, and continues to blather on in the usual way.

            I’ve tried to be polite and accomodating with him but I think we might have to call in the Spiked Pipes.

            A

          • kowalski

            Romney’s actions comport very well with his rhetoric – then and now.

            Don’t understand how you can disagree when the record is right in front of you.

          • garfieldjl

            [quote]Although some gun rights activists who subscribe to the Buckeye Firearms Association weekly newsletter pay attention to politics affecting gun rights day-in and day-out, and can immediately identify which candidates and officials support the Second Amendment not only in word but also in deed, and which do not, there are many other voters who don’t start to pay attention until the eleventh hour. So for those of you who are just now checking into the record of the Republican presidential candidates, let me put it simply:

            Mitt Romney has a record of being anti-gun.

            He supported the Clinton Gun Ban in 1994, telling The Boston Herald “that’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don’t line up with a lot of special interest groups.” Not only that, but four years ago when he ran for president, he affirmed to Tim Russert on “Meet the Press” he would have signed a renewal of the failed gun control law.

            As governor of Massachusetts in 2002, he signed into law what was described as “one of the toughest assault weapons laws in the country.”

            In his last presidential campaign, his attempt at an election year conversion failed to gain the confidence of pro-gun voters. After telling a reporter he had been a hunter “pretty much all my life,” it was soon revealed that he had in fact only been hunting twice, ever, and had only joined the NRA in the run-up to his campaign. He claimed to be a gun owner, only to have later been forced to recant, and admit that it was his sons, not he, who are gun owners. And he refused to address, let alone renounce, his former anti-gun positions.

            After folding his 2008 campaign earlier than he had to, and with many analysts correctly speculated that he would back in four years, I published a comprehensive list of things he could do before 2012 to prove his conversion was genuine. He hasn’t lifted a finger since that time toward reaching out to gun owners. And as I wrote in that 2008 article, “If Romney waits until 2011 to speak out again on gun rights, we’ll be right back to where we were in this recent primary season ? looking at a candidate whose actions in office were largely anti-gun, and who has nothing but words to offer pro-gun voters in an election year.”
            [/quote]
            http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/8239

            http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/151471-Mitt-Romney-s-Anti-Gun-Past-Chronicled

            Above link is where I found the link to McCain’s research in 2008.

          • gekster

            You could have kept up with promoting Gingrich, but that is not your aim,
            as is clearly demonstrated.
            You’ve been called out.
            Answer beckers question, in detail, how anyone can beat Romney.
            The fact you keep running away from that perticular one shows who you are and what your intent is.
            HuffPo would adore a poster like you, so go there where at the least yo could get some apreciation.

          • APA Guy

            Trying to play on Rush’s “Operation Chaos” in 2008, the moron who runs DK called for “Opeation Hilarity” in which they needlessly extend the primary to deprive our eventual nominee of money and momentum.

            They have failed at the ballot box…now they seek to disrupt the blogs. Hoping the mods here act swiftly when the time is right.

          • garfieldjl

            Build a case based on facts, not fluff.

            I want Obama to lose in November, not watch Romney (if he is the nominee) get demolished because your fluff gets chopped to pieces by Team Obama’s wood chipper.

            I found what was being said to try to sell Romney was a bunch of fluff, I found the information to back up what I said without even really trying to find it. Do you really think the media will turn a blind eye, like in the primaries? If you do, you’re an idiot.

            I’ve given you guys information on where I think you can start on building a case for Romney, and that is foreign policy.

            As much as you wish for me to be a liberal troll, that doesn’t change the fact that I’m a Conservative whom is affiliated with the Republican Party.

            If you guys want to ignore me and then blame me for Romney losing badly in the general, that’s your business, but it wouldn’t change the reality that Romney and his supporters would be responsible for losing it, not me.

            Build a case based on Romney’s record, the facts, etc. No overselling, no fluff, no attempts to re-write history. Stop trying to smear me if you can’t do it, instead be man or woman enough to admit it, and look at who is still in the race.

            We are not going to see the media covering up stuff for Romney like they did for Obama in 2008. They are going to go over everything Romney has done with a fine tooth comb, so can you build a case for Romney or can’t you?

