Mitt Romney V The Constitution (Part 2)

By Tiffany Harbridge

We will begin our fact finding mission way back in 1994 with this gem: Campaigning for the Senate in 1994, Romney said he favored strong gun laws and did not “line up with the NRA.”  Romney backed the Brady Bill which among other items attaches a five day waiting period to purchase a gun. The candidate reiterated his support for an assault weapons ban contained in Congress’ crime bill, and the Brady law which imposes a five-day waiting period on handgun purchases. “I don’t think (the waiting period) will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect” Let us ponder that for one quick moment. He thinks it won’t have much effect on crime, but let’s go ahead anyhow, because it might have some positive effect somewhere for someone at some time. Excuse me? I must have missed that lesson in Social Studies. You know, the one where they demonstrate how, why and where a servant of the People is allowed to strip rights away from the People, due to the positive effect it might somehow have.

Romney also stated he will take stands that put him at odds with some traditional ultra-conservative groups, and cited his support for the assault rifle ban and the Brady gun control law. ‘That’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA,’ he said. ‘I don’t line up with a lot of special interest groups.’ (I guess the framers of the Bill of Rights are to be considered “ultra-conservative” in Mr. Romney’s view? Which part of “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges … of citizens” does Mr. Romney not quite grasp? (Fourteenth Amendment)

For a great read on the Brady Bill and the fleecing of your tax dollars and more importantly-your rights, please do visit a wonderfully informative article by David Kopel. It was published in 1993 by the Heritage Foundation and it is a timely reminder, even now, of how Government intrusion erodes our freedoms and our livelihoods daily: http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/hl476nbsp-on-the-firing-line

In the 2002 gubernatorial debate Mr. Romney had this to say “”We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts. I support them; I won’t chip away at them,” he said. “I believe they help protect us and provide for our safety.” In all fairness, Mr. Romney was being more than truthful in that debate as he went on to become Governor and promptly assisted the legislature to increase fees and requirements for sportsman and gun owners and diverted all monies in the Inland Fisheries and Game Fund into the general fund in an attempt to balance the budget. According to G.O.A.L. (Gun Owners Action League) “The Inland Fisheries and Game Fund is considered to be sacred among sportsmen, conservationists and environmentalist in Massachusetts. The Fund, which was created by sportsmen, accounts for over 90% of the review that our Fish & Wildlife Agency operates on. The dedicated Fund was also necessary under federal law if the state wanted to take advantage of matching money from the federal government.

As a result of the action, a coalition of sportsmen, conservationists and environmentalist formed the Massachusetts Conservation Alliance (MCA) to rescue the fund. After several months of lobbying the legislature and the Governor’s office, the MCA was successful in the re-instatement of the Inland Fisheries and Game Fund. The Governor signed the re-instatement legislation into law in October of 2003.” That same organization goes on to actually support much of Mr. Romney’s tenure in the corner office. They contend that they were given more access to the Governor’s office and actually had some truly awful laws that were on the books re-written or ‘clarified’ during his Lordship. Oh, what blessings, to have a Governor who deems to allow me a loosening of my handcuffs! Me? I am prompted to recall a brilliant quote from Samuel Adams, Great American Patriot and the truly outstanding fourth Governor of Massachusetts:  “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!” You be the judge.

In August 2006 while pondering a presidential run, he signed up for “lifetime membership” of the NRA praising the group for “doing good things” and “supporting the right to bear arms.” During his 2008 Presidential nomination bid, Mr. Romney touted himself a ‘lifelong hunter”. It has since been established that he ‘hunted’ varmints-rabbits, rodents and pheasant-twice. Yep. Two times equals ‘lifelong’ in Romneyland. I suppose he can gain some sportsman cred if it can be proven that his recent claims to have gone “moose, no wait-elk hunting with some friends in Montana” can be substantiated. But then who in their right mind would corroborate that one for him? First they’d have to admit hunting with ole varmint-hunting Mittens, and they’d also have to own ‘friendship’ with one proven to be one of the foulest of deceivers on the planet. Perhaps he can look to one of his people to back him up, that ‘wealth’ that Governor Adams referred to so many years ago can do powerful things to some folks memory and integrity.

 

Advertisements

About sswimp

I am not an "African-American'. I am a proud American, who happens to be of African descent. I am Christian. My personal relationship with Jesus Christ and the Word of God shapes my concepts of what it means to be a conservative. I am Pro Life. Devoted to the principles of free enterprise, limited government,and individual responsibility. I believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman.
This entry was posted in Capitalism, Election News and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Mitt Romney V The Constitution (Part 2)

  1. Betty Everett says:

    Another great one!!

  2. Duncan Regen says:

    Excuse me , the 2nd amendment says I have the right to own a gun it does not require me to wait five days to own a gun, again I ask, where does the state have the right to over ride the Constitution. His position is horse hocky

  3. cmblake6 says:

    Reblogged this on Cmblake6's Weblog and commented:
    A little more of that sweet tender meat to give you a heads up on this scenario.

  4. Homepage says:

    Well written articles like yours renews my faith in today’s writers. You’ve written information I can finally agree on and use. Thank you for sharing. 528649

  5. Articles says:

    Thanks a ton for taking a few minutes to line this all out for people. This write-up ended up being quite helpful if you ask me.

  6. This is my sixth time to your website, I love it every time!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s