Why Romney won't ban your guns

[ViperJock]

For better or worse he is now the "conservative candidate." He is in bed with the NRA, the tea party, etc and he has made a huge deal about being conservative. Romney is NOT going to ban your weapons. At least not in his first term.

Why you should vote for Romney:
1. Ron Paul can't win. And even if he did, the powers that be would never let him do most of the stuff he wants to do anyway.
2. Obama WILL ban your guns as soon as he is re-elected
3. Obama will sell out our military even more than he already has
4. Obama knows **** about restoring prosperity to the country
5. Obama wants to destroy the America that we love
6. Romney may actually know something about economics
7. Romney will not deliberatley fan the fire of race and class wars
8. Romney will not bow down to the leaders of a foreign power
9. Romney will not persecute Christians and seek to remove God from our state
10.It pretty much impossible to be worse than Obama has been.

I too am bothered by Romney's apparent changes in opinion. On the other hand, shouldn't a man be allowed to learn and change his opinion? I know that is a foreign concept to a lot of INGO, but people sometimes do use facts, data, etc to change their mind.

Consider for a second that Romney thought Romneycare would be a good idea. It turned out not to be. He now realizes that and wouldn't do it again.

Consider for a second that the current geopolitical situation has made Romney realize that perhaps the second ammendment was made for something other than shooting clays.

Clearly, INGO should be the thought police because of the number of people on the forum that can read Romney's mind. I agree lets hold him accountable for what we think he might do (instead of holding Obama accountable for what he HAS done). Good plan.

We gave Obama a chance and he showed us how he operates. There is no need to let him continue. At least with Romney there is a chance we might at least turn in the right direction.

+1 to anyone who turns in their thought police badge and picks up an extra serving of common sense.

 

[J_Wales]

There is absolutely no significant difference between the two.

It is a choice between ****ty and ****tier.

A choice between the lesser of two evils.... and choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

I wont be voting for Romney because he is not even close to being the best man for the job. And I do not vote for someone because a "Party" tells me too. And positive reinforcement of poor past and current performance will not improve future candidates.

Especially a party in a two party system that has each taken turns leading us down this road of tyranny. Parties wont change until the voters change their standards.

 

[giovani]

Because he will be in his first term and want to get relected?

 

[J_Wales]

When did we get a two party system?

It has seemed more like a one party system for at least the past 20 years.

 

[mydoghasfleas]

When did we get a two party system?

It has seemed more like a one party system for at least the past 20 years.

We have a two party system to maintain the illusion of choice. While they are actually both the same, the appearance of choice helps keep the subjects calm as they lose their liberty. Most of them actually believe they are in control.

 

[Wreaver]

Mitt is that you??



Seriously though, because Mitt has apparently promised the NRA, the Tea party etc. he won't do what most do when elected? The exact opposite? It's called pandering for endorsements/votes.

 

[ViperJock]

Because he will be in his first term and want to get relected?

Its as good a reason as any. IMO we should ditch every politician after their first term. But if he toes the line in fear of re-elction why do we care why he does it as long as he does.

A guy ties you to a chair and says;
I'm gonna give you choice, you can get kicked in the balls right now for sure OR I'll maybe kick you in the balls later on.

Which option do you take? I know for certain some would take the kicking now. But if there were a chance you might not get kicked in the balls down the road, wouldn't you take it? This is why I do not understand why people will allow Obama to win again. Its ridiculous and it is very poor logic.

 

[firehawk1]

For better or worse he is now the "conservative candidate." He is in bed with the NRA, the tea party, etc and he has made a huge deal about being conservative. Romney is NOT going to ban your weapons. At least not in his first term.

Why you should vote for Romney:
1. Ron Paul can't win. And even if he did, the powers that be would never let him do most of the stuff he wants to do anyway.
2. Obama WILL ban your guns as soon as he is re-elected
3. Obama will sell out our military even more than he already has
4. Obama knows **** about restoring prosperity to the country
5. Obama wants to destroy the America that we love
6. Romney may actually know something about economics
7. Romney will not deliberatley fan the fire of race and class wars
8. Romney will not bow down to the leaders of a foreign power
9. Romney will not persecute Christians and seek to remove God from our state
10.It pretty much impossible to be worse than Obama has been.

I too am bothered by Romney's apparent changes in opinion. On the other hand, shouldn't a man be allowed to learn and change his opinion? I know that is a foreign concept to a lot of INGO, but people sometimes do use facts, data, etc to change their mind.

Consider for a second that Romney thought Romneycare would be a good idea. It turned out not to be. He now realizes that and wouldn't do it again.

Consider for a second that the current geopolitical situation has made Romney realize that perhaps the second ammendment was made for something other than shooting clays.

Clearly, INGO should be the thought police because of the number of people on the forum that can read Romney's mind. I agree lets hold him accountable for what we think he might do (instead of holding Obama accountable for what he HAS done). Good plan.

We gave Obama a chance and he showed us how he operates. There is no need to let him continue. At least with Romney there is a chance we might at least turn in the right direction.

+1 to anyone who turns in their thought police badge and picks up an extra serving of common sense.

Viper, why oh why did you set yourself up to be crucified? The purists will be crawling out of the woodwork soon.....

 

[netsecurity]

The Tea Party I see as basically Libertarians, who are forcing the Republican party to accept a more Conservative view. I think it has worked on Romney.