            You challenged me to build a case for Gingrich, I did so. Let’s see you build on for Romney, one based on facts, not fluff.

            The case needs to be made with rock hard facts, rocks tough enough to break Team Obama’s woodchipper when Team Obama throws them in the wood chipper.

          • gekster

            nuff said.

          • gekster

            And they are just that. talking points with nothing to them.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            parroted his strengths. At this point they’re meaningless without the money to compete.

            Again, lay out a state by state scenario that shows Gingrich stopping Romney and tell us where he gets the money to compete.

          • gekster

            lost track of nts

          • APA Guy

            Unemployment rate when Obama took office: 7.8%

            Unemployment rate now: 8.2%

            Gas prices when Obama took office: $1.80

            Gas prices now: $3.90

            And now, the idiots on the left have once and for all told the voting electorate what they really think about hard-working, stay-at-home moms. They’ll be lucky to win 45% of the female vote by the time we’re through with Hilary Rosen and her THIRTY-FIVE (35) trips to the White House.

            You’re swimming upstream with your terrible arguments. We could run Homer Simpson against Obama and whip him. Romney, faults and all, is well-funded and seasoned…Obama is history.

          • Xasteius

            no text

          • JSobieski

            Romney is more like than Obama to sign a repeal of Obamacare.

            Romney doesn’t spend time trying to sell tax increases on the rich.

            The three points above build a case for Romney being better than Obama.

          • kowalski

            I mean, end of story, dude! You’re wrong, even in the talking points you distributed at the top of the thread!

          • JSobieski

            I would probably agree with 99% of your criticisms of Romney, but the bottom line is that it would take a tragic incident to stop Romney from winning the nomination.

        • kowalski

          What would be more constructive for YOU to talk about…if there’s any doubt about it, is your opinion on national right-to-carry reciprocity and stand your ground laws, particularly in MA. Where are you from?

          • garfieldjl

            When compared to Obama, Romney’s best strength would be foreign policy and how Obama has treated our men and women in uniform.

            Talk about Obama bowed to Saudi Kings, the Japanese Emperor, tried to get in bed with our enemies, and backstab our allies. Talk about how he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq and Afghanistan.

            Talk about how Obama didn’t support the Iranian People, the Syrian People, etc. About how he backstabbed Mubarack, and let a radical organization seize power in Egypt.

            The reason why I am so dead set against Romney being the nominee, is it is extremely hard to build a case for him. In my view he’s more likely to cost us the House of Representatives than he is to win the Presidency. That’s how bad I think the matchup is.

            The only case I can come up with for Romney is completely foreign policy oriented. That’s it, I come up with zilch on domestic that Obama can’t demolish in under 15 minutes, because Romney’s own record contradicts Romney’s rhetoric.

            Gingrich, Santorum, Cain, Perry, Pawlenty, and Bachman, all would have been a lot easier to construct a case as to why they should be elected. The MSM knew this, which is why they pushed Romney on us, and the incompetitent idiots in the Republican Establishment believed the lies that were spoon fed to them by Team Obama.

          • kowalski

            I don’t care what your objections are at this point. You can’t get over the fact that it’s over. You need to go through the 8 stages or whatever and just reach acceptance and then figure out how you’re going to live with yourself. My conscience is clear.

          • gekster

            And liberals can’t/won’t accept the facts before them.

          • kowalski

            You’re not resurrecting Gingrich, Santorum, Cain, Perry, Pawlenty or Bachmann. Bachmann couldn’t even carry her home state. Perry lost his mojo. Santorum is a lightweight. Gingrich had millions of casino dollars and he couldn’t get people over his hump. We all know what happened to Cain.

            So everyone knows these stories and there’s no chance of rehashing it. If you think the Republican Establishment caused Bachmann’s failure in her home state, or caused Cain to have troubles with a woman he was not married to that he was nevertheless supporting, or caused Rick Perry to forget the names of government agencies he’d eliminate, or caused Rick Santorum to be a marginal-at-best Senator, or any of the other things that brought those candidates down, then I guess you’ll believe anything. I understand the bitterness, I guess, but it just didn’t happen!

