Jump to content

Romney and firearms


Casper
 Share

Recommended Posts

Lesser of two evils at this point. He also was representing a liberal electorate in Massachusetts. My hope is that he'll stay the conservative course as the scope of his constituents broadens.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lesser of two evils at this point. He also was representing a liberal electorate in Massachusetts. My hope is that he'll stay the conservative course as the scope of his constituents broadens.

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After meeting with the rocker Ted Nugent on Thursday, the Secret Service said its inquiry into what he had to say about President Obama was over. During a National Rifle Association meeting last weekend, Nugent rallied support for Mitt Romney and said of the Obama administration: “We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November.” He also said he would be “dead or in jail by this time next year” if Mr. Obama is re-elected. Mr. Nugent said he discussed the matter with two agents on Thursday. “The issue has been resolved,” said Brian Leary, a Secret Service spokesman. On his Web site, Mr. Nugent called it a “good, solid, professional meeting concluding that I have never made any threats of violence towards anyone.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/20/us/case-closed-on-ted-nugents-words.html?_r=1

Post up 2 guy in dark suits are at my door could it be from what I re-posted here

Edited by wht_scorpion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or he's going to "disarm" us with pro 2nd rhetoric until he get's in there. As far as I'm concerned he's more of a liberal than Nobama. Nevermind what ever he'll say to get elected. Because he was in a liberal state he suddenly loses his "values?" Bullshit.

I seriously hope Paul runs as an independant.....

Fuck this lesser of two evil shit when he's done more to limit my constitutional rights than anyone. He invented socialist healthcare for crying out loud.

Edited by ped
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or he's going to "disarm" us with pro 2nd rhetoric until he get's in there. As far as I'm concerned he's more of a liberal than Nobama. Nevermind what ever he'll say to get elected. Because he was in a liberal state he suddenly loses his "values?" Bullshit.

I seriously hope Paul runs as an independant.....

Fuck this lesser of two evil shit when he's done more to limit my constitutional rights than anyone. He invented socialist healthcare for crying out loud.

Paul runs, Obama wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or he's going to "disarm" us with pro 2nd rhetoric until he get's in there. As far as I'm concerned he's more of a liberal than Nobama. Nevermind what ever he'll say to get elected. Because he was in a liberal state he suddenly loses his "values?" Bullshit.

I seriously hope Paul runs as an independant.....

Fuck this lesser of two evil shit when he's done more to limit my constitutional rights than anyone. He invented socialist healthcare for crying out loud.

At least he did it at the state level and didn't violate the constitution doing so!

I'm no Romney fan but I'm all in against Obama!

I definetly dont want 3 more liberal leftist socialist Marxist judges at the supreme court!

Edited by crb
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the difference is? That same illogic got us where we are.....

True. Ohioans turned down Ron Paul as has most other primary states. Him running as an indy will take votes from the other 2 candidates, but the end result will be much the same, only altered by the margin of victory. We know what we have.....

68t2kj.jpg

316m5vc.jpg

but is the unknown any better????.......

2emq7te.jpg

1h8o43.jpg

Edited by ohiomike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO: If McCain > Romney and Obama > McCain, it should be obvious who will win the election. Paul running and taking votes from the idiotic repub establishment might hopefully wake them up to the fact that more and more of us are wanting that type of conservatism, not Romney pseudoconservatism. I've not seen a better question dodger in debates than Romney and that frightens me. Since GW came around and got the whole nation so polarized on his brand of conservatism we've never even come close to moving towards smaller, fiscally responsible governments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul runs, Obama wins.
I disagree. With Santorum out, Paul now has the religious vote. A large percentage of Paul's supporters are Democrats and Independents who previously supported Obama but won't be voting for him again. He obviously has the support of the tea party, Libertarians, etc as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then I'll have to read up a bit more. I'm not thrilled with anyone, but I DO NOT want Obama. Find me a fiscally conservative, socially liberal, anti-entitlement, religion-neutral, pro-business, gun-toting pot-head and I'll slap his bumper sticker on the Acura. Until then, I'll take what I can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then I'll have to read up a bit more. I'm not thrilled with anyone, but I DO NOT want Obama. Find me a fiscally conservative, socially liberal, anti-entitlement, religion-neutral, pro-business, gun-toting pot-head and I'll slap his bumper sticker on the Acura. Until then, I'll take what I can get and just keep the Ohio Riders sticker there .

^^THIS^^ (and modified)

I don't think i could have said it any better!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least he did it at the state level and didn't violate the constitution doing so!

I'm no Romney fan but I'm all in against Obama!

I definetly dont want 3 more liberal leftist socialist fascist Marxist judges at the supreme court!

You forgot fascist. I fix.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. With Santorum out, Paul now has the religious vote. A large percentage of Paul's supporters are Democrats and Independents who previously supported Obama but won't be voting for him again. He obviously has the support of the tea party, Libertarians, etc as well.

A little history might be in order here. The last person to "Split the vote" was Ross Perot. Looking back on his campaign from a historical point of view it seems clear that he had no intention of being elected. He was in fact spending his own cash to ensure a win for the party that was going to do more for his business. A shrewd investment.

I also have to point out the last time a candidate won was that was not a democrat or a republican was in 1850 with Millard Fillmore.

Having good ideas is a great thing but doesn't get you elected.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You forgot fascist. I fix.

You're so good to me!

I hope you are.t in agreement with me, if so I'm heading to the bunker be side the world is ending.

I want justices on the bench that apply the constitution and dont try to interpret it I don't want the supreme court making laws either. Surely we cam agree on that right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...