Mittens on gun control

[roberth]

No you're the one lacking in the reading comprehension here.

Romney may support gun control if its politically expedient, however 1) support of gun control is now politically dangerous and has been widely acknowledged as such since Algore lost in 2000 in part because of it and 2) Romney can't write gun control laws, just sign them after they pass the house and senate (which won't pass them now even with dems in control of the senate and certainly won't even vote on them after the repubs take over the senate and get even more control in the house).

HOWEVER, Obama has proved that he will push for gun control regardless of the political damage it does to him and his party AND he'll do it in extra-constitutional ways (Fast & Furious is but one example).


The big difference is that Romney does what will get him elected and re-elected (which for the foreseeable future is to act like a conservative). Obama will do whatever he damn well pleases (and Marxism and the end of America please him greatly).

Therefore your point that both of them will do the politically expedient thing is wrong. Obama is a pure ideologue.

If there was a viable third choice I'd be all over it, but there is no Magical Libertarian Unicorn Messiah that can win the election.

And not just gun control.

Obama has made overtures re: The Fairness Act which is an open attack on the first amendment rights of conservatives. He has enacted legislation further limiting the tenth - obamacare. He will attack your fourth amendment rights, it is just the natural progression of "for the common good" and "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" and "the ends justify the means" philosophy.

[Ronin13]

I do grow tired of this 3rd Party BS where they say "this year you're voting for Democrat or 'democrat lite.'" Humbug! Please stop saying stupid things like that, because now that he's backed by the NRA, and the Republican party, I don't think Mittens will be too hard on the right, I think if he doesn't want to piss everyone off he'll walk the line and be a good little republican. Now Obama on the other hand, he just flat out doesn't give a shit.

[Goodburbon]

Ronin, he's a progressive and a chameleon, barely a republican. It IS obama or obama lite.

[Ronin13]

Ronin, he's a progressive and a chameleon, barely a republican. It IS obama or obama lite.

Really? You're going to go as far as saying he's that much like Obama? Well I guess all hope is lost then... I guess I really can find a buyer for my ocean view property in western Nebraska!

[Goodburbon]

Yes, he is. When is the republican constituency going to notice that the republican party is no longer their party, but a corrupted compromise to achieve power?

Some did, they broke away they're called "tea party" and suddenly the republicans were morphing into "we've been tea party all along" to try to keep the sheep in the flock. Until it's attacked and unpopular, called "teabagging" then they distance themselves from the label.

[Zundfolge]

It IS obama or obama lite.

This is just foolishness.

Problem is when I point this out people think I'm defending Romney ... saying he's all wonderful or something. But that's not it, when I point out that this "obama=romney=obama" bushwah is just that; BS, I'm not talking about Romney.

Obama is not your typical left of center, Democrat idiot ... Obama is an enemy of the United States, the Constitution, Capitalism and Liberty (except for liberty for men to bugger each other and women to kill their unborn children).

Obama is on a mission to destroy the US. Period.

Romney may be a typical self-serving, flip-flopping politician, but he wants America and free market capitalism to continue to exist. Obama doesn't.

THAT is the difference and that is why I'm going to vote against Obama by voting for the only candidate that has a chance to beat him; Mittens.

Then after Romney wins we'll have to keep putting the screws to him to keep him on the straight and narrow, but I believe he can be controlled (unlike Obama that won't even be able to be controlled by the Democrats that don't hate America).

[Teufelhund]

It's distressing to me that people attribute so much power to POTUS; almost as if you want the office to be that of king. The office is just a tool for the much, much larger corrupted system. If we elect some clown that is able to crown himself king and "end America" like you keep regurgitating, is he to blame, or the system and citizenry that allowed it?

I can't believe you guys are still debating so vehemently this illusion of choice we're all handed. It does not matter who you and I "choose" (and I use that term loosely); the result is the same. There is no organization, private or public, in which those in power would ever allow something to happen that would reduce their degree of control, or retard its growth. You and I will never [peacefully] recover freedom that has been usurped by those who write the rules by which we may recover it.

Republican, Democrat, Libertarian; it does not matter. The particular guy (or gal) with the title of POTUS is not the problem, nor the solution. Know your enemy.

[TFOGGER]

It's distressing to me that people attribute so much power to POTUS; almost as if you want the office to be that of king. The office is just a tool for the much, much larger corrupted system. If we elect some clown that is able to crown himself king and "end America" like you keep regurgitating, is he to blame, or the system and citizenry that allowed it?

I can't believe you guys are still debating so vehemently this illusion of choice we're all handed. It does not matter who you and I "choose" (and I use that term loosely); the result is the same. There is no organization, private or public, in which those in power would ever allow something to happen that would reduce their degree of control, or retard its growth. You and I will never [peacefully] recover freedom that has been usurped by those who write the rules by which we may recover it.

Republican, Democrat, Libertarian; it does not matter. The particular guy (or gal) with the title of POTUS is not the problem, nor the solution. Know your enemy.

Given the use of Executive Orders by the last few presidents to sidestep the legislative process, the office of President has become exponentially more potent...

Note that Bush II and Obama have issued more EOs than all previous presidents combined...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...2.80.931981.29

[Teufelhund]

Good info, TF. Very scary stuff. Also indicative of the growth of control I mentioned earlier, and excellent evidence that the party affiliation is moot.

Even if we could elect Jesus Christ to the office of POTUS, our situation would continue to decline and freedoms would continue to erode. The puppet is of no consequence.

[Caithford]

I think the bigger problem, even more than the POTUS and candidates, is our current batch of career fucktard legislative branch. If they would get their heads out of their asses and actually do what's right for this country, instead of just for themselves, we could actually get rid of all the useless laws on the books and really put stuff into place to protect Americans and the Constitution.

However, I fear that's not going to happen unless something a la Debt of Honor happens. Fire them all and get real people in there. The idea was that the legislature was meant to be used similar to a jury... a group of regular people taking time out for civic duty for a while, then returning to their lives when the term was completed.