            You seem to have this grandiose idea that unnamed and unaccountable “power players” caused all those candidates to drop out of this race, as though people themselves didn’t *not* vote for them when it came time to do so. You have a very low opinion of everyone except yourself, I think – because the reason Romney is the nominee is that he has won the most delegates, and will continue to win the most delegates, and that’s based on the votes that people cast. Despite Rick Santorum’s attempt to enlist Democrats to vote for him.

            Make some lemonade, man.

          • garfieldjl

            Romney has outspent probably all the other candidates combined, and he’s still limping along.

            If any of the other candidates had that kind of money, this would have been over in late February, early March at the latest.

            Gingrich hasn’t left the race, and people have declared his campaign dead so many times this race only for him to come driving back in, that it is hysterical that people continue to declare it dead.

          • APA Guy

            Even HE understands that…

            http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/03/30/gingrich-budges-exactly-one-half-inch-on-romney/

            Why can’t you? Operation Hilarity need a boost?

          • snowshooze

            Is a vote for Obama.

          • APA Guy

            And look at this…he’s now down 5 points to Romney…and the public is just now getting a whiff of the stay-at-home mom outrage…

            http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

          • snowshooze

            It is the best shot he has.

          • APA Guy

            If so, let me know…I want in on that bet :)

            Obama’s surrogates just screwed him with women this past week. The economy, on which Romney already has a 10-point lead (and it isn’t even high-demand gas season), will take care of the rest of the voting electorate.

            Like I said…if we stay strong and Romney stays on message, we’ll rid the country of this disease.

          • snowshooze

            I do not think this would be a cake-walk for either one.

          • APA Guy

            Once FL and OH go for Romney, Obama’s path to victory virtually disappears.

            Even odds…this is a sitting president you’re getting :)

          • ww2nd95

            As much as I do want to see Obama gone, I do not see him wetting his pants when faced with the challenge from Romney. Romney is a stiff. He may understand business and economics and if most people payed attention to the needs of the country, rather then personality and star power, we would probably have much better people in office then we do now, all across the states, but unfortunately.. they do not. Romney has no personality on stage or in front of a camera or crowd, he comes across as fake, which is a major issue he needs to fix before the general.. And I promise you, that will play out more so in the general election more then you think it will. Obama is a bad president, everyone knows that, but when him and Romney are on the same stage and Romney is his usual stiff self while Obama comes across as himself, who still has decent poll numbers as far as “likability” goes, where Romney is seriously hurting, we’ll have problems.

            I know Romney is the nominee and I’m going to vote for him, but the man needs help in those areas if he wants Obama wetting his pants and scared to face him.

          • xymbaline

            Romney is the greatest gift that Obama could get.

            All Moderate Republicans lose national elections.

            Did McCain win? No.

            Did Dole win? No

            Did HW Bush win without Reagan in 1992? No

            Did Gerald Ford win? No

            Will Romney win in 2012? No

            Romney has only gotten ahead so far by huge negative ads and a big warchest.

            Next to Obama, he’s a piker. The Dem machine will out negative him by quantum levels and they’ll have the entire media and twice the warchest.

            He doesn’t stand a chance.

          • APA Guy

            What’s the central issue of this election again? :)

            Obama is DOOMED as long as we keep our foot on the gas and Romney stays on message.

          • snowshooze

            But I do generally think Rasmussen does about the best job.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            He bounced a $500 check.

            When he rose from the dead earlier, he had big financial backing. That is long gone. His campaign is in a deep financial hole and he will not be running any ads.

            No $$, no campaign.

          • xymbaline

            n/t

          • xymbaline

            of all 1144 delegates that Romney has won today, clinching the nomination.

          • kowalski

            Sheldon Adelson doesn’t look or sound all that hysterical. He declared it dead back on March 28th – and he was the biggest bankroller behind Gingrich. Since then it’s been about the bankruptices, the attempts to raise cash, the final futile words of a man who harbors so many deep resentments and suspicions that he probably shouldn’t have run in the first place.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9HvcMo1axM

            Gingrich is doing more damage to himself at this point than he did good for himself in the entire time he’s written his books. If he keeps it up, people are going to be buying them at flea markets as paperweights. He has to wake up one morning and get over it, and go back to doing what he did best for so long.