 

[ViperJock]

There is absolutely no significant difference between the two.

It is a choice between ****ty and ****tier.

A choice between the lesser of two evils.... and choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.

Bull****. Complete bull****. There are similarities but they are more disparate than similar. The biggest difference being that Romney's mission is not to fundamentally change America into a communist state.

If Romney wins and the decent is slower, at least that gives us more time to prepare to hit the bottom. It gives the people more time to wake up. There is a difference. Take your prozac, and stop with the suicidal ideation please.

 

[ViperJock]

I wont be voting for Romney because he is not even close to being the best man for the job. And I do not vote for someone because a "Party" tells me too. And positive reinforcement of poor past and current performance will not improve future candidates.

Especially a party in a two party system that has each taken turns leading us down this road of tyranny. Parties wont change until the voters change their standards.

Good, I agree, Obama is better suited to be your president that Romney is. Too bad the two of you can't go live on an island together and he could rule you. Not what you meant? well it might as well be. IF you don't vote for Romney you will be voting for Obama by default. Might as well get your Barry Bumper sticker now.

I'm pretty sure the "party" isn't telling you to vote. I'm pretty sure its a freedom you still have, for the moment. Of course if Obama gets his way, you won't have that freedom much longer. Its not about someone telling you that you have to vote Romney. The fact is Romney is now going to be the (R) on the ballot and if you wan't to get rid of Obama, he is the only vote that matters. Any other vote on your card may make you feel morally superiour, but it is pointless in the reality in which we live.

 

[Wreaver]

Romneycare. "assault" weapons bans. patriot act. ndaa. sopa/pipa. All things the two have in common. So why would the "descent" be any slower?

 

[ViperJock]

Romneycare. "assault" weapons bans. patriot act. ndaa. sopa/pipa. All things the two have in common. So why would the "descent" be any slower?

Clearly you didn't actually read the OP.

For one thing Romney care was the first of its kind. He didn't know how it would turn out. Then Obama came along and decided to take a failed system and implement it even more widely! Despite the Fact that at that point Romney was telling people it didn't work and wouldn't be the solution for our country.

Forget it just vote for Obama. I give up. You'll get what you deserve. **** it, I'm gonna vote for Obama too--just so you get what you deserve.

 

[handgun]

My 16 yr old sister is telling everyone to vote for Ron Paul..... I am proud of her for making her decision the way she has...I know who I won't be voting for though....

 

[Wreaver]

Clearly you didn't actually read the OP. Forget it just vote for Obama. I give up. You'll get what you deserve. **** it, I'm gonna vote for Obama too--just so you get what you deserve.

Where have I said I was voting Obama. Just because you somehow think that me not jumping on the Romney train because he's the anti O candidate. I'm glad you think Mitt Romney is going to be the first candidate in history to not pander for support by saying one thing and doing the opposite.

 

[jedi]

Meh...

If the ship is sinking (and it is) why prolong the inevitable?
Choose a captain that will cause her to sink faster so we can move on to the state where we survive in the cold sea while we swim to shore.

There is no saving the ship anymore. There is far too much water in her now.

-Jedi

 

[mydoghasfleas]

Good, I agree, Obama is better suited to be your president that Romney is. Too bad the two of you can't go live on an island together and he could rule you. Not what you meant? well it might as well be. IF you don't vote for Romney you will be voting for Obama by default. Might as well get your Barry Bumper sticker now.

I'm pretty sure the "party" isn't telling you to vote. I'm pretty sure its a freedom you still have, for the moment. Of course if Obama gets his way, you won't have that freedom much longer. Its not about someone telling you that you have to vote Romney. The fact is Romney is now going to be the (R) on the ballot and if you wan't to get rid of Obama, he is the only vote that matters. Any other vote on your card may make you feel morally superiour, but it is pointless in the reality in which we live.

By not getting the true opposition candidate on the ballot, the people get what they ask for. And they will get it good. Maybe next primary people will start to want liberty. But thats up to them, and you. Rand Paul 2016

 

[J_Wales]

Its as good a reason as any. IMO we should ditch every politician after their first term. But if he toes the line in fear of re-elction why do we care why he does it as long as he does.

A guy ties you to a chair and says;
I'm gonna give you choice, you can get kicked in the balls right now for sure OR I'll maybe kick you in the balls later on.

Which option do you take? I know for certain some would take the kicking now. But if there were a chance you might not get kicked in the balls down the road, wouldn't you take it? This is why I do not understand why people will allow Obama to win again. Its ridiculous and it is very poor logic.

If a guy straps me in a chair and promises to physically assault me I am going to do everything to ensure that I am not the one that gets kicked in the balls.

 

[ViperJock]

Where have I said I was voting Obama. Just because you somehow think that me not jumping on the Romney train because he's the anti O candidate. I'm glad you think Mitt Romney is going to be the first candidate in history to not pander for support by saying one thing and doing the opposite.

Failing to vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. Clearly you don't understand the system. The libs will all vote for Obama. The (R) will vote for Romney or Paul or stay at home. That splits the vote up so you might as well vote for Obama because that course of action will lead to his re-election.

I don't know what Romney will do. I think that he will not not ban the guns. I am pretty damn sure that if you read my original list and actually consider the other things I said you will recognize that there are other differences too.