            I kind of worry for his sanity. I don’t know whether he’s going to try for something truly theatrically Tragic at this point. It’s all up to him.

            Adelson’s big “negative” about Romney seems to be that he thinks carefully about things before giving his answer. What a horrible idea! To think things through! Well, I am asserting here that that’s a positive trait in this election cycle and more generally.

          • kowalski

            And the most important thing as a casino patron is *not* to think things through, but to “make decisions” or act on impulse – because you always lose if you do.

            In fact, if you thought things through, and took some time to give your answer, you’d realize the the entire psychology of casino gambling is designed to screw you by taking advantage of your judgments and innate decisionmaking. It’s the most predatory kind of commerce.

          • kowalski

            There isn’t a single game in a casino – from slot machines to Baccarat – that doesn’t rely for its ability to pull money toward the house on anything but mathematics. Every single thing you do there is mathematically predetermined to take money from you, if you stay long enough.

            If you get lucky, the first thing you should do is *leave*.

            If you go to a casino with $400 and you win $200 the rational side of your brain should tell you: “You just multiplied your money by 50%. Leave now.”

            But you’ll notice if you go to a casino that there is nobody there that tells you that. They don’t encourage you to leave with what you have just won. They encourage you to STAY – because if you stay long enough, you will absolutely, positively lose everything you have, unless you’re cheating, and then Robert DeNiro will come after you and Joe Pesci will put your head in a vice and pop your eye out.

            That’s what Sheldon Adelson relies on for all his money – all the money that he gave to Newt Gingrich to run his campaign.

            I was pretty disgusted when Donald Trump decided to support Romney and frankly I still am, by the way. These aren’t “industries” in the traditional sense – they’re at best parasitic pastimes.

          • APA Guy

            …and doesn’t embrace the socialism that bankrupted the former Soviet Union like your buddy Obama has.

            Put that in your pipe and smoke it, sparky.

          • xymbaline

            And Romney is the most moderate of all.

            QED

          • gekster

            Please let me know.

  • nfloridapatriot

    Romney also worked with Anti Gun groups when he was Governor.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk1bJOpYUqE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Ygw9CQ9po&feature=related

    • kowalski

      Did you read the materials at the link? You’re presenting a YouTube video versus the actual record.

  • Viet71

    garfieldjl sincerely opposes Romney. We all should respect the sincerity of his beliefs even if one or more of us thinks he needs to close ranks.

    nfloridapatriot is different. I don’t detect any sincerity here. Just anti-Romney sniping of the kind Kos launched with Operation Hilarity.

    • kowalski

      Look, as a MA resident I have my own problems with Romney’s 2nd Amendment record but in comparison to his successor they’re almost completely insignificant. Here in this state, in terms of his actual acts as Governor, he was a strong 2nd Amendment governor. There’s no attempt at spin or distortion about that. I’m not talking about publicity shots or things he said for the media – I’m talking very concretely and affirmatively about what he actually *DID* when he had the power of the Governorship at his command.

      If people want to stir the pot and elevate the noise to the level of signal, people should recognize what they’re buying into. His record here – in this Vast Blue Land – was very strong while he was the Governor. And moreover it was a strong record against some very biased opposition. As I’ve said, my conscience is clear when I say that as a MA resident, on 2nd Amendment issues in actual fact, he was a good governor.

      GOAL says it best:

      “While at the time these events greatly angered GOAL members, the result was much improved access to the Governor?s office and his staff. During the following years, senior level Romney staffers met on a monthly basis with GOAL?s Executive Director to discuss and work on any issues relevant to GOAL?s members. This should not be taken as an indication that GOAL ?controlled? the corner office, but rather that a very good working relationship was developed that benefited both parties.”

      That’s about as strong a statement as you’re going to get as an endorsement in Massachusetts. Romney had an “open-door policy” with GOAL and he worked very constructively with them. I expect the same will be even more true when he is President. All the haters here who are accusing me of one thing or the other are confusing the rhetoric with the actions, but the actions were consistent, they were productive, and they are a matter of public record – not YouTube clips.

    • kowalski

      When people promulgate lists of “facts” with ? marks in front of them on Redstate, one thing they should make sure they do is comport with actual facts.

      The actual facts of the law Romney signed in 2004 are described in my comment at the bottom of this thread. garfieldjl’s recapitulation is based on a misstatement that was picked up and run with for a long time. It isn’t even wrong!

  • kowalski

    One of the interlocutors above tries to use Romney’s record against him vis-a-vis his signing of a law in 2004. Once again, that’s a distortion and the record being promulgated by those talking points is FALSE.

    Here’s the talking point:

    “? In 2004, Romney signed permanent state-level ban on assault weapons that was mirrored after federal
    assault weapons ban.”

    Here’s the truth:

    “This is a perfect example of don?t believe in titles. The bill was the greatest victory for gun owners since the passage of the gun control laws in 1998 (Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998). It was a reform bill totally supported by GOAL. Press and media stories around the country got it completely wrong when claimed the bill was an extension of the ?assault weapon? ban that had sunset at the federal level. They could not have been more wrong. Unfortunately for the Governor, someone had also wrongly briefed him about the bill. As a result the Lt. Governor and the Governor made statements at the bill signing ceremony that angered GOAL members. The following is what the bill actually did:”

    Read the rest at the link I provide at the beginning of this post.

    Our friend garfieldjl here is repeating a mistruth based on a miscommunication. Period.

  • Viet71

    Best gun laws, climate, and scenery in the country.

    Cochise County, where I’ve got a second house, is the size of Connecticut and Rhode Island put together, with only about 130,000 souls.

    Can carry a concealed handgun almost anywhere without a permit. Pretty peaceful place, as John Lott would have predicted. The main shoot-outs are in Phoenix and involve Mexican drug gangs. BTW, I’m very much pro-Mexican people.

    • kowalski

      I might do it in a while, I’m still weighing those options. I’m all for Prescott, that’s for sure :) .

      And I can program computerized milling machines and do ISO Quality work. I’m pretty good with a variety of handguns and rifles also. Every single day it gets more attractive to me. Please don’t tempt me more than I am already. If someone comes up with a solid job offer in the $40-50k a year range with benefits, I might be on my way and I’ll never look back.

      I love where I live in Massachusetts but the machinations of the politics are so unbelievable I just sit sometimes and shake my head. People here in the northeast are supposed to be intelligent but I have to vote for a Democrat state Senator to preserve my 2nd Amendment rights here. Astounding. And I like him personally, but still.

  • checkmate2012

    clinging to guns and religion comment? It’s a no brainer to support Romney over this admin especially if it were the sole issue to debate. Even if he’s not the staunchest 2nd Amendment supporter, it’s highly unlikely that he’ll work to abolish or minimize the right to carry in any way.

    This may be issue #1 for many and rightly so, but there are way too many other pressing issues to fix that are on the minds of most Americans and I suspect for Romney too.

    I’d be worried if he said he was against the 2nd Amendment and he said just the opposite. Lying to NRA supporters would be a dangerous political move and I’m sure they’ll keep him in their sight.

    • garfieldjl

      However, you should stop at Fast & Furious, don’t get into the bitter clingers of guns and religion comment.

      Problem for Romney is his own anti-gun record, and it would be easily used against him if you go too far.

      Stick with Fast and Furious only because I don’t think Romney has a scandal similar to this from when he was Governor of Massachusetts. That way if Obama brings up Romney’s record, Romney can throw it right back in Obama’s face about his administration arming Mexican Drug Cartels and how a Romney Administration would not tolerate a DoJ that would pull a stunt like Fast & Furious.

      Gingrich and Santorum could go a lot further on this issue than Romney and bring up Obama’s “bitter clingers” comments. However, for Romney it has a strong potential of backfiring.

      • APA Guy

        …just like we should move past Hilary Rosen’s comments and her 35 visits to the White House.

        In other words, we should bring a knife to a gun fight and let the Chicago thugs escape their words.

        When hell freezes over.

        • checkmate2012

          full force of the left on Ann. We have to get smarter and give them a taste of their own medicine and quit playing footsie that has cost us agruments in the past.

          Levine was talking about some guy BO ran against for the Senate on his Thursday show and seems like targeting family was just fine! Once again, the left demonstrates do as I say not, do as I do.!

          From Mark Levin’s website:

          “On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show: President Obama took offense to what Hilary Rosen, a Democrat strategist, said about Ann Romney. Obama says that he doesn’t have patience when comments are made about other politician’s spouses. Yet, Mark goes back to 2004 when Obama was running against Jack Ryan and Obama’s campaign went after his family. Also, has the President told his Democrat operatives to stop the attacks on women like Sarah Palin? No, he is a hypocrite and a liar and it’s as simple as that.”

        • garfieldjl

          If we are looking at Gingrich or Santorum, we could press the attack about the “bitter clingers” rhetoric.

          However, Romney’s record gets in the way when you try to bring it up. Romney can however, hit Obama over the head on Fast & Furious.

          You need to be planning ahead and thinking of the countermoves, you’re trying to play checkers in a chess game.

          Sorry but the rules are different, and you need to do a lot more thinking in chess.

          Part of winning in chess is about exploiting weaknesses in your opponent’s defenses while making sure they can’t turn tables and start to exploit weaknesses in your defenses.

          By going into the “bitter clingers” you open up Romney to be attacked for being a hypocrit.

          Whereas, if you focus on Fast & Furious, and only on Fast & Furious, to my knowledge there is nothing in Romney’s record remotely similar to Obama’s gun running scandal, so we don’t open Romney up to a counterattack by Obama.

          • APA Guy

            Are you serious with that crap? Move away from a successful line of attack because we fear Obama’s counter-attacks?

            We will expose ALL of Barack Obama for the country to see. This time, they won’t be mindlessly chanting his name when we do…and HIS record, positions, affiliations, and disregard for God, religion, the value of the dollar, business, capitalism, and hard-working moms will all be fair game…all the way through November.

          • garfieldjl

            The media will be shilling for Obama, if it was going to shill for Romney in the general, yeah Romney could use that line of attack.

            Thing is though, the media will be looking for any chance they can get to shift the spotlight back on Romney.

            By sticking to Fast & Furious and not onto the other comments (to which Romney has made anti-gun owner comments as well), we deny the MSM and Team Obama the opportunity to shift the spotlight back on Romney.

            Think things through.

          • evictobama

            Obamacare has already sent thousands of American jobs overseas to China and India. The American consumer wants inexpensive goods and services and he won’t pay a dollar more for those goods and services than he has to.

            Obama seems to be completely ignorant about how a global economy works. You can’t tax the American people with Obamacare and drive up the cost of goods and services produced in the U.S. without sending jobs overseas.

            All Romney needs to do is get Republicans and Independents to keep repeating this line: It’s the economy, stupid. The economy got Obama into office and it will drive him out of that same office.

          • APA Guy

            If Romney stays on message (i.e. jobs, Obama’s debt/deficits and how he has destroyed the value of the dollar, gas prices, and Dem hatred of moms), he can’t lose.

            The media can shove it up their arses. Their jig is up and was long ago. Obama’s goose is cooked.

      • checkmate2012

        to what this admin has been up to the last 3 years. Even if they pound on Romney for flip flopping, he doesn’t have dead agents on his hands and a massive cover up. One point for Romney on this issue.

        Case closed on who wins on 2nd Amendment rights. Next issue?

        • garfieldjl

          Part of what Obama will try to focus on is how his record is similar to Romney’s. That and the class warfare and race baiting.

          What we have to do is find the differences, that we can go after.

          Fast & Furious is one example.

          Foreign Policy is another.

          • checkmate2012

            posted about an hour ago. You’re correct in that they will try to use class warfare and race baiting. They have never stopped using that tactic and won’t as that’s all they have to go on. Foreign Policy, well Romney can point out his errors but the MSM will say he doesn’t have any experience. So not a winning topic if you ask me except in defense. BTW, I wasn’t suggesting for Mitt to actual say the guns & religion quote but it is effective and he might as well.

  • Viet71

    Honest, sincere commenters. Dem interlopers trained to push the right conservative buttons.

    I guess these diaries will go on and on. If I ruled the universe, which I don’t, I’d cut off the Dem interlopers. That’s just me.

    • garfieldjl

      I’m sick of being confused with Dem Interlopers for one, I would suspect a lot of the Mittbots are in fact Dem interlopers.

      Question is how do you tell the genuine Romney supporters and Conservative critics of Romney, from the Democrat trolls.

      You may be better at figuring out who is who than I am, Viet71. People accuse me of being a dem interloper when I’m not, and I believe mbecker is possibly a Dem interloper.

      • kowalski

        At this point, I guess you’re a Gingrich Supporter. Am I right?

  • Pingback: Lavelle Gilomen

  • Pingback: Gaylord Anene

  • Pingback: electronic cigarette

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: Car Forum

  • Pingback: on front page

  • Pingback: noclegi zakopane

  • Pingback: Melatrol reviews

  • Pingback: Fischfutter

  • Pingback: skype pobierz

  • Pingback: Investment Opportunities

  • Pingback: Randka

  • Pingback: wedding hairstyle

  • Pingback: cv wzór

  • Pingback: camping weekend

  • Pingback: ropa para bebes aram

  • Pingback: Does Performer 5 work

  • Pingback: sbobet

  • Pingback: more useful tips

  • Pingback: Mining

  • Pingback: คอนโดเอแบค

  • Pingback: distill alcohol

  • Pingback: BBCAT

  • Pingback: Get More Info

  • Pingback: gameplay

  • Pingback: gameplay

  • Pingback: site hyperlink

  • Pingback: celebrities with olive skin tone

  • Pingback: Koi

  • Pingback: florida lawyer

  • Pingback: payday loans

  • Pingback: diet mountain dew lana del rey

  • Pingback: distilling vodka

  • Pingback: James

  • Pingback: dieta proteifine

  • Pingback: finish repair dallas

  • Pingback: Pool Shop

  • Pingback: leer este post aquí

  • Pingback: Video on Demand

  • Pingback: randka

  • Pingback: คอนโดเอแบคบางนา

  • Pingback: portal randkowy za darmo

  • Pingback: removing plastic crown molding windermere

  • Pingback: darmowa strona randki

  • Pingback: cheap car insurance florida

  • Pingback: super randka

  • Pingback: mobile marketing

  • Pingback: rewelacyjny portla randkowy

  • Pingback: portal randkowy za darmo

  • Pingback: darmowa strona randki

  • Pingback: randka

  • Pingback: adobe video editing

  • Pingback: online payment gateways

  • Pingback: best car warranty review

  • Pingback: market research handbook

  • Pingback: olive oil makeup prices

  • Pingback: fresh ranking pricing

  • Pingback: riddell football helmets

  • Pingback: windows task manager processes

  • Pingback: senior care wisconsin

  • Pingback: Find Out More

  • Pingback: portal randkowy

  • Pingback: randki internetowe

  • Pingback: Arkadas Ara

  • Pingback: randka przez internet

  • Pingback: darmowa strona z randkami

  • Pingback: beats for sale

  • Pingback: randki internetowe

  • Pingback: an alternative

  • Pingback: online payday loans

  • Pingback: to learn wealth creation methods

  • Pingback: her comment are going to be here

  • Pingback: resultat quinte zeturf

  • Pingback: wedding planner italy

  • Pingback: relating to Yahoo

  • Pingback: Tune Up

  • Pingback: Donatien

  • Pingback: Gaye

  • Pingback: Apple Pie Recipe

  • Pingback: cell towers investment

  • Pingback: made my own day

  • Pingback: Ruben Vossen

  • Pingback: alfileres de novia

  • Pingback: Diseño web barato

  • Pingback: Deangelo Romag

  • Pingback: View

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: honda 8000 watt generator

  • Pingback: las vegas bankruptcy law firm

  • Pingback: Gaye

  • Pingback: jesus adrian romero soplando vida zip